Jim Andris, Facebook

Foundations of Education
Education Division
Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville
Edwardsville, Illinois 6202512/10/74

John Rendleman
President

Dear Dr. Rendleman:

Thank you for replying to my letter of 12/4 so promptly. I can see how you might be threatened by this letter, but I intended no threat. My letter clearly indicates that I intend to stay within legal bounds in securing gay rights, so I can't see how the concept of 'threat', at least in a legal sense, applies. In fact, I perceive my efforts, and so intend them, as being cooperative. I have given you a statement of my contingency plans so that you may make a more informed choice about what to do. Indeed, in
my conversations with John Paul Davis, a concern that has repeatedly surfaced is the effect of publicity of this issue on public attitudes. I only intend to involve public attitudes if I cannot secure gay rights through a legitimate internal process.
It seems to me that I am acting in good faith.

With regard to your statement that the matter has not reached your attention, I am wondering what kind of effort would be required to get your attention. For one thing, and I quote from the Nov. 27 Affirmative Action Task Force Minutes, "Mr. Davis read a communication received by President Rendleman from the University Senate Executive Committee approving five different affirmative action resolutions" (p. 2) Mr. Davis made it clear in the Nov. 1 Task Force Meeting that this was the package which contained the gay rights resolution. So you must have had this matter in hand by the middle of November. Dr. Archangel referred to the date on which these five proposals were sent on to you as Oct. 31. I have a copy of a letter from me to you dated 11/18
in which I requested feedback from you on this issue and pointed out that the University of Cincinnati had taken positive action on the issue in a similar situation. I tried to get an appointment with you for at least two weeks before that and at one point your secretary made the statement to me tha t she had asked you about it, and you had said that you would get back to her later. I asked her if I should write you a letter, and she said that I could if I wanted to or some such response. Also, after working for months on this issue with your General Counsel, I conclude, Dr. Rendleman, that you have had your attention drawn to this matter a sufficient amount.

With regard to your offer of the graphics shop in preparation of any picket signs I might wish to make, no thank you; I ' l l make my own.
think that this comment reveals extreme insensitivity to a serious and legitimate issue and is unfitting of a man in your high position.

If I fail to receive a reply to this letter, I will assume that once again your attention has failed to be drawn to this issue.

I hope you can give this matter prompt attention; the civil liberties of a thousand persons here at SIUE are at stake. Securing these would be a first step, but only a first step, in undoing the harm to self-respect that centuries of social recrimination has built up. It's time, and we'd like to have you with us rather than against us!
Publicly with us.

Sincerely yours,

James F . Andris
Assistant Professor

cc: John Paul Davis