<p>I think the biggest issue for most students in this kind of arrangement is privacy. Some people might not care about changing clothing in front of people of the opposite gender, but most aren’t going to be comfortable with that. Some who might have no problem being unclothed around a close platonic friend of the opposite sex might not be so sanguine around relative strangers. Backing up a little more, let’s first take a look at Stanford’s gender-neutral policy. From the article:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This all sounds very reasonable to me. No one is forced into a situation where they feel uncomfortable. There is privacy available for each resident. The author of the NRO article doesn’t complain explicitly about the policy itself, though I suspect she’s really not a fan. She does complain that she, the parent, wasn’t notified of the change. She also complains that the school’s housing isn’t holding to its official policy. I’d agree that this is a significant problem. Yes, the daughter said it’s not really a big deal, but the official policy states that this isn’t something a student is assigned to just because they don’t mind. The student must opt in to the program. </p>
<p>Agree with cptofthehouse that the big problem with college students sharing a room with their love interest is the fallout following a breakup.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>TheGFG, I’m truly sympathetic to this issue, yet it only goes so far. As others have said, most college students end up with a romantic partner from a different floor or dorm rather than the guy or gal down the hall. The temptations and opportunities will still be there. For the situation where the parents feel one way, but the kid feels another, single-gender housing might spare the parents’ feelings, but it might not do much in terms of avoiding temptation.</p>
<p>I don’t know how anyone could possibly think that choosing same-gender housing avoids temptation or makes abstinence easier. Given that mixed-gender housing has existed for only a short period of time, and certainly can’t be blamed for the substantial prevalence of pre-marital sex among college students over the last 40 years or so, it’s fairly obvious that same-gender housing has been remarkably unsuccessful in permitting students to avoid either temptation or pre-marital sex.</p>
<p>Arguably, given the anti-aphrodisiac effect of seeing people when they first wake up in the morning and the “mystery” is gone, mixed-gender housing might actually be considerably more effective in avoiding temptation – certainly with the people one’s living with. Along with the de facto taboo against “dormcest” or “hallcest,” both of which are fairly common terms.</p>
<p>Yes, parents who control the purse-strings have the “right” to impose whatever conditions they like – the whole “as long as I foot the bill, you toe the line” kind of approach. First, though, where do you draw the line? No different-sex roommates? No gay or black or Muslim roommates? No gay or black or Muslim friends? No gender studies courses? Kind of a slippery slope, yes? Parents have an equal “right” to stop paying for college if their child associates with gay or black friends – but how many people would be defending them?</p>
<p>More importantly, that kind of pressure and “strings attached” approach, if applied too severely and if it goes much beyond the reasonable expectation that one’s child is supposed to do their coursework in college, not skip classes and spend all day and night smoking pot or getting drunk, could, even if successful in the short term, be a Pyrrhic victory. As others have alluded to, children have a pretty big stick in the longterm: cutting their parents off from contact, refusing to have anything to do with them or even to allow them to see their grandchildren. It does happen. I’ve known more than one person who, once they were financially independent, cut off their tyrannical, controlling parents, either permanently or for a very long time. Parents who assume that “my child will thank me someday for this” can sometimes be in for a very rude surprise.</p>
<p>you people are all freaks. chill out. especially the gfc. you have to realize that this is the tipping point at which you do not have a say in your child’s life anymore. it’s time to let go.</p>
<p>Welcome to the Parents’ Forum! Let me make a wild guess that you are still the object, not the subject of parenting. One’s perspective, and one’s standard of freakitude, changes with the context. Try not to call us names.</p>
<p>Anyway, I have yet to see evidence that any college is forcing kids into involuntary m/f rooms. National Observer Mom was trying to suggest that Stanford had, but I think it’s pretty clear it hadn’t, although I think it’s also pretty clear that Stanford should be more careful in the way it describes its housing options.</p>
<p>I suppose I don’t think the world will come to an end if some parents like The GFG or National Observer Mom tell their kids, “I am strongly opposed to mixed-sex rooms. Don’t choose that option, or I will choose to stop contributing.” Most children of those parents would either share the parents’ feelings about the subject, or know that it would be a big issue with them. And most children period still seem to feel more comfortable with same-sex rooms. If the parents’ and childrens’ views differ strongly on this topic . . . well, personally, I would save whatever parental veto I could exercise for something like heroin use or cult membership, but if others want to fight with their kids about sharing living quarters with non-significant, differently-equipped others, fine.</p>
<p>The Stanford policy sounds fine to me too because you have to opt into it. The question is whether the girl did without her parents knowing or not. If she did, then it’s a family issue and Stanford is blame-free. If she didn’t, then the mother has a valid point, though I think none of us agrees at all with her extreme method of handling it.</p>
<p>Look, S and his high school GF went off to the very same college. It wasn’t planned that way, but happened when due to the vagaries of college admissions neither got into their distinct first choices. Freshman year, they ended up living in the same building (different dorm names, but it was pretty much the same building). Was I happy about that? No, not for many reasons, and sex was not at the top of that list either. Did I interfere with his college choice or eventual living arrangements? No. But that is quite different from actually agreeing in advance to allow him and his GF to live together in the very same room, and furthermore, her parents would never have agreed to it either, which is also very relevant here and often more of a concern for the parents of girls than boys.</p>
<p>I do think the parents of the female students involved would have valid concerns about safety, because apparently the D didn’t even know these men she is now bunking with, nor presumably the type of friends they might have over. My D came home to her dorm room one night and found, in her words, a “huge, disgusting, sweaty guy from across the hall” sleeping in her bed. She and her suitemates were very careful about locking their room after that.</p>
<p>To be fair, National Observer Mom is objecting to the fact that Stanford’s communications to parents give the impression that mixed-sex, same-bedroom housing is not available within its dorms, and that even if she had researched its policies more thoroughly she would have learned that there was a mixed-sex, same-bedroom option, but only in specified dorms (not her daughter’s) and only under circumstances that clearly did not apply to her daughter. I think those are valid points. I don’t care, but I wouldn’t pretend to think that nobody cares. In a better world, NO Mom would have known in advance that her daughter choosing to live in that dorm effectively constituted consent to sharing a bedroom with boys if that’s where the social pressure of a seven-hour housing meeting led. She should have had an opportunity to discuss that with her daughter in advance, or at least an opportunity to know that she ought to be asking her daughter about it.</p>
<p>Everyone is being a little disingenuous here. Stanford, by not enforcing its housing policies at the co-ops, something that has been going on for a long time, and NO Mom by pretending that this was a “change” rather than something that her daughter, if not she, understood perfectly well.</p>
<p>I would think, however, that lots of thoroughly conservative kids would bristle at their parents’ suggestion that (a) they could not control themselves around random boys, and (b) that they were not competent to decide that specific random boys could be trusted not to jump them in their sleep. My kids have both shared apartments (not rooms) with opposite-sex housemates. They may have 99 problems, but sex with their roommates ain’t one.</p>
<p>“Kids who are celibate and wish to remain so, would likely choose same-gender housing to avoid physical temptation until such time as they are emotionally and financially ready for all the possible consequences of intimacy. Their parents would want them to have that choice.”</p>
<p>Amen to that. So glad that my son’s college has NO co-ed dorms of any kind, and rules about visitation by opposite-sex friends.</p>
<p>Just to clarify,it’s National Review, not National Observer, though I do like the thought of conflating NR with a scandal sheet. NRO is for NR Online.</p>
<p>I lived in one co-ed house for several years as an undergrad. There were a number of relationships that developed over the years. I just now realized that almost all of those couples ended up getting married.</p>
<p>It may well be in the next few generations that room assignments, restrooms, dressing rooms everything will be coed. Actually in some worlds it is that way already. When we went hiking/mountain walking in Europe, we would stay at wilderness cabins that are out there for shelters. They were coed. Everyone in a room, get a space and sleep. No coed bathrooms out there either. </p>
<p>However, for right now, enough folks would prefer segregation by the sexes in certain situations. Roommates for their college student is one of them. It has the strong weight of tradition behind it. </p>
<p>I don’t have any problem with coed dorms, never did. Or coed apartments. But there are people who do. If that is the case, they should avoid schools that do not offer single sex dorm situations. If there is enough fuss, they will offer these options. Schools are now offering mixed sex roommates. Again, that’s fine with me, but I don’t think I want it for my child, and I am not willing to have that forced on me. I would not want to send my child to a school that forces that situation. If the schools that I liked best started forcing folks in that policy, I would object. If enough folks object enough, I think it will have the college rethink the situation. </p>
<p>Now when it comes to those who have no rooms because they missed the deadlines, they just might get stuck in assignments they don’t like. That one is on the student’s head. </p>
<p>I don’t know what the stats are with sex within the dorms or apartments when there are mixed sexes living together. That isn’t the only issue that comes up. You have the friends coming in the room to complicate issues. I think ignoring human sexuality at that age is really a mistake. Also thinking that it is not a power keg is a mistake too. There are too many kids who are tipped off the brink emotionally over a stupid relationship happenings. When your own bedroom is not even a sanctuary from this, it can be a problem. We are just adding new problems to what is already a situation that can lead to issues. Having a roommate of any sex, any type really cuts the privacy. Your just cutting closer to the quick. </p>
<p>As I said earlier, this may be the way things will be in the future. Maybe it will be an improvement. But I have a whole bunch of issues that I think really make it more stressful when you start assigning kids of different sexes to the same bedroom.</p>
<p>Stanford’s policy seems reasonable. Look, the only way to be in a m/f room would be for both the male and female to go through the request process, both citing the name as the desired roommate. So a very small percentage of kids are actually going to go through with it. I know parents are only afraid of their children getting hurt or into trouble, or being distracted from studying. But if you think about the worst results that could come of a failed m/f room - maybe an emotional breakup, have to file for different rooms, grades are hurt, maybe the guy alienates himself from his guy friends, etc - It’s all just a learning experience. It’s an opportunity to learn about people and life.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to underplay the huge fear that parents understandably feel when their daughter is living with ‘some guy’. But I’m saying that if the two students and the college mutually agree, then as adults, they are entitled to the chance to try - and probably have rough times. </p>
<p>I couldn’t imagine rooming with my gf. What a nightmare. But honestly, being in a guys only building, or even floor, would be much more a nightmare. It’s just more real and interesting with mixed halls, (same sex dorm rooms). The sex will happen regardless of the dorming situation, but it just seems that the environment that Stanford is setting up, with a full range of options, is the way to go.</p>
The Stanford coops are student-managed; they get to make their own rules regarding who lives where. My guess is that they don’t have to follow the official dorm rules about who rooms with who. Sounds fun to me. I wouldn’t have any problem with my kids living in the coops or choosing to live in mixed sex rooms.</p>
<p>this discussion of “morals” is outrageous. a liberal arts education should embrace tolerance and diversity, and this includes aspects of student life, like dorming. morality is highly subjective and the conservative god-fearing christian overtones some parents use to drive home these ideas is just WOW.</p>
<p>gender is a given. living situations are not being forced upon anyone. colleges are rightly offering options. it’s time people acknowledge our present situation. we are no longer in the McCarthy era folks.</p>
<p>i’m a staunch republican with a religious background, but even i see this not as an issue of morality, but an issue of equality.</p>
My daughter is at a woman’s college with single-sex housing for all freshman, mostly in doubles, triples or quads. Boyfriends sleeping over was pretty much the norm. (The reason my daughter prefers a single is simply to avoid the whole overnight guest conflict problem – it can get kind of crowded and the single-sex school & housing kind of eliminates the opportunity for easy room swaps such as what I described in a previous post). </p>
<p>So there is sex in both situations, but a somewhat higher likelihood of private sex in the co-ed living environment.</p>
<p>I don’t see how same-gender housing, as opposed to the more common co-ed dorm, in any way helps kids avoid physical temptation. Except at a few colleges associated with religious groups, kids can have opposite-sex guests, including overnight guests, in their rooms even if the building only houses students of one gender. </p>
<p>As a freshman, my daughter lived in a single in an all-women’s building. As a sophomore, she is living in a double in a co-ed building. Finding privacy was much easier for her last year than it is this year.</p>
Uh, Dartmouth <em>allows</em> it – it doesn’t guarantee or force it. The vast majority of housing at Dartmouth is not gender-neutral anyway, and a lot of floors are actually single-sex. Dartmouth’s housing policy is on the conservative side.</p>
<p>–southercali: you are the one bringing Christianity into this discussion, not those of us who are “conservative” about unmarried guys and girls living in the same room. This isn’t necessarily about religion for some of us. For some it’s a matter of maturity, timing, and the stage of life a college student is in. But since you mention it, I can guarantee you that many Hindu and Muslim parents would object to this set-up, as would non-religious people from more modest cultures.<br>
–one can peacefully accept the lifestyles of others without desiring to embrace them for one’s own self. This does not make one intolerant. Why do so many people with liberal views not feel any need to show tolerance to conservatives? We’re freaks, our views are outrageous, our attitudes are akin to McCarthyism (that’s an odd stretch), what else?
–let’s not confuse the issue here. Mixed dorms by floor or by room are nothing new, and most people don’t object anymore to their existence. The issue at hand is that of mixing genders WITHIN a dorm ROOM, and especially without the student’s and student’s parents’ pre-consent. This is a different animal.
–at one college we toured recently, the guide kept talking about how laid-back the campus was, and how she and many other students walk to class and to the dining hall in their pajamas. One can only imagine how they walk around the halls of their dorm, and inside their own room. If everyone were modest, then this discussion would be moot. But I’ve seen how many high school girls like to dress for class and can only imagine how they’d be dressing inside their dorm rooms. (Victoria’s Secret is a really trendy spot for girls to shop now, for example.) I guess that’s what I meant by temptation–the regular sight of half-dressed young men and women in one’s sleeping area. Some kids can handle this just fine, without hangups or whatever, and some can’t. You have to know your own kid’s psychological makeup, and I think a parent has the right to do what s/he believes is in the best interest of the student. Who is anyone to judge? (and for the record, S lived in a co-ed by room dorm with a co-ed bathroom and I had absolutely no problem with that set-up because it still allowed for privacy.)</p>
NRO is for NR Online.</p>