I’d put open in air quotes. Certainly they won’t blanket refuse someone who doesn’t fit the minority group, but if a group focused on the advancement of a minority group accepts too many people outside the minority it will almost inevitably stray from its mission of the advancement of the original minority group.
I agree, but also think that is unlikely. Most often it is members of those groups who are most interested in joining them, nonetheless, the fact that anyone CAN join, if inclined, makes a difference. Not anyone CAN join a finals club or sorority.
Also, these groups are (I imagine) “recognized by the university” and so these new rules do not apply to them. An all male club not recognized probably would though, even if it were geared to the interests of Asian students, for example.
Weird that someone can be a captain of an all-male or all-female team, but they can’t be a member of an all male or all female unrecognized clubs.
Legions? Really? In 1958 it was 14% of the class http://www.thecrimson.com/article/1958/11/22/the-final-clubs-little-bastions-of/ today Today it’s about 10% in the male final clubs and another 5 or 6% in female sororities. Hardly legions. Most students go through Harvard barely aware of their existence.
Fire has released a statement: https://www.thefire.org/harvard-brings-back-the-blacklist-for-final-club-fraternity-sorority-students/.
The freedom of association is fundamental. Refusing Harvard students certain privileges based on their membership in “unapproved” off-campus groups discriminates against those students. It causes them material harm. Certainly, the university should be calling for all sports teams and singing groups to be coed, if other groups do not align with “our values.” It is, however, good to know that an exceedingly wealthy university prefers to punish only certain students.
I am glad I don’t have a child looking at colleges now. If I did, Harvard would now be on the “You may not apply/we will not pay tuition” list. I would have no faith that the administration would be capable of treating students from different backgrounds fairly–such as students who would want to join a fraternity or sorority. As a matter of fact, such a statement of enmity cannot be withdrawn. Once an institution declares a blacklist, there is no going back. As recommendations for leadership positions and scholarships are usually confidential, I would have no confidence that the university treats its students fairly.
Harvard really isn’t doing anything that many other elite (and perhaps non-elite) schools haven’t done before though. I don’t think any of those schools were sued, either (nor do they seem to be suffering from a lack of applicants).
According to an article written by Lukianoff for the HuffPost, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-lukianoff/fraternities-and-free-spe_b_912673.html freedom of association of family or expressive association is fundamental but socially, not so much. So it would actually be hard to break up an off campus club of communists or fascists.
If finals clubs or greek orgs actually took up some cause and consistently acted in the furtherance of it, they could avoid this penalty for their members, if this reasoning is correct.
It seems Lukianoff was posting about the DKE speech incidents at Yale. There is no offensive speech alleged on the greek orgs or finals clubs; their members are to be punished for membership . The groups singled out for punishment are not associated with the university; the finals clubs own their own houses. They are self-supporting.
Look, for me the freedom of association is fundamental. I agree with Harvey Silverglate’s statement on the Fire page I linked upthread:
I gather from other articles in The Crimson that the clubs are considering suing. You’ll notice that the timing of the changes leaves time to deal with a lawsuit. No currently enrolled student will need to deal with it–although they certainly should wonder if such a ban is already tacitly in effect.
Even if the finals clubs, fraternities and sororities were to vanish tomorrow, I’d bet Cadillacs to Matchbox cars that undergraduate students would still manage to get drunk. I’d bet that unfortunate things would happen between the genders under the influence of alcohol in the dorms. It happens at every other college, doesn’t it?
@periwinkle In the article I posted he says he’s “taking a step back” to post about greek orgs in general and their rights to association. And while finals clubs are not formally associated with the U (since 1984 anyway), I’d bet they have zero members who aren’t students at Harvard.
I didn’t read that but I wonder if such a suit could succeed given that Harvard is walking down a path walked by many other colleges before it?
I did read that this action prevents loss of federal funding. Found info on this on the thread in the Ivy League forum because I couldn’t remember exactly where I read it 
Here is an exchange from that thread:
there’s absolutely no way the government could punish Harvard for not punishing students who engage in a legal organization off campus, even if said legal activity appears to be correlated with an increase in nonconsensual sexual contact.
Response: The lawyers of the Harvard Corporation think otherwise and the administration is proactively doing something so that federal funding is not taken away – which would be the punishment. http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/qa-sexharass.html
OCR investigates and resolves complaints alleging that educational institutions that are recipients of federal funds have failed to protect students from harassment based on sex. Complaints are often resolved by agreements requiring schools to adopt effective anti-harassment policies and procedures, train staff and students, address the incidents in question, and to take other steps to restore a nondiscriminatory environment.
In addition to resolving complaints by students and their parents, OCR takes steps to inform schools of their obligation to provide a nondiscriminatory environment. On January 19, 2001, OCR issued policy guidance that explained the legal principles requiring educational institutions that receive federal funds to take steps reasonably calculated to stop harassment when it occurs and prevent recurrence.
Legion in terms of financial, social, and political clout from their elevated SES status and financial, social, and political connections…
A group doesn’t necessarily have to make up the majority of a given population in terms of numbers to be highly influential or even dominant over the rest of society.
Plenty of examples from history such as the planter class in the antebellum south, wealthy bankers/industrialists during the Gilded Age, etc…
childish behavior by the administration.
This policy is just the other extreme of bible schools or BYU telling students that they can’t drink (even if of age).
Just wanted to add that if an organization has a purpose other than social, apparently they are recognized and supported by Harvard. Examples are the aforementioned South Asian Men’s Club and sports teams. Many organizations at Harvard are exclusive (such as Signet) in the sense that admission is selective, but these organizations are, at least officially, not solely social.
all the students go to Harvard because it has a blue chip name even among other elitist colleges and all the people working at the school (admissions,administrative faculty etc) are also there for the elitist status of working at HARVARD. so now the power structure at a school for elitists and run by elitists (of course nobody at Harvard ever says I am an elitist…I attend school in the boston area…pause…Cambridge…pause…yes I go to Harvard or work at Harvard) now all male clubs are to elitist…(so ironic)… I personally dislike frats, eating clubs etc…but let the adult students decide who they want to “play” with…stop social engineering. Or purge all the clubs on campus.
Watching this on and off for a while, I’ve never been able to understand the president and her lackey’s obsession with these clubs. They’re private, off-campus and have been told they’re not part of the university.
Sometimes smart people obsess about things far beyond their relevance and do themselves a disservice. This seems to be what has happened here. Like Grandad says, “if enough people say you’re drunk, lie down.”
fragbot
“smart”
use quotes
I disagree that “all the” students, and faculty, are at Harvard because of its elite status.
While FIRE is right that it is by definition, a freedom of association violation, Harvard has no responsibility to uphold the right of free association. Much in the way that you can stop being friends with someone if they join a group you disagree with.
I’m the one quoted in the back and forth arguing that Harvard would never have lost funding if they hadn’t done this. Unlike Harvard, the federal government does have to uphold the right of free association and so there’s no way they could sanction Harvard for failing to violate that right. Harvard is putting that out there as an excuse to soften the blow of their real statement: “we simply don’t like these clubs anymore and we’re getting rid of them.”
Reminds a bit of “Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix” where the High Inquisitor gets to decide what organizations can exist in the school. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this rule isn’t softened up considerably or rescinded because on the surface it is so heavy handed. Secret societies will truly become secret where before they only played at it.