Recently there has been much discussion regarding the need to revise the current alcohol policy on campus. The FRIENDS group brought the debate to the forefront once again by submitting a proposal five weeks ago to revise the current alcohol policy.
The proposal conains several policy changes, including the abolishment of the current system of party and keg registration, the creation of a Party Engagement Group (PEG) “to advise students of preventive measures to help them avoid personal harm,” the removal of the designation of “alcohol-free residential housing” or “dry dorms,” an increase in the number of areas for student socializing on campus where regulated alcohol usage might be an option, and a revision of the violations and sanctions of the University policy to ensure compliance with relevant laws and with Georgetown’s mission.
So what’s the verdict? How do people feel about alcohol on campus? It depends on who you ask. The Hoya’s editorial board seems to think that some aspects of the proposal may actually help increase student access to alcohol while lessening the consequences for underage drinking and allowing ways for hosts to skirt the rules. In contrast to The Hoya, The Voice’s editorial board expressed disappointment with Res Life’s recent move to cap party registrations and branded the move as a way of adding more unnecessary rules. To that extent, The Voice advocates changing the recent cap, or as the FRIENDS group’s proposes, eliminating it all together.
Either way you look at it, it’s a good discussion, particularly for the minority community. The minority community seems to view this issue through a totally different lens. Many people suggest that the minority community’s emphasis when partying is on dancing and not drinking. I’m not saying that people of color don’t drink or get drunk, but the social norm for the community of color dictates something different. People of color look for parties where you can dance first and drink second.
So what does this mean? First, that the emphasis on dancing produces a less dire need to completely revamp the alcohol policy in favor of taking small practical steps to improve what already exists and keep what seems to be working. Second, the alcohol issue highlights the distinct social norms of the minority and majority communities and illuminates the even larger issue of much more significance, the social segregation on campus.
Many students of color feel that a complete revamping of the alcohol policy is too drastic. A more practical approach would emphasize safety as the number one priority. Building community, although not necessarily with alcohol, is a wiser approach.
Yes, alcohol is a part of campus life, but for some much more than others. In talking to fellow students of color, including Latinos, African Americans, and Asian Americans, the need to curb unnecessary rules is important. For example, eliminating the cap on off-campus party registrations and/or even consider eliminating the 50-percent-plus rule in apartments, where students who are over 21 cannot drink if half of their roommates aren’t 21, seem like reasonable suggestions. It makes sense that those students who are over 21 be allowed to drink with other students who are 21 in their apartments if they want to. It is not fair to, in a sense, force them out of their place should they want to hold a social that includes alcohol but the majority of their roommates aren’t 21.
Until the University’s social atmosphere redevelops a tradition of holding events on campus where regulated and monitored alcohol use is an available option, then students must understand that some measure of university involvement is merited and justifiable for the sake of safety. As the Voice’s editorial board noted, registered parties aren’t the problem, so it makes little sense to limit them. Moreover, this limited University involvement insures that DPS is aware of student flow and activity so that it can respond to an emergency should one arise.
That aside, however, thee is an issue of much more significance: the social segregation on campus. Like it or not, believe it or not, the majority and minority communities are segregated. People of different races and ethnicities rarely sit together in the cafeteria, join the same club, or attend the same socials. The party scene is perhaps the best example of this segregation. There are “black-and-brown” parties where people “get their groove on,” not necessarily with alcohol, and then there are “white” parties, described as “chug-and-mingle” fests.
This type of segregated community breeds stereotypes, misunderstandings and societal tension. We shouldn’t go about living as a community of disassociated individuals. There is much to be shared and learned from one another. Whatever it may be that keeps people from sitting with each other-be it tastes, interests, or affinities-let us not lose sight of the type of Georgetown that we are trying to create, one in which people care and respect each other. This can only be accomplished once we refuse to let those factors keep us from meeting new people and making new friends. This should be the goal and the intended result of revising the alcohol policy-integrating our community. If alcohol is keeping students from interacting with each other, then tinkering with the policy in appropriate ways might bring us closer together. Regardless, this segregation is something to think about and integration something for which to aim.
Luis A. Torres is a junior in the College. He serves on the GUSA Assembly and is a SAC Commissioner.
