Is this fair?

[GGGG]

Its what I would expect at University claiming to be Catholic.

You didn't answer any of the questions I asked.  Forget the Catholic thing.  What if you son was at a public university?

[Lennys Tap]

Where did you get the idea that I would say that to my daughter at that point in time?

Because it's what you believe?

[muwarrior69]

You didn't answer any of the questions I asked.  Forget the Catholic thing.  What if you son was at a public university?

My son valued his privacy. I am sure he would be a bit uncomfortable with a transgendered room mate. Had he lived he would be 35 today so not so relevant as today. I think it is much more difficult for our daughters who would be in that situation. As Still just posted even his daughter would be uncomfortable. I hope we can get to a point where we can accommodate everyone and not have the policy be so one sided and rigid. I am really curious how many would appreciate it if the University your child was accepted to would e-mail you saying they have a transgendered student and ask if they would like to room together. I am sure there would be some who would agree and it would be a win/win for all around.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Because at a Catholic University I would expect people with penises and vaginas would not live together. I am sure many parents would ask that their child's room be reassigned at MU if their room mate was of the opposite sex. It seem that the discomfort of the transgendered student is being accommodated by force of law but the discomfort of the non transgendered student is being ignored and even questioned as being unreasonable. Would MU be in violation of Title IX if they accommodated the non-trangendered student with different living quarters if they so wished? I cannot imagine there would be many cases of this as compared to your example of race which I don't find even comparable.

69, let me start by apologizing. I included the racial story in my original post, thought better of it and edited it out. I was surprised you even saw it given you posted over an hour after I edited it out. I had good intents with the comparison to talk about the role of cultural norms in this discussion, but after re-reading it thought it bordered to closely of accusing people who are uncomfortable with trans individuals with being racist. For that, I am sorry.

My personal expectation of a university that claims to be Catholic would be that it creates an environment that is open, safe, and welcoming to all students, regardless of their gender, sex, orientation, age, race, etc. I believe that means allowing trans students to live with people who match their gender identity. This is not a matter of comfort. This is a matter of safety, dignity, and social justice.

What I don't think a university should be mandated to do is cater to people's comfort. As someone else in this thread stated, college is about pushing students outside their comfort zone. Part of that could be living with someone with an identity that makes you uncomfortable.

That being said, and as I stated previously, I would want those with religious beliefs about men and women not living together before marriage to have their beliefs respected. I would hope there would be some way for them to opt out.  Honestly for the sake of the trans individual as much as their own sake. However, I will say I have met very few millennials who truly believe that men and women should not live together until marriage. I can't think of one person that I knew from Marquette who is now married that didn't live with their spouse, another significant other, or a friend of the opposite sex at some point before tying the knot. If they are willing to move in with a girl or boyfriend, than I don't think they would qualify for a religious exemption....though how could you honestly tell so it would be moot point.

[GGGG]

Because it's what you believe?

You are really being intentionally obtuse here.

While that may be my belief as a 50 year old man, I wouldn't just share that with my daughter who finished second in the state track meet because I think at that point in time she would have a much different viewpoint.  Life's lessons are oftentimes taught better with hindsight.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Because it's what you believe?

Its possible to believe something but also be sensitive of someone else's feelings.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

My son valued his privacy. I am sure he would be a bit uncomfortable with a transgendered room mate. Had he lived he would be 35 today so not so relevant as today. I think it is much more difficult for our daughters who would be in that situation. As Still just posted even his daughter would be uncomfortable. I hope we can get to a point where we can accommodate everyone and not have the policy be so one sided and rigid. I am really curious how many would appreciate it if the University your child was accepted to would e-mail you saying they have a transgendered student and ask if they would like to room together. I am sure there would be some who would agree and it would be a win/win for all around.

Would it be? Or would it be more difficult for the parents of daughters? In my experience, female college students tend to be a lot more open and accepting of trans individuals than their male counterparts.

[jsglow]

So TAMU, in your view does the 'minority' student (let's use gay for example) have some societal obligation to help make the majority comfortable?

Let me give you an example.  Say a mixed group is watching a MU game in a big dorm room and that one guy is discretely kissing his girlfriend off to the side.  And let's further assume he has all the official university permission paperwork in triplicate in his left pocket!  Now most of society (as defined by folks in the room) would probably be okay with that.  But they might have a completely different reaction if that were a homosexual couple.

See, that's where I am.  I sincerely believe that my gay friends simply want to be treated like friends. I'm happy to attend functions with them as two 'couples', etc.  No problem whatsoever. No judgement.  It's all perfectly fine.  But I'd be very uncomfortable if they were at the end of the couch in the situation I described above.  My belief is that they have some obligation to respect that. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

So TAMU, in your view does the 'minority' student (let's use gay for example) have some societal obligation to help make the majority comfortable?

Let me give you an example.  Say a mixed group is watching a MU game in a big dorm room and that one guy is discretely kissing his girlfriend off to the side.  And let's further assume he has all the official university permission paperwork in triplicate in his left pocket!  Now most of society (as defined by folks in the room) would probably be okay with that.  But they might have a completely different reaction if that were a homosexual couple.

See, that's where I am.  I sincerely believe that my gay friends simply want to be treated like friends. I'm happy to attend functions with them as two 'couples', etc.  No problem whatsoever. No judgement.  It's all perfectly fine.  But I'd be very uncomfortable if they were at the end of the couch in the situation I described above.  My belief is that they have some obligation to respect that.

Those triplicate forms better be signed!

I guess I'm confused. You say homosexual couples just want to be treated like other couples. Which I agree with. I think that's the ultimate goal. But then you say they shouldn't act like other couples because it might make others uncomfortable. How are they ever supposed to get to the point where they are just another couple if they aren't allowed to act like a normal couple? Are they doomed to abnormal couplehood?

I understand the thought process. Its natural to want everyone to be comfortable. We can't necessarily control the people around us being uncomfortable with LGBT but we can "control" whether or not the gay couple does PDA. I would say while well-intentioned, it unintentionally supports a culture where gays need to hide or at least be discreet about their sexuality, rather than just being another normal couple.

I want everyone to have the right to make out on the end of the coach with their significant other without fear of violence. I don't think you get there without some people being uncomfortable along the way. Hopefully, they go from uncomfortable, to neutral, to openly accepting.

Hell screw the couches and significant others. Make outs for everyone everywhere!

[StillAWarrior]

69, let me start by apologizing. I included the racial story in my original post, thought better of it and edited it out. I was surprised you even saw it given you posted over an hour after I edited it out. I had good intents with the comparison to talk about the role of cultural norms in this discussion, but after re-reading it thought it bordered to closely of accusing people who are uncomfortable with trans individuals with being racist. For that, I am sorry.

My personal expectation of a university that claims to be Catholic would be that it creates an environment that is open, safe, and welcoming to all students, regardless of their gender, sex, orientation, age, race, etc. I believe that means allowing trans students to live with people who match their gender identity. This is not a matter of comfort. This is a matter of safety, dignity, and social justice.

What I don't think a university should be mandated to do is cater to people's comfort. As someone else in this thread stated, college is about pushing students outside their comfort zone. Part of that could be living with someone with an identity that makes you uncomfortable.

That being said, and as I stated previously, I would want those with religious beliefs about men and women not living together before marriage to have their beliefs respected. I would hope there would be some way for them to opt out.  Honestly for the sake of the trans individual as much as their own sake. However, I will say I have met very few millennials who truly believe that men and women should not live together until marriage. I can't think of one person that I knew from Marquette who is now married that didn't live with their spouse, another significant other, or a friend of the opposite sex at some point before tying the knot. If they are willing to move in with a girl or boyfriend, than I don't think they would qualify for a religious exemption....though how could you honestly tell so it would be moot point.

I agree with you to a point.  I agree that college is a good time to move out of your comfort zone.  However, I don't think that it is necessarily a good idea to take away all comfort zones.  Again, we can debate whether a young female "should" feel uncomfortable about sharing a dorm room with a young male, but I think most would agree that many would, in fact feel uncomfortable in that situation.  So, while I'm very in favor of kids moving outside their comfort zones, I'm not so sure I would support requiring that in the dorm room.  Much of the housing process in most colleges is about trying to make students feel comfortable in their rooms (e.g., morning or night; messy or neat; quite or loud), even if they are being pushed outside their comfort zones in other areas.  I think that forcing a kid to live with someone of a different biological sex if it makes him/her uncomfortable would be inappropriate.  Even if a kid did not have a religious objection to living with someone of the opposite sex, that's a far cry from forcing him or her to do so.

I must admit, however, that in my opinion this principle is becoming remarkably one-sided on college campuses.  Some people are being "encouraged" to move outside their comfort zones, while others are fighting to ensure that the entire college campus becomes one massive comfort zone (aka "safe space").

[Pakuni]

See, that's where I am.  I sincerely believe that my gay friends simply want to be treated like friends. I'm happy to attend functions with them as two 'couples', etc.  No problem whatsoever. No judgement.  It's all perfectly fine.  But I'd be very uncomfortable if they were at the end of the couch in the situation I described above.  My belief is that they have some obligation to respect that.

Are you suggesting you would be very uncomfortable with PDA by any couple on that couch, or just the homosexual couple?

If your position is that either couple should have the decorum to respect others' level of comfort with PDA, I agree.
But if you're saying homosexuals have some sort of added obligation to make those around them comfortable with their prejudices, that's, well ... prejudice.
Carried to its logical conclusion, how is that line of thinking different than those who argued that blacks have some obligation to respect those whites who are uncomfortable sharing the same lunch counter or drinking fountain?

[muwarrior69]

Would it be? Or would it be more difficult for the parents of daughters? In my experience, female college students tend to be a lot more open and accepting of trans individuals than their male counterparts.

Still's daughter would be uncomfortable as he stated a few posts above (or below as I have most recent post first). As for me the Marquette I knew is long gone. Most of my class mates were pretty much open minded but to the center of most issued; but the center back in my day is way to the right of center today. Most of us hardly knew any gay much less a trans person. I am sure there were some but back then it was well hidden. I can't imagine what my grand daughter will face when she is in college, fall of 2029.

[StillAWarrior]

Still's daughter would be uncomfortable as he stated a few posts above (or below as I have most recent post first). As for me the Marquette I knew is long gone. Most of my class mates were pretty much open minded but to the center of most issued; but the center back in my day is way to the right of center today. Most of us hardly knew any gay much less a trans person. I am sure there were some but back then it was well hidden. I can't imagine what my grand daughter will face when she is in college, fall of 2029.

I have said many times that my kids (and, I believe, the vast majority of kids their age) simply do not "see" issues relating sexual preference or gender.  Not only do they not see it, they have a hard time understanding why people my age did/do have issues with it.  I would consider my oldest daughter very typical in that regard.  That said, she would be very uncomfortable if her roommate was a biological male.  And frankly, I strongly suspect that many very progressive and open minded college age females would feel exactly the same.  I would support allowing a female student live with a biologically male student in a dorm room if she was comfortable doing so.  I would absolutely oppose surprising her with it and/or forcing her to do so.

[muwarrior69]

I have said many times that my kids (and, I believe, the vast majority of kids their age) simply do not "see" issues relating sexual preference or gender.  Not only do they not see it, they have a hard time understanding why people my age did/do have issues with it.  I would consider my oldest daughter very typical in that regard.  That said, she would be very uncomfortable if her roommate was a biological male.  And frankly, I strongly suspect that many very progressive and open minded college age females would feel exactly the same.  I would support allowing a female student live with a biologically male student in a dorm room if she was comfortable doing so.  I would absolutely oppose surprising her with it and/or forcing her to do so.

I agree with you whole heartedly on all counts. It's all so one sided and that ought to change. It seems that our campuses should be places where people of reason should settle ones differences reasonably, but our campuses are not reasonable places any more.

[jsglow]

Those triplicate forms better be signed!

I guess I'm confused. You say homosexual couples just want to be treated like other couples. Which I agree with. I think that's the ultimate goal. But then you say they shouldn't act like other couples because it might make others uncomfortable. How are they ever supposed to get to the point where they are just another couple if they aren't allowed to act like a normal couple? Are they doomed to abnormal couplehood?

I understand the thought process. Its natural to want everyone to be comfortable. We can't necessarily control the people around us being uncomfortable with LGBT but we can "control" whether or not the gay couple does PDA. I would say while well-intentioned, it unintentionally supports a culture where gays need to hide or at least be discreet about their sexuality, rather than just being another normal couple.

I want everyone to have the right to make out on the end of the coach with their significant other without fear of violence. I don't think you get there without some people being uncomfortable along the way. Hopefully, they go from uncomfortable, to neutral, to openly accepting.

Hell screw the couches and significant others. Make outs for everyone everywhere!

Ha, I sincerely appreciate the conversation.  I just can't get there.  I guess there still is a bit of a double standard for me.  Just being honest.

[jsglow]

Are you suggesting you would be very uncomfortable with PDA by any couple on that couch, or just the homosexual couple?

If your position is that either couple should have the decorum to respect others' level of comfort with PDA, I agree.
But if you're saying homosexuals have some sort of added obligation to make those around them comfortable with their prejudices, that's, well ... prejudice.
Carried to its logical conclusion, how is that line of thinking different than those who argued that blacks have some obligation to respect those whites who are uncomfortable sharing the same lunch counter or drinking fountain?

I do think there is a difference.  As none of us would exist without a father and a mother.  So I don't accept your premise. That's not in any way suggesting that any form of discrimination other than societal decency should be at issue.

[GGGG]

I agree with you whole heartedly on all counts. It's all so one sided and that ought to change. It seems that our campuses should be places where people of reason should settle ones differences reasonably, but our campuses are not reasonable places any more.

That's just silly. Most college campuses are completely reasonable and don't use things like intellectual "safe spaces." 

Diversify where you get your information. It's not as one sided as you suggest.

[jsglow]

Those triplicate forms better be signed!

I guess I'm confused. You say homosexual couples just want to be treated like other couples. Which I agree with. I think that's the ultimate goal. But then you say they shouldn't act like other couples because it might make others uncomfortable. How are they ever supposed to get to the point where they are just another couple if they aren't allowed to act like a normal couple? Are they doomed to abnormal couplehood?

I understand the thought process. Its natural to want everyone to be comfortable. We can't necessarily control the people around us being uncomfortable with LGBT but we can "control" whether or not the gay couple does PDA. I would say while well-intentioned, it unintentionally supports a culture where gays need to hide or at least be discreet about their sexuality, rather than just being another normal couple.

I want everyone to have the right to make out on the end of the coach with their significant other without fear of violence. I don't think you get there without some people being uncomfortable along the way. Hopefully, they go from uncomfortable, to neutral, to openly accepting.

Hell screw the couches and significant others. Make outs for everyone everywhere!

Let me try this another way TAMU.  Let's make the couple at the end of the couch an adult and a 10 year old.  How about a human and an animal?  There is a natural order and there is a line. We in society have a right to demand and expect that.  Somewhere.  Now in those cases we're talking about crimes.  So everything isn't okay.

[jsglow]

That's just silly. Most college campuses are completely reasonable and don't use things like intellectual "safe spaces." 

Diversify where you get your information. It's not as one sided as you suggest.

You tell me this isn't out of control?  Never get me to agree Sultan.

http://evergreen.edu/

[GGGG]

You tell me this isn't out of control?  Never get me to agree Sultan.

http://evergreen.edu/

Do you understand what "most" means?

[jsglow]

Do you understand what "most" means?

Sultan, no need to be nasty.  But it is fair to say that a notable and ever increasing number of universities are out on the fringe.  Places like Berkeley for example are not institutions where I'd write a tuition check on behalf of my son or daughter.  There are many other examples.  I chose the most extreme simply to make a point.

[Pakuni]

I do think there is a difference.  As none of us would exist without a father and a mother.  So I don't accept your premise. That's not in any way suggesting that any form of discrimination other than societal decency should be at issue.

But who sets the standard for so-called societal decency (and let's stick to consenting adults here)?
If someone is uncomfortable  - and let's face it, some would be - with an interracial couple  on that couch, should that couple do the "decent thing" and not show affection? What about an unmarried couple?
Why does your right not to be made uncomfortable by your prejudices supersede someone else's right to a normal existence?

[jsglow]

So I can see where this is all potentially headed.  My thanks to you for a truly stimulating and interesting conversation.  I think I really learned some things, always good.  I hope I treated all of you with courtesy and respect. 

[Pakuni]

You tell me this isn't out of control?  Never get me to agree Sultan.

http://evergreen.edu/

Citing Evergreen as an example of standard campus life is a bit like using the Lusitania as an example of a typical vacation cruise.

[Jay Bee]

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-due-process-lawsuits-increased-dramatically-after-education-dept-overreach/article/2600819

Repeal the DCL