<p>It's difficult to understand why Harvard condones these clubs that stand for everything they purport to be against:</p>
<p>If you find clubs like Hasty Pudding objectionable, well, nobody’s forcing you join. Nobody’s forcing you to go to Harvard, either. Choose a good school that has long distanced itself from Greek life, secret societies, big-time D1 sports, etc. Examples: Reed, Oberlin, Swarthmore, Chicago.</p>
<p>H condones and actively encourages a lot of things they “purport to be against.” While praising diversity, they are happy to admit a monoculture of status-chasing dollar-chasing students, with half of them heading to finance after graduation. Overnight, H could change and admit top flight students who had true interests (and a future) in the arts, education, community work, etc. But that would mean fewer alum contributions. The clubs are merely emblematic of the culture, and a foretaste of the exclusionary country clubs that will be joined later in life. </p>
<p>I know young people at all schools and those not in school are still very immature and not very worldly. but many students at harvard who applied and have got into the school (because harvard has the blue chip name) are very childish, extra insecure and ignorant. those opposing hasty pudding are among the childish and insecure people I am referring too. leave hasting pudding alone. I read the link and it is not a big deal.of all the causes in the world a harvard student should or could get involved in ,hating on hasting pudding is absurd. </p>
<p>I think it’s good if college groups work for more diversity, and I also think it’s good if the university prods them to do so, and this has happened at a lot of schools, including Harvard, Yale and Princeton. They all have organizations that were formerly all-male (even after coeducation) that are now open to women, as well as organizations that are open to minority students. But the desire for socially connected people to flock together is pretty strong, and it’s in evidence at most colleges, including lots that aren’t as selective as Harvard. It’s not exactly “unfair” for social clubs to exclude people because they aren’t socially connected, although it may be undesirable. I guess it’s some progress that there are more socially connected minority students (and women).</p>
<p>Harvard accepts the Hasty Pudding Club for the same reason it accepts people like Sandra Korn.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But aren’t those schools (and Harvard) elitist themselves, in having highly selective admissions?</p>
<p>Perhaps less elitist would be to go to a school where the whole range of college-attending students attends, like the public universities in Arizona or Iowa.</p>
<p>I’d be happy to bash Harvard, were it warranted. It isn’t in this case.</p>
<p>Look, the proper comparison for Hasty Pudding punches isn’t the class of 2017. HPC is a specialized interest group, right? So, of the entire student body, how many students involved in/majoring in the arts, esp. theater, attended public school. Hmm? </p>
<p>I’d be willing to bet a whole lot that the students participating in the arts at Harvard hail from wealthy families, if only because most other families will freak out about the employment chances for arts degrees. I’d also be willing to bet that Harvard admits “artsy” kids from other backgrounds, only to find that many end up majoring in STEM fields at Harvard, because of the pressure this generation faces to complete career-oriented degrees.</p>
<p>The time needed for a theater degree and the time needed for a STEM degree (pre-med, engineering, computer science) are mutually exclusive. </p>
<p>“But the desire for socially connected people to flock together is pretty strong, and it’s in evidence at most colleges, including lots that aren’t as selective as Harvard. It’s not exactly “unfair” for social clubs to exclude people because they aren’t socially connected, although it may be undesirable.”</p>
<p>Agreed. These birds are going to flock together regardless of whether it’s under the aegis of an “official” Hasty Pudding Club banner or not. </p>
<p>Yeah, I don’t think this club does Harvard any good. But I don’t know that it would do Harvard any good to officially cut them off, either. We’re talking about an undergrad club that is the same age as the United States. The university doesn’t recognize the final clubs because of their gender exclusion, and that doesn’t slow the clubs down at all. This group went coed, and it’s recognized because it obeys the rules to be an undergrad club. So there we are. 55 punches a year is about 3% of the undergrads.</p>
<p>If you looked at the makeup of the Glee Club, you’d probably find strong racial and private-school patterns, because white and Asian kids at fancy schools disproportionately get strong musical training. Not a good thing, but I don’t know that it’s fixable. The freshman dorms and the Houses are the most effective tool for encouraging diverse interaction. There’s a limit to what the university can and should do to control students’ social lives.</p>
<p>Periwinkle, The Hasty Pudding Club is strictly a social club not connected to the theatrical group, Hasty Pudding Theatricals. The social club members do not need to have any interest or skill in arts or in the theatre. S’s freshman roommate was punched last year - told S that membership is predetermined…siblings of current members or grads of the same prep school are chosen and they all know that beforehand. The big cattle call exploratory meeting is window-dressing so that it looks like membership is open to all, when it’s really not. </p>
<p>Thank you, Gourmetmom. Lacking context, I was misled by the phrase, “famous for its ties to arts groups,” and the group’s name.</p>
<p>What distinguishes this sort of a social club, and fraternities/sororities? Aren’t they both systems built upon exclusion, run by student groups which may or may not be recognized by a college? </p>
<p>U of C has fraternities, BTW.</p>
<p>“What distinguishes this sort of a social club, and fraternities/sororities?”</p>
<p>It’s not very different from a coed, local fraternity.</p>
<p>I was punched for the Hasty Pudding many eons ago. I didn’t really see the point and didn’t join. One of my roommates (public school from the midwest - not their target demographic) joined because she thought it was amusing to have been asked to join. While I agree it’s not much different from a coed fraternity, frankly Harvard gives lots of money to various clubs whose missions I like even less.</p>
<p>Birds of a feather. . .
Nothing stopping the poorest and least connected from forming their own club. But what would be the advantage of of that association? As always, “Them that has, gets more.” No news there.</p>
<p>Having been regaled just recently of sorority and fraternity selection processes at various schools, including UCLA, UC Davis, Indiana University, University of Colorado, University of Arizona, SMU, Elon, and even the University of North Dakota, it is of zero shock to me that Harvard has essentially the same outcomes at it’s social club selection process.</p>
<p>From the article:
</p>
<p>It is a silly assumption that ‘diversity’ of every type in every activity and every experience is essential or even desirable. It is also silly to assume that just because many in a group are quite rich, or even white if that’s the real complaint, that they are not ‘diverse’ in many meaningful ways.</p>
<p>I assume that the Hispanic Students Society skews a little towards Spanish-speaking, but they can still get what they want from the club without hearing a lot of Chinese spoken.</p>
<p>I agree that there isn’t much difference between this club and the Chinese Club. They are both exclusive, but only one admits it. </p>
<p>“It is also silly to assume that just because many in a group are quite rich, or even white if that’s the real complaint, that they are not ‘diverse’ in many meaningful ways.”</p>
<p>I knew a lot of these folks. They’re not diverse in many meaningful ways compared to most groups at Harvard. (Admittedly, that’s a pretty high bar.)</p>