|
Volume CXXXIII, Number 9 |
 |
Houses still healthy
To the Editors:
I am compelled to respond to the Women's Resource Center article in your last week's Orient. As a three-year member of the houses, I was sincerely disappointed by the lack of perspective included.
First, some history is needed to see the fallacies in Ms. Shrayer's article. The house system has existed for six years. Ms. Shrayer argues men who "maintain fraternity traditions" have dominated the houses. However, historically, WOMEN have dominated the houses. For example, in six years, Helmreich has had only one year with more men than women. In those six years, the top officers have been women for three of them. Many other houses have similar histories.
The second problem is the tremendous gender bias in the article. The assumptions made are offensive. The notion that house members (implying men) swill beer, do not clean up, and let strangers traipse through is unfair.
Firstly, it's been a struggle for houses to get students involved. If strangers are traipsing through, the houses are successful as people are getting involved.
Secondly, another "non-scientific poll" will show 100 percent of residents (male and female) don't want to clean up after others. The implication is that men (who populate the houses) either: A) don't mind cleaning up; or B) don't mind living in a dirty house. Now A is not true, which leaves B, the implied answer in the article. That is unfair and untrue. I am disgusted at the state of the house after parties and help clean up, because it is right.
Thirdly, implying women are more interested in the common good is another stretch. First, numerous service events are led by houses, including Flag Football, Road Wars, etc. The campus takes many of these events for granted. Additionally, it is unfair to claim women are more interested in service than men.
Arguing, "few women returning is a sign that men enjoy themselves more," is equally false. First, few students remain in the houses after sophomore year. This limits the pool of returners. Second, the number of reapplications is astonishing-almost no one returned. This may be a fluke representing more students deciding to remain-a good thing, as continuity is important. Claiming a gender relation is a stretch. Several women desired to live in houses. None were gender-related issues.
There has been a change in the complexion of the residents, but no more significant than reversing the 70:30 female-male ratio of the past. The Houses are bound to change in gender, race, etc. Invariably it will shift. This is a non-issue unless this becomes a trend. A one-year switch is not significant in a system this dynamic.
Bleak-not at all. The outlook for the houses is very positive. Ms. Shrayer's premature death knell for the houses is jumping the gun. The system will continue to grow and change.
Sincerely,
Kurt Jendrek
Helmreich House '02 -'04
For information on sending a letter to the editor, please click here.
|
FastCounter by bCentral |