Anonymous wrote:Wow, that article really was depressing. Interesting that there's been quite a bit about Stanford in the news lately - including their idiotic "harmful language/forbidden words" nonsense. Too bad. I always thought Stanford would remain independent of all the liberal nuttery, but I guess not.

The forbidden language thing was for the IT people who wrote official content for their website. Stop letting clickbait get you worked up!

Anonymous wrote:Stanford is a weird place with lots of sleazy types

It’s the oddest one out of hypsm if we are being honest

Keep working at it, PP. If you keep poo pooing Stanford, maybe someday someone will add Columbia to HYPSM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Undergraduate culture” is a synonym for misogyny, bad behavior masked as exploitation and inequality.

It’s time colleges are wiped clean of Greek culture and other clubs that drive division and discrimination. This needs to be done everywhere.

A-FREAKING-MEN

+2
As someone who went to college with Greek parties in the early 90s, she definitely idealizes all the fun and leaves out all the date rape culture and crap we had to deal with that was much more normalized back then with no concept of consent that resembles what young women expect today. Just look at how many people re-watch movies from the 80s with their kids and become disgusted.

That’s not to say that I don’t think that there are serious issues these days around young adult culture in terms of loneliness and social capital. But leaving out social media from the discussion is problematic. Also, having studied abroad in a very progressive European country in the 90s, I was able to have a ton of fun without some privileged douche bag creating a sandbar and a zip line.

I have no problem with the Greek houses going away, but it sounds like Stanford has thrown out the baby with the bath water. Labeling groups by only numbers and letters is dehumanizing.

For those who didn’t read the article, I think the conclusion sums it nicely:

We have so many words to describe the ways an institution can be problematic. It is easy to find faults, scrape crests off walls, and feel like you have done a good deed. But there are far fewer stock phrases to articulate what is lost when an organization is destroyed. There are no parties anymore. I want to live with my friends. It’s hard to name the pain of absence.

An empty house is safe. A blank slate is fair. In the name of safety and fairness, Stanford destroyed everything that makes people enjoy college and life.

Stanford is a weird place with lots of sleazy types

It’s the oddest one out of hypsm if we are being honest

I went to a large state university with a reputation for being something of a party school, but even in the early 90s they were already starting to be nervous about liability and reputation. Fraternities were required to have a guest list, ID checks, and wristbands for parties—just like the example the author gives of the now-downgraded KA party. It sounds like Stanford is just now catching up.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I appreciate some of what the writer is saying (The Band sounds hilarious), but it gives me pause when he says, "Some incident would spark an investigation." Like all these incidents are trivial. But, is that really the case? Does the author have any idea what tge incidents are?

The author is female. The only thingStanford needs to reform is it’s disciplinary process so it doesn’t have another suicidal like that of Katie Meyer.

Ok, I stand corrected on that, but you didn't address the concerns I raised.

Anonymous wrote:I think the article is tool long and boring and who cares.

I thought it was fascinating. I almost went to Stanford in the 90s so maybe that's why.

Anonymous wrote:“Undergraduate culture” is a synonym for misogyny, bad behavior masked as exploitation and inequality.

It’s time colleges are wiped clean of Greek culture and other clubs that drive division and discrimination. This needs to be done everywhere.

A-FREAKING-MEN

I think the article is tool long and boring and who cares.

Wow, that article really was depressing. Interesting that there's been quite a bit about Stanford in the news lately - including their idiotic "harmful language/forbidden words" nonsense. Too bad. I always thought Stanford would remain independent of all the liberal nuttery, but I guess not.

Anonymous wrote:Times change. Everyone likes to remember "the good old days." Stanford has liability to worry about, as our society is more litigious these days

I think their concern is less about litigation than it is about public shaming.

Anonymous wrote:I know three kids at Stanford now and all report they don’t have friends or a social life. This was surprising for me to hear given what I knew from stanford alums but this essay provides context that explains it.

That is an incredibly depressing thing to hear. Human beings crave community. What an awful experience we’re giving to the people who are some of our “best and brightest”. How will they lead when their turn comes?

Times change. Everyone likes to remember "the good old days." Stanford has liability to worry about, as our society is more litigious these days

I know three kids at Stanford now and all report they don’t have friends or a social life. This was surprising for me to hear given what I knew from stanford alums but this essay provides context that explains it.