We’ve all been there or at least know someone who has. The RA happens to overhear a faint female voice past the 1 a.m. visiting hours in a men’s freshman dorm. A poster is found hanging that depicts a banned alcoholic beverage (during my freshman year we actually defied this by hanging up a poster of Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Last Supper’ with an arrow pointing to Christ’s goblet of wine). Or my personal favorite: photos on Facebook discovered by a shadowy administrator and constructed into hard evidence of supposedly morally repulsive activity. What is the common crime in these varying examples? The official jargon in the Student Handbook would state that such activity is a violation of “basic human respect.”
Human respect is quite wonderful when the entire community mostly agrees upon the terms. I’m well aware that we’ve all signed that Student Handbook agreement written in clever legalese and promulgating more rules and policy prescriptions than the biblical book of Leviticus. But how many of us actually have had a say in which rules are instituted on campus?
As much as the administration would like you to believe that these policies are nothing short of divine law and founded upon the most rational of principles they are actually transient and open to critical review. When each new annual edition of the handbook is produced however the students often don’t contribute adequately to its policies. Instead the major decisions are left up to various administrative offices (often due to pressure from the wholly unaccountable university Board of Regents). As one who had been on SGA for two years I can honestly say that the students have little practical power with regard to the implementation of community standards and policies.
The university’s top-down structure of authority with regards to community policy is terribly outdated and out of touch with modern society. The example of our own national government for instance dictates that citizens should determine their own standards within a framework of deliberative democracy rather than succumb to an authoritarian hierarchical system. Rather than informing students of changes in the handbook and then giving a limited chance for input why not just institute an appropriately diverse student board of representatives to help shape and develop these standards? What is there to be really afraid of? Perhaps the powers that be have fears of the university’s “Lord of the Flies”-esque descent into chaotic despotism leading to extravagant hedonism and high-profile lawsuits.
We are not lawless children though. Yes we are often irresponsible adults but we learn from our mistakes and learn fast. Students often wonder why the university is so dead on Friday and Saturday nights even leading the Student Programming Board to resort to funding only campus events during the weekend. This undesirable phenomenon is likely due to the atmosphere being so sterilized and sheltered that on-campus life stagnates as a result.
Additionally an opportunity to be irresponsible can also be an educational opportunity and does not mean that irresponsible behavior will even necessarily take place. Why is there not a bar on campus for faculty graduate students and undergrads older than 21 for example? If it were put to a vote my bet is that the majority of students and faculty would agree to institute one. How’s that for a much-needed energetic jolt to the HAWC?Other examples of likely undemocratic policies include unreasonable visiting hours (many other universities offer some dorms with visitation hours and others without – each student chooses a preference during the request for housing) a ban on both a GLBT group on campus and openly gay faculty and of course the simply ridiculous policies that govern behavior off-campus regarding alcohol and social gatherings.
Regardless of the reason the abundance of silly rules causes us to always worry about breaking a policy rather than just living life and actually celebrating the freedoms that we do have.