When i apply to college i will skip Harvard because everyone there thinks like this. I won’t see this issue in every other school because the student body is uniformly angelic. Thanks CC for saving me from the pain of a Harvard rejection.
I don’t think there’s any doubt of that. It’s hard to think of any place that wouldn’t be much safer than it is if you banned all men.
My wife has been saying for years that men should have a curfew. After 7 pm, men must be at home.
I agree that what the guy wrote was stupid. He apologized, and it appears that the argument he’d prefer to make is that the membership policy of the Porcellian Club has nothing to do with campus sexual assault, because women aren’t even allowed to enter the clubhouse. That’s not such a bad argument. It doesn’t answer the question of why any organization of this kind should still be single-sex, though. Even Skull and Bones is coed now.
" My wife has been saying for years that men should have a curfew. After 7 pm, men must be at home. "
@dstark, is your wife Golda Meir? 
https://motleynews.net/2012/07/11/the-best-statement-made-about-rape-gold-meirs-curfew-for-men/
@SurvivorFan, some schools change more slowly than others (like most organizations, not just colleges). Those who have been very successful are often slowest to change – they don’t see the point or need to. Sometimes they get left behind by the modern world.
Most fraternities and sororities are also single sex. I dislike all these exclusionary social clubs, but I don’t see any difference. I think they are particularly inappropriate at schools like Harvard where the school has structured their undergraduate life around residential colleges.
Does Porcellian (or do any of these clubs) really have any meaning nowadays? I think you give these clubs too much power when you get all agog about what they say or do. Let irrelevant clubs stay irrelevant, IMO.
I would like to see a reasonable answer to “Why should your group have to exclude based on gender? How does it further your mission?”
I think the burden of proof should be on the single-sex organization, since the default for education nowadays, including at the host i.e. Harvard, is co-education, and this is a situation both data-driven (better outcomes than single-sex) and value-driven (equality of opportunity better than single-sex).
Actually, because the Porcellian Club is a private entity that isn’t part of Harvard, and has off-campus property (I’m pretty sure), it doesn’t really have a burden of proof. The burden of persuasion is on those who want it to change its policies.
@Hunt - I think that Harvard is a big enough gorilla that if it wanted to force Porcellian out, it could. Hence I do think the club needs to answer to H.
I wonder if the kid actually read the report – which essentially found that the final clubs fostered a culture of women as second-class citizens (and presumably useful only for decorative and supportive purposes), which is seen as a contributing factor to sexual assault (particularly the “let’s find drunk girls to have sex with” attitude). I’m not sure if he was being stupid or deliberating misleading about the point being made – the folks doing the study were well aware that the clubs do not have mixed gender parties – they were studying culture and attitudes. I think he pretty much illustrated why they might be concerned.
Every school in the country is trying to work on its culture. In particular, education for student organizations (not just the frats). The problem is that one can’t provide education for super-secret societies. On the one hand, I’m also glad my kid has no interest in Harvard (sexual assault is an issue on every campus, but this level of elitism makes me uncomfortable). On the other hand, I feel a little bad for the folks at Harvard – nothing you can do about a group that you no longer recognize.
Fretfulmother. If what Hunt says it’s true - it’s a private club with private off-campus property - how can H do anything?
Yes.
@Pizzagirl - I’m not exactly sure, but if they made academic or disciplinary consequences for involvement, maybe that would be a start? Surely not all random Cambridge organizations/cults are allowed to just prey on Harvard students without reproach. If Porcellian is treated with a wink and a nod and “recognized” (i.e. asked to become coed so recognized de facto if not de jure) then something different is going on here that could be adjusted.
I think we need to not just look at all male clubs but the value of the Greek system in general that sort of feed this battle of the sexes mentality. In a nobler day members of fraternities would try to woo and court members or sororities. In this hook up culture the mentality has changed. Why not just have co-ed clubs to help with community activities and events instead of this ancient Greek system who I think society is ready to disband and move on from.
" I think that Harvard is a big enough gorilla that if it wanted to force Porcellian out, it could." I think not. I think Harvard would also very much like to keep the fraternities and sororities that sprang up in recent years from growing but they don’t seem to have any way of doing this. How can they regulate private clubs, even those which undermine the inclusive social environment they are working very hard to provide?
Not if the many wealthy and well-connected Harvard alums who were part of that 200+ year old club over the decades have the substantial wealth, connections, and influential clout to intimidate the Harvard admins to back down.
Not necessarily disagreeing with you 100%. Just that it may not be nearly as easy as your post implies.
If Harvard’s admins are willing to arouse the wrath of some portions of their wealthy well connected alums who are alum members of Porcellian and other clubs like it, they as a private university can ban students from joining as members as a condition of matriculation and continuing enrollment during their undergrad career.
Several colleges like Oberlin do have such policies on the books where clubs which are exclusionary on the basis other than academic merit* or “secret societies” are not only banned on campus, but students are prohibited from joining them as a condition of matriculation and continuing enrollment or risk the possibility of serious penalties up to and including expulsion. This applies even if the club/“secret society” is off-campus.
Granted, Harvard’s not likely or possibly have the level of boldness against a block of wealthy well-connected alums who possibly donate substantially and have the wealth and political/social connections to make even Harvard a bit hesitant to move in this manner. Moreover, it may cause other wealthy alums to view Harvard’s actions as a form of serious ingratitude considering the substantial donations the club and its members provided during the past 200 years including donations for a Harvard gate facing their clubhouse.
- An exception where selection criteria is solely on academic merit is Phi Beta Kappa.
@mathyone - the best way would be more sunlight on the whole business.
These people own a building in Harvard Yard? Attempt to buy it. Generate some press coverage. They have “secret” memberships? Attempt to reveal/publish membership (Natalie Portman already helped quite a bit in her leaks from a former boyfriend ahead of the Zuckerberg movie). The goals of the organization are opposed to the goals of Harvard? Publish frequent and loud information about how it is not associated with the university and any attempts to “rush” current students will be met with disciplinary/law-enforcement involvement. Use whatever means they ordinarily use for organizations that are known to prey on undergraduates (like they did with that ICC cult from the 1980s and 90s:
http://www.nytimes.com/1994/11/30/nyregion/ex-members-compare-campus-ministry-to-a-cult.html?pagewanted=all).
I’m not convinced that Harvard is quite opposed enough to the cachet (and $$$) that these clubs generate.
These clubs aren’t worth all that bother.