<p>I read the article about sub-free housing linked in post 14. I found the author of that article to be rather sanctimonious. Is this typical? All things considered, I think my son would prefer a pleasant drunk or stoner for a floor-mate over a control-freak zealot.</p>
<p>I just read the article also. While I understand her comments about how other students perceive her, I do not understand why she is upset that sub-free is housed in typically less desirable dorms. To me, the obvious reason is that if sub-free housing were also the best housing on campus, you would have a lot of people who do not want to respect sub-free housing opting to be placed into it to receive better housing. She even acknowledges this in her article! I do agree with her that I don’t understand why they don’t put ALL the sub-free students together, particularly all the ones in the same year.</p>
<p>With regards to how students perceive sub-free, I have always believed that the vast majority of students feel this way: If you want to live a sub-free lifestyle, I have no problem with that, just don’t try to force me to do that or think you’re better than me. The reason why sub-free housing gets a bad rep is because I think that many students perceive choosing to live there as an implicit statement along the lines of “you drink? stay away from me because I don’t.” which kind of infringes upon the “don’t force it on me/don’t assume you’re better than me” since one could argue that you could be sub-free yourself while living in a normal dorm.</p>