Any form of discrimination based on race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, age, national or ethnic origin, political beliefs, veteran status, or disability unrelated to course requirements is contrary to the principles and policies of Harvard University.
Can it be possible that the president of Harvard University doesn’t know that repeal of DADT doesn’t make open service for transgender soldiers possible because the military considers transgender people to have a disqualifying mental disorder (unlike the militaries of major allies)? Or does she know all too well and hopes nobody will notice Harvard’s violation of its own non-discrimination policy, what with all that juicy federal funding hinging on the decision?
If you’d like to contact Harvard University President Drew Faust and ask:
Tel: (617) 495-1502
Fax: (617) 495-8550
president@harvard.edu
Crossposted at Pam’s House Blend.
Just FYI, President Faust is a woman.
<
p>
i mean typo đ
…even with DADT in place I’d be more than fine with ROTC at Harvard. I’m uncomfortable with an institution telling the United States Military to keep out. They are a special opportunity rather than a private organization.
and they still aren’t to out transgender people.
Would you still be fine with it?
I’m always a little leery of assuming what views I would hold in a historical period. We should also be clear about what we mean by “fine with it” I would not be fine with the policy of racial exclusion just like I’m not fine with the policy of LGBT exclusion. I might be fine with ROTC, however, despite my objection to this particular policy. There’s a bigger picture which I confess I have trouble putting into words, but I just think the military should be able to recruit without outsiders passing judgement against duly enacted law.
If the UCMJ was to allow for transgenders to serve openly, you would then have no problem with ROTC’s presence on Harvard’s campus?
n/t