Sexual Orientation

The Current | February 8, 1999

Sexual orientation not so private and invisible

Speaking at the Board of Curators meeting Friday, January 29, University President Manuel T. Pacheco warned students and faculty to stay in the closet. No, he did not say it explicitly. Instead, he recommended Executive Order #3, which subsequently passed; this order substitutes vaguely worded guarantees of a "positive work and learning environment" for the direct disavowal of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Hundreds of students, staff, and faculty had sent letters and made telephone calls to seek full inclusion. Refusing to specify sexual orientation by name, one curator added importantly that sexual orientation should be, in any case, private and invisible.

In keeping with the board's desires, we would like to make a modest proposal for full implementation. Starting on Valentine's Day, February 14, we request that all signs of sexual orientation be excluded from campus. Of course, no one minds if you keep photographs of your spouse in your wallet, but please, please do not subject the academic community to unneeded information about what you do in bed. All signs of sexual orientation should go private. No "Miss" or "Mrs." used on campus; no off-handed references to "my wife" or "my husband" in the classroom or during office hours; no requests to take a personal day to get married or go on a honeymoon. This sort of behavior needlessly contributes to heterosexual stereotypes.

Some details still need to be worked out. The Heterosexual Agenda is notoriously subtle in its devices. Fraternities and sororities must comply. An orientation-neutral campus has no room for provocative parties. Human Resource Services would be expected to modify everything from library privileges to pensions in accord with the new closet mandate. University social events should be strictly limited to people employed here, and we respectfully request that top administration officials model this behavior for the impressionable young. We look forward to the day when we shall know nothing, absolutely nothing about one another's private lives.

The absurdity of this modest proposal demonstrates the inadequacy of the board's recent action. The board's executive resolution, while seemingly innocuous, sets a dangerous precedent. Instead of forthrightly banning discrimination based on sexual orientation, it panders to homophobia. The executive order leaves the door open to discrimination based on sexual orientation and asks that only lesbians and gays crowd the closet-hidden sexual identity. The brutal murder of Matthew Shepard, a University of Wyoming student, spurred the most recent effort to protect gay rights on University of Missouri campuses. It seems, however, that his October 1998 killing has already lost its impact.

So, until the University implements a genuine non-discrimination policy, we invite everyone, regardless of sexual orientation, lack thereof, or obsession with, to join with us in the consistently applied policy outlined above.

-Gerda W. Ray
John Works