While a preference for self segregation by race, etc. is common reality in many situations (and not just in college), that is not a reason to encourage or enable it. Note the fraternity issues with bigotry both in the past and more recently at Syracuse (apparently part of the back story of the protests).
But note that a white student getting a random roommate at Syracuse has a 57% chance of getting a same-race roommate, while a non-white student has a <10% chance of that. So that creates an asymmetric situation where racist white frosh are likely to get their preference, but racist non-white frosh are not. So the protesters may be asking for equalization of the ability to have one’s racist preferences fulfilled. Yes, it sure looks like a race to the bottom…
IDK, i hear your argument there. But it just doesn’t sit well with me, too much of double standard for my taste. When a white person asked to be separated, we assumed due to racist reason. When a minority asked for the same thing, we assumed it’s for their safety. IDK.
Presumably, “identities” in this demand is being interpreted as meaning to include such things as race, ethnicity, etc. Perhaps more clarification on the intended meaning may be needed.
“Interpreted,” but missing the “mutual interests” part.
Afaiac, the interpretation by the link author is borderline inflammatory. We could get pages and pages on this thread referring to "racist"or race and miss the broader possibilities.
Lots of schools allow you to specify interests and have sets of rooms or floors allocated to those.
I like your idea of how it’s asymetrical, ucb. That it is. But not everything has racism or extreme isolation behind it.
Protesters can make all the noise they want, but it doesn’t change federal and state discrimination laws that exist for good reason. If Syracuse adopted that policy, they’d be violating the law and risk being sued by…everyone.
Emsmom1 wrote " if you’re a landlord you cannot choose a tenant by race’’. Actually, a landlord can depending upon the size of the rental unit. Single family dwellings are exempt.
@lookingforward, thank you for the link. According to the notes at the bottom, the students are specifically asking for:
No mention of choosing a roommate by race, just a call for the expansion and advertisement of multicultural learning communities. For me the most salient part of this sections is “This will allow for more diversity and intercultural communication, as well as give students of color the option of being surrounded by other students who look like them.”
I wouldn’t support the idea of allowing students to choose a roommate based on race, but the above seems reasonable to me.
Many colleges offer roommate matching by interests (in a prospective roommate survey). But I have not heard of any matching by any identity aspect other than gender (generally requiring or defaulting to same gender), whether or not it also offers matching by interests.
However, there is no note of explanation for demand 5, which includes the reference to “an option in the roommate selection process to allow future residents to choose a roommate based on mutual interests and identities” and is the one which can be easily interpreted as allowing requesting a same race (or other identity aspect like ethnicity or religion) roommate. Or, if the “FOR 6” is misnumbered and refers to demand 5, it does not explain the “identities” referred to.
I find the assumption implicit in this discussion that most white kids would not mind rooming with a racist white kid a bit disturbing! As @Techno13 points out, perhaps the issue lies in admitting bigoted kids of any type.
Not surprised with that assumption. That describes 95% of my white friends in my very white town. It hurts but I learned to accept them as the way of (their) life and love them anyway. They are good people, they would be the first to help you if you ever need help. Still sucks but what can we do.
The linked article refers to student demands and is written by a student, if I read correctly. It’s a little misleading to imply that this is the doing of Syracuse U itself.
Which makes me think that what we need is more racial mixing rather than yes. Let kids see that difference doesn’t have to be scary.
Of course it’s not fair to make kids in the minority, whether by race, gender identity, or any other measure, bear the responsibility for educating their fellow students.
I have managed rental property for 30+ years and I can tell you that is 100% incorrect. It is one of the pillars of the FHA.
Maybe the example you meant to use was when a person is renting a room in the house in which they themselves reside. That person has the ability to use more “filters” to decide who he/she chooses for a tenant.
Otherwise, it makes no difference if it is a 1000-unit apartment or a 1-br house. The landlord is prohibited by the Fair Housing Act to not discriminate against race.
How much social engineering we want to impose on people is the question here. Too much of it will inevitably cause resentment and a whole host of other unintended consequences.
In this particular situation - something about this doesn’t feel right. If minority wants changes for a long run, they can’t have demands that make them look like a hypocrite, that reverse discrimination (even for “safety” reason) is somehow okay.
Here’s a thought: if you, as a freshman, opt to eliminate roommate possibilities based on race (or religion for that matter), you may do so, but you’re automatically assigned to the crappiest rooms and/or whatever is left over after everyone else is assigned.
Can a school like Syracuse have a LLC that is based on race? The black student’s LLC? Hispanic student’s LLC? Can white (non-Hispanic) students choose to be in those LLCs and can the black or hispanic students ask not to be in the same room as they feel that would be diluting the experience?
What if a student at a HBCU only wants to room with another black student? The student could argue that he chose a HBCU to get the black experience and wants that 24/7. Does he have the right to ask for that?
I think it is a slippery slope to allow some choices and not allow others.