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

51–60 of 402 posts

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#51

Post by UncleEntity »

julianeon wrote: post #19

I think I'm close to an outside observer - I didn't go to Stanford and don't have a dog in that fight, as the saying goes. I don't trust the conclusions of this article. It starts with a story about a frat which filled their building's first floor with sand, so much that they had to rent a bulldozer to relocate it to the campus lake. Then they call the Stanford admins killjoys for not supporting it. But... of course…

> What if someone is injured by the bulldozer? I wouldn't trust teenagers renting an after-party bulldozer who never cleared that with anyone, never notified anyone, and have no proof of training.

You, sir, would have an absolute conniption if you knew half the stuff we got up to in the airborne…

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#52

Post by majormajor »

pigscantfly wrote: post #48
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 wha…

I like how we're immediately jumping to "this is going to ruin the financial success of future graduates and thus hurt future fundraising."

"Thing I like must be directly responsible for this other thing that happened later" is sad to see from someone from what's supposed to be one of our nation's best schools.

Turning high school into middle school and college into high school, etc, in terms of adult supervision isn't my favorite thing in the world, but it's also something that been happening since long before you made it to a college campus in the early 2010s. So it's not very clear that it's going to cause corporate or economic pain. The social arguments are much more compelling, but also far harder to unwind. Parents have been both complaining about but also calling for this sort of thing for decades.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#53

Post by zdragnar »

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…

I've seen a quiet but persistent thought pattern that outdoor / nature activities- hiking, camping, etc- are endemically white and that any attempt to organize around it without making overt, aggressive attempts to include minorities is a sign of white supremacy.

This is the main thrust of the "anti-racist" movement. If you aren't talking about being inclusive in every aspect of any social interaction you partake in, you are automatically racist. Just wanting to be around other people who like hiking and camping makes you a white supremacist.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#54

Post by ketzo »

scarmig wrote: post #50
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…

In my sophomore year, my roommate came back at 7am after being out all night with his thighs literally purple from paddling. He couldn't stand up for a day - I had to bring him meals.

He was in the professional society for international relations students.

It's not just frats.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#55

Post by csdvrx »

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…

> - forced people to consume dangerous amounts of drugs and alcohol

Forced, really?

> Yeah, sorry, you don’t get to 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...

Hmm, did they kill a kid, or did the kid OD'ed THEN declined medical attention?

> According to Weiner’s family, the sophomore overdosed two days before his death. Paramedics were called to the frat house, but Weiner declined medical attention. Two days later, he was found unresponsive in a bathroom by a janitor

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

I don't know, but you certainly did a ninja-fast edit of your post to find more chopwood for the axe you're grinding.

Life is dangerous. Unfortunately, given the glacial pace of research, odds are you may even die in the end.

If you can't accept the risks, don't ruin the fun for the rest of us.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#56

Post by pigscantfly »

majormajor wrote: post #52
pigscantfly wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 wha…

I like how we're immediately jumping to "this is going to ruin the financial success of future graduates and thus hurt future fundraising." "Thing I like must be directly responsible for this other thing that happened later" is sad to see from someone from what's supposed to be one of our nation's best schools. Turning high school into middle school and college into high school, etc, in terms of adult supervision isn…

It was a (possibly-overly-blunt) attempt to tie this cultural shift to outcomes the bureaucracy cares about, but absolutely the biggest loss is to the undergraduate culture and future students' experiences. Both future grads and the university will obviously be fine financially.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#57

Post by ketzo »

csdvrx wrote: post #55
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…

> - forced people to consume dangerous amounts of drugs and alcohol Forced, really? > Yeah, sorry, you don’t get to 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... Hmm, did they kill a kid, or did the kid OD'ed THEN declined medical attention? > According to Weiner’s family, the sophomore overdosed two d…

> Forced, really?

Lol. No friends at SEC schools, huh?

Do we really need Lord of the Flies to tell us that in certain environments, at certain ages, around certain people, people can be pressured into doing things that they would never do otherwise?

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#58

Post by Hizonner »

Why would you make your housing or social life, or indeed your weird edgy experiences of whatever kind, dependent on the same institution teaching your classes? That's the actual root cause.

And I understand that some of these institutions require living on campus, at least in the first years, which is absolutely insane.

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#59

Post by throwaway0a5e »

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…

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

At what point do we admit that the people who cried slippery slope and said this power would just be used as a cudgel for their bureaucrats to enforce whims they could not otherwise justify were right?

Re: Stanford’s war on social life

#60

Post by majormajor »

pigscantfly wrote: post #56
majormajor wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like how we're immediately jumping to "this is going to ruin the financial success of future graduates and thus hurt future fundraising." "Thing I like must be directly responsible for this other thing that happened later" is sad to see from someone from what's supposed to be one of our nation's best schools. Turning high school into middle school and college into high school, etc, in terms of adult supervision isn…

It was a (possibly-overly-blunt) attempt to tie this cultural shift to outcomes the bureaucracy cares about, but absolutely the biggest loss is to the undergraduate culture and future students' experiences. Both future grads and the university will obviously be fine financially.

My theory is that the root cause is the financialization and rat-race-ification of everything.

You gotta go to college to make a good living.

You gotta go to a TOP college especially.

You gotta work your ass off in high school to get in.

And so everyone just is told their whole childhood to compete harder and harder in this race to the bottom and there's no more room for interesting experiences since a truly interesting experience isn't guaranteed to sound as good on an application as a boring "interesting experience" run-of-the-mill extracurricular schedule.

Leaving in room for insanity and creativity is counter to what this money-above-all-else societal push for undergrad education wants.

But hey, we gotta do that because if we don't, China will!

It's not the students who benefit from having to work twice as hard to get the same degree.

Post reply on HN