67
68

PoliticsHarvard women rally against single-gender clubs policy (bostonglobe.com)

RoadsterFan が 投稿

全 96 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト (提案されたアイデア)
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]ljuvlig 22ポイント23ポイント  (1子コメント)

What aggravates me most about this is that the policy is FAR harder on fraternities and sororities than it is on finals clubs, which are the root of the problem. A finals club is an independent organization, so it can vote to allow in the opposite gender. The fraternities and sororities are part of national organizations, so they can't change that policy. Their only choice is to close down.

[–]-MassachoositeCambridge 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Do you have a source that says any of these organizations are problems?

[–]datwrasse 22ポイント23ポイント  (1子コメント)

So Harvard wants its exclusive clubs to become super secret clubs that it can't easily keep tabs on. If only anyone could foresee this backfiring...

[–]itsonlyastrongbuzzProbably on a Pub Crawl 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If it can't keep tabs on them, it can't be expected to enforce or be responsible for the actions of them.

[–]ajdragoonCambridge 38ポイント39ポイント  (35子コメント)

There's gonna be tons of backlash to this and Harvard deserves every bit of it. I get they had a problem with the finals clubs and wanted to solve it, but this was not the way.

[–]itsonlyastrongbuzzProbably on a Pub Crawl 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

See I dunno if I agree. I think they're damned if they do, and damned if they don't.

People are creating an uproar over it. Ignoring it will only make the minority more vocal and make them look insensitive and enabling sexism/whatever through indifference.

Acting, and making any sort of sanction or comment silences the SJW/whatevers and pisses off someone else.

It's whack-a-mole.

[–]eaglessoarMedford 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

ELI5: Finals clubs? Is this like the Yale skull and bones club or something? Or do they study for finals together?

[–]swissarmychris 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

They're "final clubs" not "finals clubs". Originally there were different clubs for each year (e.g., freshmen would join a freshman club) and the "final club" was the club that students would join their senior year.

These are just social clubs, as far as I can tell. They're not located on campus and haven't been officially associated with the university since 1984.

[–]SexLiesAndExerciseSomerville 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officially_unrecognized_Harvard_College_social_clubs

[–]lemurmortDirty Irish townie 11ポイント12ポイント  (3子コメント)

I really do enjoy a good ole /r/boston flame war

[–]noraamitt 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

My tizzies are in a whirl already

[–]lemurmortDirty Irish townie 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

How long before mitch arrives on the scene?

[–]tobascodagamaWatertown 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

This situation is actually pretty difficult to understand without a lot of Harvard-specific context. I recommend reading this Metafilter thread if you want to get some of that context.

[–]lemurmortDirty Irish townie 15ポイント16ポイント  (25子コメント)

So now that the women want to keep finals clubs it's news? What about all of the guys who wanted to keep theirs?

[–]ajdragoonCambridge 22ポイント23ポイント  (21子コメント)

To be fair, the goal of the policy was to impact men's groups; no surprise there. This is news because women--who were supposed to be protected by this policy--are being hurt too. Which just shows how even more awful it is.

It's like in the early 2000's when DRM prevented some CDs from playing in proper CD players.

[–]PerfectMonikerPepperell 14ポイント15ポイント  (5子コメント)

If they had banned only men's groups, that would have been extremely sexist.

[–]ajdragoonCambridge 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

No one's being banned. There are just restrictions as to what members can do.

EDIT: My bad--I thought you meant that they banned the groups in general.

[–]PerfectMonikerPepperell 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

They banned members of single-gender groups from being captains of clubs, receiving Rhodes or Marshall scholarships, and from being awarded endorsement letters from the deans.

Technically, finals clubs are already disavowed by Harvard, but Harvard does not have control over what their students do on private property. That said, if someone were to do an undercover investigation of final clubs, they would find gross negligence and sexual assault.

[–]cpxhBurning down the Fens 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

That said, if someone were to do an undercover investigation of final clubs every college activity and group, they would find at least some evidence of gross negligence and sexual assault.

Not saying we should do nothing about it. But this policy is like seeing a spider in your basement, and sealing the door so no one can go down there anymore.

[–]ajdragoonCambridge 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

See my edit above. I'm teh dumb.

So this is interesting. If Harvard claims it can't regulate finals clubs, why this new policy? How can they hope to enforce it?

[–]TouchDownBurrito 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Too bad they're not officially affiliated with the university and the university does not have access to their membership lists.

[–]anurodhpBrookline 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Out of curiosity, since this does not specify what single gender organizations it is targeting, does this include the boy scouts? does being a member of an islamic group that might separate men and women get you black listed.

[–]RoadsterFan[S] -5ポイント-4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Membership in either should hurt a candidate seeking admission in Harvard's eyes if they want to be consistent.

[–]Dave_the_Pigeon 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is so stupid. Finals clubs would just go away if they were coed, not to mention that forcing clubs to be coed is a really idiotic way to "reduce rapes on campus".

I do however, agree with what these women are supporting.

[–]Shootr_McGavn 5ポイント6ポイント  (7子コメント)

When will people realize that restricting personal freedoms usually hurts all groups? Allow people to make, or not make, whatever associations they choose to make or not. Do not dictate how others live their lives.

EDIT: removed a link to political subreddit, as it was a distraction from the conversation.

[–]aidrocsidWestern MA 10ポイント11ポイント  (3子コメント)

So which personal freedom should we not restrict? The freedom to form groups which discriminate on the basis of gender, or the freedom to take part in those groups that make you most comfortable regardless biological happenstance?

Is the freedom to discriminate more important than freedom from discrimination?

[–]Shootr_McGavn 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

Great comment! This is exactly where the debate should be. In terms of freedom from discrimination versus freedom of discrimination, I side with freedom of discrimination. Not because I am a fan of discrimination, but rather because I believe in the power of the individual over the power of the institution.

In my opinion, there are acceptable and unacceptable levels of discrimination. For me, personally, I have no problem with a 55+ community that discriminates based on age. Personally, I do have a problem with a restaurant refusing to serve someone based on race. With all of that being said, that is my opinion. An individual. A governing body (Harvard in this case) is far less nimble than the individual. Far less able to react appropriately in small-scale situations. A large governing body dictating how individuals can organize and act (with obvious exceptions of overt harm being done to others) will almost always oppress through heavy-handedness.

How does this philosophy apply in this situation? A "social club" with discrimination deemed acceptable (by most individuals) will continue to exist. If most people feel an all-female social club is okay, they will face no backlash and will continue to exist. A "social club" with discrimination deemed unacceptable (by most individuals) will not continue to exist. If most people feel an all-white social club is unacceptable, they will face a lot of backlash, have declining membership, be denied social engagements, etc. If Harvard takes a hard-line, governmental approach on anti-discrimination, they will inevitably restrict "acceptable" discrimination (as deemed by enough individuals).

With all of that being said, I also believe in Harvard University's right to discriminate against those who discriminate. (Whoops I got in the weeds here). The more individualistic the better, so as a private organization, Harvard should be free, from state law, to enact this policy. But, on the basis of individualism, I feel this is the wrong approach, and support one that allows maximum personal freedom.

I completely respect the opinion of those who prefer freedom from discrimination over freedom of discrimination. As far as freedoms go, the freedom to discriminate is very far down the list of importance. Putting in perspective, good people don't have the freedom to smoke marijuana. Heck, until recently, gays didn't have the freedom to marry who they loved! So, protecting the freedom to discriminate is not exactly the top priority freedom. But, I try to side with freedom of the individual wherever possible.

[–]aidrocsidWestern MA -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

What about the level of the club as a private organization, though? They're discriminating as a larger group against individuals.

How many people do you have to gather before your discrimination stops being okay? What kind of unique resources can you deny others without moral censure? In the context of sororities and fraternities what's on hand is pretty gender-specific anyway, but there are a lot of other services, like domestic violence shelters and hotlines, where this ideology of "female space" as one of the signs at Harvard invoked is harmful.

And let's look at the arguments they're making. A lot of them are generalizing behaviors that are more predominant in a demographic onto individuals with no connection with those behaviors simply because they share that demographic. How is that different from students forming an all-white club because they're afraid of the statistically higher proportion of violent crime perpetrated by black men?

Well, I mean, I can tell you in part why it's different but it's certainly not an argument that highlights the victim status of white women. It's different because gender isn't a genetically inherited trait. If you discriminate along gender lines you're not exacerbating intergenerational poverty and disenfranchisement. Gender is a roll of the dice, not a genetic inevitability inherited from your parents. It's not different, though, in that we are by definition at least in part talking about exactly the same individuals. Why would you deny the same individual opportunity based on one piece of their demographic information but not another? Is it not mostly black men who are the primary victims of mass incarceration and the drug war in the United States?

Freedom to discriminate in semi-public organizations seems to be on the wrong side of all the values the people who argue for it in the context of gender would otherwise support. I feel like that should tell us something.

What it tells me is that this isn't at all the kind of culture we should be promoting or fostering if we want people to start learning to be more accepting and understanding.

[–]Shootr_McGavn 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

What about the level of the club as a private organization, though? They're discriminating as a larger group against individuals...there are a lot of other services, like domestic violence shelters and hotlines, where this ideology of "female space" as one of the signs at Harvard invoked is harmful.

You make a case for the types of discrimination you agree with and the types of discrimination you disagree with. That's great! My argument is for the freedom to do exactly what you just did. The individual should be free to decide what organizations he wants to support, donate to, and associate with, and what organizations he is against.

How many people do you have to gather before your discrimination stops being okay?

My philosophy, the philosophy of personal freedom, is that of choice. People will choose associate with groups who hold their values. And it is not about size either. As I stated previously, "I also believe in Harvard University's right to discriminate against those who discriminate." Just because I disagree with Harvard University's actions, does not mean I disagree with their freedom to take those actions. Similarly, just because I may/may not disagree with a social-club's discrimination, does not mean I disagree with their freedom to take those actions.

If people feel discriminated against (by a social club or Harvard), they are free to start/join a private organization with values they agree with. They are also free to speak out against an organization's oppression. That is what I am doing here, in speaking out against Harvard's oppression. My argument is one for freedom over non-freedom.

tl;dr Here, Harvard is exercising their freedom as a private organization to restrict their members' freedom. In the name of freedom, I am against their actions, but I support their freedom to take those actions.

EDIT: clarity

[–]Boston_JasonChances are I'm at The Landing 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

Do not dictate how others live their lives.

Unfortunately, that just isn't true in this State.

[–]yourewickedretahded 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Harvard is a private college and they do have the right to do this but freedom of association is also a cultural norm here and this is bound to get people upset.

[–]Boston_JasonChances are I'm at The Landing 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think all this will do is force a simple name change and force this to be a secret society.

[–]RoadsterFan[S] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Boston.com version includes Tweets with more photos.

http://www.boston.com/culture/education/2016/05/10/harvard-women-protest-schools-crackdown-single-sex-spaces

[–]BuckeyeBentleyFramingham 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Harvard not wanting exclusion and privilege on their campus? Perish the thought. It's not like they're one of the most exclusive and privileged schools in the country.

[–]Jsm1370 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

So whats the problem, women are being treated equally and held to the same standards are males now.

How can you be a feminist and be against that?

[–]yep45 -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd be surprised if Harvard tried to apply this policy to any female-only organizations

[–]jawntaySomerville -5ポイント-4ポイント  (1子コメント)

At first I thought they were arguing for the creation of coed groups, but they are arguing that certain groups should be single gender. Seriously if it's not one thing it's the other, harvard students always playing the victim. Next week girls will wanna join fraternitis and vice versa.

[–]redditmakesmesmiles 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Did you read the article? The students are not "playing the victim" in the way you suggest. They are simply pushing back against a rash and reactionary policy. It should also be noted that this policy was protested by both men's and women's groups.

[–]NewYooserMan -5ポイント-4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ask those females how they feel about admitting non-Harvard students into their clubs once they're co-ed.