I guess I’m puritanical.
The only way I would have allowed my roommate to “entertain” a male visitor in our room would be if I were to tell her specific times of my classes and social engagements. And if I said I would be gone “6 to 8 pm,” I would expect them to be DONE by 8:00.00. And I would NOT agree to a request such as, “Could you vacate the room Sunday between 2 and 4 pm?” Because I paid for the room and I had the right to be there whenever I wished.
“How come the first page answers were all about finding somewhere else to go, and now it’s OP’s inalienable right to have sex specifically in the room? There is no reason she can’t go elsewhere.”
Exactly what the above posts say. Earlier in this thread the focus was on where the OP’s male friend would spend the night while visiting. The roommate does have the right not to be kicked out of the room or to have to share it with a male during the night. However, the OP came back to update saying that her roommate doesn’t want sex going on in there regardless. That’s a big difference IMO.
“Apparently it affects the roommate very strongly: “she was so troubled by the questions dealing with sexual relationships in the dorm that we had to skip it.””
Honestly, that’s the roommate’s issue, not the OP’s if she is uncomfortable about even talking about sex as a first year college student. I think the OP has been upstanding in bringing up the discussion. Many others would just do what they wish, no questions asked.
I really could have been the roommate in this case. I probably would have said, “I can’t control what you do when I’m not in the room, so what I will do is tell you the times that for sure I will be absent.”
@MaineLonghorn I don’t think that is puritanical. And what you said you would be willing to do is what in my experience the vast majority of college students who have sex in the dorms do. And what if you told your roommate you would be studying at the library or with a friend for a couple of hours on Sunday and your roommate asked you what time because bf/gf was coming over? Would that be a problem?
And from what I have seen of statements by the OP, I don’t think she would be asking for more than this.
The puritanical concept comes in with these statements:
“any sexual activity in one’s living space could be considered spiritually polluting as is the case with some sub-sects of religions(i.e. Buddhism, fundamentalist Christianity, etc),”
“she’s hampering my need to explore my sexual identity”
“Roomie really doesn’t need to foster this exploration”
The last two statements being made with respect to having sex in your dorm room when your roommate isn’t there.
“A person engaging in an activity when their roommate is no where near the room isn’t being “fostered” in any fashion by that roommate”
My response was to expecting the roomie to not come back unexpectedly, have a class cancelled, feel ill, whatever. Or to accept a sock on the door. Or to accommodate herself to OP’s wants, without regard for hers. NOT what happens that she never discovers. (I have no opinion on the latter.)
Respect can work both ways. OP knows her rm has said she’s uncomfortable. Why is it on the rm to “find a school that allows them to get a single, or to be matched up with someone else who shares that belief?” OP can ask for a change, too. Those big girl pants.
Doschicos, I read that as they closed the convo, skipped over this. Not that rm dictates. OP asked if negotiation is feasible, how to approach this.
"she would “really prefer guys not to spend the night”
I think some have read far more into this than OP asked. Some are responding to other comments about sin and all.
But your standard means someone could never have sex in their dorm room because a roommate could always come back to the room unexpectedly. Class could always be canceled. Roommate could get sick. Forget something. Change of plans. The set of times when none of those things are possible is exactly zero.
Because the discussion has morphed. First page the discussion was about men staying the night in the room. Most recent discussion has been about sex in the room when the roommate isn’t there.
Interesting that you bring up inalienable rights when part of that concept was freedom of religion. That idea that what happens in a dorm room when a roommate isn’t there spiritually pollutes the room and thus the roommate should not engage in that activity (again when the other roommate isn’t in the room) is imposing religious views on others.
Where would you suggest the OP go? Library? Student union? Football stadium? Park?
Some people would be able to handle it if they came back and caught their roommate in flagrante. Doesn’t sound like this girl will be able to. So either work with that, by not putting her in situations that go against her religious beliefs, or switch roommates. Those are the options.
Hotel has already been mentioned. What about his place? Sure that’s more driving for him, but since I don’t have a car at school I’ve done that several times in order to go visit my bf instead of having him visit me.
OP’s most recent post states this:
"We came back to it at the end, and she explained that she didn’t want sex going on in the room AT ALL.
That means that if I were to put down her schedule and match up some meetup times according to it, she still would prefer sex to not be occurring in the room. And she cited her religion for the reason."
Kk.
Nope. Neither gets to dictate.
Y’all are making me long for the good ole days.
Everyone needs to show some respect. On both sides.
" because a roommate could always come back to the room unexpectedly. Class could always be canceled" That’s where the “Men Working” and “Road Work Ahead” sign on the door is useful.
Ha, I liked the good old days. Men weren’t allowed on the women’s floors in my dorm at all! I loved that.
Not allowed on our dorm either but it didn’t stop much.
Main difference I guess is everyone needed to like who you were hanging out with.
@bodangles the conversation is now different because the roommate said she is against any sex in the room at all. Sure, OP and her guy need to find places to go if the roommate is in there, and it is totally reasonable for the roommate to not want a guy, or anyone, staying the night. But if roomie isn’t going to be in the room, it’s unreasonable to impose her beliefs on OP. Where’s the compromise?
Really, the roomie should have requested a single, but now OP is left with the problem of trying to find a new living situation, ignoring roomie (making for a bad vibe all year), or never having sex in her room, which frankly, isn’t fair, because it’s OP’s room too. Roomie should have asked for a like-minded roomie, or a single.
This confirms what I suspected…when the conservative roommate told the OP that she’d prefer guys to not spend the night, what the roommate REALLY meant was “no sex in the room whatsoever.”
Should the conservative roommate just said this to start off with? Absolutely. BUT one should also recognize that we’re all human, nobody’s perfect, and some people even at age 40 are still figuring out how to effectively communicate in an assertive but non-confrontation way with others.
If I was the OP, I’d probably feel pretty frustrated right now because if I had known even before moving in as to what the conservative roommate’s REAL stance was on the matter, then I could have started efforts to switch roommates.
But there’s a silver lining to the cloud in all of this. This sort of issue is part of the whole “going to college” thing is all about. You are sometimes forced into situations which you really hate, forced to have to negotiate with people who are vehemently opposed to you on certain topics. It’s like practice for the rest of your adult life.
OP - I’m sorry that you didn’t win the roommate lottery. It sucks. But your options are clear:
@tucsonmom has accurately laid out some options but not all might be available. Many colleges don’t allow students to live off campus (not sure if applicable to this situation) and realistically not all students can afford hotel bills (I sure couldn’t when in college despite working part-time).
Indeed.
When I attended my undergrad, the official policy was that students must live on campus for all 4 years unless one had a serious documented medical condition which couldn’t be accommodated in the dorms/cafeterias/dining co-ops. In practice, some students who didn’t have medical conditions also lived off campus…but they all tended to be seniors, not underclassmen and certainly not first-year students.
Some other undergrads such as Harvard College have an official policy of mandating students live on campus for their first 2 years which means while juniors and seniors have the option to move off-campus, first-year students are out of luck.
Based on the additional information, the roommate sounds totally unreasonable. Hopefully, you can get a different roommmate.
Hotels are expensive. Could easily run into $1000+ a semester. A lot of college kids are struggling to pay for college as it is without having to pay additional money because their roommate wants to impose their religious views on them.
My parents said that when my dad dropped my mom off at her dorm (all girls religious institution) when they were dating, if she didn’t exit the car within a pretty short amount of time there was a knock at the car door. No way I would ever have wanted to live like that. I didn’t like single sex dorms or floors. We never lived in sex dungeons either.
Certain posters have already said this option isn’t acceptable.
When I was in college, people would put a rubber band around the doorknob if they were entertaining, so the roommate would know not to walk in. It was during the age when there was no cell phone. Why would it be so hard for the roommate to text or call the OP if she was coming back early. D2 is living with me now. Neither one of us “entertain” at home (I am divorced), but we tell each other when we are coming home, just to give the other person heads up.
I am in the camp of the roommate doesn’t have the right to tell OP what to do when she is not in the room. If she is so offended by anyone having sex in her room then she is the one who needs to pay for a single or get a different roommate. This is no different than when a Jewish man can’t sit next to women on a plane because of his religion (I think we had a thread about it). If his religion is so important to him then he should be the one to move or buy an extra seat so no one could sit next to him.
Where do we draw the line what the roommate can dictate? What if she doesn’t like people wear revealing clothes, does it mean the OP then shouldn’t be allowed to wear certain clothes in their room? What about music?
Although I think the OP’s roommate sounds like a nut job, one practical alternative could be buying a cheap tent if there’s a place close by where you could go camping. In the long run, that would be way cheaper than a hotel and provide sufficient privacy to avoid running afoul of public indecency laws.