No Freedom of Association for You, says Wesleyan University

[Crazed Rabbit]

Dear Students:

I write to notify you of a revision to Wesleyan's residency requirement designed to clarify the University's rules concerning off-campus housing. In brief: beginning Fall 2011, Wesleyan students will be prohibited from residing in - or using for social activities - houses or property owned, leased or operated by private societies that are not recognized by the University. You can find the revised policy online at http://www.wesleyan.edu/studenthandbook/residency.html

Students found to be in violation of this policy will be subject to disciplinary measures by the University, including suspension.

President Roth asked for this policy revision to address the problematic issue of having residential organizations that appear to function as Wesleyan entities yet have no Wesleyan oversight. DKE, Psi U, and Alpha Delt are recognized as part of program housing and are thus not affected by this change. This revised policy would, however, have major consequences for Beta which has chosen to not participate in program housing and is therefore not recognized by the University.

We are continuing our discussions with the members of Beta and their alumni about joining program housing, and remain hopeful that they will choose to do so. Such a choice would result in University recognition and avoid the scenario of students being prohibited from residing in Beta or using it for social activities.

This revised policy won't affect the great majority of you as you consider your housing options for the 2011-2012 academic year, but President Roth and I agreed that it was important to call your attention to the revision - and its potential ramifications.

Sincerely,

Dean Mike Whaley

Vice President for Student Affairs

All targeted at one fraternity: (http://wesleyanargus.com/2011/02/15/university-issues-ultimatum-to-beta/)

According to Vice President of Student Affairs Mike Whaley, who sent the all-campus e-mail, the policy change is targeted at Beta Theta Pi (Beta), which, for six years, has not been recognized by the University.

“What we’re doing is we’re setting up Beta to make an intentional decision,” Whaley said. “What I have been telling the Beta leadership for many, many months now is that the status quo is not tenable from our perspective. And so we don’t want to continue forward having the relationship that we have had for these past several years.”

From the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (http://thefire.org/case/853.html):


Wesleyan University promises freedom of association to its students. Yet, in order to force a private fraternity to seek official recognition, Wesleyan has prohibited all students from "participating in social activities" on the property of any unrecognized private association. The policy is scheduled to go into effect in August 2011. FIRE has written Wesleyan President Michael S. Roth advising him that this new policy violates Wesleyan's moral and legal obligation to its students dating back to 1969, namely its promise that "As citizens, students should enjoy the same freedom of speech, peaceful assembly, and the right of petition that other citizens enjoy ... both on and off campus." The new policy effectively bans students from participating in social activities on a vast amount of off-campus property including houses of worship, the Middletown Elks Lodge, the Italian Society of Middletown, and a wide variety of private societies throughout Connecticut.

Legal analysis: (http://volokh.com/2011/02/18/wesleyan-university-banning-students-from-participating-in-social-activities-off-campus-on-property-operated-by-private-societies-that-are-not-recognized-by-the-university/)

Pretty stunning; sounds like a return to the days when universities were seen as acting “in loco parentis” to students (who were at the time treated as underage, since the age of majority throughout the country was mostly 21). And of course the policy is remarkably broad: Eating dinner at a local Italian-American society, going to a party at a church, going to social/political events put on by political or ideological groups, and so on would all qualify. Yow.

The rule seems to be motivated by criminal activities at a local fraternity: underage drinking, and a reported rape. But the customary, and in my view essentially adequate, way of dealing with the risk of off-campus crime is criminal punishment for the crime, plus possibly school discipline for the accused criminals. (The discipline might even apply to people before they are convicted, or even if they aren’t convicted: A school need not feel bound, for instance, by the criminal law requirements of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and may conclude that the fact that there’s a 75% chance that a student is a rapist is reason to expel him even if it isn’t enough to imprison him.) A preventative rule of such breadth and intrusiveness is going way too far in trying to deal with the danger of crime, however real.

Wesleyan is a private university, and is not legally barred from imposing such rules; nor does this rule seem like it undermines academic freedom principles that should bind the university as a matter of professional ethics. But the rule still strikes me as silly, and sure to be discriminatorily enforced; Wesleyan deserves to be criticized for it.

I certainly hope the university folds quick. I have to wonder just who they think they are.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

~:confused:

"who they think they are" is a university trying to rid of a specific date-rape-frat.

It's not a subject for glorious defense of of human rights, nor is the university evil. It's just not a thing they can do for pragmatic reasons.

[HoreTore]

Fraternities have always looked incredibly geeky to me...

[Crazed Rabbit]

~:confused:

"who they think they are" is a university trying to rid of a specific date-rape-frat.

It's not a subject for glorious defense of of human rights, nor is the university evil. It's just not a thing they can do for pragmatic reasons.

If they want to punish criminals, they can pursue the law or even expel specific students ( a standard with much less evidence required than the legal system ).

This is the university saying they will punish students for associating with anyone not approved in advance by the university.

Surely you would agree the university should not have such control over students.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

If they want to punish criminals, they can pursue the law or even expel specific students ( a standard with much less evidence required than the legal system ).

This is the university saying they will punish students for associating with anyone not approved in advance by the university.

Surely you would agree the university should not have such control over students.

CR

I disagree about the attitude with which we say "the university shouldn't do that".

[Rhyfelwyr]

It's a Uni we're talking about not the state, these people choose to attend it and if they don't like their rules they can just go to another one.

[Crazed Rabbit]

So Rhyfelwyr, you wouldn't have a problem with a university expelling students for attending Church - it being a private society unrecognized by the university?

CR

[Tellos Athenaios]

Look on the bright side: this should prove an opportunity for local law firms to do some more business and create jobs!

[Beskar]

By Crazed Rabbit, the University own the property, isn't it their property rights to have whatever house rules they like on it? Or are you advocating that if your daughter/son brought in a bunch of no-gooders in your home, using your basement as a drugs den and you want to get rid of them, you are not allowed to, as it violates your daughters/son's freedom of association?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Indeed, the university may be within it's legal rights on this. That doesn't make it right, of course, especially since it pretends to be an institution of higher learning. And so I will launch such a withering barrage of criticism that they will be shamed and change their actions!

CR

[Beskar]

It depends really, in my opinion. If the society/group is receiving any form of University funding or using the Universities property, then it would have to abide by the Universities rules. Otherwise, they would have to abide by their own and the rules set out in law.

That's where I draw the line in the sand.

If lets say, the students wanted to join a non-related Republican/Tea Party group, then it is fully within their rights to do so, and the University has no place to suspend students on this. (Unless they take it within University grounds and violate University rules, then it would be based on that, not due to association.)

[Don Corleone]

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm with Beskar on this one. The University, as a private institution, is well within its rights to set up rules for continued membership in it's broader academic core.

Let's look at this another way. Let's suppose the university was a non-denominational church. Wouldn't the church leadership have the right to require its members not to frequent the bawdy house across the street (assuming we're in Nevada)? Wouldn't they have the right to tell its members that regardless of the activities they actually engage in while on the premises, merely entering the facility would constitute forefiture of their membership in good standing within the church organization?

[Beskar]

That's a bit more extreme than me, Don. :tongue:

[Rhyfelwyr]

It seems from the links in the OP the University was targeting a non-official 'frat' (is that the right term?) group.

So this has nothing to do with restricting students membership of churches or political affiliations etc, its really a fuss about nothing.

[Crazed Rabbit]

So this has nothing to do with restricting students membership of churches or political affiliations etc, its really a fuss about nothing.

So students shouldn't be able to visit a non-sanctioned fraternity?

Also, they aren't restricting membership in churches or political groups yet - the wording of this announcement would allow them to.

CR

[Louis VI the Fat]

I never thought I'd say this, but I'm with Beskar on this one. The University, as a private institution, is well within its rights to set up rules for continued membership in it's broader academic core.

Let's look at this another way. Let's suppose the university was a non-denominational church. Wouldn't the church leadership have the right to require its members not to frequent the bawdy house across the street (assuming we're in Nevada)? Wouldn't they have the right to tell its members that regardless of the activities they actually engage in while on the premises, merely entering the facility would constitute forefiture of their membership in good standing within the church organization?Two universities, to which will you send your daughters:

University A. Protects female students from drugs abuse and serial sexual predators, including non-student ones.
University B. Protects the abstract right of students to freely associate.

:shrug:

[Sarmatian]

I've always wanted to know - what's a fraternity and what's its purpose?

[Strike For The South]

http://www.broslikethissite.com/

Read all 152

[TinCow]

That University is my university, and I was in one of the fraternities listed. Wesleyan is a great school, but it's had a vendetta against Greek life for decades now. They reigned in all of us but Beta over the years with various methods, but Beta always held out. Looks like Beta is finally getting its ass handed to it like the rest of us. It's an example of liberalism taken to an extreme where it becomes conservative: many liberals on that campus won't accept anyone who doesn't accept everyone. It's a hypocrisy that gives me a headache.

That said, it's still a great school and I highly recommend it.

[Strike For The South]

That University is my university, and I was in one of the fraternities listed. Wesleyan is a great school, but it's had a vendetta against Greek life for decades now. It's an example of liberalism taken to an extreme where it becomes conservative: many liberals on that campus won't accept anyone who doesn't accept everyone. It's a hypocrisy that gives me a headache.

That said, it's still a great school and I highly recommend it.

You're a bro?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

[TinCow]

You're a bro?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

I can say Dude with the best of them.

[Strike For The South]

I can say Dude with the best of them.

This is a most pleasing revalation

The Org does have hope

[TinCow]

This is a most pleasing revalation

The Org does have hope

If it helps, I was actually Sergeant at Arms for the Garnet Army Faction. Which essentially meant I was in charge of organizing pranks against other fraternities. My crowning glory was dumping 10,000 live crickets into the middle of DKE's common room without being noticed. I also drank copious amounts of alcohol and engaged in much homo-erotic nudity. Basically, your typical fraternity life, though I probably skewed more towards marijuana and less towards alcohol than most. My last two years at school, my fraternity (Psi U) was nicknamed High U, in no small part because of me.

[TinCow]

Oh, and to get back to the actual topic, the OP doesn't clearly explain what this about. It's about integration. WesTech has been uppity about fraternities for eons because they do not allow women to participate, which they believe is goes against the grain of what the University stands for. When I entered WesTech, there were, essentially six fraternities on campus: Psi U, Beta, DKE, Chi Psi, Alpha Delt, and Eclectic. Alpha Delt was already co-ed and had female 'brothers.' Ecelectic was a former fraternity that decided in the 70s they liked LSD more than alcohol, threw off their national charter, and became a total party house. They were also co-ed. The other four were normal fraternities. Psi U was the preppie fraternity, DKE was the meathead fraternity, Chi Psi was the boozer fraternity, and Beta was the athletic fraternity (smart sports, like soccer, lacrosse, basketball, etc, DKE had the football and ice hockey players).

Chi Psi was struggling for membership and was going to lose their house without financial aid from the school, so my sophomore year they went under school control. That meant that the school funded them and paid for their house, but they had to take female boarders. They eventually went under and ceased to exist completely.

Alpha Delt embodied everything that is bad about fraternities. The members were idiots, they were bigots, they caused problems, and their house was filthy. It actually got condemned by the health department for six weeks in my junior or senior year. They also got in serious trouble with the school over a major bigotry violation, which resulted in the fraternity submitting to University authority and admitting female boarders (not members, just residents) my senior year.

So, at the time I graduated, there were only two fully independent classical fraternities left: Psi U (mine) and Beta. About five years after I graduated, my fraternity started having financial problems. All the fraternities on campus were in really old houses, and Psi U had the best house of them all. It's actually the oldest building built as a fraternity house (1893) and still being used as a fraternity house. It's huge and gorgeous. It's had upwards of 50 in-house residents at various times, and when I was there we had 38 people, all living in singles. However, a huge old house like that costs a stupid amount to maintain, and the chapter simply couldn't keep up with the bills. Eventually they submitted to unveristy control in exchange for financial support, and now the bottom floor is for female residents (not members).

So, that left Beta as the last remaining all-male institution on campus. The thing cited in the OP is WesTech's way of finishing them off.


Oh, and if you're curious, the movie PCU is about WesTech. It was filmed there and was written by two member of Eclectic, who based 'The Pit' (the protagonist house) on Eclectic. Balls and Shaft (the antagonist house) was based on Psi U (my fraternity). It was probably accurate when they were in school in the 80s, but the fraternity shifted from Bon Jovi to Bob Marley a long time ago, so it's no longer true.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

So it's not about rape like the last bit said, but about fraternities being male only? :dizzy2:

I guess that shows what idiocy you can hide behind phrases like "the status quo is not tenable from our perspective".

[TinCow]

So it's not about rape like the last bit said, but about fraternities being male only? :dizzy2:

Specifically, it's about fraternity houses not allowing women to live there. They aren't pushing for female members of the fraternity (Alpha Delt and Eclectic have co-ed membership by choice), they just want the housing itself to be co-ed. I think it's stupid, but apparently my fraternity hasn't had any problems with the female boarders, who all intentionally choose to live there anyway (there are always groupies, so it's not a big deal to find cool girls). As long as the women don't prevent the men from engaging in stupid guy stuff, I suppose it's not too bad. Still, I can't help but think that diversity means allowing guys to be dudebros if they want to be dudebros, so long as they aren't racist :daisy:wads.

[drone]

Am I the only one here who thinks requiring frat houses to have female boarders is a baaaaad idea?

[TinCow]

Am I the only one here who thinks requiring frat houses to have female boarders is a baaaaad idea?

I think WesTech is able to handle it better than most schools would, because of the nature of WesTech students. If you're not liberal when you enter the school, you certainly are when you leave. It just breeds that kind of thinking. Plus, it's generally pretty accepting as long as you're pretty accepting. There's an annual Naked Party at Art House, which you can't even attend unless you strip completely in the entryway. It's co-ed. There's also an on-campus dorm which has bylaws which specifically says clothing is optional, though no one actually goes around naked. So, the women at WesTech tend to be more accepting of The Wang than they might be at other schools. In addition, women have to specifically choose to live in the fraternity houses, so they know what to expect.

As an example, my fraternity was considered one of the most conservative organizations on campus. But we had an openly gay pledge who was admitted despite an anonymous vote amongst the brothers, in which any single person could have blackballed the pledging if they had wanted to. But no one did, because we're cool and don't care if you like the wang or the tang. We also hosted the annual BiLeGa coming out party, which was awesome, and we did the most community service of any organization on campus every single year. So, we weren't exactly your typical fraternity.

That said, I never would have voted for it, and it's certainly not a good fit for schools less liberal than WesTech.