Correspondence.

Earlier Letter Clarified

To the Editor:

I find your publication enjoyable and worthwhile and am therefore gratified to learn that your decision to publish Ian Young's article (Jan.-Feb. 2002) does not represent editorial advocacy of his views on the AIDS epidemic. I admit that I was injudicious in reaching this conclusion [Letter, March-April 2002], which was based upon the listing of his name on your editorial page. On the basis of your clarification of this point, I feel I must apologize for the harsh tone at the conclusion of my letter and withdraw the term "reprehensible." Perhaps "ill-advised" would be more suitable, but I will allow for disagreement on this point.

With regard to Mr. Young's reply to my letter, I stated that I did not disagree with his statements on the ads, only with his viewpoints concerning the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of AIDS. That twenty years into the epidemic these remain a matter of "serious and heated scientific debate" is an idiosyncratic viewpoint that unfortunately continues to exist in the minds of a thankfully diminishing group of individuals. Rather than ignoring this analysis, I thought my letter had rebutted each of his statements concerning AIDS, but the reader may reach his own conclusion on this point. In characterizing my statements as those of a True Believer, I am afraid that Mr. Young confused religious dogma with belief based on accumulated scientific evidence with demonstrated empirical value.

I don't know what to say to his denigrating dismissal of twenty years of voluminous scientific and medical research as "official press releases."

Irving Soifer, New York

A Neglected "Witch Hunt"

To the Editor:

Your series of articles on "Witch Hunts in America" (March-April 2003) issue was much needed and quite interesting. You omitted one major "witch hunt" of recent years. I refer to the activities of the Florida Legislative Committee, also known as the "Johns Committee." Through the efforts of Senator Charley Johns, one of the so-called "pork chop gang" from northern Florida, this committee conducted a reign of terror and infamy from July 1956 until July 1965. The committee was established to identify and root out left-wingers, ungodly faculty, and homosexuals at all colleges and universities in Florida. In the process it violated every form of human rights and intimidated some persons into committing suicide. The state of Florida, which now recruits GLBT tourists and residents, spent considerable sums of money to make life miserable for GLBT persons.

Up to this point, this dark page in gay history has been ignored and covered up, with only one modest masters thesis investigating this transgression of human rights. (See: Charles L. Elkins's article in Sociological Perspectives, 1998, V. 41.)

Charles Harvey Miley, Genoa, IL

Don't Overlook the Gains We've Made

To the Editor:

Regarding Ann Pellegrini's article ["A Gay Purge at Harvard," March-April 2003], it was informative, well-written, and heart-rending, except for the last paragraph. How can anyone rationally claim that conditions are no different today than in the distant, if not the fairly recent, past? The problem is one of expectations. In 1920 no minority expected any recognition. Today, as advances occur and expectations rise, it is possible to demand ever more. And that is as it should be. But that also clouds some people's minds into believing that no improvements have come our way, or to blacks, women, or other minorities.

Jay Donner, the Internet