Difference between revisions of "ROTC Protests"
(New page: ``The contradiction between the university's principle of non-discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation, and the presence of an ROTC that does discriminate, ca...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | ``The contradiction between the university's principle of non-discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation, and the presence of an ROTC that does discriminate, cannot exist on the campuses indefinitely,'' - John M. Deutch, provost of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology | + | ``The contradiction between the university's principle of |
| + | non-discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual | ||
| + | orientation, and the presence of an ROTC that does discriminate, | ||
| + | cannot exist on the campuses indefinitely,'' | ||
| + | - John M. Deutch, provost of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology | ||
During the early '90s, the widespread presence of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) on college campuses became a major point of contention for queer activists. The ROTC's policy of excluding from participation openly gay men and women was strongly criticized and on many campuses, protests and administrative petitioning demanded the cessation of University support for the organization. | During the early '90s, the widespread presence of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) on college campuses became a major point of contention for queer activists. The ROTC's policy of excluding from participation openly gay men and women was strongly criticized and on many campuses, protests and administrative petitioning demanded the cessation of University support for the organization. | ||
Revision as of 12:21, 30 March 2010
``The contradiction between the university's principle of non-discrimination against individuals on the basis of sexual orientation, and the presence of an ROTC that does discriminate, cannot exist on the campuses indefinitely, - John M. Deutch, provost of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
During the early '90s, the widespread presence of the Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) on college campuses became a major point of contention for queer activists. The ROTC's policy of excluding from participation openly gay men and women was strongly criticized and on many campuses, protests and administrative petitioning demanded the cessation of University support for the organization.
Indiana University's Bloomington campus engaged in just such a push over during 1990 and 1991.
Early Objections
IU’s protest began with an ambiguous clause in a new Student Code of Ethics, stating that Indiana University “does not condone” discrimination based on sexual orientation. During the summer of 1990, student leaders requested an investigation into the status of ROTC on campus, citing a belief that its discriminatory policies conflicted with the new Ethics Code. Ultimately, the Student Faculty Council voted to support a resolution asking that the University cease to engage with the ROTC program by 1995, unless the ROTC policy was changed. This resolution caught the attention of the Indiana University Board of Trustees.
Civil Disobedience and Administrative Resolutions
Student Civil Disobedience
Student protestors of ROTC, angered by the lack of administrative action and bolstered by the furor surrounding the Persian Gulf War, took their demonstrations to the next level in February of 1991. On the 22nd of February, a group of over 100 students marched towards Rawles Hall--where the ROTC office was--shouting such slogans like “ROTC Out!” and “Gentler, Kindler, Bush Needs a Reminder!”. They entered and occupied the ROTC offices in Rawles Hall. The protest and occupation of the ROTC office was peaceful; however, the following day’s similar demonstration, which had fewer protestors, resulted in the arrest of a 19-year old student.
Although the IU Faculty and Student Councils reached a resolution to ban ROTC pending a change in ROTC policy, along with a Bloomington petition that acquired 1700 signatures, the IU Board of Trustees ultimately voted 8-1 to allow ROTC to remain on campus.4 Perhaps influenced by an IU President, Ehrlich, who himself was an ROTC student at Harvard, the Trustees believed they had reached a compromise regarding the ROTC issue. They claimed to have supported the organizations commitment to education, while simultaneously making an effort to reach out to the Department of Defense to change the military’s policy on homosexuals.
Regardles Trustees were forced to consider not only the 2.5 million in Department of Defense grants that would be lost if ROTC was removed, but also those students that benefited from the ROTC program, that wouldn’t have been able to attend college without it.2
s of the outcome, the ROTC debate that lasted for over a year represents perhaps one of the greatest periods of public support of the LGBT community in Bloomington’s history. To have collected over 1700 signatures in a petition, and for the issue to reach the Board of Trustees in the first place takes considerable effort. At the Trustees Student Affairs meeting, OUT President Joseph Clemans stated that the new IU Student Code of Ethics, which prompted the ROTC debate in the first place, had led to “an upsurge of pride and self-confidence in my community.”4
Klassen, Teri. “IU Student Leaders Protest ROTC's Exclusion of Gays.” Herald Times, May 5, 1990. http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/1990/05/05/archive.19900505.4920170.sto.
Klassen, Teri. “Students Want ROTC Banned.” Herald Times, September 20, 1990. http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/1990/09/20/archive.19900920.8801380.sto.
Welsh-Huggins, Andrew. “Protestors Occupy ROTC Offices.” Herald Times, February 22, 1991. http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/1991/02/22/archive.19910222.5c0f1e1.sto
Klassen, Teri. “IU Trustees Find ROTC Compromise.” Herald Times, May 4, 1991. http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/1991/05/04/archive.19910504.89f6939.sto
