FOR GIRL CHEERLEADERS

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

We feel that the editorial of Wednesday, February 11, approving the Student Council's action on the basketball cheerleader proposal was one-sided and unjust. We certainly agree that the Indoor Athletic Building "reeks with masculinity," but if "it is no place for the installation of women," then forbid feminine spectators. After all, the girl cheerleaders would hardly invade the showers. As for "setting tradition in the heels," this brings to mind a CRIMSON editorial of April 15, 1952 which defended newly opened Burr Hall as "progress in stocking feet." Harvard is a liberal institution that has retained its fine reputation and traditions while advancing with the times. Furthermore, considering Radcliffe's "insinuation into College life" as something distasteful is a poor attitude towards a school whose relations we should value and promote with pride.

Concerning the assumption that cheerleaders are unnecessary to develop crowd spirit, perhaps, a team's efforts do usually bring "spontaneous applause," but aren't we overlooking their significant importance as a symbol of a loyal, interested school behind their team. The argument we find hard to follow is the recommendation that existing cheerleaders "pack away their uniforms" in favor of "informal, genuine cheering" at indoor events. Not only is this a gross absurdity, since there are no cheerleaders at the games, but the informal hisses, shouts, and disordered applause we have witnessed warrant a more effective system of expressing our loyal support. Basketball is the nation's biggest spectator sport and it is time that we brought our team up to the standards that Harvard has maintained in other sports, standards which any large university ought to hold to realize its athletic prestige.

Cheerleaders are certainly not a cure-all for our basketball woes, but they are a step in the right direction. Attendance and receipts will not suffer from such a move and it will involve little or no expense. This isn't really such an earthshaking proposition to imagine and it isn't imperative to continue the program next year if it proves unsatisfactory. All we ask is a trial for the few remaining games. After all, how can one condemn something before it is tried.

The Student Council did the right thing in saying "no" to our first proposal because true student opinion over the entire college was not known. Their suggestion for a petition certainly will be followed as soon as possible to honestly ascertain the college's interest in the proposal. Dwight L. Holloway '56   John W. Hurst '56   Larry M. Abrahams '56

We cannot agree that the University's athletic prestige depends on the caliber of its spectator sports teams. It is a potentially dangerous doctrine, as the activities of recruiters at other schools have borne out. Harvard has wisely and traditionally emphasized the participation, not the spectator side of athletics. Its "athletic prestige" rests on an excellent program of "Athletics-for-All" rather than on the teams it produces to entertain the public.

It is not, therefore, necessarily "advancing with the times" to glorify a spectator sport by use of girl cheerleaders or any other gimmicks. Nor is it advancing in the University's tradition to goad spectators into cheering instead of booing and cheering as they wish. Re-emphasis of cheerleading will have no bearing on the present difficulties of our basketball team, but it may turn the College toward the reincarnation of "rah-rah" it has so fortunately shunned.--Ed.