Co-ed to a New, Fun Level

Rutgers Says Male, Female Students Can Share Room

I wanted to lighten it up a bit considering all the madness in the world and for the sake of my spinny head. Rutgers is saying YES to gender neutral housing. It’s about time! Oh relax, prudes. The world is not going to end. Not now, anyway.

Way back in the day in the dorms, some of those in our hall would complain about how their roommate’s girlfriend or boyfriend was there all the time. I think they would have loved this idea. Let the happy couple live together. They’re practically living together anyway. The other roomate can study, get some sleep, and actually spend time in their room without feeling uncomfortable. If they are able to change during the year, I’m sure those couples could probably get a lot of help moving.

This is making me reminisce about those fun, carefree days. My dorm was a 10-story U-shaped building. On each floor, there was one wing of dorms, a gathering area, and another wing. The wings faced each other. The rooms housed two students. For those lucky enough to be chosen from the pool of applicants, they could get one of maybe 5 single rooms.

Next door, a sweet gal with a penchant for tie dye tank tops and beads in her hair had one of those coveted rooms. Her boyfriend was over there almost every night. I would wander over to the gathering area or the other wing and hang out with some of the guys/gals. This was pre-internet where you actually had to talk to people in person. One of them said, “You might want to tell her (the girl with the single room) to blow out the candles.” Apparently, the other wing could see activity in the shadows. 🙂

Now, these co-ed bathrooms are a different story. The guys who didn’t grow up with sisters may get irritated at the wait time of the “higher maintenance” gals. Works both ways, though. The guys might forget to put the seat down. Might be hard to remember if you are sleepily walking to the stall, ladies.

This is going to be one interesting experiment for Rutgers. Columbia and the University of Maryland already offer this option. If you live in a U-shaped dorm, remember to blow out the candles.


25 responses to “Co-ed to a New, Fun Level

  • Terrance H.

    Lucky for me, by the time I went to college, I had my own house and everything, so I commuted. I never stayed on campus, and nor would I have had there been a requirement; I would have went to another school.

  • lbwoodgate

    I think Rutgers is just acknowledging what the rest of us already know; that fraternizing between the sexes is so common that by putting a facade on it only makes those who think they’re in control look foolish. Might as well allow it and then create criteria that has some guidelines for responsible adult behavior by which their privileges can be removed if such privileges are violated.

    College students are still a long ways off from having the adult behavior they will need in the real world so this perhaps could serve as a testing ground for them. Or maybe not.

    • Terrance H.

      We’ll see what tune people are singing when some poor girl is raped, or when some poor guy is falsely accused of rape.

      This is a mess in the making.

      • lbwoodgate

        And this doesn’t happen now?

        Maybe by confronting this head on by acknowledging such relationships will put more responsible males in close proximity to vulnerable women who could quickly intervene when a pervert chooses to force himself on a woman.

        Not everyman is an animal out of control when they see a naked woman.

      • Terrance H.

        Of course it happens now. But how much more common does your little mind imagine it will be when men and women share dorm rooms?

        The problem with liberals is that they have to make every possible mistake before they achieve wisdom. It’s common sense this is not a good thing; not for Rutgers, men, or women, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see an enrollment decline.

        I don’t know about during the Civil War or whenever you went to college, but I know these days, kids drink, and drinking lowers inhibitions; it’s not a good thing for man and woman to share a damn dorm-room during a period in life when inhibitions are lowered not just by biology, but pharmacology!

    • SpinnyLiberal

      A long ways off, but I believe they will definitely learn something from it. If they run into habits that drive them up the wall, an unintended consequence might be perpetual bachelor/ette-hood. 😉

  • Kini

    Hey Baby, what’s your major in.

    STD’s!

  • lbwoodgate

    You know Terry if you took your mind out of the gutter and quit presuming that this arrangement would be thrown together willy nilly and with reckless abandon you might find that the opportunity for some people to co-habitate under different arrangements enables some to grow up quicker. But your knee-jerk reaction assumes no precautions will be taken.

    One story on this pointed out that the co-ed dorms will have shower curtains replaced by doors, and the bathrooms will have restricted access via key cards, so only those occupying the dorms can utilize them. First-year students will not have access to the program, but LGBT freshmen will have the prerogative to ask for a roommate that respects their sexual preferences.

    Housing assignments will be determined by a lottery, and those students assigned to any of the three buildings offering gender-neutral housing will be able to choose the sex of their roommates.

    This entire program is aimed at providing safe housing for the LGBT community, not opening it up for licentious accommodations for hormonal druggies. But then you wouldn’t have known that since you were unwilling to look beyond your own preconceived views on this.

    There may be some abuses that will occur here but until we see that they’re any worse than from what currently exists why don’t you wait until you pronounce your holier-than-thou prognostications. Your common-sense approach at looking at things is not always fool proof.

    The problem with liberals is that they have to make every possible mistake before they achieve wisdom.

    Without taking some risks there would be no one to lead knuckle-draggers like you to leave their cave dwellings. Not every evil thing you can conceive of based on your ancient view of the world always pans out. Sometimes those assumed mistakes turn out to be the right move. Sometime they don’t. But we never know by sitting around wringing our hands.

    Thanks god any one perception of reality is not solely what the universe revolves around. We’d still be hunters and gathers if that were the case.

    • Terrance H.

      Lbwoodgate,

      After reading your latest bit of bombast, it seems my concerns were hardly the result of a knee-jerk reaction.

      It’s quite ridiculous to assume curtains, doors, and bathroom locks can, magically, nullify said concerns. The sleeping quarters, the living quarters, are still co-ed; no locks; no cameras; nothing to protect women from assault, or men from false accusations. Nothing.

      You’ve admitted there will be some problems, and I’m willing to bet they’re going to deserve more than a flippant, casual mention.

      The problem with liberalism is that it puts ideology above people. Clearly, if some woman is raped and beaten half to death – or worse- it an unfortunate consequence of social progress, and nothing more. Never mind that a bit of common sense could have prevented it.

      Society has achieved so much because of humanities’ ability to think critically. This new program is going to be a damn disaster, and solely because people like you wish to implement your bizarre milk and honey view of the world.

      When blood is spilled, be sure to wash your hands.

  • Snoring Dog Studio

    I don’t understand why it would be any bigger a disaster than what college students are doing at dorms without this policy and what they did when I was in a dorm. Not a whole lot of people were actually staying in the dorm rooms they were assigned to. I saw guys on my floor who were there so often, they might as well have been assigned to their girlfriend’s room. And what does rape have to do with the Rutgers experiment? How did rape become part of the discussion here? The same kind of accusations and authentic incidents of rape were going on before this policy came into existence. Rapes don’t occur BECAUSE there’s opportunity and proximity. That’s sort of like saying if you live with a person who has a lot of nice bling, you’re likely to rob them. In the case of rape, it’s about exercising power over another human.

    • SpinnyLiberal

      It’s definitely about power not convenience.

      • Terrance H.

        The prospect of rape is quite valid, in my opinion. Opportunity means nothing unless desire exists; but desire seeks opportunity. Rutgers is creating yet more opportunity with policies that reflect ideology rather than reason.

        This, I believe, goes hand in hand with your next point. There is exploitation now – of course. But I don’t understand the logic in creating an environment in which more exploitation can exist, or which, intrinsically, breeds exploitation.

        I have no problem with LGBT individuals being treated fairly and feeling safe. I do not believe, however, co-ed housing is necessary in order to achieve this goal, and I certainly do not believe the aim of this program is to achieve said goal. I think the object of the program is to bring about the bizarre vision of a milk and honey existence.

        As a side note, I will say that I have my own issues with the LGBT movement. I’m not sure special accommodations are necessary because the groups included in that blanket term are radically different, in my view. I don’t believe a man who willfully dresses up in women’s clothes and prances about is the same as a gay man interested in obtaining an education, hoping to be left the hell alone by bigots.

        Bisexuality, in my opinion, is a myth; a state of mind. Transsexualism, in my opinion, is a mental illness, and those afflicted need help, not encouragement.

        Am I a knuckle-dragger for having such views? Perhaps. But the facts have a well-known TerranceH bias in this area.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Why do you believe bisexuality is a myth?

      • Terrance H.

        At my age, Spinny, there seems to a lot of bisexuals running around. Far more than what should be average, if you believe the science. I believe many claim to be bisexual because they think it’s cool. I bet if most had the chance to be with a member of the same sex, they’d scurry out fast, quick, and in a hurry. There is also the matter of the ability to sleep with the same sex when drunk and only when drunk.

        I think it’s the result of pop culture; a mere myth, and I ignore those who claim to be bisexual. I’m just like, “Yep. Whatever. Good for you.”

      • SpinnyLiberal

        Hmm. Bi chic. I think they may call themselves that even if they only just experimented. And can’t forget the college students – the BUGs and LUGs. “Bi and Lesbian Until Graduation.” 🙂 It is easier to admit because it’s more accepted nowadays.

        I’m bisexual. Before it was “cool,” as you put it. When you were considered an embarrassment by your family.

      • Terrance H.

        I figured you were going to say that. Regardless, I still don’t believe bisexuality is all that common; most of it, I think, is a myth. It’s pop culture nonsense.

        But, hey, I’m a man; I love bisexual chics. I mean, seriously, if such a thing exists, I’m all for it. 🙂

      • SpinnyLiberal

        If I had a nickel for every time…..let’s just say I’d be for cutting taxes for the wealthy. 😛

      • Terrance H.

        A nickel for every time…? What? How can you leave a man hanging like that, damn it!

        Sorry. I’m supposed to be a conservative…We don’t talk about things like that, unless you’re Newt Gingrich.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        You may be a Conservatve, but you’re still a guy. 🙂

        Newt Gingrich is in his own little bizarre-o world.

      • Terrance H.

        Yep. And a young one, which makes it like, I think, a 1000 times worse. I mean, after all, I don’t hear woodgate asking those questions. LOL.

        Newt Gingrich just launched an “exploratory” website, so he’s running. I’m not voting for him, and I plan to launch several YouTube videos rejecting him, like I did Giuliani in 2008! Not that they have that big of an impact, but I did 500,000 views, so maybe I helped shatter Giuliani’s presidential hopes – somewhat.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        500K views? WOW! I wasn’t too into the other side (too busy concentrating on mine), so what did you hate so much about Giuliani?

      • Terrance H.

        Yep. 500K. No joke.

        And I hated him because he’s a facist. As mayor, he lost over two dozen First Amendment cases in Federal court, meaning 24 or so different times he or his city government tried to supress speech, and 24 different he lost – in Federal court. He’s a facist.

        He’s also pro-gay and pro-abortion. I reject same-sex marriage and abortion, so he wasn’t appealing to begin with.

      • SpinnyLiberal

        I didn’t know that about the speech suppression. That’s scary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: