RSS
Facebook
Twitter
E-PrinceEarlier this month, the administration announced a gender-neutral housing (GNH) pilot program to explore the possibility of allowing students to live with roommates of the opposite sex. This board has advocated for GNH several times, and we are glad this ...(back to the article)
The opinions expressed here are those of the individual commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of The Daily Princetonian Publishing Company, Inc. We do not take responsibility for the opinions, facts, or claims presented by individual commenters, and reserve the right to moderate or delete inappropriate comments.
Well done dissenters!
The dissenters seem not to be aware that no one is forcing anyone to live with someone of the opposite sex. If the gender of your neighbors is enough to make you uncomfortable, you really need to get a life.
i like the idea of gender neutral housing, just not all the liberal politics involved with it
I don't understand Mr. Hat's comment. To me, gender-neutral housing isn't a political issue at all; it just seems like a common-sense housing alternative to offer to Princeton students who are, for the most part, mature adults. That's how it's been described by Janet Dickerson, and that's how I think it should be perceived. I also don't understand the views of the dissenters, who are concerned about the discomfort of a "much larger minority (those who are uncomfortable with GNH for any reason)." If people are uncomfortable with mixed-gender housing, then they don't need to elect to enter into it! You can choose to draw with a same-gender roommate or group, or to draw into a single, or whatever; no one is talking about *forcing* students into mixed-gender housing situations - so I really don't grasp the problem here. As for the concern about "a host of new problems within the rooms themselves (relationship breakups, for example)" - I don't understand how mixed-gender rooming situations are going to create any more problems than same-gender rooming situations. Roommates who end up hating each other are not unheard of in any housing setup, and somehow these problems get dealt with; moreover, I'm not convinced that the majority of people electing to live in mixed-gender housing would consist of romantically-involved couples, anyway. Dozens of colleges across the country have had mixed-gender housing in place for years, and there doesn't seem to have been a huge nationwide problem caused by "relationship breakups" - why should that be a particular problem at Princeton?
Excellent and well reasoned dissent.
What puzzles me is why the majority of the editorial board favors jumping into such a widespread GNH experiment all across campus. Why not start small with Spelman and see how that pans out? It seems unwise to launch a drastic and sudden overhaul of the entire housing system based on so little data.
I don't understand why there is any dissent on this issue. Except for perhaps the incoming freshman class, all sophomore, juniors and seniors should be able to live with whoever they want.
I think its ridiculous that, during summer break, we can all go off, live with whoever we want, wherever we want, in cities all over the world, but when we come back to campus, our housing options are restricted by University policy. I'm 22 years old, I think I can decide for myself what is in my best interest. And if my neighbor doesn't like it, he/she/they can get over it.... When you're out in the real world for good, what are you going to do then? Complain to your landlord about the gender-neutral housing next door?
But we're NOT in the real world--we're in the Orange Bubble for four years, like it or not. And while we're here the University is able to regulate various aspects of our lives. We accept things like RCAs, the residential colleges, and PSafe, so I don't see why all of a sudden the University should have no say in housing choice. No matter what your opinion is on gender neutral housing, surely you recognize that we grant the University a certain degree of control over many other aspects of our lives--why should this aspect of housing be any different?
If you're suggesting that the University should be much more hands-off and libertarian in its attitude towards students, wouldn't it logically follow that things like RCAs, ResColleges, and other "in loco parentis"-type programs have to be abolished and students be left to fend for themselves just as they would in the "real world"?
@1978: yes, to me, gnh shouldnt be a political issue. however, certain ppl attach politics to it.
for examples, read this:
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/2009/10/26/24270/
Yes, the University has the right to regulate some aspects of our lives. But when I'm paying $6,000+ per year for a dorm room, I should also have the right to regulate who shares that room.
Other university policies meant to "control" other aspects of our lives are to protect our health, safety and well-being, none of which have anything to do with who shares my common room or sleeps in the room next door.
Finally, I'm a senior. And like many upperclassmen, I don't have an RCA, I don't live in a Residential College, I don't eat in the dining halls and I don't have/need a parental figure in my college life. We already fend for ourselves and, somehow, we all manage to survive and thrive.
@@support: But RCAs and Psafety are less-obnoxious versions of landlords and police, both of which exist in the real world.
The res colleges have basically no effect on your life unless you deliberately go to their study halls, etc.