Initiate All-Gender Housing

On Wednesday, the General Faculty will consider a proposal to adopt all-gender housing across campus. If it is approved, the recommendation will be passed on to senior administrators for approval. This policy is 12 years in the making. Such a decision, which would eradicate discrimination against transgender, queer and other students who would prefer to room with a person not of their biological sex, is long overdue.

All-gender housing is, first and foremost, an opportunity for those who do not identify as part of the gender binary or do not subscribe to heteronormative perspectives to live with a roommate of any gender in a location of their choice. The proposal would open up all rooms across all dorms for multi-gender occupancy, excluding those in single-gender halls and residences such as Baldwin.

Oberlin has already begun to take steps toward all-gender housing. In 2004, an all-gender floor was introduced in Noah and next year similar halls will become available in East, South and Talcott. Although the expansion to other dorms offers greater options to students in the types and locations of rooms available, Oberlin’s policy limits these students to a select group of traditional dorms and bars from them the experience of program housing. At a time when fewer students are qualifying for off-campus and demand for village housing cannot be met, this issue directly affects the living arrangements of more students than in the past.

At first glance, all-gender housing is understandably controversial. From the moment co-ed rooms were first requested, the College feared the reactions of parents, prospective students and alumni. The prospect of promiscuity on the part of co-ed roommates and discomfort on the part of their neighbors delayed even the minimal implementation of a policy that included co-ed rooms for seven years.

But co-ed rooms have been available for two years and no one has sounded any alarms. Peer institutions that have implemented all-gender policies similar to Senate’s current proposal have found that once policies were in place, all anticipated backlash failed to materialize. These colleges and universities report that only a small percentage of students on campus take advantage of this option; it is mostly utilized by mature students whose needs are not met by the gender-binary enforced by traditional housing policies.

In 1996, Residential Life and College admissions feared getting ahead of the curve in adopting a co-ed room policy would hinder recruitment. Ten years have passed, and Oberlin has already been surpassed in the scope of our all-gender policy by peer institutions such as Wesleyan and Swarthmore, and many other institutions that have taken measures similar to Oberlin are considering expanding their policies as well.

Oberlin takes pride in being at the forefront of previous social movements: as a stop on the Underground Railroad, in its role protesting Vietnam, in its leadership in the civil rights and women’s rights movements. Now Oberlin has the chance to take a progressive and supportive stance in the current social movement toward LGBTQ equality. Oberlin should not, in the face of this opportunity, cower behind an image of fearlessness while shying away from true progress.
 
 

About us
Subscriptions
Advertising

Previous issue
Archives

Powered by