On Sunday, the Georgetown University Student Association Senate passed a resolution calling for a discussion about implementing gender-blind housing at Georgetown. Also referred to as gender-neutral housing, gender-blind housing does not restrict students to traditional single-sex dorm pairings.
The legislation, which called for a conversation with administrators and student groups on a potential pilot program for the Gender-Blind Housing Program, was introduced by Senator Josh Mogil (SFS ’11).
Josh Mogil crafted the legislation calling for gender neutral housing at Georgetown.
Gender-blind housing often serves to accommodate LGBTQ students.
“The reason for this resolution was the shocking suicides in colleges and high schools across America,” Mogil said.
The resolution cited the incidents, which include the suicide of a gay Rutgers University student who was harassed by his roommate for his sexual identity. Chris Pigott (COL ’12) proposed an amendment that eliminated this reference, which failed by one vote.
Before the final vote, the Senate approved an amendment stating that GUSA will not take an official position in the discussion.
Colton Malkerson (COL ’13) supported the amendment because he said he was concerned the legislation would represent an implicit endorsement of gender-blind housing and force GUSA to “pick a side.”
Georgetown receives a small number of requests for special accommodations at the beginning of each school year, Mogil said. These students are provided a private room and bathroom in one of the dorms. University spokesperson Julie Green-Bataille did not respond to clarify why these students generally request special accommodations.
Mogil said that it is evident the University recognizes that traditional dorms are not ideal for some students. However, Mogil believes the current policy stigmatizes these students’ situations by isolating them from the traditional freshman experience of having a roommate.
Mogil also emphasized the role that housing plays in student safety, citing physical and verbal abuse.
One of the four senators who abstained from voting, Nathaniel Tisa (SFS ’14) disagreed with this interpretation.
“If this group is concerned about safety, that’s a separate issue from housing,” Tisa said.
GU Pride was not notified by Mogil about the resolution, according to the group’s secretary and historian Kevin Mercer (COL ’11), but supports gender-neutral housing as a way of including members of the LGBTQ community who do not identify as male, female, or within the gender binary.
Mercer said that gender neutral housing combats the heteronormative thinking implied by the logic behind single-sex dorms.
Matt Cantarino, staff editor of the Georgetown Academy, the University’s only Catholic student-run newspaper, also said he did not perceive the need for a change in Georgetown’s housing policy.
“I have hard time seeing the urgency of this issue, as I think a lot of Hoyas will,” he said.
Cantarino said that he would participate in the coming dialogue “if it comes down to something that involves the spiritual identity of the students and the University.”
It remains unclear whether that will be the case, but LGTBQ Resource Center Director Sivagami Subbaraman said the resolution will only begin a dialogue.
“We are just beginning the conversation, and we will have to be thoughtful about … how we can best meet the needs of our students within the larger context of being a Jesuit institution,” Subbaraman said.
Shane Windmeyer, founder and executive director of Campus Pride, an organization that provides information about the LGBTQ environment on college campuses, echoed the importance of dialogue about the broader issues of tolerance, and said it is just one part of the puzzle of what needs to be done in residence halls.
“What will really change Georgetown is the attitudes of students, along with the administration, that accept students for who they are,” Windmeyer said.
Mogil’s idea is pointless and quixotic. If you have gender blind housing, you’ll just see opposite sex couples living together – and I cannot imagine a single RA that would want to also be a relationship counselor.
PS: Georgetown is a Catholic university, for those who forgot. This will never happen. So don’t waste your time.
@Phil, Never say never.
Good job getting the conversation going GUSA – but why stay neutral? Not only will gender-blind housing be approved here sooner or later, but it’s ALSO the right thing to do to allow students to live with whoever they please. Take a stand!
Thanks for covering this important issue, but what is the Voice’s fetish with interviewing members of the Georgetown Academy as voices of dissent? If you’re seeking a similarly narrow-minded interpretation of Catholic theology, there are plenty of other groups on campus that are willing to spout off, just so you know.
Senator Mogil’s statements are his own and do not reflect the opinion of GUSA as a whole.
The approved resolution was decidedly neutral; the resolution as proposed by Mogil was heavily amended before passage,
Actually, the proposed resolution was not heavily amended. A few words were stricken and a few words were added, but the resolution passed by the Senate is very similar to that passed in committee. Look on the box account.
And for anyone who has yet to actually READ the resolution, you would know that it calls for a working group to discuss gender-blind housing for freshman dorms for students who opt out of traditional dorm accommodations, not upperclassmen housing.
Also, Tisa’s argument doesn’t make sense and shows he clearly lacks the ability to understand nuanced campus issues. Housing and student safety are completely related. If a student feels unsafe and/or is harassed by their roommate, which is the concern of the bill, then that absolutely has something to do with campus safety.
Senator Mogil, I presume?
Be careful with claiming “nuance” in this discussion. I’ve read the (unamended, couldn’t find the amended one?) resolution online, and feel like it’s got a nuance of its own. And, quite frankly, I find that the “nuanced” suggestion claiming rooming with same-sex heterosexuals leads to abuse and suicide to be insulting.
Roommate abuse happens regardless of gender, and is dealt with appropriately here. I don’t see the absolute relation between gender blind housing and safety. A quick look at the DPS blogroll shows a number of assaults in public areas, but none in a dorm room. Be careful with this logic.
With Love,
The Allied part of LGBTQA.
nope, not mr. mogil . just a student.
but really… \I find that the “nuanced” suggestion claiming rooming with same-sex heterosexuals leads to abuse and suicide to be insulting\ a bit much, even for some anonymous online comment section.
i think somebody has again, failed to understand what the bigger picture is about. the issue about students who feel unsafe or uncomfortable living in traditional housing situations and about finding a different option to the university’s current policy for those students. roommate abuse isnt always dealt with appropriately here, or at every school because many times it goes unreported –and im talking about all kinds of abuse for all students. the discussion that will hopefully take place is to start the conversation and hopefully find a better alternative to the current policy.
First, the suggestion (nuanced or otherwise) that same-sex housing leads to abuse IS insulting.
Second, I’m not sure how roommate abuse is at ALL related to “gender-neutral” housing. It would seam fair to state that roommate abuse at Georgetown has to do with the individual relationships of roommates regardless of sexual orientation. Can someone demonstrate a causal relationship between gender identification and roommate abuse? Seeing as the recent suicides had NOTHING to do with gender ID but had to do with sexual orientation, this resolution appears to be the devious usage of a legitimate problem (roommate abuse based on perceived sexual orientation) to further a political agenda.