Catholic University Goes Back To Single Sex Dorms

In an editorial to the Wall Street Journal yesterday, Catholic University President John Garvey announced that his school will be going back to single sex dormitories because of the binge drinking and hooking up that the coed environment encourages. He also decried young women for failing to be "a civilizing influence" on young Catholic men.

After first making the case that intellect and virtue are connected, (and even quoting Aristotle), Garvey discussed the hazards of binge drinking. He then expanded on the hazards of "hooking up."

Hooking up is getting to be as common as drinking. Sociologist W. Bradford Wilcox, who heads the National Marriage Project at the University of Virginia, says that in various studies, 40%-64% of college students report doing it.

The effects are not all fun. Rates of depression reach 20% for young women who have had two or more sexual partners in the last year, almost double the rate for women who have had none. Sexually active young men do more poorly than abstainers in their academic work.

Garvey states that the solution to this problem is single sex dormitories. He points to research by Christopher Kaczor at Loyola Marymount who says that hooking up and binge drinking are greatly reduced by separating the sexes. And then he discusses why he is puzzled that women can't hold men back from their destructive impulses.

The point about sex is no surprise. The point about drinking is. I would have thought that young women would have a civilizing influence on young men. Yet the causal arrow seems to run the other way. Young women are trying to keep up—and young men are encouraging them (maybe because it facilitates hooking up).

Although the move is garnering praise on some Catholic blogs, Heidi Schlumpf a writer at the Catholic National Reporter thinks the entire thing is one "brilliant PR move" for "nervous parents" as Catholic University dorms were single sex by floor anyway.

What do you think? Do you think single-sex dorms encourage bad behavior? Should women be thought of as "civilizing influences" on young men? Weigh in below!

Comments

[Sol Rosenberg]

03:57 PM on 07/01/2011

It would have been nice if Garvey had shown this much concern about who was coming to speak at commencement ceremonies. It was laudable that the professors at CUA wrote their letter to Boehner. It is disappointing that the president of the university did not exercise better judgment. He has problems with the students engaging in binge drinking, so he invites a known alcoholic to deliver the commencement speech? Does that make any sense?

Converting the dorms to single sex after decades of co-ed living quarters is going to be unpalatable to many students. It is likely that they will move off campus to the apartment complexes in the nearby neighborhoods, where drinking and sexual encounters will be up to their own discretion. Students will also be more likely to take part in off campus activities at the local bars rather than those offered on campus. There is merit to what other posters have said about the advantages to having the students on the campus, where security and medical staff are available .

Parents are somewhat naive in thinking that single sex dorms will remove drinking or sex from the college culture. While these issues are legitimate points of concern, they are part of the college experience no matter where you go, and part of the learning and growing up process. Missteps and mistakes will be made along the way, and lessons learned. Trying to shield these experiences out in college could lead to bigger problems later in life.

[txtraveler]

12:26 AM on 06/22/2011

Why do some people spend so much time and effort either twisting or pulling out of context things that others say with an eye towards finding something to be offended by?

If the rates of depression rise among women and the academic performance levels sink among men, that is something that is within the purview of a university to attempt to deal with. If their research indicates moving to single-sex dorms will help, I say it's worth a try.

The question at the end of the article ("Should women be thought of as "civilizing influences"...") appear to me to be an attempt to find something to be offended by, but the truth is 1) that reference was SPECIFICALLY about drinking, and 2) overall we should hope that both sexes would bring out the best in each other. That they didn't in this case supports the conclusions the university reached about separating them.

[Moogoo]

10:18 AM on 06/16/2011

It's about time Catholic colleges and universities start acting like Catholic institutions.

[mividaloca]

03:58 AM on 06/16/2011

I am currently a student at The Catholic University of America. I'm part of the class of 2014 and honestly, I disagree with President Garvey on this one. He needs to step into the shoes and POV of an 18, 19, or 20 year old. I grew up in a very, VERY strict household and every time my mother put restrictions on me, I just thought of a crafty way to get around it. This is only going to make kids come up with more ways to sneak around and not get caught because let's face it, people like a challenge. also, kids are going to drink and have sex REGARDLESS. IT'S COLLEGE! Not middle school for goodness sake! I feel the school shouldn't really try to shelter us from that, it's life.

[Moogoo]

10:24 AM on 06/16/2011

By this logic the University should set up bars in the dorms. The school should set the standard of students adhereing to the teaaching of the Church as the norm not the exception.

[50crowley]

01:56 PM on 06/16/2011

I do not agree with the decision either, but you need a better argument against it. Simply stating 18-20 year olds drink and have sex because that is what they do and nobody should try to stop them isn't good enough. CUA is a private university and they can make whatever rules they want.
I think the problem with single-sex dorms is that students who would have engaged in unruly behavior otherwise are simply going to do it off campus (at bars, houses, apartments, other universities, etc), where the school has much less control over their safety. If you get alcohol poisoning at CUA there are measures in place to ensure you get to a hospital, but if it happens in the basement of some GW frat house, you have no guarantee that someone will be there to help.

[Marv Evre]

12:05 AM on 06/16/2011

I like how the women, and focuses mainly on their sexuality. The only thing more important than God is sexism and double standards.

[Lisa Ann Homic]

07:44 PM on 07/10/2011

women do set the tone of a culture. It's not sexist at all. And a gentleman would say it is true.

[Calculator]

09:08 PM on 06/15/2011

Didn't know sex was uncivilized. This is news to me!

[JudgeCCrater]

06:21 PM on 06/15/2011

"I would have thought that young women would have a civilizing influence on young men."

Mr. Garvey doesn't know too many young women. Perhaps he felt that they would carefully dismount from their old-time bicycles - making sure not to tear their bloomers - and lecture the local male population on the hazards of sloth and the deviltry of alcohol.

[onwisconsin]

05:42 PM on 06/15/2011

I went to an undergrad institution that did not have co-ed dorms back in my day. Didn't seem to stop ANYONE from having sex.

I have taught college students for quite a while now who live in on-campus housing as well as off-campus housing. I don't think there's a difference in the amount of sex either group is enjoying.

The fact is that college students (most of them anyway) are going to have sex. They are adults and they have the right to do as they please in that area.

The only worry I have is about the connection between the use of alcohol and drugs and the incidence of date rape, violent and or risky behaviors. We have a responsibility as a university community to work to reduce these. We do not have the right to interfere with students' sex lives if both are willing partners.

[50crowley]

02:04 PM on 06/16/2011

If you think college students are adults, you are out of touch with reality. Adults manage their own finances, maintain their belongings, are responsible for their work loads, and owe up to the consequences of their actions. The vast majority of college students do not.

CUA has every right to interfere with student's sex lives. The students have agreed to come to the university and abide by it's rules. If you don't like them, don't go there.

[onwisconsin]

05:05 PM on 06/16/2011

I'm well aware the CUA is a private religious institution and as such, can choose to do whatever it wants with its dormitories.

However, I take issue with your assessment of college students. Many college students conduct themselves as adults by your definition. They are paying their own way through school, working sometimes 2-3 jobs to do it, maintaining apartments, making car payments, and still making their grades as full time students. Many of them are on academic scholarships or financial aid that requires that they maintain a certain grade point.

They are young adults. We give them support through university health services (though they pay insurance to use that) and free counseling when needed. They, like any other adult, sometimes do not make good choices and they have to deal with the consequences just as any adult would.

I don't know where you get your idea of "the vast majority of college students" but I teach on a university campus and interact with them every day. I sometimes get frustrated with a few but the vast majority are here trying to make something of themselves.

[50crowley]

03:54 PM on 06/15/2011

The Huffington Post is intentionally attacking the Catholic church in this article by twisting President Garvey's words. Never did he "decry" women or blame them for the sexual appetite of men.

If you people actually read Garvey's article, you would realize that when he says "I would have thought that young women would have a civilizing influence on young men", he is referring to social drinking behaviors and not sex. In other words, he thought that because most women cannot drink as much as men, that men would slow their drinking down to match their female counterparts in social situations. Instead, women have a tendency to speed up and try to match men, thus drinking beyond their limits.

[jessica6986]

02:27 PM on 06/15/2011

I went to CUA, and I wish they had single sex dorms then. I would have loved to been spared the 2am fire alarms in the middle of winter.

[kjames196]

01:29 PM on 06/15/2011

Single sex halls are not much different than single sex dorms. For there to be a moderating influence, the opposite sex has to live in close enough proximity (seeing people when they enter and leave their rooms). My own experience was when I lived in a single-sex dorm the atmosphere was like "Animal House"; drinking and high fives for bedding women (with number being more important than any relationship). Co-ed dorms (by room) had none of that. While Catholic University's proclamation may be good marketing, it won't change the culture.

[Alvin Sherman]

12:50 PM on 06/15/2011

3. CUA is a private, Catholic school. According to the Catholic church, sex outside of wedlock *is* a problem; excessive drinking *is* a problem; since half of their students are under 21, breaking the law *IS* A PROBLEM. All of those things have nothing to do with sexism. Single-sex dorms should not be surprising. Initiatives to curb sex or binge drinking should not be surprising. You signed up for it, you abide by the rules - or you GTFO. Whether or not his decision is motivated by his own sexist beliefs is completely irrelevant, given the university's patronage and overall mission.

4. Despite Garvey's very valid observations about drinking and hooking up at CUA, segregating dorms by sex will accomplish exactly NOTHING. The idea of someone policing such activities by simply not allowing men and women in the same dorm is laughable. Frankly, any current or future student intimidated by this new policy probably isn't all that clever.

[duffey36]

01:41 PM on 06/15/2011

Alvin, on your fourth point, you're right. Binge drinking and sex are two impulses that college students will find the resources to act on, regardless of dorm segregation. Point three is true as well; but, just because they are allowed to do it doesn't mean they should be exempt from criticism. The students must abide by the policy of the school they CHOOSE to attend, true; but that school's policy is wrong. Sex out of wedlock is NOT a problem. No scientific evidence has ever shown a causal link between premarital sex and ANY detrimental life circumstances. The church is wrong, though, of course, entitled to be so.

[Alvin Sherman]

02:19 PM on 06/15/2011

Agreed on there being nothing wrong with casual sex - which is why I wouldn't apply to Catholic University. But if I had, these actions wouldn't really matter: it wouldn't stop me, and like you said, they (and by extension, the Catholic church) have a belief system that they're entitled and expected to stick to it in places under their purview. I don't know why it's anyone's right to criticize the school (and by extension, the church) for their beliefs in this particular instance, as it doesn't hurt anybody.

[jessica6986]

02:30 PM on 06/15/2011

I disagree, at CUA, they do not allow visitors into dorms after 2am. This is monitored by a security guard and is strictly enforced. It will be pretty easy to identify who an "illegal" visitor who is of the wrong sex.

[Alvin Sherman]

12:50 PM on 06/15/2011

As usual, biased journalism rules the day and manages to stir up misplaced anger.

1. Garvey didn't sound sexist at all, if you read what he actually said. "I would have thought that young women would have a *civilizing influence* on young men." = "I would have thought that young men would have enough pride in themselves to not look like a drunken jack*** in front of attractive women." I don't know why that sounds like an admonition of women; if anything, it is correctly scolding men for not acting like men.

2. As for women trying to keep up with men drink-wise, even a casual visit to any college in America will prove that to be the truth. You'll go to parties, and see 115 or 120-lbs women pounding beers and shots in perfect tempo with guys nearly 2x their weight - any *rational* person responsible for someone else's well-being would want to curb that behavior. It's safe to think that the president of an expensive private (and DRY) university would do whatever they can to keep from obtaining the "party school" stigma.

[duffey36]

01:42 PM on 06/15/2011

Now, points one and two are where you are wrong. Garvey is not just stating his expectations of young women; he is essentially blaming them and holding them responsible for the promiscuity of their male counterparts. He "decried" the young girls of CUA. It's the age old Adam and Eve argument that women draw men into sinfulness, also reminiscent of the claim that a woman who gets raped was asking for it because she was dressed a certain way. Exploring opportunities for sexual encounters is not bad behavior, and women shouldn't be blamed for leading men astray, nor be held responsible for the misbehavior of their male counterparts. Why did he not say that the young men should serve as civilizing influences on the women? Because that's not our "role". The Catholic Church is sexist, and Garvey adheres to its tenets. Your second point is correct but its premise is not. A president of a dry university SHOULD curb binge drinking, as it is problematic and dangerous for students, especially in Brookland, DC. But again the male/female comparison doesn't hold. Girls levels of consumption is no more influenced by the guys at a party than their own girl friends. Having been to many parties at CUA, I can attest that most people at the party aren't "pounding beers and shots". Some are, and even fewer act completely out of line. But women and men are equally represented in that minority and it isn't a battle of the sexes.

[Alvin Sherman]

02:49 PM on 06/15/2011

Again, I don't think he's holding women responsible. I think he is blaming men for not recognizing that, when in the presence of a woman, they should exercise better judgement. Whether or not that's relevant in the 21st century is debatable, but it's not a *bad* thing. The example I used with a friend of mine was holding a door open for a woman: that train of thought doesn't mean that a woman should instruct men to have manners an open the door, but rather that men should take the initiative themselves when in the presence of a woman.

Having also been to many parties at CUA, I have seen guys encouraging women to drink perhaps more than they should. We could go back and forth endlessly with personal anecdotes, but neither of us have a full view of the entire school body and the number of drinking-related instances that have come up. If anyone is as likely to be informed about such instances, it'll be the president of the school.

[50crowley]

02:38 PM on 06/15/2011

As a recent graduate of CUA, I can assure you that it is NOT a dry campus. There are limits to what an individual (21+) can bring on campus (one 6-pack per person or equivalent amount), but these rules are rarely enforced.

If Garvey wants to prevent CUA from obtaining "party school" status, he needs to force the school into becoming more selective in their admissions. There are a lot of students at CUA who are not serious about their studies. The arts and sciences program has an 80+ acceptance rate, which is absurd.You wouldn't believe how many sub-par students I have had to put up with in my required classes.

[WriterInThePink]

10:29 AM on 06/15/2011

What sexist garbage. Women aren't responsible for a man's sexual appetite. It's that kind of thinking that makes people blame rape victims instead of the person who did the raping. Then again, it's a Catholic university, so I'm not at all surprised. People will have sex whether or not you separate them.

[Kelly Jade]

09:54 AM on 06/15/2011

Yep, segregating the sexes because men can't help themselves and women need to be hidden from their view

Women, how dare you be so sexy. Your sexiness is to blame! Men just can't help themselves because they're men!

Hysterical.