Gender-neutral housing should be revisited
By Eric Surber
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill lost an important battle last year in the fight for equality. The UNC Board of Governors banned gender-neutral housing, claiming there were more practical ways to make students feel safe, comfortable and included than allowing same-gendered students to live in the same room.
Seven Ivy League schools and UNC’s biggest rival, Duke University, disagree with the Board of Governors. These schools and 152 others from across the United States have gender-neutral housing options, and for good reason.
Schools that offer gender-neutral housing recognize that not all people identify with the gender binary, and assigning roommates strictly based on a birth certificate could be uncomfortable in the best cases and hostile in the worst. According to the National Gay and Lesbian Task force, 20 Percent of LGBTQ students are harassed each year, fearing their own physical safety.
Gender-neutral housing can decrease this shocking statistic. It gives students another option and more control over their living environment. They can choose whom they feel most comfortable living with, even if that’s someone of the opposite sex.
The logic behind the Board of Governors’ decision is a mystery. The decision was made behind closed doors in a meeting Peter Hans, the chairman, defended as “not a public hearing.” The discussion wasn’t archived in meeting minutes, and even if it was recorded, Chapelboro.com said the “measure passed unanimously without discussion.”
The only possible rationales for banning gender-neutral housing are misguided or homophobic in nature. Perhaps the Board of Governors felt that gender-neutral housing would backfire, igniting a sexual “free for all” in dorms. Maybe they thought the progressive motion was distracting, or that it wasn’t the right time. Or maybe it conflicted with their personal moral or religious convictions. In any case, the arguments against gender-neutral housing are weak.
Students can already spend as much time—even spend the night—in dorms of the opposing sex. And 152 colleges can attest that after establishing gender-neutral housing, there hasn’t been a complete moral breakdown. No campus-wide apocalypse. No sexual free for all.
In fact, a majority of students still prefer gender-separate housing. Not a single freshman enrolled in gender-neutral housing this year at Duke University, and only 16 rooms are mixed-gender. According to “The Chronicle” however, most Duke students still support having the choice.
Yes—athletic scandals and the mishandling of sexual assault cases may have the university’s undivided attention, but after handling these indiscretions, establishing gender-neutral housing should be revisited.
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill lost an important battle last year in the fight for equality. The UNC Board of Governors banned gender-neutral housing, claiming there were more practical ways to make students feel safe, comfortable and included than allowing same-gendered students to live in the same room.
Seven Ivy League schools and UNC’s biggest rival, Duke University, disagree with the Board of Governors. These schools and 152 others from across the United States have gender-neutral housing options, and for good reason.
Schools that offer gender-neutral housing recognize that not all people identify with the gender binary, and assigning roommates strictly based on a birth certificate could be uncomfortable in the best cases and hostile in the worst. According to the National Gay and Lesbian Task force, 20 Percent of LGBTQ students are harassed each year, fearing their own physical safety.
Gender-neutral housing can decrease this shocking statistic. It gives students another option and more control over their living environment. They can choose whom they feel most comfortable living with, even if that’s someone of the opposite sex.
The logic behind the Board of Governors’ decision is a mystery. The decision was made behind closed doors in a meeting Peter Hans, the chairman, defended as “not a public hearing.” The discussion wasn’t archived in meeting minutes, and even if it was recorded, Chapelboro.com said the “measure passed unanimously without discussion.”
The only possible rationales for banning gender-neutral housing are misguided or homophobic in nature. Perhaps the Board of Governors felt that gender-neutral housing would backfire, igniting a sexual “free for all” in dorms. Maybe they thought the progressive motion was distracting, or that it wasn’t the right time. Or maybe it conflicted with their personal moral or religious convictions. In any case, the arguments against gender-neutral housing are weak.
Students can already spend as much time—even spend the night—in dorms of the opposing sex. And 152 colleges can attest that after establishing gender-neutral housing, there hasn’t been a complete moral breakdown. No campus-wide apocalypse. No sexual free for all.
In fact, a majority of students still prefer gender-separate housing. Not a single freshman enrolled in gender-neutral housing this year at Duke University, and only 16 rooms are mixed-gender. According to “The Chronicle” however, most Duke students still support having the choice.
Yes—athletic scandals and the mishandling of sexual assault cases may have the university’s undivided attention, but after handling these indiscretions, establishing gender-neutral housing should be revisited.
Comments
Post a Comment