As someone who went to a large state school, this post blows my mind. I can’t imagine this level of restraint around parties.
My fraternity and half a dozen other groups would host parties with 2-300 people each weekend. Most groups hosting these large parties had practices in place to ensure everyone was safe (e.g. sober drivers, cutting people off who were too intoxicated, etc.).
Attendance was more valuable when events conflicted because it became a social status symbol. That being said, prominent groups coordinated with each other. I also disagree with characterizing throwing a party during finals as a “facepalm”. My friend group always prioritized studying and grades, and I believe others should as well. I believe to a greater extent that they should be given the freedom to make mistakes, or have fun if they believe themselves able to manage both their studies and their social life.
I doubt that diligent campus security could do a better job than responsible and respectful hosts and friends. Giving students resources to host safe parties would be more effective since they are closer to the source of issues and can stop small issues before they become bigger issues. The same resources could encourage other safe practices like not over-imbibing, traveling with trusted friends, etc., and would keep students safer than any campus security could, while giving students more freedom and responsibility.
I base this assessment in part off of personal experience. At my school one year, a girl went to a frat party with her friend, and got too drunk. The fraternity made sure she and her friend had a ride home. Her friend made sure she got to her dorm room safe. After getting home, she wandered out of her building to the nearby fire department, which neighbors the famous police office. She fell asleep in front of the bay door and was run over and killed by a firefighter responding to a call who did not see her.
This story demonstrates 1) the effort that other students made to ensure safety and 2) the failure of campus security to catch a massive safety issue right under their noses. I feel terrible for the girl and her family. Their experience was tragic and heartbreaking. That tragedy resulted does not negate the fact that all involved did everything they could (shy of not having the party) to ensure safety and campus security could not have done anything more without tucking her in to bed and watching her all night, which I find unreasonable.
As you said, parties can be dangerous. Hosts and attendees being cautious and responsible will go much further than more vigilant campus security.
To be clear, campus security didn’t actually hang out and watch parties. The hosts were supposed to manage their own parties (within boundaries set by the university). And I’m not saying Stanford’s policies were perfect or even close. But I do think they did a decent job of letting students host parties on campus with keeping a degree of awareness of what happened on campus.
Stanford was also known for allowing students to drink with friends in their own rooms, in undergrad dorms, with the doors open. It was quite strongly discouraged to close the doors when drinking. These weren’t “parties” for these purposes. I think this was an excellent policy — it encouraged being social, it helped keep everyone safe, and it steered undergrad drinking in a more mature and safer direction. Sadly, IMO, this is no longer the case:
That sounds like a good policy to me as well. I think the “they will do it anyway” logic is a slippery slope, but underage drinking in college is so mainstream that preventing it is a Sisyphean task. IMO it is best to discourage but encourage a safe atmosphere when students inevitably ignore recommendations.
My fraternity and half a dozen other groups would host parties with 2-300 people each weekend. Most groups hosting these large parties had practices in place to ensure everyone was safe (e.g. sober drivers, cutting people off who were too intoxicated, etc.).
Attendance was more valuable when events conflicted because it became a social status symbol. That being said, prominent groups coordinated with each other. I also disagree with characterizing throwing a party during finals as a “facepalm”. My friend group always prioritized studying and grades, and I believe others should as well. I believe to a greater extent that they should be given the freedom to make mistakes, or have fun if they believe themselves able to manage both their studies and their social life.
I doubt that diligent campus security could do a better job than responsible and respectful hosts and friends. Giving students resources to host safe parties would be more effective since they are closer to the source of issues and can stop small issues before they become bigger issues. The same resources could encourage other safe practices like not over-imbibing, traveling with trusted friends, etc., and would keep students safer than any campus security could, while giving students more freedom and responsibility.
I base this assessment in part off of personal experience. At my school one year, a girl went to a frat party with her friend, and got too drunk. The fraternity made sure she and her friend had a ride home. Her friend made sure she got to her dorm room safe. After getting home, she wandered out of her building to the nearby fire department, which neighbors the famous police office. She fell asleep in front of the bay door and was run over and killed by a firefighter responding to a call who did not see her.
This story demonstrates 1) the effort that other students made to ensure safety and 2) the failure of campus security to catch a massive safety issue right under their noses. I feel terrible for the girl and her family. Their experience was tragic and heartbreaking. That tragedy resulted does not negate the fact that all involved did everything they could (shy of not having the party) to ensure safety and campus security could not have done anything more without tucking her in to bed and watching her all night, which I find unreasonable.
As you said, parties can be dangerous. Hosts and attendees being cautious and responsible will go much further than more vigilant campus security.