Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stanford’s war on social life

palladiummag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 402 posts

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#41

Post by krsrhe »

WoahNoun wrote: post #31
googlryas wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there specific details about what the band did?

History of rampant sexual harassment and hazing. > The university initiated the joint inquiry after learning of concerns regarding several band events, including off-campus trips, that the band held for its members between 2012 and 2015. The investigation found that, on several occasions, the band violated university policies regarding alcohol, controlled substances, hazing and/or sexual harassment. Violations includ…

No post body was provided.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#42

Post by kernoble »

A lot of these high-end schools have been working to crack down on forms of risk, at the cost of a huge amount of fun and personal discovery. The issues is, this has happened for kids all the way down to when they are toddlers. People need to be able to be in risky, crazy, abnormal situations; it's part of growing up and figuring out who you are. This will only push it later in life, when the risks are far higher, and/or will just have even more uncreative drones.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#43

Post by ketzo »

It is absolutely impossible to take this article seriously, because the author refuses to acknowledge the un-fucking-believably fraught legacy that the Greek fraternity system has, at Stanford and at every other school.

> Driven by a fear of uncontrollable student spontaneity and a desire to enforce equity on campus

Oh, yeah, Stanford’s really afraid of “student spontaneity.”

They’re definitely not afraid of organizations that:

- ritualize physical and mental abuse

- force people to consume dangerous amounts of drugs and alcohol

- institutionalize racism, classism, and misogyny

- protect - and encourage! - sexual assaulters

Fraternities aren’t all bad. Fraternity brothers aren’t all bad. I was one, and I met some of the best friends of my life. But that also means I know just how fucking bad it gets, even now (2016-2020).

Yeah, sucks, you don't get to live in a big fun house and pull Animal House-style pranks any more. You lost your privileges after killing a fucking kid.

https://www.sfgate.com/crime/article/Family-sues-Stanford-ro...

Oh, sorry -- did I say a kid, singular?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hazing_deaths_in_the_U...

29 dead in the U.S. in the last 12 years.

And the author makes this out to be some stick-in-the-mud administrator trying to take away their toys. Makes me fucking sick.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#44

Post by narrator »

Has anyone interviewed anyone in the administration to figure out what their thinking was with the enactment of these policies? More importantly, who was responsible, and how did they get put in that position of authority? Our world seems to be about seizing power and then doing whatever you want with no clear explanation as to why. Everything is opaque these days or nonsensical. Just do what we tell you or get cancelled.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#45

Post by hprotagonist »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #35

“Stanford's new social order offers a peek into the bureaucrat's vision for America. It is a world without risk, genuine difference, or the kind of group connection that makes teenage boys want to rent bulldozers and build islands. It is a world largely without unencumbered joy; without the kind of cultural specificity that makes college, or the rest of life, particularly interesting.” This is true at MIT as well. Ca…

pour one out for senior house.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#46

Post by dgs_sgd »

I can see why there's a push to eliminate Greek life given all the unfortunate events associated with it. But I'm extremely confused this example:

> One such case was the end of Outdoor House, an innocuous haven on the far side of campus for students who liked hiking. The official explanation from Stanford for eliminating the house was that the Outdoor theme “fell short of diversity, equity and inclusion expectations.”

They can't even organize around a common interest unless it passes some bureaucrat's standard of diversity?

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#47

Post by kernoble »

hemloc_io wrote: post #33

This highlights something I feel like most older people on Hackernews, and generally don't know about modern student life! the amount of university involvement in what's going on in everyone's personal lives has increased substantially from when you were in school, much to the adulation of a portion of the student population. Unis now focus on "student welfare", which really just means expanding the universities reac…

The universities seem to have forgotten that there role is to teach and educate, not overreach into their student's lives. College is about learning to cope and manage on your own, as well as learn. Having a different helicopter parent at the university (compared to home) won't help that development.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#48

Post by pigscantfly »

dougmccune wrote: post #15

I spent 3 years living in one of the co-ops briefly mentioned in the article ("In 2013, the administration took over the student-run anarchist house and painted over the old murals."). I wouldn't call it an "anarchist house" but it sure as hell was a lot of fun to live there. I painted some of those murals that are now apparently gone. We built a giant illegal loft in our room to make it two stories (which we would d…

I was in the co-ops and also a frat in the early 2010's. I knew about XOX, SAE, and KA but not theta delt or sigma chi -- let alone french house, slav, haus mitt, or casa italiana. Aside from undergrads, the school will miss out, too -- my pledge class founded thirteen companies in the few years after graduation, and I hired several friends from EBF for my own -- but the administration will probably never realize what they've done to the undergraduate culture. This is really sad news; I hope the rest of the co-ops escape -- most of the housing options are extremely uninspiring to actively anti-social and not great for mental health, as the article points out.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#49

Post by sandworm101 »

dgs_sgd wrote: post #46

I can see why there's a push to eliminate Greek life given all the unfortunate events associated with it. But I'm extremely confused this example: > One such case was the end of Outdoor House, an innocuous haven on the far side of campus for students who liked hiking. The official explanation from Stanford for eliminating the house was that the Outdoor theme “fell short of diversity, equity and inclusion expectations…

>unless it passes some bureaucrat's standard of diversity?

That is what was said, but not why the school is attacking student organizations. Any student organization presents a liability to the school. An outdoor club, something with the schools name on it where student go out and teach each other how to ski on glaciers or climb rocks? The schools are listening to their lawyers, their insurance schemes. They are against any and all groups that operate without direct school management.

I was a member of the VOC, UBC's outdoor club and an organization that predates the school itself. Every year I am surprised that the school hasn't moved to to shut them down.

https://www.ubc-voc.com/tripagenda/upcoming.php

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#50

Post by scarmig »

ketzo wrote: post #43

It is absolutely impossible to take this article seriously, because the author refuses to acknowledge the un-fucking-believably fraught legacy that the Greek fraternity system has, at Stanford and at every other school. > Driven by a fear of uncontrollable student spontaneity and a desire to enforce equity on campus Oh, yeah, Stanford’s really afraid of “student spontaneity.” They’re definitely not afraid of organiza…

This might be a slightly more trenchant critique if Stanford weren't simultaneously declaring war on houses devoted to everything from French culture to cooperative vegetarian meals.

But, as little as I liked the frats, I'm not going to throw them under the bus and push the idea that they were some kind of dens of misogyny and rape. They're not. If Stanford really wanted to combat those ills, perhaps it should focus more on the more general culture of binge drinking.

Post reply on HN