Dorm Brothel The new debauchery, and the colleges that let it happen.

Christianity Today ^ | January 21, 2005 | Vigen Guroian

[The Loan Arranger]

"The so-called sexual revolution is not, as advertised, a liberation of sexual behavior but rather its reversal. In former days, even under Victoria, sexual intercourse was the natural end and culmination of heterosexual relations. Now one begins with genital overtures instead of a handshake, then waits to see what will turn up (e.g., might become friends later). Like dogs greeting each other nose to tail and tail to nose."

Walker Percy, The Last Gentleman (1966) Nineteen sixty-six, the year in which Walker Percy's The Last Gentleman was published, is also the year I entered as a first-yearman at the University of Virginia. We did not stoop to the State U level of referring to ourselves as freshmen, sophomores, and such—not at "The University." We were all men at U.Va.—"gentlemen," we were told. Young women visited on weekends from Sweet Briar and Randolph-Macon, Mary Washington, and Hollins College. But they did not stay in the dormitory or the fraternity house. They stayed in college-approved housing, more often than not the home of a widow who had a few rooms to let and happily accepted a delegation from the colleges to assume the responsibilities of in loco parentis.

Parietal rules were enforced even in the fraternity houses—self-enforced by those of us who lived in them. Young women were not permitted in the bedrooms and had to be out of the house by a certain hour. We dated, blind-dated often. We did not know what "hooking up" was. We had never heard of date rape either, though some of us may have committed it.

[Modernman]

The girls are willing participants so I don't know if the author is correct with the whole 'serving it up thing'.

This is all just "women are shy, innocent flowers getting plucked by mean, wolfish, men."

It's related to the feminist "all sex is rape" nonsense.

Going back to the in loco parentis of the 1950's in colleges is silly. You hit 18, you are an adult. Deal with the consequences of your actions. If a boy breaks your heart, tough nooggies. If you get knocked up, deal with the consequences. If you get an STD, it's your fault.

When kids turn 18, they are responsible for their own actions.

[Antoninus]

Back in 1966 I am sure no kids in college were having sex.

Back in 1966, abortion was illegal in most states, and yes, fewer young people were having pre-marital sex. Also, killer STDs were practically unknown. Today, the scenario is different. When it is estimated that 50% of sexually active young women have HPV--a disease that condoms don't protect against which could potentially make them infertile and is a major risk factor for cervical cancer--if you think we don't have a problem, I picture you sitting cross-legged on the floor with your fingers in your ears yelling, "lalalala I can't hear you."

[Modernman]

Notice I said "dorms" not "floors." And it is different if they have a door monitor, and you have to sign in before you can go into the girls' dorm, and they keep track to make sure no one is "sleeping over."

Why should adults need babysitters? They're grownups living in the real world. How long do you expect other people to watch over the shoulders of legal adults?

[Antoninus]

We had co-ed floors and co-ed bathrooms at U. of Michigan. Not really a big deal, to tell you the truth.

Of course it's not a big deal to you. Atheistic libertarianism is what started this idiotic trend in the 1960s to begin with.

[Tax-chick]

Interesting. I guess it depends on where you were, and when (I was in college 1984-1988), and who your friends were. The girls I knew in my early 20's wanted to get married. Most of us did. Some are divorced now, but that's a different article :-).

[cyborg]

Yeah divorce is like a game here in NY. There's even a magazine devoted to divorce.

[Antoninus]

Why should adults need babysitters? They're grownups living in the real world. How long do you expect other people to watch over the shoulders of legal adults?

According to this logic, bars don't need bouncers and apartment buildings don't need doormen.

[Modernman]

Of course it's not a big deal to you. Atheistic libertarianism is what started this idiotic trend in the 1960s to begin with.

It's not a problem for me because I was a grownup with the ability to control my actions. Seeing my female floormates in their pajamas didn't turn me into a slavering monster.

It's silly, really. People in college are adults that should be trusted to control their own actions.

[Tax-chick]

Ping to respond later ... we have to leave for church shortly. I liked what you said on the thread about abstinence education.

[Modernman]

According to this logic, bars don't need bouncers and apartment buildings don't need doormen.

Bouncers and doormen exist to prevent criminal activity such as underage drinking and burglary. I have no problems with dorms doing the same thing. I just don't see the need for dorms to act as babysitters to people who are adults.

[Antoninus]

Interesting. I guess it depends on where you were, and when (I was in college 1984-1988), and who your friends were. The girls I knew in my early 20's wanted to get married. Most of us did. Some are divorced now, but that's a different article :-).

Indeed. I think my time in college (1989-1993) was the cusp of a radical change in attitude among both young men and young women. Maybe I was tracking with the "old-fashioned" crowd that was on its way out. I did end up married to an older woman after all was said and done. Hmmm.

[Antoninus]

Bouncers and doormen exist to prevent criminal activity such as underage drinking and burglary. I have no problems with dorms doing the same thing. I just don't see the need for dorms to act as babysitters to people who are adults.

So if a college sets rules that say, for instance, no boys in the girls' dorms after a certain hour, you're ok with them actually enforcing such a rule, right? In that case, we have nothing to argue over.

[TChris]

This is precisely why BYU still does not have coed dorms. While I'm not naive enough to think that BYU doesn't have some level of the same problems, I'm very confident that its far below the average university.

[FastCoyote]

I don't remember things being this wild, even at Stanford in the 70's.

[Marysecretary]

It was like he described in my growing up years. I am amazed at what goes on here at school, between young men and women, men and men, women and women. Nobody seems to care anymore. I AM GLAD I AM A PRUDE!!!

[Cogadh na Sith]

We had co-ed floors and co-ed bathrooms at U. of Michigan.

What!?

I don't want any women around while I power-dump the products of a beer and buffalo-wing bender the night before. That is pure insanity.

I also don't want to see fatass hippy chicks in the morning while I am trying to S*&), shower and shave.

What is the matter with you people now?!

[Marysecretary]

I would venture to say, not much better. Even in Christian colleges these things happen, sex, drugs, drinking. Perhaps not as much but it's still there. The spirit of depravity!

[Modernman]

So if a college sets rules that say, for instance, no boys in the girls' dorms after a certain hour, you're ok with them actually enforcing such a rule, right?

Of course not, it's private property, after all. There's a dorm like that at Michigan (which was, ironically, known for the lesbian tendencies of its residents).

I just question the maturity and self-control of anyone who would want to live in such a dorm. Heck, I moved out of dorms as soon as possible just to get away from loopy rules.

[durasell]

I happen to know for a fact that it does not happen among engineering students or math majors.

[hopespringseternal]

They're grownups living in the real world.

Legally, yes. Emotionally, no. Remember that they are free not to enter the association in the first place. They don't have to live on campus, and they don't have to attend a university.

Managing dorm behavior is not the same as the state issuing random adults chastity belts.