more comments...
« Bushmaster556 wrote on Saturday, Apr 02 at 04:56 PM »
« eipiplusone wrote on Saturday, Mar 19 at 08:25 AM »
I worry that people have unrealistic expectations of what dormitories do for students. The university pitches the system as one that assists students with their transition to college life. How?!?!

As soon as a student leaves their dorm, they are free to drink, smoke, and raise hell as much as they want. Curfew is always broken by simply taking guests in an unmonitored door, and I wouldn't be surprised if people brought beer and other forbidden items in the alternate doors as well.

The idea that RAs act as mentors is also flawed. I see my RA only when I enter through the main dormitory door, submit to room inspections, and exit my place for a fire drill. The university and parents have created this false idea that an RA is like some big brother or sister that holds your hand through university living and make sure you don't stray from the path of perfection. They don't.

Since both rules and RAs don't live up to the false image of residence life at the university, should the university abolish their rules? Should they attempt to better enforce their laws? Neither answer is correct. Instead, the university should learn to be realistic. It should stop promoting an idea of a dorm as a safe, sexless, sinless place to live. They shouldn't allow parents to believe that their kids will be monitored by RAs or other campus workers. Instead, they should stress the importance of preparing one's child for independent living BEFORE they leave for school. They should urge parents to be realistic about the facts that people in their late teens and early twenties may have opposite sex visitors instead of holding up a now rarely enforced rule. Now is the time to be rational, rather than pathetically idealistic.

@ceciladkins:

Many upperclassman who live in the dorms do so because the location is great. It takes some only two minutes to get to class, while many off campus students must deal with bus schedules or parking. The apartments just off campus are usually either very expensive or of very poor quality, so some just find it easier to stay in the dorms. There is nothing wussy about living in the dorms, unless you follow the inaccurate assumption that the dorm rules are forever and always strictly enforced.

Furthermore, your rape comment is also inaccurate. Students are not calling for unescorted individuals to have full access to the dorms. They simply want those of the opposite sex that they are with to be allowed to enter at any hour. The doors would still require card swiping to unlock, so your idea of some creeper raping students would not become a more elevated risk because of the rule change.
« whimseyjenny32 wrote on Friday, Mar 18 at 10:07 AM »
« patrick666 wrote on Friday, Mar 04 at 05:11 PM »
« snowbird wrote on Sunday, Feb 27 at 02:20 PM »
The author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" has been giving this advice to students fighting smoking bans:



You should look around your campus and think about the sources of the information you've been given by people pushing these bans. I'm willing to bet about 90% of it will be at least partly supported by the "Smoke-Free" folks funded by taxes or grants from the NicoGummyPatchyProductPushers.



If you'd like to spread some information from the "other side" download and print out "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans" Just Google "V.Gen5H" and click on The Health Arguments.



It's a one-sided Tom Paine style "rabble rouser," but its facts are accurate and their presentation is both honest and presented in an easily readable print-out format. Bind it in slidebar grip clear plastic term paper covers and spread it around. If you'd like to customize it for your campus go right ahead. Email Cantiloper on the AOL system if you want help.



The people pushing these college bans are professionals. Google Smoke-Free Campuses and see the sorts of information you get and where their funding comes from. Don't fall for their tricks. For example: one of their favorites is the Bandwagon Fallacy: "Everyone ELSE is doing it! Don't be the LAST!" Actually, before the big organizations got involved three years ago there were less than 100 totally smoke-banned campuses. They've built that up to about 400 now, but that's still less than 10% of the nationwide total.



There has never yet been a single scientific study showing any degree of harm from the concentration and duration of exposure to secondary smoke that anyone would get outdoors on a campus. If anyone wants to dispute that go right ahead: try to find a study (Not a report, statement, opinion, factsheet, or website, but a STUDY!) with accessible data that shows differently and post it up here to show I'm wrong. If I miss it somehow, again, just email me at Cantiloper over on AOL: I stand firmly behind what write.