Closed Channels


The actions taken by Dean Murphy against HOPS, which have the implicit backing of President John W. Oswald, expose these men for the blatant hypocrites they are. To say the least, it is interesting to note that all the while these men have stressed the need for open-minded dialogue with students on student and social issues, and of student-administration cooperation in working with these issues. What could be a better illustration of this hypocracy than Murphy’s admitted “going over the heads” of USG in action upon his own personal biases?

After all, wasn’t USG established as a bona fide organization for student self government. The actions of Murphy and Oswald indicate that they are using USG as a mere puppet front to lull the student body into thinking that students really do have some say in the management of their own affairs, while really, those in power personally wield be-all and end-all power over us and what we are to learn.

One member of the administration personally expressed his dismay to some of HOPS’ officers and indicated that though he and many other members the Administration backed HOPS, those with the greatest power were those who were hostile. He even-went so far as to personally contact a lawyer as to HOPS’ legality, and reported that the organization was totally legal in regard to both State and University codes.

Though what- HOPS stands for may be unpopular with; or of little interest to many members of the University community, HOPS’ dispute with the Administration have very important implications in terms of all student affairs. After all, haven’t such administrators as Walker, Oswald, Nixon, etc., advocated using existing channels in working to overcome social injustices? HOPS did just that -- no demonstrations, no hoopla, no disruptions of University functions -- and. Yet, the response of those in power is plain for all to see. Such administrative policy is se1f-justifying: If what you are and say is music to their ears, the channels remain open, but if not, you are then forced to use other means, and then they “cry havoc and loose the (pigs) of war.

Finally, as to Murphy’s doubts of HOPS’ educational value, homosexuality has been given a great deal of coverage in several major magazines, and numerous books have been published. According to some of the more recent authors; all this coverage, plus the nationwide efforts of dozens of homophile organizations have begun to bear  fruit.  Some states are relaxing or eliminating discriminatory laws, and many once uninformed citizens have said they have gained a much greater understanding of gay people. As a member of HOPS’ original steering committee, I want to make it clear that our purpose is not, to promote homosexuality, but rather, to promote greater understanding of’ it and to expose the myths that much of the public accept as truth. Murphy, et al, by their actions, show that they prefer that untruth and misunderstanding continue to flourish, and that reality be kept locked up in its closet. The scores of people who have come to the Tuesday night Free University workshops, their continuing interest, and the feedback I have had from many other students, should be ample proof of the educational value of their organization.

Richard A Frank

(Grad -regional planning – Drexel Hill)