<p>Key phrase- they avert their eyes when one or the other is dressing. The whole reason to have single sex rooms- bed and bath- is this privacy issue. No one should have to be careful to watch themselves for "indecent exposure" everywhere.</p>
<p>There's another similar thread. In that one the news article stated the roommates avert their eyes when the other one dresses, this is the case for single sex rooms- both bed and bath. Everyone needs a place they can consider private, one they don't need to worry about "indecent" exposure in.</p>
<p>I wanted to do this next year, my parents weren't too happy, so I didn't. I don't think it's a big deal at all.</p>
<p>I have merged two threads started on this same topic, which should explain any temporary disjointed-ness (if it's not a word, I'll make it one for the moment ;) ) in the posting order.</p>
<p>I guess it is the natural progression from what happens off campus. There are a lot of coed arrangements which are platonic. The choice is often based on things like safety, ability to cook etc.</p>
<p>As long as they're not forcing people who don't want to live with the opposite sex to do so who cares?</p>
<p>
[quote]
The whole reason to have single sex rooms- bed and bath- is this privacy issue. No one should have to be careful to watch themselves for "indecent exposure" everywhere.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, most of the guys I know averted their eyes when their roomates changed anyway, so no differance there. Even at Wesleyan, many guys are very private about who sees their "junk," and while more girls are comfortable changing in front of their roomates, certianly not all of them are, so this arguement doesn't really hold up. And as someone who has slept over in the same room as her male friends, the "avert your eyes" thing is REALLY not a big deal. I mean, sure, some people would rather not have to do it...so either they chose a single, a same-sex roomate, or an opposite sex roomate who they are confortable changing in front of. Different strokes and all.</p>
<p>in my experience- in single sex situations I have been forced to " avert my eyes" much more than in shared situations.
In locker rooms for example, certain people act like they are in their own home and it is very awkward- it's one thing not to feel you have to hide to change clothes, its' another to do everything on the public seating area nude.</p>
<p>My daughters dorm were always co-ed although they did not have co-ed rooms, they had co-ed bathrooms. I felt people were much more modest in a shared situation than they were in a single sex environment.</p>
<p>She had a single for her first three years, and senior year lived in a college housing townhouse with a male roommate. IT worked fairly well I think. ( they also had two bedrooms and two baths)</p>
<p>Well, come on, I mean, really! It's nonsensical to think that all these arrangements would remain platonic. That may be OK to many parents, but we shouldn't pretend. If you want your kid to lose weight, he probably shouldn't live in a candy store.</p>
<p>If that is your concern- how would a single sex environment be candy free?
Haven't you heard of GUG?</p>
<p>I haven't heard of GUG, actually, and Urban Dictionary didn't enlighten me in this case, unless you mean that there are gay kids in single sex environment.</p>
<p>I don't think any college environment is candy-free, of course. I just think that over-indulging is more likely if you actually sleep in the candy store.</p>
<p>The phrasology is cute, Hunt, but there really are often times when students are not looking at each other as candy. Sometimes I think some of them are more mature than some adults. I mean, don't you know lots of people of the opposite sex that you really wouldn't be drawn into "indulging" with even if given the chance? This idea that younger folks are mindless sex addicts is so common, and so disheartening. As if they can't be expected to have discernment. I have had a different experience with my kids and their friends.</p>
<p>"I mean, don't you know lots of people of the opposite sex that you really wouldn't be drawn into "indulging" with even if given the chance?"</p>
<p>Ummm....yes, why yes, of course. But if you had asked the 18-year-old me this question, an honest answer would have been....</p>
<p>*But if you had asked the 18-year-old me this question, an honest answer would have been....
*</p>
<p>Then I think you are projecting your memories onto others.
Yes you will find threads from students/parents concerned about sexual activity on campus.
And you will read responses from parents/students who had many interests that took precedence over getting involved while in school.
My girls both decided not to date while in high school other than group dating, they had too many other things to do. They both know that sexual activity takes a relationship to another level oftentimes, and that would interfere with other priorities.</p>
<p>However, if all you need to indulge is availability, not knowledge of quality, tastiness, and nutrition, then I would agree, don't work in a candy store.</p>
<p>Well said, EK.</p>
<p>Like I said, Hunt, I actually think many young adults have more sense and discernment than many older adults I know. Some don't, but they're not mine or my kids' friends, so I can't comment on them.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
<p>Here’s the thing: Hunt is right, occasionally students probably do go into these arrangements thinking it will be platonic, and then end up hooking up. It must happen sometimes. But not that often, at least in my experience. Sometimes people will go into it KNOWING they are going to hook up (I know a couple living together at Wes, despite the university not encouraging it), but that’s a different story. All of the people I’ve known living in a co-ed room/two room double* (including the two in the article, actually) have remained platonic if they meant to. Same with the people who went into apartment and house living situations intending to stay platonic (there you do have more people intending not to). </p>
<p>I mean, when trying to figure out where to live for sophomore year, at one point I actually encouraged my boyfriend to consider a two-room double with a different girl (who is close friends with both of us) — although our housing ended up completely different for unrelated reasons, I still think that would have ended up being a good living situation for everyone involved if it had happened. I think you underestimate the ability of undergrads to control themselves — for example, although people do break the “no hallcest” rule, LOTS of people stick to it because they know the problems that come with it. If people can do that, I’m pretty sure they can avoid roomcest...and if they think they can't, they are normally smart enough not to room with someone of the opposite gender.</p>
<p>** At Wesleyan, at least, it is actually a lot more common for people of the opposite sex to share a two room double than a true single, a fact the article overlooks, because except for in program houses sophomores and up rarely get stuck in one room singles anyway. But still, there is a lot of sharing going on in a two room double. *</p>
<p>Thanks, Hunt!!!!, at 25 and 22, they've never given me any reason not to be impressed with their maturity as regards the opposite sex (many other areas, yes, but not there.)</p>
<p>I thought I had already replied to this thread, then realized that it was on yet another thread that was already started on this subject.</p>
<p>"If people can do that, I’m pretty sure they can avoid roomcest...and if they think they can't, they are normally smart enough not to room with someone of the opposite gender."</p>
<p>I don't know about this, but perhaps you're right. Maybe fluoridation has sapped our youth's vital bodily essences since I was in college.</p>