the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
What can I say, Pants Man? Your logic is impeccable. Put boys and girls together and everything goes to shit. It's very obvious and we are all very silly for not immediately grasping this flawless, irrefutable point.
What can I say, Pants Man? Your logic is impeccable. Put boys and girls together and everything goes to shit. It's very obvious and we are all very silly for not immediately grasping this flawless, irrefutable point.
I think the crux of the issue is that you are acting like someone from the Victorian era.
either that, or you guys are placing most of your argument in the hands of 18 and 19 year olds, most of whom are living on their own for the first time.
which is hilarious.
Well, since 18 and 19 year olds are the ones you are saying aren't mature enough, I don't see why my opinion and observations of college as a 19 year old are invalid.
Because the plural of anecdote isn't data? Look, this is the Debate and Discourse section of a video game forum, as a whole, the people who are here are probably smarter and a little more mature than the average member of their age group. I have no idea how the average 18 or 19 year old would handle a co-ed dorm room and neither do you.
That said, I don't think this is all that big a deal, except from the school's perspective, there's a question of liability that might make me shy away from this if I were a school administrator. All it takes is one bad case or event and the school is potentially fucked in a legal sense.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
This is stupid.
I'm not even sure how to respond to it, it's so stupid.
Dude, I'm in college RIGHT NOW and we're responsible enough to not fuck our room mate. Yes, we drink, yes we try to get laid but I really don't see how this makes coed dorm rooms horrible. NEWS FLASH: Teenage males can indeed go long periods of time without trying to screw anything that moves.
hooray for you and your roommate
look, i'm not saying all freshmen are stupid and horny and looking to get drunk. but a lot of them are, and if you don't think there'd be more problems with a 1000 coed dorm rooms compared with a 1000 single sex dorm rooms, you're out of your mind.
I'm very out of my mind then. Not only do I not see anything wrong with this, but I think it is a step in the right direction.
i know the opposite of what drez is saying just as much as he knows it. it's a statement of opinion, not fact.
You said "disagree". You should probably choose your words better. Something like "I understand that you know thing X, but I also know thing Y in addition". Saying you disagree is saying that Drez is wrong.
secondly: arguing that 50 year olds are on the whole any way comparable to the maturity level of 18 year olds? really? REALLY?
Really. Oh and 40 year olds, but whatever. My point, that you completely missed, is that immaturity can exist at all ages. At what point do you say it's OK for co-ed roommates? What makes you judge and jury on choosing that age?
lastly, read the OP. i said that if the students are mature enough to handle this, this would be fine and great, like the situation in the article. my problem is that colleges are going to have some kind of liability in this if something goes wrong AND the fact that college freshman are generally looking to get laid and drunk.
Freshman roommate pairings go wrong all the time. The sex doesn't matter. My freshman roommate sucked, and I picked him. If you don't like your roommate, guess what, either 1) suck it up and deal or 2) bitch and get your room changed. It can and does happen all of the time.
but let's stop with the retarded "NUH UH I AM TOTALLY MATURE SEE YOU ARE WRONG" crap.
Just as soon as you stop assuming all college freshman want to do nothing but fuck every member of the opposite sex they lay eyes upon, we'll stop telling you that mature people exist in the world.
Dude, I'm in college RIGHT NOW and we're responsible enough to not fuck our room mate. Yes, we drink, yes we try to get laid but I really don't see how this makes coed dorm rooms horrible. NEWS FLASH: Teenage males can indeed go long periods of time without trying to screw anything that moves.
hooray for you and your roommate
look, i'm not saying all freshmen are stupid and horny and looking to get drunk. but a lot of them are, and if you don't think there'd be more problems with a 1000 coed dorm rooms compared with a 1000 single sex dorm rooms, you're out of your mind.
The thing is, we are not okay with your broad sweeping generalities and the implications they entail. So find a new, cogent argument and try again. Your fallacies just continue to detract from your waning point.
wait, my broad, sweeping generality that teenagers are horny? do you really want me to provide emprical evidence to that effect?
i'm sorry your panties are in a bunch over the implication that college freshman are on the whole much more prone to retardation than even upper classmen, but that is hardly some kind of radical assumption on my part.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
but let's stop with the retarded "NUH UH I AM TOTALLY MATURE SEE YOU ARE WRONG" crap.
Just as soon as you stop assuming all college freshman want to do nothing but fuck every member of the opposite sex they lay eyes upon, we'll stop telling you that mature people exist in the world.
Oh shit. If I room with a dude, that means I will constantly have to not have sex with him. Fuck. What will I do? What if I am in no way attracted to him, and he isn't even gay? Fuck. This is a dilemma. I'll have to room with a girl. But then, because she is female, I will inevitably end up having sex with her, because even though I'm gay, I am obligated to sex her up because she is within my 300 meter dong proximity.
That most important piece of this is that it isn't terrible common. If you read the article you see that there are hundreds of people doing this when there are thousands of people living in the residence halls for whatever universities are offering it. People seem to be effectively policing themselves.
I know it's cool and all to think that college kids are still kids but when do we start treating them like adults, allowed to make decisions (that sometimes turn out poorly) for themselves?
the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
For many reasons, some of which have been discussed already:
1) Gives homosexual students more chance to feel comfortable.
2) Gives heterosexual friends the ability to room together.
Why are you ignoring these things? Those are only two good reasons out of a possible hundred or thousand more.
I'm not assuming that there will necessarily be sexual tension between a homosexual male rooming with another male (homosexual or not) but why not allow them a choice? And why not allow co-gender platonic couples the opportunity to room together?
Nothing you've suggested is a valid reason against this. You're just throwing out silly hypotheticals which reflect - as others have suggested - a very conservative, backwards point of view.
That said, I don't think this is all that big a deal, except from the school's perspective, there's a question of liability that might make me shy away from this if I were a school administrator. All it takes is one bad case or event and the school is potentially fucked in a legal sense.
i've been saying this from the beginning.
You said "disagree". You should probably choose your words better. Something like "I understand that you know thing X, but I also know thing Y in addition". Saying you disagree is saying that Drez is wrong.
no, saying i disagree is saying that i disagree with his opinion. he "knows" that people approve of co ed living, and I "know" that people don't. it's all opinion.
Freshman roommate pairings go wrong all the time. The sex doesn't matter. My freshman roommate sucked, and I picked him. If you don't like your roommate, guess what, either 1) suck it up and deal or 2) bitch and get your room changed. It can and does happen all of the time.
yes, they DO go wrong all the time. do you really think that adding the element of the pairing being coed does not have the potential of making the situation that much worse?
Just as soon as you stop assuming all college freshman want to do nothing but fuck every member of the opposite sex they lay eyes upon, we'll stop telling you that mature people exist in the world.
Christ, i acknowledged this in the OP
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
You said "disagree". You should probably choose your words better. Something like "I understand that you know thing X, but I also know thing Y in addition". Saying you disagree is saying that Drez is wrong.
no, saying i disagree is saying that i disagree with his opinion. he "knows" that people approve of co ed living, and I "know" that people don't. it's all opinion.
No, you still don't get it. Whatever though, this doesn't even matter to your argument.
Freshman roommate pairings go wrong all the time. The sex doesn't matter. My freshman roommate sucked, and I picked him. If you don't like your roommate, guess what, either 1) suck it up and deal or 2) bitch and get your room changed. It can and does happen all of the time.
yes, they DO go wrong all the time. do you really think that adding the element of the pairing being coed does not have the potential of making the situation that much worse?
Just as soon as you stop assuming all college freshman want to do nothing but fuck every member of the opposite sex they lay eyes upon, we'll stop telling you that mature people exist in the world.
Christ, i acknowledged this in the OP
Then point it out to me, because no matter how many italics you use I'm not seeing it.
the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
For many reasons, some of which have been discussed already:
1) Gives homosexual students more chance to feel comfortable.
2) Gives heterosexual friends the ability to room together.
Why are you ignoring these things? Those are only two good reasons out of a possible hundred or thousand more.
I'm not assuming that there will necessarily be sexual tension between a homosexual male rooming with another male (homosexual or not) but why not allow them a choice? And why not allow co-gender platonic couples the opportunity to room together?
Nothing you've suggested is a valid reason against this. You're just throwing out silly hypotheticals which reflect - as others have suggested - a very conservative, backwards point of view.
Two assumptions are being made here: you guys are convinced that a large group of 18 and 19 year olds living together will be no less mature than any other group of people will be when living with each other. fine. i think you're totally wrong, but fine.
my assumption is that they will not, but how in the fuck is that any less rational than what you're saying?
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
0
Options
thorgotthere is special providencein the fall of a sparrowRegistered Userregular
the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
For many reasons, some of which have been discussed already:
1) Gives homosexual students more chance to feel comfortable.
2) Gives heterosexual friends the ability to room together.
Why are you ignoring these things? Those are only two good reasons out of a possible hundred or thousand more.
I'm not assuming that there will necessarily be sexual tension between a homosexual male rooming with another male (homosexual or not) but why not allow them a choice? And why not allow co-gender platonic couples the opportunity to room together?
Nothing you've suggested is a valid reason against this. You're just throwing out silly hypotheticals which reflect - as others have suggested - a very conservative, backwards point of view.
Two assumptions are being made here: you guys are convinced that a large group of 18 and 19 year olds living together will be no less mature than any other group of people will be when living with each other. fine. i think you're totally wrong, but fine.
my assumption is that they will not, but how in the fuck is that any less rational than what you're saying?
When you say large group, I'm imagining you shaking your head in disappointment over the thought of hundreds of people living in a coed orgy room.
Then point it out to me, because no matter how many italics you use I'm not seeing it.
i guess this is great if the people rooming with each other are compatable and also incredibly mature, but there are just so many things i can see going wrong with this that i'm really surprised that colleges would take the risk in doing this. if there was ever some kind of sexual incident, i'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the parents would try and find a way to make the college liable in some fashion. i just envision thousands and thousands of horny teenagers signing up for this thinking it'll get them laid.
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
When you say large group, I'm imagining you shaking your head in disappointment over the thought of hundreds of people living in a coed orgy room.
i know, right? it's so much easier to argue for this when you imagine the other guy as a stuffy conservative guy wearing bifocals who hates sex and HURF HURF THOSE DARN KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
Your argument is that people within two years of each other are so massively different in maturity that their choices for who to live with should be different from an institutional stand point. 18 year old boys like sex but 20 year olds don't?
the other thing is: as rare as sexual assault might end up being, why should colleges even try and facilitate coed rooms, which is only going to serve to increase the chances of it happening?
For many reasons, some of which have been discussed already:
1) Gives homosexual students more chance to feel comfortable.
2) Gives heterosexual friends the ability to room together.
Why are you ignoring these things? Those are only two good reasons out of a possible hundred or thousand more.
I'm not assuming that there will necessarily be sexual tension between a homosexual male rooming with another male (homosexual or not) but why not allow them a choice? And why not allow co-gender platonic couples the opportunity to room together?
Nothing you've suggested is a valid reason against this. You're just throwing out silly hypotheticals which reflect - as others have suggested - a very conservative, backwards point of view.
Two assumptions are being made here: you guys are convinced that a large group of 18 and 19 year olds living together will be no less mature than any other group of people will be when living with each other. fine. i think you're totally wrong, but fine.
my assumption is that they will not, but how in the fuck is that any less rational than what you're saying?
Because they are adults, and should be allowed to if they so desire..?
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
Your argument is that people within two years of each other are so massively different in maturity that their choices for who to live with should be different from an institutional stand point. 18 year old boys like sex but 20 year olds don't?
Of course they don't, sex is for 18 year olds. It's so last year.
agoaj on
0
Options
thorgotthere is special providencein the fall of a sparrowRegistered Userregular
Then point it out to me, because no matter how many italics you use I'm not seeing it.
i guess this is great if the people rooming with each other are compatable and also incredibly mature, but there are just so many things i can see going wrong with this that i'm really surprised that colleges would take the risk in doing this. if there was ever some kind of sexual incident, i'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the parents would try and find a way to make the college liable in some fashion. i just envision thousands and thousands of horny teenagers signing up for this thinking it'll get them laid.
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
I fail to see how a single year could make a difference in terms of maturity, so that is a pretty stupid restriction.
And I know for a fact that Brown gives freshmen a roommate. This process cannot give them a roommate of the opposite sex. I'm willing to bet the other colleges in the article do something similar.
lastly, read the OP. i said that if the students are mature enough to handle this, this would be fine and great, like the situation in the article. my problem is that colleges are going to have some kind of liability in this if something goes wrong.
I don't really see any greater liability here than there already is in say, dorms with males and females on separate floors within the same building that are easily accessible. That was the situation in the one year I lived in dorms many, many, moons ago (like, so many moons ago most of you peeps were probably in elementary school), and I presume its fairly common. Or maybe its crazy liberal Canadian invention, but somehow I doubt it.
I'm no lawyer, but what exactly is the increased legal liability here compared to the above situation? Is the College or University even responsible for the actions of students in dorms?
The worst case we're looking at here is someone getting sexually assaulted by their opposite gender roomie. Unfortunately sexual assaults happen all the time at colleges and universities, both off and on campus. I'm not aware of the educational institution being held liable in these situations, though its quite possible I'm just totally uninformed there.
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
Your argument is that people within two years of each other are so massively different in maturity that their choices for who to live with should be different from an institutional stand point. 18 year old boys like sex but 20 year olds don't?
no, it has nothing to do with that. most colleges require freshmen to live on campus in dorms. upperclassmen have that experience, and would understand that living in a dorm room with someone isn't some happy fun time sleepover. most people learn a lot about having to live someone else their freshman year, and i think that if you're going to live with someone of the opposite sex, you should have that information.
"Incredibly mature" is making an assumption that you really have no basis for.
fine, if you want to get into semantics, "mature enough to handle living with the opposite sex"
that argument is still no more "rational" than what i've been saying.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
18 year olds are adults, and can be expected to act as such. As long as this is strictly an optional, request-driven program where couples living together is discouraged, I don't see too much of a problem with it.
lastly, read the OP. i said that if the students are mature enough to handle this, this would be fine and great, like the situation in the article. my problem is that colleges are going to have some kind of liability in this if something goes wrong.
I don't really see any greater liability here than there already is in say, dorms with males and females on separate floors within the same building that are easily accessible. That was the situation in the one year I lived in dorms many, many, moons ago (like, so many moons ago most of you peeps were probably in elementary school), and I presume its fairly common. Or maybe its crazy liberal Canadian invention, but somehow I doubt it.
I'm no lawyer, but what exactly is the increased legal liability here compared to the above situation? Is the College or University even responsible for the actions of students in dorms?
The worst case we're looking at here is someone getting sexually assaulted by their opposite gender roomie. Unfortunately sexual assaults happen all the time at colleges and universities, both off and on campus. I'm not aware of the educational institution being held liable in these situations, though its quite possible I'm just totally uninformed there.
the liability might (and i say might because hell, i'm not a lawyer either) be increased because the assaulter would have been given access to the person by the college itself. the claim could be made that the college didn't do an adequate enough of a vetting process on the roommate, and that led to the assault.
but again, that's just a guess, i'm sure there's someone who knows more about the liability involved than i am
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
0
Options
thorgotthere is special providencein the fall of a sparrowRegistered Userregular
When you say large group, I'm imagining you shaking your head in disappointment over the thought of hundreds of people living in a coed orgy room.
i know, right? it's so much easier to argue for this when you imagine the other guy as a stuffy conservative guy wearing bifocals who hates sex and HURF HURF THOSE DARN KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN
I'm not arguing for this. It's just that I could care less about who other people choose to live with, as long as it is their choice, and I think it's amusing that it matters so much to you.
18 year olds are adults, and can be expected to act as such. As long as this is strictly an optional, request-driven program where couples living together is discouraged, I don't see too much of a problem with it.
Pretty much. Although I'd certainly hesitate to call most college first years "mature". But it's not killing anyone, so whatever.
I don't think I'd ever wanna live in the same room as a girl who was just a friend/roommate though. Changing and habits and whatnot could get kinda weird.
When you say large group, I'm imagining you shaking your head in disappointment over the thought of hundreds of people living in a coed orgy room.
i know, right? it's so much easier to argue for this when you imagine the other guy as a stuffy conservative guy wearing bifocals who hates sex and HURF HURF THOSE DARN KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN
I'm not arguing for this. It's just that I could care less about who other people choose to live with, as long as it is their choice, and I think it's amusing that it matters so much to you.
the thing is, they don't "choose" to live with any particular person unless they request them. coed roommates are chosen just as randomly as same sex roommates.
but you're right, overall it is a choice that they make, and i'm not here to say that someone making that choice is "wrong." i just think its surprising given the potential problems involved, which i think are more numerous than in same sex rooms.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
Your argument is that people within two years of each other are so massively different in maturity that their choices for who to live with should be different from an institutional stand point. 18 year old boys like sex but 20 year olds don't?
no, it has nothing to do with that. most colleges require freshmen to live on campus in dorms. upperclassmen have that experience, and would understand that living in a dorm room with someone isn't some happy fun time sleepover. most people learn a lot about having to live someone else their freshman year, and i think that if you're going to live with someone of the opposite sex, you should have that information.
"Incredibly mature" is making an assumption that you really have no basis for.
fine, if you want to get into semantics, "mature enough to handle living with the opposite sex"
that argument is still no more "rational" than what i've been saying.
This is why your argument is irrational. Why does "living with the opposite sex" require more maturity than "living with the same sex"? Is "don't rape your roommate" merely an extension of maturity? I mean, is that your argument?
All this is based on the hypothesis that sexual assaults will result, which has not been shown to be true at all.
that's one of the concerns, but i don't think you could say that coed rooms make sexual assault any less likely.
and if even if it isn't any more likely at all, the PR nightmare that would result of just one happening would be enough for me to reject the idea if i were in charge of a college.
edit:
and yeah drez, living with the opposite sex does require more maturity than living with the same sex, especially if you're 18 or 19 or haven't lived in a dorm/apartment setting before. the fact that you're even trying to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
All this is based on the hypothesis that sexual assaults will result, which has not been shown to be true at all.
that's one of the concerns, but i don't think you could say that coed rooms make sexual assault any less likely.
and if even if it isn't any more likely at all, the PR nightmare that would result of just one happening would be enough for me to reject the idea if i were in charge of a college.
You're coming at this from a million stupid angles. I'm not even sure what you're trying to do anymore...help the university save face if some tragedy strikes? Who gives a shit about "PR nightmare"? I think this damns your position outright, as "PR nightmares" in this country quite often occur when people overreact to something that isn't the blamed party's fault at all. Not always, but it happens often enough that when someone starts talking about a "PR nightmare," I yawn and tune out because it is irrelevant.
and yeah drez, living with the opposite sex does require more maturity than living with the same sex, especially if you're 18 or 19. the fact that you're even trying to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
I fail to see how a single year could make a difference in terms of maturity, so that is a pretty stupid restriction.
And I know for a fact that Brown gives freshmen a roommate. This process cannot give them a roommate of the opposite sex. I'm willing to bet the other colleges in the article do something similar.
To be fair, a lot can happen in one year. I know I matured a whole lot during my junior year, because my boyfriend moved away.
Anyway, I went to Caltech, and they've been doing this co-ed thing for a while, but co-ed roomies are pretty rare. The key factor here is that all Caltech students are supposed to pick their own roommates. The only time you're assigned a roommate is the first two weeks at school, before you pick a house to join. After you pick a house through a process that I've been told is similar to Rush Week, the members of the house choose their own roommates and pick their own rooms, with priority given to upperclassmen. It is virtually impossible for anyone to be forced to lived with someone with whom they were not comfortable. It was never a big deal for any of us, and I don't see why it should be.
As a side note, the bathrooms in some of the dorms are also co-ed, but it's mostly out of convenience/tradition, because there didn't use to be many girls there (actually, when I went there, some of the designated girl's bathrooms still had urinals in them because they used to be men's bathrooms). Though a large portion of the dorms were recently renovated, so maybe they put in gender-exclusive bathrooms or something.
and yeah drez, living with the opposite sex does require more maturity than living with the same sex, especially if you're 18 or 19. the fact that you're even trying to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
no u r
if you can't even accept something that simple, there's no point in responding to your posts
Anyway, I went to Caltech, and they've been doing this co-ed thing for a while, but co-ed roomies are pretty rare. The key factor here is that all Caltech students are supposed to pick their own roommates. The only time you're assigned a roommate is the first two weeks at school, before you pick a house to join. After you pick a house through a process that I've been told is similar to Rush Week, the members of the house choose their own roommates and pick their own rooms, with priority given to upperclassmen. It is virtually impossible for anyone to be forced to lived with someone with whom they were not comfortable. It was never a big deal for any of us, and I don't see why it should be.
this seems like the ideal situation if you're going to do coed rooms for freshmen. if you can choose exactly who you're rooming with, there's no problem here at all.
Pants Man on
"okay byron, my grandma has a right to be happy, so i give you my blessing. just... don't get her pregnant. i don't need another mom."
the thing is, they don't "choose" to live with any particular person unless they request them. coed roommates are chosen just as randomly as same sex roommates.
Do yourself a favor and read your own article next time. Coed roommates are not being randomly paired together in any of the cases the article is talking about. These coed situations only occur when the two people explicitly choose to live together.
and yeah drez, living with the opposite sex does require more maturity than living with the same sex, especially if you're 18 or 19. the fact that you're even trying to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
no u r
if you can't even accept something that simple, there's no point in responding to your posts
While appeal to popularity or whatever might be a logical misstep, I'm going to go ahead and point out that pretty much everybody in the thread disagrees with you, on THIS and every other point you've made.
You've not justified your statement and you apparently have no desire to explain why I should assume that it requires more maturity to cohabitate with someone of the opposite sex as it does to cohabitate with someone of the same sex. This is not some kind of inherent, natural truth that I should somehow hold as self-evident, so you're going to have to validate your claim before you (a) assume it is true, (b) blame us for not assuming it is true, and (c) say that I am "ridiculous" for not holding it as true, especially if your entire argument is predicated on this assumption.
Also, your language is obnoxious. I'm so sorry that I have not achieved perfect empathy with you in this debate, that I am unable to comprehend the mindset that drives your position in this debate, but as "ridiculous" as my fundamental views may be, I assure you, yours are equally silly. Or maybe not, I don't know, you just won't fucking explain them. "Ha ha, how could you not agree with me, you FOOL!" is not a valid argument, ever. So if you plan on actually debating this, debate it. If you plan on sitting in the corner jerking off, then go do it in private, please.
Posts
Because the plural of anecdote isn't data? Look, this is the Debate and Discourse section of a video game forum, as a whole, the people who are here are probably smarter and a little more mature than the average member of their age group. I have no idea how the average 18 or 19 year old would handle a co-ed dorm room and neither do you.
That said, I don't think this is all that big a deal, except from the school's perspective, there's a question of liability that might make me shy away from this if I were a school administrator. All it takes is one bad case or event and the school is potentially fucked in a legal sense.
I'm not even sure how to respond to it, it's so stupid.
I'm very out of my mind then. Not only do I not see anything wrong with this, but I think it is a step in the right direction.
You said "disagree". You should probably choose your words better. Something like "I understand that you know thing X, but I also know thing Y in addition". Saying you disagree is saying that Drez is wrong.
Really. Oh and 40 year olds, but whatever. My point, that you completely missed, is that immaturity can exist at all ages. At what point do you say it's OK for co-ed roommates? What makes you judge and jury on choosing that age?
Freshman roommate pairings go wrong all the time. The sex doesn't matter. My freshman roommate sucked, and I picked him. If you don't like your roommate, guess what, either 1) suck it up and deal or 2) bitch and get your room changed. It can and does happen all of the time.
Just as soon as you stop assuming all college freshman want to do nothing but fuck every member of the opposite sex they lay eyes upon, we'll stop telling you that mature people exist in the world.
wait, my broad, sweeping generality that teenagers are horny? do you really want me to provide emprical evidence to that effect?
i'm sorry your panties are in a bunch over the implication that college freshman are on the whole much more prone to retardation than even upper classmen, but that is hardly some kind of radical assumption on my part.
I know it's cool and all to think that college kids are still kids but when do we start treating them like adults, allowed to make decisions (that sometimes turn out poorly) for themselves?
For many reasons, some of which have been discussed already:
1) Gives homosexual students more chance to feel comfortable.
2) Gives heterosexual friends the ability to room together.
Why are you ignoring these things? Those are only two good reasons out of a possible hundred or thousand more.
I'm not assuming that there will necessarily be sexual tension between a homosexual male rooming with another male (homosexual or not) but why not allow them a choice? And why not allow co-gender platonic couples the opportunity to room together?
Nothing you've suggested is a valid reason against this. You're just throwing out silly hypotheticals which reflect - as others have suggested - a very conservative, backwards point of view.
i've been saying this from the beginning.
no, saying i disagree is saying that i disagree with his opinion. he "knows" that people approve of co ed living, and I "know" that people don't. it's all opinion.
yes, they DO go wrong all the time. do you really think that adding the element of the pairing being coed does not have the potential of making the situation that much worse?
Christ, i acknowledged this in the OP
No, you still don't get it. Whatever though, this doesn't even matter to your argument.
No, I don't.
Then point it out to me, because no matter how many italics you use I'm not seeing it.
Two assumptions are being made here: you guys are convinced that a large group of 18 and 19 year olds living together will be no less mature than any other group of people will be when living with each other. fine. i think you're totally wrong, but fine.
my assumption is that they will not, but how in the fuck is that any less rational than what you're saying?
When you say large group, I'm imagining you shaking your head in disappointment over the thought of hundreds of people living in a coed orgy room.
it CAN happen. 18 and 19 year olds, as individuals, can be just as reasonable and get along with the opposite sex in a dorm room as well as anyone else. but exrapolated over a large group, you're an idiot if you think that age group wouldn't have more problems than juniors or seniors.
i have no problem with the idea of coed rooms IF the people involved know what living with someone in that kind of space entails. that's why (in the OP GASP) i said maybe the solution is to restrict this to upperclassmen.
i know, right? it's so much easier to argue for this when you imagine the other guy as a stuffy conservative guy wearing bifocals who hates sex and HURF HURF THOSE DARN KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN
Your argument is that people within two years of each other are so massively different in maturity that their choices for who to live with should be different from an institutional stand point. 18 year old boys like sex but 20 year olds don't?
Stop calling us idiots.
You need to chill out if you're really going to keep chasing this line. Take a step back.
Because they are adults, and should be allowed to if they so desire..?
I fail to see how a single year could make a difference in terms of maturity, so that is a pretty stupid restriction.
And I know for a fact that Brown gives freshmen a roommate. This process cannot give them a roommate of the opposite sex. I'm willing to bet the other colleges in the article do something similar.
I don't really see any greater liability here than there already is in say, dorms with males and females on separate floors within the same building that are easily accessible. That was the situation in the one year I lived in dorms many, many, moons ago (like, so many moons ago most of you peeps were probably in elementary school), and I presume its fairly common. Or maybe its crazy liberal Canadian invention, but somehow I doubt it.
I'm no lawyer, but what exactly is the increased legal liability here compared to the above situation? Is the College or University even responsible for the actions of students in dorms?
The worst case we're looking at here is someone getting sexually assaulted by their opposite gender roomie. Unfortunately sexual assaults happen all the time at colleges and universities, both off and on campus. I'm not aware of the educational institution being held liable in these situations, though its quite possible I'm just totally uninformed there.
no, it has nothing to do with that. most colleges require freshmen to live on campus in dorms. upperclassmen have that experience, and would understand that living in a dorm room with someone isn't some happy fun time sleepover. most people learn a lot about having to live someone else their freshman year, and i think that if you're going to live with someone of the opposite sex, you should have that information.
fine, if you want to get into semantics, "mature enough to handle living with the opposite sex"
that argument is still no more "rational" than what i've been saying.
the liability might (and i say might because hell, i'm not a lawyer either) be increased because the assaulter would have been given access to the person by the college itself. the claim could be made that the college didn't do an adequate enough of a vetting process on the roommate, and that led to the assault.
but again, that's just a guess, i'm sure there's someone who knows more about the liability involved than i am
I'm not arguing for this. It's just that I could care less about who other people choose to live with, as long as it is their choice, and I think it's amusing that it matters so much to you.
Pretty much. Although I'd certainly hesitate to call most college first years "mature". But it's not killing anyone, so whatever.
I don't think I'd ever wanna live in the same room as a girl who was just a friend/roommate though. Changing and habits and whatnot could get kinda weird.
the thing is, they don't "choose" to live with any particular person unless they request them. coed roommates are chosen just as randomly as same sex roommates.
but you're right, overall it is a choice that they make, and i'm not here to say that someone making that choice is "wrong." i just think its surprising given the potential problems involved, which i think are more numerous than in same sex rooms.
This is why your argument is irrational. Why does "living with the opposite sex" require more maturity than "living with the same sex"? Is "don't rape your roommate" merely an extension of maturity? I mean, is that your argument?
that's one of the concerns, but i don't think you could say that coed rooms make sexual assault any less likely.
and if even if it isn't any more likely at all, the PR nightmare that would result of just one happening would be enough for me to reject the idea if i were in charge of a college.
edit:
and yeah drez, living with the opposite sex does require more maturity than living with the same sex, especially if you're 18 or 19 or haven't lived in a dorm/apartment setting before. the fact that you're even trying to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
You're coming at this from a million stupid angles. I'm not even sure what you're trying to do anymore...help the university save face if some tragedy strikes? Who gives a shit about "PR nightmare"? I think this damns your position outright, as "PR nightmares" in this country quite often occur when people overreact to something that isn't the blamed party's fault at all. Not always, but it happens often enough that when someone starts talking about a "PR nightmare," I yawn and tune out because it is irrelevant.
no u r
To be fair, a lot can happen in one year. I know I matured a whole lot during my junior year, because my boyfriend moved away.
Anyway, I went to Caltech, and they've been doing this co-ed thing for a while, but co-ed roomies are pretty rare. The key factor here is that all Caltech students are supposed to pick their own roommates. The only time you're assigned a roommate is the first two weeks at school, before you pick a house to join. After you pick a house through a process that I've been told is similar to Rush Week, the members of the house choose their own roommates and pick their own rooms, with priority given to upperclassmen. It is virtually impossible for anyone to be forced to lived with someone with whom they were not comfortable. It was never a big deal for any of us, and I don't see why it should be.
As a side note, the bathrooms in some of the dorms are also co-ed, but it's mostly out of convenience/tradition, because there didn't use to be many girls there (actually, when I went there, some of the designated girl's bathrooms still had urinals in them because they used to be men's bathrooms). Though a large portion of the dorms were recently renovated, so maybe they put in gender-exclusive bathrooms or something.
if you can't even accept something that simple, there's no point in responding to your posts
this seems like the ideal situation if you're going to do coed rooms for freshmen. if you can choose exactly who you're rooming with, there's no problem here at all.
Do yourself a favor and read your own article next time. Coed roommates are not being randomly paired together in any of the cases the article is talking about. These coed situations only occur when the two people explicitly choose to live together.
I actually did picture that, not out of malice, but simply because throughout this entire thread you have put into question your ability to read.
While appeal to popularity or whatever might be a logical misstep, I'm going to go ahead and point out that pretty much everybody in the thread disagrees with you, on THIS and every other point you've made.
You've not justified your statement and you apparently have no desire to explain why I should assume that it requires more maturity to cohabitate with someone of the opposite sex as it does to cohabitate with someone of the same sex. This is not some kind of inherent, natural truth that I should somehow hold as self-evident, so you're going to have to validate your claim before you (a) assume it is true, (b) blame us for not assuming it is true, and (c) say that I am "ridiculous" for not holding it as true, especially if your entire argument is predicated on this assumption.
Also, your language is obnoxious. I'm so sorry that I have not achieved perfect empathy with you in this debate, that I am unable to comprehend the mindset that drives your position in this debate, but as "ridiculous" as my fundamental views may be, I assure you, yours are equally silly. Or maybe not, I don't know, you just won't fucking explain them. "Ha ha, how could you not agree with me, you FOOL!" is not a valid argument, ever. So if you plan on actually debating this, debate it. If you plan on sitting in the corner jerking off, then go do it in private, please.