News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
To the Editors of The Crimson:
The Harvard community has lately been struggling with a number of difficult ethical issues, most notable of which has been that of the final clubs and the role they play in College life. While many students remain unsure of their position on this issue, it appears that a collective indictment has been laid on the club system for their alleged sexism, eltism and who-knows-what-elseism.
Especially in the wake of the formal charge of sex discrimination against the Fly Club, many Harvard students appear to be riding the wave of the moral crusade against the club system. Their arguments have been passionate--witness Elizabeth L. Wurtzel's "Liquor, Cocaine, Pot, Ecstasy and Sexism" (Nov. 22), an emotionally charged account of her transformation from an active clubgoer to a censorious critic of their existence.
Yet the very vehemence of these moral attacks against the clubs has precluded a more critical analysis of the issue that would help to elucidate its problems toward a more sensible approach to dealing with it. Mere slandering and name-calling does not lend credibility to the moral high ground on which critics of the final clubs claim to be standing. Quite the opposite, their moralistic approach has, if anything, undermined their attempts to steer the final clubs toward reform and has fallen short of generating intelligent discussion that would, at the very least, foster a better understanding of the final clubs and the role they play in the Harvard social community.
From a legal point of view, it would appear that forcing the final clubs to institute an admissions policy against their will would be an infringement of their right to freedom of association as outlined in the Constitution. From a philosophical point of view, however, the answer is not so clear. Much thought has been given and should continue to be given to the issue of alleged elitism and sexism in the clubs. Name-calling and slandering, however, are not intelligent or effective ways to discuss such an issue.
The lies contained in the grossly unjust generalizations of the outspoken critics of the club system have angered and hurt final club members such as myself. We would have hoped that fellow Harvard students would display a little more broadmindedness and maturity in attacking something they consider wrong. Rather, we have seen moralistic club-bashing that is barely worthy of response.
Contrary to popular opinion, final club members are sensitive to the way other Harvard students feel about the issue of admitting to the clubs. Believe it or not, final club members are not all sexist men intent on continuing a tradition merely for the sake of doing so. Final club members are also progressive thinkers who are actively involved in and concerned about life at Harvard.
My final club experience has been an enjoyable part of my Harvard experience. That my final club membership is so controversial is distressing to me since I also proudly consider myself a member of the Harvard community. And that a sizable portion of the rest of the Harvard community is fighting for the inclusion into the club system of Harvard women is also difficult for me to deal with. As I witness the increasing disenfranchisement of the clubs from the Harvard social community, I am compelled more and more to confront these issues intellectually and to seek explanations for and solutions to them.
Whether or not the legal right of final clubs to remain all-male is upheld, the issue will continue to be a source of division within the Harvard community. How this will be dealt with is up to the community as a whole. The moralistic name-calling might continue, though this would be deplorable. What is needed is an understanding that both sides in the dispute are part of the same community and ought to work together for the common good of the community. While this may not render an outcome acceptable to both sides, at least it will provide the common ground from which intelligent and hopefully effective discussion can be launched. Simon J. Alberga '89
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.