101 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
additional chastity issues? As it is right now (or at least when I went to BYU), the Honor Code couldn’t handle the burgeoning, repressed sexuality among the students. Two of my roommates would occasionally have their girlfriends over and they would snuggle on the couch together…all night…er… One could easily justify having his/her girlfriend/boyfriend over at a co-ed dorm for the whole night because, hey, there are members of the opposite sex already living in the same place. Why not my girlfriend too? Heck, why not convince my girlfriend to move in in the same dorm (don’t know the technicalities if that’s possible, but I certainly would try for it). |
“Sure there might be some additional chastity issues …” pretty much sums up why BYU would not even consider this as an option. |
You’ve got a valid point about getting used to men in a less than ideal hygiene state. The problem is that the chastity issue isn’t worth the price to pay for such lessons. The coed dorms were fair game when I was in college. It would be no different at BYU which is why they would never even consider it. |
I feeel confident saying BYU would NEVER consider co-ed dorms, and frankly, I don’t think I would have chosen to live in co-ed dorms when I was first going to school, but I see your point about de-mystifying men. Recently a woman in my ward was hemming and haaaing about how all the youth were dating non-members. I think there is a lot to be learned from dating, so if your options are to date non-members or not to date, it seems preferable to date non-members. 16 year olds these days are not thinking of marrying. Let them date and learn and not even contemplate serious relationships until later. |
thanks and welcome! I think that it goes both ways, men could use a lot of demystifying and desexualizing of women too. I would guess this context is useful for that. However, it would never happen at BYU… |
Yesterday, it was a poke at the adventure of life-threatening undertakings. Today, the romance of the mysterious opposite sex is threatened. You folks don’t like the Cisco Kid, do you? |
Who is the Cisco Kid? The two posts were written different people: “DCcLemon” and “ESO”. |
Yes, two different people–which means it’s a conspiracy: a conspiracy against adventure and romance. |
I think you are all right that BYU would never go for co-ed dorms since it appears they don’t even want you to let a memeber of the opposite sex use your bathroom! From the BYU housing page:
I would submit that civility would ALWAYS dictate that you let some poor soul use your restroom! Come on, people. Do we really have so little self control that we can’t allow a member of the opposite sex to use the bathroom or walk in a bedroom without something happening? Back to the topic of co-ed dorms though, Dan- I think your point is valid, but I think if people want to sleep together, they will do so whether or not they are living together. Yes, it might make it easier to do so, but don’t we have a modicum of self-control as a people? Danithew – yeah, I know. But I think self-control and maturity would overcome the issues. Matt Rasmussen – I’m not sure what you mean when you said “the coed dorms were fair game when I was in college.” Could you ellaborate? Did you see LDS students getting into trouble in coed dorms? ESO – I agree that dating when you are in your later teen years is a good learning experience, even if there are not members in your area to date. I think it is important, though, to have both parties understand that ultimately the goal would be to become serious later with a member. Devyn – I agree that demystifying both men and women would make for better marriage relationships. John Mansfield- I must admit I had to look up who the Cisco Kid is. |
Co-ed dorms!?!?! Think of all the “hanging out” that would occur! There is no practical reason to avoid co-ed dorms. There would not be a significant rise in LoC violations. Perhaps it’s the sight of the opposite sex in pajamas? |
Scratch the pajama theory. If midnight is the end of visitor hours, pajamas are seen now. |
ESO – Why would you have avoided a coed dorm when going to school? I’m curious as to why. Most coed dorms that I’ve seen have separate bathrooms and shower areas, etc. |
KyleM – Lol. It is true that there was not much dating going on between people living in my dorms. I think a lot of people avoided dating people living in the same dorm in case it didn’t work out and you were stuck living in the same building with that person for the whole year. There was certainly a lot of dating going on between students, though. Granted, most were not LDS, so most dating situations did not lead to marriage during college. I should clarify that in my dorms, coed living meant having men and women in the same building, but women shared rooms with other women and men shared rooms with men. There were no coed bedrooms. |
I think the jist of this post fails to pass the sniff test. Its premise would be opposed by…. 1. The bretheren As for the “dmystifying issue” again this fails. Most LDS girls have brothers or cousins or fathers. They do not need to live with men in a coed dorm to be around men when they wake up. |
I might note that my college had to close down the only male-only dorm because of behavioral problems the year before I arrived. It was reopened the following year as a co-ed dorm. College men, at least at my college, were much better behaved in co-ed dorms. |
The Cisco Kid has passed into oblivion? Finally, I start to understand what’s wrong with the kids these days. |
BBell, I think most parents and many bishops outside of Utah wouldn’t have any problem with co-ed dorms. I went to a school with a relatively large LDS population, and I had to live in a co-ed dorm. I assume that the state schools in Utah have co-ed dorms and plenty of LDS students attend those. The policy at BYU is strictly about appearances. |
Kyle, I think you are making an assumption about where I live and where I went to school. I think that coed dorms for LDS students lead to….. 1. More LOC issues The problems far outweigh the benefits. |
I don’t think that the idea is too far fetched at BYU. While at BYU, I lived in some townhouse condos that (rumor had it) previously were not BYU approved because they were attached. That policy seemed to have changed. The BYU language home complex purposely puts men and women in close living arrangements (albeit in different suites). I could definitely see a co-ed dorm with male floors and female floors being a viable option–sometime in the future. |
There are countless universities which provide a co-ed option along with a multitude of other things which are not available @ BYU. Why would you want to gut BYU of its specific character? Doesn’t UofU have Coed dorms? |
Whether or not BYU *would* do it, it’s a really valuable topic to bring up. I wonder to what extent the current policies reinforce a self-fulfilling prophecy: “If men and women live under the same roof, it’s going to be easier for them to copulate.” Which then leads to, “I’m under the same roof as a woman–time to copulate!” That is, the setting up of these types of rules actually contributes to, reinforces, and even reifies the idea that the focus of male-female interaction is a sexual one and can only lead there, a la “When Harry met Sally”. I know people have blogged many times about this before, but I think it’s crucial to think about. I, for one, would have probably benefited from a co-ed situation, having grown up in a predominantly male household. |
If BYU’s character is limited to its “bathroom policy,” go ahead and gut it! Personally, I think that BYU has plenty of other characteristics that make it a great and unique university. I don’t think that modifying the housing policy would have a big impact–I like to think that BYU students keep the law of chastity not for a lack of opportunity. Maybe I’m just optimistic. |
DCcLemon–just because I was (am) socially retarded. Of course, that means co-ed dorms MIGHT have helped me get over that, but I really would have been afraid to have had a roommate with a boyfriend who always slept over, or something. I think the BYU housing measures are pretty dranconian, but I like to think they are there to protect the rights of the roommates against your (perhaps poor) choices. |
By “your,” I don’t of course, mean “your.” I mean one roommate’s poor choices make many other roommates uncomfortable. |
BBell, Have you ever lived in a co-ed dorm or are you speaking from a complete lack of experience? |
I lived co-ed for a semester while in a BYU study abroad program. We were the first group to go to this country, and I don’t think the study abroad office knew we would be co-ed ahead of time. But, once we got there, we were all given a big flat to share–kitchen, large co-ed bathroom, and 7 bedrooms. Our BYU chaperone tried to fix the situation but there wasn’t anything he could do, so he wisely let it be and returned to the states because of his wife’s health, leaving us unsupervised and amused at our situation. |
BBell, Why would living in a room next door (or on another floor) to a member of the opposite sex lead to LoC issues? For the life of me, I can’t imagine how. I submit that it’s just as easy to get into trouble when a visitor at 11:30 pm as it is a next door neighbor. Do you have any data to back up your claim that sexual assaults increase in co-ed dorms? |
ESO, co-ed dorms can still have visitor rules. I lived in a co-ed dorm where visitors had to be out of the room by a certain hour. Of course, that didn’t stop everyone. But I doubt the BYU policy does either. |
Maybe one of the Church’s missions could test out co-ed missionary companionships? |
Both of my college-age kids went to non-LDS private colleges and lived in co-ed dorms (alternating floors in my daughter’s case, shared floors in my son’s case). It’s no big deal. I don’t see why BYU can’t treat its students like the adults they are. |
I wonder about the maturity of BYU students based on the comments in this thread. Are they mature enough to get married (and make a good decision in doing so) in their first or second year of college but not mature enough to live in a co-ed dorm without fornicating? |
BBell (#14 and #18) – My point about living in coed dorms is not just to be comfortable with men and their hygiene issues. I think it is valuable to learn how to be around members of the opposite sex and not have it be a potentially sexually-charged situation. I think it is important for college-aged kids to learn how to work with, talk with, relate to, and be friends with members of the opposite sex, with no pressure or expectation that something else may come of it. I have never heard of the rates of sexual assault or harassment increasing in the setting of coed dorms. Do you have any data to support this? I myself never experienced any problems, and I think if the rates were significantly increased, colleges across the nation would have taken action by now and stopped the practice of coed dorms. Jupiterschild (#21)- Well stated. I couldn’t agree more. Anonymous (#22) – I am not trying to limit BYU’s educational experience to its bathroom policy. I agree there are wonderful, unique aspects to attending college with other LDS memebers. But I do think the policies there suggest that college kids can’t control themselves and therefore rules must be established to keep everyone in control. It is almost as if we don’t trust our own college kids to do the right thing. Michelle (#26) – I wonder if any administrators got in trouble over that. Were there any cases of people ripping each other’s clothes off in an uncontrollable rage of passion? Non-Utah dad – thank you for your perspective. I too think we should give college kids more credit for acting responsibly and in accordance with their religious convictions. |
It cuts both ways. What is the big deal of having non-co-ed housing? I don’t buy the “accustom oneself to the hygiene habits of the opposite sex argument.” You can’t say they are being treated as adults on one hand and then assume that they are so emotionally underdeveloped that they need to be forced into proximity to the opposite sex on the other. I agree that as barrier to sexual activity it is so low as to not really justify it. I have yet to see an convincing argument to change the status qho. |
MAC – see my comment in #32. My point is NOT about hygiene issues. It is about relating to and working with and getting to know members of the opposite sex. I am not suggesting that college aged people are fully-developed adults. I am saying that I developed and grew from learning how to relate to and be friends with men I wasn’t related to while living in the dorms. |
I agree with MAC (33). I lived in coed dorms when I studied during a couple of summers at other universities. I lived in single sex buildings when studying at BYU. I’m not sure my experience with the opposite sex was different amongst the institutions. I didn’t break the LOC when cohabiting with women and I didn’t lack for female friends when living with only dudes at BYU. Maybe part of this discussion should be about whether there are advantages to single-sex living. If we eliminate all the places where women are just with women and men are just with with men, do we lose something? I think we have some Wabash men on this board who may be opinionated on the subject. |
Sorry, DCcLemon, Anonymous #22 comment about reducing BYU to its housing policy was directed at MAC (comment 20–”There are countless universities which provide a co-ed option along with a multitude of other things which are not available @ BYU. Why would you want to gut BYU of its specific character? Doesn’t UofU have Coed dorms?”) |
Of course BYU tell it’s students how to dress, what to drink, and how to live. That is what makes it the destination college for the middle east. Seriously, I have plenty of issue with BYU, but these “standards” are the exact reason many students choose it. |
“I wonder about the maturity of BYU students based on the comments in this thread.” I wonder about the FLDS based on what I read in the media. |
arJ, FWIW, most of my friends at Columbia Law School lived in single-gender apartments (at least until they moved in with a boyfriend/girlfriend or got married). In fact, I don’t offhand recall any who lived in mixed-gender apartments. (Yes, apartments; what I heard about the law school dorms wasn’t nice–not that they were single- or mixed-gender, but that they were falling apart.) Why? I don’t know. I’m sure Columbia didn’t have a policy uniformly requiring that students in school-owned apartments live with members of the same gender. But it largely happened, mostly to nobody’s detriment (although one friend did have to kick out her roommate’s boyfriend; with NY rents, though, I totally understand why you’d take a free spot in an apartment if you could.) |
People here do know that a co-ed dorm is different that co-ed dorm rooms, right? |
I think there is a big difference between living in the same building with men and women and living in the same ROOM with a member of the opposite sex. I would not have felt comfortable sharing an apartment or dorm room with a man, but I feel no problem with sharing a building and common living areas. |
Sam B., My sister recently completed a graduate program at Columbia. Her school owned apartment was simply an apartment in a local apartment building. Most of her neighbors weren’t even students. I was in NYC for work several times, and did some “home improvement” projects for her and her roommate in the evenings. I’m very well aware of the quality of Columbia student housing. This thread is full of people arguing about the plusses and minuses of a BYU housing policy based purely on conjecture and guesswork. No, this thread is mostly full (and until recently completely full) of people’s knee-jerk reactions defending the BYU housing policy and claims that any liberalization would be an unmitigated disaster. It seems that most of those commenting have zero experience with co-ed dormitories. In any case it is apparent to me that some on this thread are making comments based on their experience at BYU and suggesting that co-ed dorms at BYU would be a very bad thing. I think this is at best a self fulfilling prophecy. BYU students are taught by the housing rules that they are in constant danger of copulation and it seems that some here have learned the lesson well. I’m a bit shocked. I would think that our best and brightest could live in close proximity to members of the opposite sex with confidence knowing that they have made the decision to be chaste. The suggestion (not made by you) that they’d all rape each other is what should be offensive to those that think highly of BYU and its students. Honestly I think that the option of co-ed dorms and a general relaxation of the housing rules at BYU would be a great thing. Besides the benefits others have mentioned it might do something to quell the hyper charged dating atmosphere there. It would also be a wonderful example of “teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves,” don’t you think? That said, I’d be reluctant to allow the football players to reside there… |
Unlike bbell, I think the gist of this post is right on. I think co-ed dorms – if managed properly (which can be tricky) – can foster lasting friendships between girls and boys and teach them to respect and love each other on a non-sexual level (When Harry Met Sally be damned). I think one of the problems/pitfalls in our LDS culture is the strict segregation of sexes. Just last week at Church, for example, I was hanging out in the hallway and started a conversation with a guy who I’d seen around but never talked to before. Turns out he had lived in the ward for almost a year and was the husband of someone I knew from Relief Society. Huh. The time isn’t ripe for instituting co-ed dorms at BYU, however. Can you imagine the outrage? If people get exercised over Dilbert cartoons, then their minds would be completely blown at the thought of sharing living space with the opposite sex. That said, it would be progress if men and women were less segregated in Church meetings and responsibilities. Anyway, nice first post DCcL! |
DCcLemon said:
The way I look at it is that it’s the job of parents, by the time their children are 18, to teach them how to live responsibly. I’m not here particularly to criticize BYU (actually, we’ve encouraged all our children to go there, but so far only one of them has seriously considered it). But I do think it’s too bad that students can’t have the opportunity of having the advantages that an LDS education has to offer without accepting many of the negatives that go with it. But that’s life, and despite my differences I’m glad the church invests so much in its young adults. And I’m not saying I think they should have co-ed dorms. I just don’t think it’s a big deal. If a student is going to have LoC problems, the student will even with segregated housing. And there’s something to be said for the reasons DCcLemon gave. I think the fact that my son “lived with” female students actually helped him on his mission to relate better to the female investigators he came across. Before she picked her school, we took our daughter to a campus visit at BYU-Idaho. There were a lot of things about it that she liked. But her reaction was something like, “Why would I want to have a curfew? I’ve never had a curfew. And why would I want them deciding what I can wear? I’ve always decided before. I’ll be 18. I don’t want to be treated like a kid.” It’s true. We never had imposed a curfew (but we did expect her to have a cell phone with her at all times and to let us know where she was and to accept calls from us at any time), and we never told her what to wear (although the encouraging was strong at times!). We were fortunate. Our philosophy has been to give our children the most responsibility they can handle, and so far they have done well with it. Our oldest graduated from a secular school while following LDS standards. Our daughter is about to graduate, and she too has remained active in the church while living on a secular campus. We’re very proud of both of them. I hope their younger siblings do as well! |
Ick, dorms. It’s all about living off-campus. |
I did not go to BYU and did not grow up in Utah. I went to a big ten school and yes I did live in mixed gender housing for a year. My exp has been that that many many single LDS kids that lived in the coed dorms went inactive and had issues with the LOC. Those that either lived at home or who had LDS roomates in private apartments did much much better. Unlike ECS I find no problems with the way we segregate the sexes in the church and find that following the bretheren in these matters works the best. |
arJ, I’m not sure that people on this thread have been arguing that BYU students lack any self-control and coed dorms would become an unmitigated love-fest (although I’ll concede that at least a couple people have made that claim); I see more of the less-ambitious claim that BYU will never have coed dorms because the powers that be (a) don’t trust BYU students or (b) don’t want to present a certain appearance to the world. I think that’s probably a pretty fair assessment. I’m frankly pretty agnostic about that policy; it seems to be a pretty common religious-school policy (based on my experience at BYU and a friend’s at a private Christian college in the Midwest, the name of which escapes me, but they recently had their first coed dance in like 50 or 100 years). The rule that I find absurd is that, in order to be approved housing, you can’t have men and women on the same side of a building (or at least you couldn’t back when I was there). That meant that, while my brother could have lived in the condo my parents owned for a couple years, because it was on the girls’ side, he couldn’t have roommates. Because seriously, if I want to have sex, I’m not going to walk down the stairs and around to the other side? But I’m enough years out now that I really don’t much care. |
“It seems that most of those commenting have zero experience with co-ed dormitories. In any case it is apparent to me that some on this thread are making comments based on their experience at BYU and suggesting that co-ed dorms at BYU would be a very bad thing.” It stands to reason that if lack of experience with co-ed dorms lessens the validity of one’s opinion, having attended BYU should lend additional credence. In either case the validity of the opinion being offered is based upon having experience with the thing in question. I have experience with both but, like Sam B., can’t seem to muster an opinion one way or another. |
It appears to be overlooked that the dorms are primarily freshmen, and primarily premie freshmen at that. As such, placing all these 18-year olds in close quarters, with shared living space, and particularly in the case of shared bathroom space, there would without question be a decrease (even if ever so slight) in the number of young men going on missions. Whatever the potential benefits of such living may be, they’re not going to outweigh that downfall. The church has absolutely no motivation to make that tradeoff. |
Re: BBell #46 I had co-ed dorms in my freshman year and while I did not go inactive at my school, probably 2 out of 10 LDS kids did. I don’t think it was because of the fact that they were in co-ed dorms though. I think they just found their new freedom away from mom and dad and nobody would notice if or how often they came to church. I later lived in a co-ed house with non-lds people and was amazing, and my last housing was with other male LDS roomates. I think if people want to go inactive while at school, they do so regardless. They actively choose not to have LDS roomates to make the transition easier and less complicated. I think co-ed dorms are innocuous, but “the powers that be” (to quote Bennett Brower) would never go for it. |
DCcLemon (#32) — I’m sure no administrators got in trouble. It was a very unique situation, but I do wonder what they did about the next group of students. And no, no uncontrollable passion in our flat. :) Lots of talking, lots of hanging out, lots of sightseeing, occasional studying. There was one couple that started dating very discreetly, but the rest of us were more like brothers and sisters. The most controversial thing that happened among us was that one of the guys married a local girl in a civil ceremony while we were there. |
BBell, I think that you might be confusing correlation with causation. |
Maybe if Hillary hadn’t attended Wellesley, then she would have known how to handle Bill. And John Kerry and Michael Bloomberg wouldn’t have divorced. |
Oh, and John McCain too; can’t forget him. All those years in Annapolis, stationed on ships, and then captive in Vietnam. |
ESO (#37) – lol. I do think that people’s standards for how to behave should be the same regardless of whether they live in coed housing or not. I agree that the “standards” aka rules are part of the reason some people go there or want their kids to go to BYU. arj – I don’t think the average BYU student is any more or less mature than an average student attending any other college ECS – I agree that there is a significant amount of segregation between the sexes at church. I understand some of this to a degree, as many members are married. I think it is difficult and can be inappropriate to develop real and appropriate friendships with members of the opposite sex once you are married. BBell (#46) – I agree with others who have indicated there may be a correlation with inactivity and coed living, but I’m not sure it causes such choices. Eric Russell – I agree with you that it seems unlikely that BYU will adopt coed dorms any time soon for the reason you mentioned as well as others mentioned previously. |
Could some of you who lived in co-ed dorms help me understand this by pointing out one or two concrete aspects of your current relations with the other sex that you attribute to your college dorm experience? |
John Mansfield (#56) – I don’t know if I can come up with a specific situation, but in general it was nice for me to learn to be myself around guys without any romantic overtones to the relationship. I think it helped me have the confidence to voice my opinions and discuss issues without worrying about what the other person would think of me. It is very possible this would have happened no matter what living situation I was in — perhaps it was just part of being in college. But I do think it was nice to see men and women engage each other as individuals rather than as stereotypical man or woman. I also think it influenced me to pursue my academic aspirations. I became friends with men who thought it was completely normal for women to have both careers and a family. I had not met very many guys in my Utah high school that felt that way. It was good for me to meet a variety of people with a variety of viewpoints on all sorts of issues. Learning how to be friends with men helped me learn how to be friends with my eventual husband. Certainly one can learn these lessons in a variety of settings, but the dorm was an easy, natural setting for me to learn in. |
I’m a college student right now, and I’ve always lived in coed dorms. I’m currently an RA in coed dorms, and honestly, I can’t imagine it being any other way. Do I get any kind of benefit from it? I don’t know. I mean, I guess being in dorms at BYU and not hanging out with guys in your room would be weird, but I’d imagine I would just hang out with them somewhere else. Its nice that everyone can hang out in the lounges next to our rooms, and since we all live on top of each other there is definitely a sense of community. I think I’d miss that – its nice. I don’t know if it has any impact either way for relationships with members of the opposite sex, because I just don’t even know what single-sex housing would be like. I can’t imagine coed dorms ever at BYU, but I don’t really see what the big deal is elsewhere. I also can’t really imagine parents having that many problems with it… mine didn’t and they’re pretty conservative. Most LDS parents that I talk to about their children coming to school here don’t seem to think it is much of an issue either, so long as the bathrooms and individual rooms are single-sex. (although if you want to bring up a really interesting topic, there is quite a trend toward the option of gender-neutral housing at a lot of universities. That I can see as more of a problem) |
Megan (#58) – I haven’t heard the term “gender-neutral” housing. Could you explain what that means? How common is it? What problems do you see with it? |
There are gay/lesbian students at Stanford who recently said they’d feel safer living with opposite-sex roommates than with same-sex roommates. BYU campuses do go to the other extreme, though, not just segregating dorms. How bizarre is it that “young ladies’ housing” is on one side of town and “gentlemen’s housing” is on the other? And landlord’s must abide by Honor Code regulations about curfews and bathrooms or risk non-approval for student dwellings? |
Basically, gender-neutral housing just means that your gender isn’t relevant to your housing situation – people of the opposite sex can live in the same rooms and share bathrooms in university housing. I guess some of the push is from LGBT students, who feel like the having the existing divisions in housing policy assumes certain sexual/gender norms that everyone isn’t comfortable with. I don’t know that much about it, as my university doesn’t offer it, but I think its becoming a pretty common option for universities, especially if a large portion of the student body lives on campus. Obviously, the issue is less salient if off-campus housing is available and utilized, since no one really cares who you live with (except for at BYU, of course) if it is off campus. I don’t really see many problems with offering it as an option, generally, but I know that part of the reason that it isn’t offered at my university is because of how our housing selection works and because of the fear that couples would move in together, then break up during the year and cause the housing department to have to shuffle people around. I do know that I wouldn’t be comfortable with it as a living option for myself if it meant sharing a bedroom with someone of the opposite sex, but I don’t really care what other people do, and in general, I’m in favor of more housing options so long as they don’t lead to institutional problems. |
Like I said in my earlier post, I have lived in both co-ed and single sex dorm arrangements. I stayed active in the Church in both situations, and I didn’t break the LOC in either case. I didn’t mind them, but I didn’t find any great advantages to living in co-ed arrangements. Women are great. They are fascinating, beautiful, stimulating, interesting, confounding, infuriating, etc… Before I was married, I was friends with many, lover of some, and admirer of all. Now I’m friend of many and the lover of one. That said, I think I preferred living in single-sex dorms. Generally speaking, when you’re a straight single LDS male RM at BYU, you are constantly on the prowl for a mate and long-term companion. Classrooms, church, social events, the cafeteria, the Wilkinson Center, the library, it is all a hunting ground. It was nice to have a refuge where you could rest from the hunt. Where you could be with your brothers and not have to put on airs, where you could belch with abandon, and focus without female distraction on schoolwork. It was nice to have one place where you didn’t, no, couldn’t, continue the hunt. |
I find it amusing that that honor code is often regarded at BYU as some sort of sacred scripture that can never be added to or taken away from. The famous Karl G. Maser quote about the wall and the circle is often quoted to show the importance of keeping your honor. I guess some people think that if you were to change the honor code, somehow you would be compromising your honor. And since apparently it was handed down directly from God, you would be in direct violation of sacred commandments. My experience at BYU (which was mostly favorable, by the way) was that most of the honor code served the purpose to “build walls” rather than “draw circles”. If they truly believed the Maser quote, I would think that you would be able to trust that a student who gave his or her word would keep the law of chastity regardless of whether they lived in close proximity to a member of the opposite sex. I actually lived in an off-campus BYU-approved housing unit that almost got their approval status revoked because they decided that the male and female buildings were too close to each other. They literally had to build a wall between the buildings so you would have to walk an extra 50 steps to get to the female apartments. Obviously, by the time you got there, you would be far to tired to fornicate. |
“I would think that you would be able to trust that a student who gave his or her word would keep the law of chastity regardless of whether they lived in close proximity to a member of the opposite sex.” Two things: 1. I don’t buy that the maintenance of chastity is the only purpose to the segregation of living quarters of the sexes. I grant that it is an important purpose, but it is not the only purpose. I would agree, however, that the introduction of coed dorms would result in a marginal increase in the number of students breaking the LOC. 2. Just because we’ve given our word not to do something doesn’t mean we should surround ourselves with temptations that may tempt us to go break on our word. I’ve made certain covenants to the Lord and my wife with respect to our marriage, as a result, I limit the time and circumstances where I am alone with other members of the opposite sex. I don’t do this because I think there is the remotest possibility of anything happening, but by avoiding the situations where it could happen, I provide myself with an additional stopgap. The same would hold true for any number of things. I’ve decided not to gamble, so I try to avoid casinos. The alcoholic who doesn’t want to drink anymore generally avoids bars. The same is true for the LOC. Most students at BYU probably wouldn’t fornicate if living in close proximity to the opposite sex. But why surround them with the tempation if our goal is to help them keep that commandment? |
Jota G, You’re equating living in a co-ed situation with surrounding yourself with temptation. In doing so you’ve bought into what BYU is unintentionally teaching: that we aren’t equipped with sufficient self control to live with members of the opposite sex without constant copulation. Co-ed dorms actually teach the opposite. Living in close quarters with members of the opposite sex is not temptation because it isn’t the sexually charged situation that your assumption characterizes it as. It teaches you that it is possible to have completely platonic relations with both men and women. I guess that I have to admit that is entirely possible that such an environment is impossible at BYU due to the mentality that you mention having:
It might be that in order for co-ed housing to work one would have to be willing to discard that mentality in certain situations. I’m of the opinion that learning to discard it would be a good thing, but perhaps it that isn’t possible at BYU. Whether this is a defect or a positive attribute of BYU students is in the eye of the beholder. |
John, Yes. That’s exactly what I’ve done. For any hetrosexual man, cohabiting with a large number of unrelated females is, generally speaking, surrounding oneself with temptation. I agree that a person won’t be attracted to every girl on his floor, and that it’s possible he won’t be attracted to any of those girls. His relationship with most will be platonic. If it were possible to control for this and guarantee that only girls and boys lived together who had no attraction to each other, then I might agree that this part of the issue could be resolved. Unfortunately, that’s not possible. If the pool of young women living on his floor includes some that he would be attracted to, don’t you think that the chances that an LOC issue would arise would be greater than if he wasn’t sharing facilities and in their presence at all hours and in all emotional states? I agree that coed dorms wouldn’t lead to mass fornication (my argument is a marginal one), but I also think that coed dorms do not create some shangra-la of gender relations. There is nothing I learned living in a coed dorm that I didn’t learn living with a mom and sisters, or from relationships with women outside my living arrangements. I had plenty of platonic female friends when I was living in a coed dorm and plenty of platonic female friends when I was living in a same-sex dorm. |
To correct the third sentenance of my first paragraph, I should have said “surrounding onself with THE POSSIBILITY of temptation.” |
I think it would be helpful to define what we’re talking about when we say co-ed dorm. I could be wrong, but most co-ed dorms that I’ve seen still have some separation between men and women. For example, women on one floor, and men on a different floor. I don’t believe that anyone is advocating having men and women share bedrooms and bathrooms. With that definition established, I fail to see how being in the same building increases the likelihood of fornication. If the only thing stopping you from having sex is inconvenience, then I’m sure somewhere, sometime during your stay at BYU a convenient situation will arise–with or without the housing rules. |
CJB, Some coed dorms have same-sex floors and some dorms have mixed-sex floors, it depends on the school. Where the floors are same-sex floors, there are often no restrictions on the opposite sex’s access to the floor or the individual dorm rooms. |
In the co-ed dorms that I’m familiar with rooms are shared with same-sex roommates and bathrooms are single sex facilities. Floors may be single sex or mixed. There were never any rules about who could be in what room at what time. Amazingly, people behaved themselves. Of course I’m sure that any configuration that you can imagine has been put into practice. |
Benefit of co-ed dorms: you have close-knit friendships with both sexes and more of a family feel (most co-ed cohabitants don’t get involved with others because it’s way too awkward when it ends). Benefit of current ultra-restrictive BYU housing policy: having grounds to evict your roommate’s (sometimes weird) boyfriend from the apartment. I invoked the BYU housing clause pretty selectively as a student. I didn’t care a whit for the curfew or “bedroom” rule if the visitor was a decent human being and I believed things were pretty much under control. But I definitely made a stink about the rules when a roommate was bringing some wacko or creepy guy into the apartment. That’s tough to do when those rules don’t exist. |
I think coed dorms at BYU would be enormously beneficial. The strict sex segregation, during freshmen year and beyond, creates an artificial and unhealthy sociality for both men and women. First, having a group of women so isolated causes insane amounts of drama. In both my dorm and my apartments the amount of gossip, jealousies, and fighting was enormous. Second, while some may argue that coed living increase the likelihood of LOC violations, segregated living increases the feeling of homoeroticism. Girls were often cuddling (sometimes in bed), hugging, and giving each other back rubs. Guys were always wrestling around and hugging each other. I’m not saying these acts alone constitute homoeroticism. But the vibe that accompanied such acts was a notch above friendship. There was a great deal of sexual tension that was being released on members of the same sex. Third, as DCcLemon has argued, such strict segregation of the sexes thwarts healthy male/female relationships. One of my biggest peeves about the Y was the near impossibility of having a guy as a friend. As soon as a guy started visiting our apartment frequently, the incessant speculation would begin about which roommate he liked. And when a gal visited a guy’s apartment frequently, it was assumed she liked someone there as more than a friend. If you hung out one on one with a guy, the gossip wheel would start in motion immediately. It was such a strange social atmosphere. |
Ruth, Assuming that I’m in with the cool kids next year, I’m going to nominate your comment for a Niblet. |
Jota G (#62 & #64) – Wow. I think you may be missing my point with the post. My point is it is a wonderful thing to become friends with members of the opposite sex WITHOUT a romantic or flirtatious aspect to the relationship. I find your description of life as a single LDS male “constantly on the prowl” pretty sad and somewhat offensive. Did you ever see an attractive woman as anything other than something to be hunted and caught? Why would sharing a living room and seeing women in a common hallway constitute surrounding yourself with temptation? I find your attitude toward women a little concerning. I would hope any man would see a woman as another PERSON with a mind, personality, likes, dislikes, opinions, etc, rather than a siren seducing men at every turn. |
Ruth (72) “segregated living increases the feeling of homoeroticism…Guys were always wrestling around and hugging each other…the vibe that accompanied such acts was a notch above friendship” That’s just silly. DCcLemon (#74), It saddens me that my posts have left you with the impression that my attitude toward women should be concerning. I’m being absolutely sincere when I say that, so please don’t read any flippancy into this post. I apologize for using the metaphor of the “hunt” in my original post. I agree that such a metaphor is unartful and was likely to give the wrong impression. I agree that it is a wonderful thing to become friends with members of the opposite sex without a romantic or flirtatious aspect to the relationship. I agree with your ends, I just disagree with your means. I have had many, many close friends of the opposite gender. Some of my best friends in high school and college were women with whom I had no romantic or flirtatious relationship. Now that I’m married, I only have platonic relationships with women other than my wife. But neither my experience in a coed dorm, nor my experience in an all male house precluded or facilitated my ability to enter into positive, platonic relationships with women. |
Jota G (#75) – Thanks for the clarification. I agree with you that there are many situations and ways in which one can develop real platonic relationships between men and women. Certainly dorms are not the only place. |
Jota G, you in 75:
you in 64:
I think that you need to consider the marginal case in Ruth’s argument. I also think that as long as we’re considering marginal cases you should consider not just in college fornication but life-long law of chastity consequences. It is entirely possible that if BYU students weren’t taught the lessons that you’ve learned so well that there would be marginally less adultery later in life because of an increased ability to keep relationships on a platonic level. Of course neither of us has any evidence for our assertions, but I would assert that while neither is good, adultery is worse than fornication. |
“That’s just silly.” No, it’s not actually. It’s something I really observed. And others did as well. Guys and girls hugged and cuddled waaay more than at the secular college I also attended. The difference was striking. Truly. Maybe Mormons are just really affectionate. But again, the vibe was discerniably homoerotic and I haven’t observed the same thing in either high school or adult age Mormons. Also, if you disagree, please try to do so in a less dismissive way. |
I wasn’t being dismissive. I actually thought the premise was silly. I never witnessed women cuddling in bed at BYU since boys weren’t allowed in girl’s rooms. I don’t recall excessive inappropriate public displays of affection between women, but perhaps a lot has changed in the last twelve years. I did witness and participate in a fair share of wrestling with friends, brothers and roommates. This was never sexual or erotic for me. Most of the time the wrestling ended up causing me pain. If I recall, there was a certain youngish prophet who also liked to wrestle and rough house with other men. I do think it’s sad if we’ve gotten to a point in our society that same-gender contact is generalized as erotic. If that’s your opinion, you’re entitled to it. I won’t discount that you hold that opinion or that you were left with that impression when you witnessed the acts you mentioned. Just don’t expect me to not think it’s silly. |
I absolutely don’t think normal same sex contact is erotic. These people were not homosexual. I think same sex people should definitely be affectionate. The guys and girls who engaged in this cuddling and wrestling did not view it as sexual in any way, shape, or form. I simply observed an abnormal amount of affection and I think it’s due to a lot of built of sexual tension at BYU. Certainly, same sex housing is not entirely to blame for this; the whole not having sex before marriage is most responsible. |
random john, “I think that you need to the marginal case in Ruth’s argument” Duly noted. I am, however, in the camp that thinks SGA isn’t the result of environmental impacts once one arrives at college. Also, given that in the vast majority of coed dorms the bedrooms are shared by members of the same sex, if a student is suffering from SGA, whether their dorm is coed or single sex won’t make any difference, they’ll still have a same gender roommate. “neither of us has any evidence for our assertions” Indeed. But isn’t that half the fun? “adultery is worse than fornication” Agreed. |
Ruth (80) “the whole not having sex before marriage is most responsible” Perhaps then, the better solution is to keep the same gender dorms, but do away with the prohibition on sex before marriage. That would end the sexual tension and result in less abnormal amounts of affection, or, perhaps, affectation. |
Jota-Of course that wouldn’t be an option. But at least having same sex dorms would facilitate greater mixing of the sexes and not leave students to spend the majority of their time in same sex groups. This mixing would help students release some of that sexual tension without having to break the LOC. It just promotes generally healthy social attitudes. I am not sure why you feel the need to tinge all of your comments with snarkiness. Sarcasm is typically employed when the commenter does not have sufficient confidence in the strength of his arguments. |
I think we need the viewpoint of someone who lived in mix-gender housing and then proceeded to violate the LOC. We’re all just talking in anecdotes, obviously, and “what worked for me”. I had a brother do his graduate work at a Big-10 school, who reported that the single LDS students who lived in mixed-gender housing had double or triple the LOC problems as those who lived in single-gender housing. Just an anecdote. I honestly don’t believe that having an opposite-sex roommate or one living next door does *that* much to increase your understanding of and improve your relationships with the opposite sex. |
Oh, and as for my background, I spent 1 year in the dorms at BYU, 1 year in the apartment dorms (Heritage), and 2 years off campus before I got married. In Heritage and off-campus, we practically had members of the opposite sex living in our apartment. And I had roommates who got in trouble. My perspective is that co-ed living increases the *chances* of LOC problems. It does not increase actual problems — just the chances. |
Ruth (83), I apologize if you found my comments snarky. “Sarcasm is typically employed when the commenter does not have sufficient confidence in the strength of his arguments.” I’m not the one postulating that same sex dorms lead to homosexual behavior… |
queuno, How does it increase the chance of a LOC violation? Two people wake up in the middle of the night, are really horny, but can’t find their shoes? |
Again, speaking strictly from my experience, allowing members of the opposite sex into living areas in apartments for extended periods of time increased the likelihood of intimate contact. Maybe the best way to characterize it was that if there were women acting as if they lived in our apartment, there was invariably some problem with a girl and one of my roommates. I knew of 7 roommates or close friends at BYU (note – not all roommates were close friends, some were just people who bought a contract to live in the apartment) who had LOC problems. *ALL* of them ran into problems because they were essentially “living” in a girlfriend’s apartment or were hanging out at their girlfriend’s apartment at 3am, or something similar. I have three relatives who served on high councils in stakes with student wards (one a BYU stake). They report similar patterns. Again, we’re all presenting our own anecdotes, but I think we’re being silly when we don’t acknowledge that single co-ed living increases the opportunity and chances for LOC violations, and we’re being silly when we don’t think that’s serious. |
My hunch is that if the concern were raised with the students and administrators at most schools that co-ed dorms may increase incidence of fornication, the most common response would be “So?” |
88: What your anecdote says to me is that BYU’s current arrangement doesn’t work for it’s intent. Your roommates broke rules and would have had to have broken the same rules in a co-ed dorm. If BYU really wants to prevent LoC violations, they need two campuses with a large geographic division. Of course, that would interfere with BYU’s primary mission. |
That statement is rather lacking in logic. Allow me to fix it for you: *ALL* of them ran into problems while they were essentially “living†in a girlfriend’s apartment or were hanging out at their girlfriend’s apartment at 3am, or something similar. There. That was easy. |
Of some interest may be this review of Sex and the Soul: Juggling Sexuality, Spirituality, Romance, and Religion on America’s College Campuses by Donna Freitas. “On the flipside at evangelical campuses, what I saw that I didn’t see at other places was a level of integrated community. Talk about educating the whole person. I’ve never seen anything like it,” Freitas says. “Watching a community build itself around shared values was pretty extraordinary and I think really fulfilling for most of the students even if it can be stressful.” |
As those who follow the Phantom comic strip know, two of Mrs. Walker’s* friends passed a difficult initiation trial and have been accepted by Coronel Worubu as the Jungle Patrol’s first-ever female recruits. However, some will be disappointed with the new construction that the Coronel ordered. *For the woman married to the ghost who walks. |
John Mansfield (#92) – Thanks for the link to the review. I liked the description of the “senior scramble” at evangelical colleges where senior women “scramble” to find a husband due to “extreme pressure” to marry before graduating. Does that sound familiar to anyone who went to school in utah valley? |
That statement is rather lacking in logic. There. That was easy. I’m not sure you changed my point (because/while). You imply that it’s just correlation, not causation. I still argue that “yes, it was”. |
I yield to your superior reasoning. |
[...] #36 DKL speaking to a troll comment #170 and comment #182 Russell Arben Fox comment #54 Ruth comment #72 Ryan comment #19 Steve Evans comment #994 on “Police Beat Roundtable #10†Steve Evans comment [...] |
[...] Ruth on segregation of sexes at the “Y†comment #72 [...] |
I’ve had plenty of friends that fooled around who are lds. I don’t think that it has much to do with the housing or rules. It all comes down to what we chose to do individually. It is personal responsibility for our actions. The honor code is not going to stop or even help people. I’ve also known people who are memebrs of other faiths who live in the same apartment as members of the opposite sex, they never fooled around. It all comes down to personal choice. If you are going to fool around, you’ll do it. If not then you’ll hold to your principles no matter how powerful the hormones. There are plenty of times I’ve gotten up and walked away because a conservitive LDS girl wanted too much. Funny thing is that most of them all ended up fooling around, then getting married in the temple worthily, where as I’m still single becaue they dump me since I don”t fool around. Go figure, an extremely attractive guy in his mid 30′s who looks like he’s 25. Can’t find a wife because all the “Good” Mormon girls I date decide to cheat on me and hop in the sack with some guy and end up getting married to them. Then they live happily ever after while I suffer in loneliness because I chose to keep the law of chastity. It’s the same story over and over again so many times that I don’t even date anymore. Sad really. It all comes down to what you are willing to do, not the rules of where you live. |
Hmmm. You may want to consider the possibility that there’s some other reason involved in why these girls dump you. |
[...] CJB: I actually lived in an off-campus BYU-approved housing unit that almost got their approval status revoked because they decided that the male and female buildings were too close to each other. They literally had to build a wall between the buildings so you would have to walk an extra 50 steps to get to the female apartments. Obviously, by the time you got there, you would be far to tired to fornicate. [...] |