Radcliffe's Forum and Grad Students

To the Editors of The Crimson:

Pain. Betrayal. These are what I felt when I learned that the Radcliffe Forum may be dissolved June 30, subject to the April 10 vote by Radcliffe Trustees on President Horner's proposal to cut the Forum's funding from the Radcliffe budget.

One of the reasons cited for the cut in the March 31 Crimson story is that Radcliffe can no longer afford to serve "outsiders" with its limited budget. This seemed like a good reason to diminish a service until I realized that I, a graduate student at Harvard, was one of the "outsiders" which President Horner feels it is not Radcliffe's job to give intellectual and emotional support.

Suddenly, the issue seems more important. The very limb which gives graduate women the contacts with other feminists and accomplished women scholars and the knowledge of the frontiers of research on issues pertaining to women which enable graduate women to turn around and teach and support undergraduates is being severed, apparently because too many non-undergraduates seek out the lectures, discussions, change-oriented organizations and the `EGIBLE>ere enjoyment of surrounding oneself, for a change, with a large number of women scholars at Harvard.

Maybe President Horner believes that not enough undergraduate women attend events to justify the Forum's budget. It is well known that college-aged women are likely to be much less interested in feminism than their older sisters. The educational process through the A.B. level favors the attributes which women are socialized to value: following instructions, being organized, meeting deadlines, etc. The most common belief of college women about sexism is that it exists, but if "I'm good enough, it won't affect me." It is only after women enter the work force or graduate school that sexism may actually impede their progress toward a tangible goal that women become radicalized.

However, what undergraduate women may not have realized, and must tell President Horner before it is too late, is that the existence of the Radcliffe Forum, as an institutional sponsor of the most excellent programs for women I have ever heard of validates the study of issues concerning women here at Harvard. The programs which bring so many excellent women here provide the knowledge and interest which causes spillovers into curricula, teacher attitudes, and pushes for change which Harvard needs. The chance to think about and discuss alternate approachs to current intellectual and social issues allows women the opportunity to develop ideas which they later introduce in class discussions, broadening the exposure of all Harvard-Radcliffe men and women to feminist ideas.

Graduate women across the university find that they are hissed at in class when they argue that an approach to an issue, a policy or even language used is sexist. The graduate women get the support they need to bring up these concerns publicly from programs and groups like those the Forum organizes. The professors these women are trying to educate to treat women as equal colleagues also teach undergraduate women.

Graduate women also serve as teaching assistants and propose curriculum changes and additions which affect undergraduate women. I am certain that the Institute of Politics Study Group on "Women in Power in Government" which I helped Professor Valerie Nelson of MIT to organize for this semester would never had been thought of without exposure to the so many excellent programs and contact with other university women which the Forum has fostered.

Then there is the issue of working with other academic women and providing role models for undergraduate women. If Radcliffe does not see an important role for the Radcliffe Forum in helping graduate women to meet and discuss issues and push for changes, then where will the role models for women undergradutes come from? Given that the university has no women deans, few women professors and an amazing ability to stifle or ignore women's recommendations for change, if graduate women are not supported as women and feminists, where will any encouragement to undergraduate women to change society to fit their needs rather than to fit into a male mold which even men are now find too constraining come from?

I hope undergraduate women will quickly organize to articulate the direct benefits the Radcliffe Forum gives them and to convince President Horner that the Forum's services are necessary, representing the essence of the goal to provide women an excellent and equal education. I hope, too, that President Horner will reevaluate her decision in light of the myriad of indirect benefits the Forum gives to undergraduate women through its services for graduate women. Cynthia J. Dahlin   Kennedy School of Government