Council Votes Down Anti-Club Resolution

The Undergraduate Council voted last night to fund a senior's discrimination complaint against the Fly Club but rejected a statement of moral support for her cause.

The council deliberated on two separate proposals. The first stated support for the complaint filed by Lisa J. Schkolnick '88 and called on the nine all-male final clubs to admit women. The second offered $250 to reimburse her attorney, who is not charging Schkolnick a fee, for postage, xeroxing and long-distance telephone calls.

Professor of Law Alan M. Dershowitz, who was invited by Council Secretary Frank E. Lockwood '89 to address the council in support of Schkolnik, said, "This is really a historic crossroads."

Dershowitz said Harvard final clubs serve as the "minor leagues" for adult all-male clubs. "Where did they learn that it's more comfortable to be with only males, to be with only Christians, to be with only whites," he asked. "They learned it at Harvard."

"The time has come for Harvard students to declare that this is wrong," Dershowitz said.

But the council balked on issuing a statement of principle against the final clubs after several council members argued that the council should not take political stands.

In his opening remarks, Chairman Evan J. Mandery '89 said it was entirely appropriate for the council to consider political issues. Mandery withheld his opinion on the two measures and abstained from both votes.

But Thomas D. Warren '88 said, "The people in this room were not elected as political representatives. If this is a legal issue,...then I believe the legal system should handle the issue, not the student government at Harvard."

Warren, a member of the Phoenix Club, said that since the University severed formal ties with the clubs more than the three years ago, the practices of the clubs are outside the council's jurisdiction.

"I don't think we should start now being irresponsibly activist," said Gregory R. Schwartz '89, who said he was punched but declined membership in a club.

Of the 41 council members eligible to be in final clubs, five, or 12 percent, are members, according to a Crimson survey conducted yesterday.

But Theodore Liazos '89 urged the council to be brave and pass the resolution against the clubs' practices. "There are a number of people here tonight who want us to be timid," he said, criticizing those who spoke against the resolution.

Lockwood, who authored both resolutions, argued for the council members to represent their constituencies and fight for a united campus community. "The question is, `is this council going to be a voice for the student body [by] standing up to oppose sexism and racism?'" he said.

Former Council Chairman and Owl Club member Richard S. Eisert '88 attempted to downplay the significance of the clubs' all-male rules. "There are a lot of all-female opportunities available at Harvard," he said, adding that Radcliffe offered women opportunities unavailable to men.

The debate also focused on what some members called the possible negative consequences of mandated co-ed clubs.

"If the final clubs were to allow women, I certainly think it would make them a more integral part of Harvard social life," said Nancy L. Slotnick '89, who voted against the resolution because she said co-ed clubs would still discriminate against students who could not afford membership dues.

In response to Slotnick's comment, AndreasBeroutsos '88, who vocally opposed both proposals,said, "This is a woman."

Jonathan Leff '90 spoke against passing aresolution in support of Schkolnick's cause,arguing that forcing clubs to admit women wouldinfringe of individual freedom.

"Those who support this resolution are in factsacrificing freedom to impose their own vision onour society," Leff said.

But Robert J. Greenstein '89 countered, "Whenour actions affect others,...their action has tobe accountable to the entire community."

And council member Robert Weissman '88-'89 saidthat a no-vote on the resolution would havegreater political impact than passage of the moralstatement.

The council voted down a proposal by JenniferCopaken '90 to table the resolution pending acampus-wide referendum. The council then voteddown the statement of support, 40 to 35.

Of the five council members who are also infinal clubs, four were present and all votedagainst the resolution. The vote of the 26 womencouncil members present split evenly, 13 to 13. Ofthe men not in final clubs, 27 voted in favor ofthe resolution, compared to 21 against it.

SWAT Granted Funds

The measure appropriating money for StopWithholding Access Today (SWAT), a student groupformed to raise money and build support forSchkolnick's complaint, passed by a margin of 21votes. All four final club members again votedagainst the proposal.

Supporters of the measure said the funding wasnecessary to ensure that both sides of the finalclub issue be heard.

"This is an issue the Harvard community has toget resolved for itself," Liazos said.

Schkolnick, who spoke at the end of the debate,said she needed the money because the Fly Clubcould afford a legal battle. "I don't own realestate, I have nothing," she said.

Opponents of funding SWAT said the councilshould not give financial support to groups thattake a partisan side to a debate.

"The council during its regular grant processhas made it a policy not to grant money to anorganization that does not present a balanced viewof the issues," Warren said.

About 20 supporters of Schkolnick attended themeeting, occasionally urging the council toremember to represent their full constituencies.

Council members after the meeting offeredvarying interpretations of the significance of thesplit vote. Amy B. Zegart '89, who voted for bothmeasures, criticized the council for its fear ofbeing political.

"The split vote is an example of the council'sfailure to take a definite stand on a majorissue," Zegart said.

But Eisert defended the council, saying themembers are not afraid to take strong stands onimportant issues.

SWAT member Chrystia A. Freeland '90 said, "Asa woman, I have been betrayed by my electedrepresentatives."

Dershowitz's presence at the meeting alsogenerated its share of controversy.

In response to one council member's charge thatthe council is not a courtroom, Dershowitz said,"I'm not here as a lawyer, I'm here as a humanbeing."Vote on Endorsement: Yes 35, No 40 Absent 10,Abstain 1

Final Club Members

No: 4 (80 percent)

Yes: 0 (0 percent)

Absent: 1 (20 percent)

Total: 5 (100 percent)

Women

No: 13 (44.8 percent)

Yes: 13 (44.8 percent)

Absent: 3 (10.4 percent)

Total: 29 (100 percent)

Men *

No: 21 (36.8 percent)

Yes: 27 (47.3 percent)

Absent: 7 (12.2 percent)

Abstain: 1 (1.7 percent)

Total: 57 (100 percent)Vote on Funding: Yes 47, No 26 Absent 11,Abstain 2

Final Club Members

No: 4 (80 percent)

Yes: 0 (0 percent)

Absent: 1 (20 percent)

Total: 5 (100 percent)

Women

No: 8 (27.5 percent

Yes: 18 (62.2 percent)

Absent: 3 (10.3 percent)

Total: 29 (100 percent)

Men *

No: 18 (31.6 percent)

Yes: 29 (50.8 percent)

Absent: 8 (14 percent)

Abstain: 2 (3.5 percent)

Total: 57 (100 percent)

* The total for men voting includes final clubmembers