Harvard seeking to ban fraternities, sororities and single sex social org's.

[LafayetteBear]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.) It indicates that Harvard University is taking punitive action against any Harvard students who join fraternities, sororities or single sex social organizations. This seems like an infringement of students' First Amendment free association rights and/or a violation of Title IX.. I wonder if it will stand a court challenge.

Have any other fraternity members out there received a similar notice? I am assuming that many, if not most, National Intrafraternity Conference (NIC) fraternities have sent (or will send) a similar notice to their members. They have apparently formed a website (standuptoharvard.org) as part of their campaign.

Dear ________:

Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Pi Kappa Phi stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted—stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media posts to add your voice to the support as we #StandUpToHarvard

Learn more at standuptoharvard.org

Fraternally,

MARK E. TIMMES
Chief Executive Officer

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.) It indicates that Harvard University is taking punitive action against any Harvard students who join fraternities, sororities or single sex social organizations. This seems like a pretty clear infringement of students' First Amendment free association rights. I wonder if it will stand a court challenge.

Have any other fraternity members out there received a similar notice? I am assuming that many, if not most, National Intrafraternity Conference (NIC) fraternities have sent (or will send) a similar notice to their members. They have apparently formed a website (standuptoharvard.org) as part of their campaign.

Dear ________:

Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Pi Kappa Phi stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted—stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media posts to add your voice to the support as we #StandUpToHarvard

Learn more at standuptoharvard.org

Fraternally,

MARK E. TIMMES
Chief Executive Officer

Last I checked, Harvard isn't the government.

 

[LafayetteBear]

Last I checked, Harvard isn't the government.

LOL, it's obvious that Harvard is private, so it may well have no First Amendment problems taking this action. But I believe they receive federal funding in significant quantities, so I wonder if Title IX might pose a challenge for them. The letter from my fraternity's CEO indicates that the court cases filed against Harvard cite both First Amendment and Title IX as bases for the court challenge.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

LOL, it's obvious that Harvard is private, so it may well have no First Amendment problems taking this action. But I believe they receive federal funding in significant quantities, so I wonder if Title IX might pose a challenge for them. The letter from my fraternity's CEO indicates that the court cases filed against Harvard cite both First Amendment and Title IX as bases for the court challenge.

 

[83wuzme]

When did universities start acting like the Thought Police ?

 

[Nitt1300]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That's the First amendment, people always talk about it as though they have actually read it.

 

[psu_1294]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.)

Hey, I'm a Pi Kap 66-69. When were you a brother?

 

[1PSUfootball1]

Wouldn’t the women’s softball team be considered a single sex organization. I guess they can try out for baseball or let the guys that didn’t make the baseball team play softball. Think of all the money we will save having one basketball team, one track team etc. The best players play. Time to step up your game ladies. Finally....equality! Oh wait....that’s just freaking stupid. This non sense going on at college campuses sounds great at demonstrations but at some point these snowflakes have to go out and deal with things in the real world.

 

[Uh Clem]

I received a very similar one from the National office of Alpha Chi Rho.

 

[Lmfl123]

I never liked the concept of fraternities thus never joined one. It was a simple personal decision.

Apparently we are not able to trust kids to make a similar decision today. It is really pretty mind boggling.

 

[Mile High Lion]

A female friend of mine posted something similar from her sorority. Never thought much of fraternities. They always struck me as magnets for hazing and other negative behavior. But in a battle between fraternities, sororities and the forces of university political correctness I have to side with the Greeks on this one.

 

[LionDeNittany]

Wouldn’t the women’s softball team be considered a single sex organization. I guess they can try out for baseball or let the guys that didn’t make the baseball team play softball. Think of all the money we will save having one basketball team, one track team etc. The best players play. Time to step up your game ladies. Finally....equality! Oh wait....that’s just freaking stupid. This non sense going on at college campuses sounds great at demonstrations but at some point these snowflakes have to go out and deal with things in the real world.

There are two divisions in most sports: The "Open" division and "Womens". If a woman could play baseball well enough she would be on the baseball team.
What is odd is where there is a demand of equality in the face of inequality.

That said, this is somewhat separate from the original topic which is Harvard implies they can control what students do off campus. They are opening themselves up to lawsuits and in the end it is a bad decision. Harvard will lose a lot of money fighting this and eventually back away.

LdN

 

[Beachwineguy]

I received a similar one from ATO national headquarters, and we don’t even have a chapter at Harvard.

 

[androcles]

... is the football team a single sex organization?...
...jes wunderin'...

 

[Pardlion]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.) It indicates that Harvard University is taking punitive action against any Harvard students who join fraternities, sororities or single sex social organizations. This seems like an infringement of students' First Amendment free association rights and/or a violation of Title IX.. I wonder if it will stand a court challenge.

Have any other fraternity members out there received a similar notice? I am assuming that many, if not most, National Intrafraternity Conference (NIC) fraternities have sent (or will send) a similar notice to their members. They have apparently formed a website (standuptoharvard.org) as part of their campaign.

Dear ________:

Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Pi Kappa Phi stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted—stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media posts to add your voice to the support as we #StandUpToHarvard

Learn more at standuptoharvard.org

Fraternally,

MARK E. TIMMES
Chief Executive Officer

Clearly, Harvard thinks its students are too stupid to figure out who they should associate with, so they're going to do it for them.

 

[NitneLiun]

Last I checked, Harvard isn't the government.

True, but it does receive enormous federal funding, either directly or indirectly. This has been used in the past as a wedge in litigation against non-governmental organizations.

The truth is that there are only two or three truly private colleges and universities in the country, who received absolutely no funding from the federal or state governments, either directly or indirectly. One is Hillsdale College in Michigan, another whose name escapes me in Indiana. I believe there is also a third somewhere.

 

[DandyDonII]

When did universities start acting like the Thought Police ?

Ever since I was in college in the 90s that is for sure....

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

True, but it does receive enormous federal funding, either directly or indirectly. This has been used in the past as a wedge in litigation against non-governmental organizations.

The truth is that there are only two or three truly private colleges and universities in the country, who received absolutely no funding from the federal or state governments, either directly or indirectly. One is Hillsdale College in Michigan, another whose name escapes me in Indiana. I believe there is also a third somewhere.

I guess we'll see what the courts say. Harvard does get a lot of federal funding - about $500mm a year (half of it's annual R&D budget). I found this tweet pretty funny....

 

[WDLion]

True, but it does receive enormous federal funding, either directly or indirectly. This has been used in the past as a wedge in litigation against non-governmental organizations.

The truth is that there are only two or three truly private colleges and universities in the country, who received absolutely no funding from the federal or state governments, either directly or indirectly. One is Hillsdale College in Michigan, another whose name escapes me in Indiana. I believe there is also a third somewhere.

I think Bucknell is one.

 

[GastonLion]

This is the e-mail I received from my fraternity today:


Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy! Today, Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

“From its founding, Phi Kappa Psi has focused on being the organization that inspires men to strive for the highest intellectual, moral and spiritual character in order to live productive, honorable, and purposeful lives” said Phi Kappa Psi Executive Director Mark Guidi. “Today, we stand with the sororities, fraternities and students of Harvard to retain their right to associate with single-sex organizations if they desire.”

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted— stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams, and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.
We need you! Share our social media posts on Facebook and Twitter to add your voice to the support as we STAND UP TO HARVARD. Learn more at standuptoharvard.org.Additionally, if you have specific questions or feedback about these lawsuits, please emailheather.kirk@nicfraternity.org.
Fraternally,

Mark A. Guidi
Executive Director, Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity

I expect there will be a lot of pushback to what Harvard is doing. Not a lawyer, but seems the Crimson is on thin ice here.

 

[LionDeNittany]

I guess we'll see what the courts say. Harvard does get a lot of federal funding - about $500mm a year (half of it's annual R&D budget). I found this tweet pretty funny....

View embedded media

Not really that funny. Most policy designed to create parity effectively become discriminatory. Non-Sexism policies are sexist by rule.

Affirmative Action for example. Meant to prevent discrimination is effectively discriminatory. Not arguing whether it is "good", but it discriminates for sure.

https://www.vox.com/2018/3/28/17031460/affirmative-action-asian-discrimination-admissions

LdN

 

[bmw199]

Acacia too. This is insanity. At this point, what student wants to go to a school that controls what students can associate, congregate, and live with each other? I know a lot of schools have on campus fraternities, but the schools are way overstepping the right to govern student organizations.


Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Acacia stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities, and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.
“This situation is unacceptable. What’s happening at Harvard could spread to other schools, and we can’t allow that. Harvard is not only saying that there is no place in the administration’s ideal society for a group of men or a group of women to exist, they are violating the Constitution and actively punishing young men and women for joining an association in which they believe. Fraternities and sororities aren’t perfect, but do we really want the people in leadership of institutions of higher education limiting our rights, our relationships, our opportunities? We have good data that shows that membership in a fraternity makes it more likely that a young man graduate and graduate on time. At a time when male college attendees and graduates are declining, does it make sense to eliminate something that makes it more likely for men to graduate?”

Patrick McGovern, Executive Director
Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted— stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams, and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media (Facebook / Twitter / Instagram) posts to add your voice to the support as we STAND UP TO HARVARD. Learn more at standuptoharvard.org.

Fraternally,

Patrick W. McGovern
Executive Director

 

[Pardlion]

FWIW, the old, established "Eating Clubs" (fraternities) at Princeton have been co-ed for decades.

This is all just more noise exacerbated by a media frenzy. Harvard will figure it out. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Agreed. It's difficult to figure out whether students should be punished for belonging to off-campus clubs, but I'm sure the wizards who run Harvard can figure it out in another 5 or so years.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.) It indicates that Harvard University is taking punitive action against any Harvard students who join fraternities, sororities or single sex social organizations. This seems like an infringement of students' First Amendment free association rights and/or a violation of Title IX.. I wonder if it will stand a court challenge.

Have any other fraternity members out there received a similar notice? I am assuming that many, if not most, National Intrafraternity Conference (NIC) fraternities have sent (or will send) a similar notice to their members. They have apparently formed a website (standuptoharvard.org) as part of their campaign.

Dear ________:

Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Pi Kappa Phi stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted—stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media posts to add your voice to the support as we #StandUpToHarvard

Learn more at standuptoharvard.org

Fraternally,

MARK E. TIMMES
Chief Executive Officer

Also, Harvard isn’t ‘banning’ these clubs - people are free to join so long as they know and are prepared for Harvard’s response, which is noted. Women’s clubs were actually given a five year grace period to comply - men’s clubs weren’t.

 

[dailybuck777]

Harvard will figure it out. Don't get your panties in a bunch.

Just like it has figured out Asian admissions. Super smart, fair, practical place. (Sarc)

 

[dailybuck777]

Also, Harvard isn’t ‘banning’ these clubs - people are free to join so long as they know and are prepared for Harvard’s response, which is noted.

Harvard can't ban off-campus organizations that aren't part of Harvard -- a really profound observation on your part.

Of course, its action is only a negligible intrusion on those students who join the clubs. How many students consider it to be important to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships at Harvard following their undergraduate studies? (sarc)

Instead of deflecting and minimizing Harvard's actions, why not directly confront the issue by arguing why it is important and right (apparently in your view) for Harvard to substantially punish students who are members of these organizations. Typical Lefty deflection and dishonesty by you following the modus operandi of Hillary Clinton.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Harvard can't ban off-campus organizations that aren't part of Harvard -- a really profound observation on your part.

Of course, its action is only a negligible intrusion on those students who join the clubs. How many students consider it to be important to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships at Harvard following their undergraduate studies? (sarc)

Instead of deflecting and minimizing Harvard's actions, why not directly confront the issue by arguing why it is important and right (apparently in your view) for Harvard to substantially punish students who are members of these organizations. Typical Lefty deflection and dishonesty in the tradition of Hillary Clinton.

The OP used the word 'ban'. Dope.

 

[step.eng69]

The OP used the word 'ban'. Dope.

 

[dailybuck777]

The OP used the word 'ban'. Dope.

He didn't use it in a literal sense. (You almost certainly know he is a lawyer) He was saying that it would amount to a functional ban and that no one would join a frat if the penalties were that high even if the frats weren't technically banned. You are so clueless and simple-minded that you took him literally. Apparently, that level of "sophistication" is way beyond your understanding and pay grade.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

He didn't use it in a literal sense. (You almost certainly know he is a lawyer) He was saying that it would amount to a functional ban and that no one would join a frat if the penalties were that high even if the frats weren't technically banned. You are so clueless and simple-minded that you took him literally. Apparently, that level of "sophistication" is way beyond your understanding and pay grade.

Clearly.

 

[Aardvark86]

This is the e-mail I received from my fraternity today:


Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy! Today, Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

“From its founding, Phi Kappa Psi has focused on being the organization that inspires men to strive for the highest intellectual, moral and spiritual character in order to live productive, honorable, and purposeful lives” said Phi Kappa Psi Executive Director Mark Guidi. “Today, we stand with the sororities, fraternities and students of Harvard to retain their right to associate with single-sex organizations if they desire.”

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted— stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams, and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.
We need you! Share our social media posts on Facebook and Twitter to add your voice to the support as we STAND UP TO HARVARD. Learn more at standuptoharvard.org.Additionally, if you have specific questions or feedback about these lawsuits, please emailheather.kirk@nicfraternity.org.
Fraternally,

Mark A. Guidi
Executive Director, Phi Kappa Psi Fraternity

I expect there will be a lot of pushback to what Harvard is doing. Not a lawyer, but seems the Crimson is on thin ice here.

Hi hi hi!

 

[Aardvark86]

Also, Harvard isn’t ‘banning’ these clubs - people are free to join so long as they know and are prepared for Harvard’s response, which is noted. Women’s clubs were actually given a five year grace period to comply - men’s clubs weren’t.

I’m not sure which is worse actually.
But different grace periods strikes me as facially discriminatory.

 

[m.knox]

I just received this e-mail from the CEO of my college fraternity. (I hope it comes through, as stuff I receive via e-mail sometimes does not when I try to copy and paste it here.) It indicates that Harvard University is taking punitive action against any Harvard students who join fraternities, sororities or single sex social organizations. This seems like an infringement of students' First Amendment free association rights and/or a violation of Title IX.. I wonder if it will stand a court challenge.

Have any other fraternity members out there received a similar notice? I am assuming that many, if not most, National Intrafraternity Conference (NIC) fraternities have sent (or will send) a similar notice to their members. They have apparently formed a website (standuptoharvard.org) as part of their campaign.

Dear ________:

Our right to brotherhood is in jeopardy!

Today, Pi Kappa Phi stands in support of a group of sororities, fraternities and students who filed a pair of lawsuits challenging Harvard’s sanctions policy that punishes students who join off-campus, single-sex social organizations. Even though we do not have a chapter at this specific school, it is critical that we stand together to protect members’ right to shape their own leadership and social paths.

Before Harvard announced its policy, one in four undergraduates belonged to sororities, fraternities or all-women’s or all-men’s final clubs—opportunities protected by Title IX and the First Amendment. Starting this fall, members of our organizations are, in a word, blacklisted—stripped of opportunities to hold leadership roles in Harvard organizations and athletic teams and to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships influenced or controlled by Harvard.

We can’t sit back and allow Harvard to set a precedent that could be followed by others. This policy blatantly infringes on the rights of Harvard students.

We need you! Share our social media posts to add your voice to the support as we #StandUpToHarvard

Learn more at standuptoharvard.org

Fraternally,

MARK E. TIMMES
Chief Executive Officer

Well, are you standing up to Harvard?

 

[LafayetteBear]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That's the First amendment, people always talk about it as though they have actually read it.

If all you read was the text of the First Amendment, you would conclude that it applies only to the U.S. Congress. We know that, following passage of the 14th Amendment, it applies to government action at all levels.

 

[LafayetteBear]

He didn't use it in a literal sense. (You almost certainly know he is a lawyer) He was saying that it would amount to a functional ban and that no one would join a frat if the penalties were that high even if the frats weren't technically banned. You are so clueless and simple-minded that you took him literally. Apparently, that level of "sophistication" is way beyond your understanding and pay grade.

I don't want to get in the middle of your argument with Midnighter, but I DO agree with you that Harvard's action is the functional equivalent of a ban. The penalties imposed on students who join off campus organizations are pretty severe.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I don't want to get in the middle of your argument with Midnighter, but I DO agree with you that Harvard's action is the functional equivalent of a ban. The penalties imposed on students who join off campus organizations are pretty severe.

LOL. No argument with him from me - he's so focused on partisan outrage that he didn't bother to ask if I agreed with Harvard (answer: no). Having said that, as a private institution, I respect their right to govern in a manner that is best for them and consistent with their values and mission. Worth noting this policy was instituted in 2016, and is only now being challenged in the courts. Will be interesting to see how they decide.

Here is an excerpt from a statement from the University President from last year about their reasons for adopting the policy:

Over the past two academic years, this body has had a robust discussion about how the University should respond to the many issues presented by unrecognized single-gender social organizations (USGSOs), including the final clubs, sororities, and fraternities. We appreciate the intense engagement of the Faculty on an issue that will shape the non-academic educational experience of current and future students. These discussions have helped both to generate deeper understanding and to define the range of plausible options. It is now time to decide the path forward—a way that builds on what we have learned, that establishes ongoing opportunities for Faculty engagement, and that permits students in the Class of 2021 to make fully informed decisions about whether to participate in a USGSO.

First, the University must act. The final clubs in particular are a product of another era, a time when Harvard’s student body was all male, culturally homogeneous, and overwhelmingly white and affluent. Our student body today is significantly different. We self-consciously seek to admit a class that is diverse on many dimensions, including on gender, race, and socioeconomic status. As this Faculty recognized when it unanimously endorsed the statement on the benefits of diversity, that diversity is central to our mission, as well as to our understanding of an effective educational environment in which students learn from exploring their differences. It is central to our obligations to society and to our students. It is central to the very organization of the College, which emphasizes a residential undergraduate experience where students are randomly assigned to Houses as a means of maximizing each student’s exposure to people unlike themselves. Indeed, we are in the midst of a lawsuit, as well as an investigation by the United States government, in which we are vigorously defending these bedrock commitments.

While we should respect tradition, it is incumbent on us to organize the institution for the benefit of our current students and those who will follow. This requires us to create a community where students have the fair opportunity to engage in curricular and extracurricular activities regardless of their gender, socioeconomic status, or other attributes unrelated to merit. There are those who agree with this principle but argue that the impact of USGSOs should not be a matter of University concern given the organizations’ independent legal status. We disagree. We cannot ignore the responsibility we bear in relationship to our students’ experience in these settings and their effect on the broader community. These organizations are very much of Harvard: They are effectively on our campus, consist exclusively of Harvard students and graduates, and directly influence the character of undergraduate life. More importantly, in their current incarnation, they stand in the way of our ability to provide a fully challenging and inclusive educational experience to the diverse students currently on our campus.

 

[PS4814]

Harvard can't ban off-campus organizations that aren't part of Harvard -- a really profound observation on your part.

Of course, its action is only a negligible intrusion on those students who join the clubs. How many students consider it to be important to obtain post-graduate fellowships and scholarships at Harvard following their undergraduate studies? (sarc)

Instead of deflecting and minimizing Harvard's actions, why not directly confront the issue by arguing why it is important and right (apparently in your view) for Harvard to substantially punish students who are members of these organizations. Typical Lefty deflection and dishonesty by you following the modus operandi of Hillary Clinton.

 

[12375CAT]

What is the reason(s) Harvard is banning membership @ greek organizations!
You MUST explain the reason(s) for this otherwise posting this type of thread is a complete waste of your time (jerk)

 

[LMTLION]

I am too busy with my career and family (and PSU football!) to have been dialed into these things, so I just don’t know.... what is the rationale behind eliminating gender nowadays? Is it to correct inequality? Is it not ok to be traditional masculine or feminine now? If someone could explain without politics that would be great! I started noticing this gender elimination with bathrooms a few years ago, and I feel like I missed the ‘why’ of these issues.

 

[NCLION]

The saddest part of this is the irony that Hollywood is being handed the plot to the next “Revenge of the Nerds” movie and is way too politically correct to make it!