Delaney Harness’ Sept. 28 column voiced her concerns about the proposed gender-neutral housing policy. The Daily opinion section has largely favoured the policy and I think dissenting views are important. But I fundamentally disagree with many of her statements, in particular her suggestion that homo- and transphobic harassment, exclusion and violence are merely “annoying,” predictable and acceptable aspects of university and residence life. Also, it should not be up to gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex and asexual students to educate their peers — particularly when they feel unsafe.
However, her column did remind me that when you are involved in something, it is easy to forget that not everyone knows as much about it. While Students for a Democratic Society and the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender and Friends group host more teach-ins on gender-neutral housing and advertise their meeting times, not all students can attend such events. So I will outline the basics of our proposal and try to address the concerns highlighted by Harness and others. The full proposal is available on oklahomasds.wordpress.com.
Gender-neutral housing would allow students of any gender identity or assigned sex to share a room with another student of a different gender identity or assigned sex. The university allows upperclass women and men to live on the same floor, though they do not share rooms or bathrooms, while freshmen must live on solely male or female floors. It is important to note that this is not just an OU policy — this situation is mandated by the Oklahoma State Regents and thus the proposal we have been advocating for goes beyond just our campus.
This sex-segregated system endangers some GLBT residents, because their gender expression and/or their sexual orientation may set them apart from their community members and make them easy targets for exclusion, bullying and physical violence.
Harness raises an important point that has been discussed thoroughly: Is there not potential for a gender-neutral housing community to be targeted? Academics and activists call this problem “ghettoization,” wherein an oppressed group is confined to one space, making it easy to deprive its members of their rights. The caveat for gender-neutral housing is that it is open to straight and gender-conforming students as well. Our proposal does not even require students to “out” themselves to housing officials unless they have a specific roommate requests.
Harness also notes that some students may abuse the gender-neutral housing option to “shack up” with their significant other. Very little empirical research has been done on this policy, but researchers at Clark University have found little evidence of such behavior.
This criticism has two important faults. First, our present housing system ironically allows same-gender loving students to room with their significant others. Surely straight students should be allowed the same?
Second, sex-segregated housing in no way impedes sexual relationships among students of any orientation — as anyone awoken to the staccato squeaking of bed springs next door knows. In four years of on-campus living, I have seen residents practically live with their different-sex partner. While the alternative may be criticized as naive, it is not the university’s place to dictate a “moral” living situation for students.
Especially in light of the tragedies the GLBT community experiences yearly because of homo- and transphobes, it would seem a good deal more moral on the university’s part to ensure that its student have the safest, most welcoming environment possible. I encourage reading the proposal and attend our meetings: SDS meets at 9 p.m. Sundays in Kaufman Hall Room 132, and GLBTF meets at 7 p.m. Wednesdays in the Oklahoma Memorial Union.
As we wind down from Coming Out Week, I hope you are inspired to take action for the GLBT community. I only ask that when we present our own solutions to issues we face, our straight and gender-conforming allies listen and help us instead of asking us to accept worse than we deserve so bigots will be more comfortable.
Elizabeth Rucker is an international studies and interdisciplinary studies on the environment senior.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Concerned 7 months, 2 weeks ago
I think you need to go back and reread Ms. Harness' statement. She never once calls these appalling issues merely annoying! She discusses the annoyance of 3 am roommates. She then goes on to talk about how putting GLBT in a seperate dorm would in fact keep others from learning about GLBT issues. I'm tired of people bad mouthing when they can't support their own facts! Did you even read her article?
Jaco99 7 months, 2 weeks ago
OU has a freshman class of around 3500 students, and assuming that around 10% are GLBTQ (undoubtedly an underestimate) that would make 350ish GLBTQ freshmen. Unless you are proposing a dorm to house ALL of these hundreds of students, which I don't think you are, ghettoization would not be a problem with this proposal.
eerucker 7 months, 2 weeks ago
@Concerned, quoting from Harness' column: "We all have to deal with the annoying people who come in drunk at 3 a.m., but that’s what college is about: learning to deal with the annoying things and dealing with people. By isolating the GLBT students, we completely lose out on opportunities to learn from them"
By sequencing her thought the way she did, she implies that LGBTQIA students' victimisation is equivalent to annoying drunks. Furthermore, it is NOT the responsibility of a marginalised group to educate the privileged.
Furthermore, while I did not address it directly in this column -Harness seems to be the one incapable of checking her facts, as the letter to the editor from the HCSA president and vice president demonstrate. She also apparently did very little (if any) research on our proposal before writing her column.
SgtB 7 months, 1 week ago
Here's my idea. Do away with dorms and turn them into apartments. That way people have a right to live with whomever they wish and can pick their own room mates at will. I don't see how it is any of the University's business telling grown adults (that is what you all are unless you ascribe to the belief that you are still a child until your parents stop paying your way) who they can and cannot stay with. If someone wants to live with their highschool girfriend, who is the University to say they cannot? Who in this world would have the right to tell a person who is not under their parents' roof who they can and cannot live with? No one.
The answer to everyone's problems is less government, less regulation of personal behavior, and a strict set of laws that is enforceable, constitutional, and simple to understand.
Of course I hope that all of you vote for Ron Paul in 2012, especially since you are all adult citizens and it is your duty to vote for the person you feel is best suited to lead this nation or run for the position yourself.