"George" sparks discussion
by Rob Wingate
Staff writer
Several hundred = students
packed the left side of the
Haverford Dining Center last
Friday to discuss the Honor
Council abstract titled George
which dealt with last spring’s pink
triangle controversy. Participants
expressed a broad range of opin-
ions, and the forum was marked
by occasionally heated debate on
this touchy issue.
George, a graduating senior,
was confronted in April for at-
tempting to "violently erase’ a
pink triangle during a dorm
party. The confronting party
maintained that George’s actions
represented a violent attitude to-
ward sexual minorities, while
George claimed that the triangles
were an act of vandalism. The
situation went to trial, and a
twelve-person jury decided that
George’s actions did violate the
Honor Code.
Most students at the lunch
meeting agreed that George’s re-
action to the triangles was inap-
propriate. "Being a part of this
community, you need to find a
way to express your values in a
way so that other members of the
community don’t feel threat-
ened," said one student. Ques-
tions also arose as to George’s
credibility.
Senior Jenny Rees wondered
whether the jury placed too much
faith in George’s side of the story,
asking "Should trust be uncondi-
tional when a person has repeat-
edly breached that trust?”
Some said that the con-
fronting party had received pref-
erential treatment because of its
role in minority affairs, and some
thought it unfair that George was
confronted by a large group of
people. "An individual alone has
trouble standing up to a group,”
said Junior Paul Reitter.
Several students stated that
the triangles did not belong on
the sidewalks of the school. Se-
nior Bill Reed asserted that "No
other group does this. The Chris-
tian Fellowship doesn’t paint
Bibles all over campus; this is a
violation of the posting policy.”
(continued on page 2)
