The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionLife still coed at CUA
by Heidi Schlumpf on Nov. 02, 2011
"If people want to have sex they are going to have sex,” said Melissa Reid, a freshman living in the all-female Ryan Hall. Reid, who goes to Mass nearly every other day, said she talked about the policy in one of her psychology classes recently. Nearly all the students, including Reid, agreed that this housing change will not stop students from having sex or drinking. "If you have to separate people to prevent that then what are you saying about those people?” she told "Inside Higher Ed."
I hate to say, "I told you so," ... and I won't, because it's too early and there is no conclusive or scientific evidence yet, but this journalistic report from The Catholic University of America by "Inside Higher Ed" shows that the new single-sex dorms at the school haven't had much effect on either binge drinking or "hooking up."
In June, when CUA President John Garvey announced the decision to revert to single-gender dorms after being co-ed for years, I argued that while his stated intention was to lower the incidence of drinking and sexual activity, there was little evidence his move would accomplish much. Instead, I believe, it was most likely a decision meant to satisfy parents and church leaders, primarily conservative ones.
The "Insider Higher Ed" reporter estimates that the student body is mixed, with about half approving of the change and half upset about it. Spray-painted graffiti depicting a man and a woman with the slogan “Life is Co-Ed” has appeared on several places on campus. A planned student referendum on the subject, which will not be binding on the university, will reveal more accurately student opinion.
More interesting would be data that show that Garvey's move was well received by his true audience. Perhaps evidence of increased donations from conservative Catholics?
Anyone who thinks that
Anyone who thinks that putting young men & women into different dorms will stop them drinking or getting together with each other in ways of which he does not approve, is a fool.
For heavens sake, most colleges, not dorms, were themselves single sex, back in the 20s, 30s, & 40s and they were hardly full of teetotalers, and there were plenty of sexual shenanigans going on then too. The real rein on that kind of stuff was fear of getting pregnant, not any inability of college students to find times & places to be alone together.
If they want to, they will. A wise college president finds ways to encourage them not-want to. Putting them in different dorms is not one of those ways.
{Although, the girls' dorms will smell nicer! : -- ) }
I'm reminded of the biblical
I'm reminded of the biblical story of the tree of knowledge. It seems that when you make eg sex in some sense illegal, the attraction grows.
And to some extent it explains the rape of children by the church. Where the only access was to mostly boys, there were no alter girls until fairly recently.
Better that if people do it safely, then make them feel like criminals.
Or we could - this is far out - maybe create a drug that would once taken make sex mildly painful. Something you only did for children specifically.
Just a wild thought. But it would take the animal out of most of us.
But maybe destroy marriage. I dont know.
I lived in Ryan when it was
I lived in Ryan when it was all male in the 80s. That never stopped anyone from hooking up, although we never called it that. As far as I know, only the RA had a girlfriend who slept over.
Post new comment