Death, Life, Human Connection, & Coeducation

, by Joseph Nucci,

When I was 11 years old, my father passed away unexpectedly. Death is a reality that most of us do not have to deal with until adulthood but those of us that have experienced this at such a young age know that it can become very engrained into our development. I know the way I deal with this is by being super friendly and outgoing with everyone. By being friendly with everyone, I can avoid becoming friends with anyone. After all, what is the point of becoming close to somebody if they are just going to leave you? I do not want to imply that I am incapable of making friends but this is the first line of defense my personality provides. This is surely a combination of a predisposition I would have regardless of whether or not my father was alive with my extroverted personality intensified by his death. It is something I have noticed about myself time and time again.

One of my favorites parts about college had been that people don’t know about him. Of course my friends know and I am very honest about his deceased status but at home, it is something that everyone knows about. I was able to get away from all of that and I really enjoyed that coming to Wesleyan. I recently spoke about his death at “In the Company of Others” event during New Student Orientation. I decided to speak so publicly about it because I wanted to let any incoming students know that they are not the only ones with a dead parent. While my experience does not reflect everyone’s, by speaking about it, I hoped to destroy the feelings of loneliness that can be felt when a young person has such a tragic experience. When you learn that someone else is like you in anyway, no matter how big or small, it establishes a connection, a sense of recognition, and a sense of belonging. It says to you, “Hey! I’m like that too. I understand.”

I want to take this time to discuss how my father’s death has affected my relationships at Wesleyan. As an out and proud gay man, my relationships (both platonic friendships and lust-filled romances) have been constantly affected by the death of my father. My understanding of masculinity is, to my knowledge, different from many others. Throughout much of my childhood and adolescence, my sexuality and fatherless status have left me lacking the male touch. In America, a man touching another man is often seen as a taboo. After my father passed, there was no immediate male figure in my life that could show me physical affection. Furthermore, my trust issues with men would have inhibited any potential for other male family members to establish such a bond with me. Additionally, any physical connection with another man I could experience has been stunted since I came out as a gay man when I was 17. Straight men are wary of showing me too much physical affection. When a guy slaps another guy on the ass, it often has nothing to do with either one of them being gay. It means a touchdown was scored or something else exciting may have happened that warrants such a bonding moment. The only people that slap my ass are my closest friends who do not care about my sexuality, or guys who I am 50 percent sure have a crush on me. Either way, I’m flattered. I do not blame straight guys for being wary about putting their arm around me, hitting my butt or touching me in any way. My hormones are wired to be physically and emotionally attracted to men and when straight guys touch me because they are my friends, or maybe they are just non-judgmental and not thinking about it, they do get my heart racing sometimes (this happens especially when I don’t know them that well). Perhaps some of them do not touch me because they are homophobic, or maybe they are not the touching type, or maybe they don’t want to give me the wrong impression. It doesn’t really matter to me. I think it makes a lot of sense. It is something that I am continuing to recognize and differentiate. I think I can usually successfully tell the difference between platonic touches and flirting. Nevertheless, the male touch, that bond, was something I didn’t really experience until college.

One of the first friends I made here on the swim and water polo team was very unafraid of showing me physical affection. I immediately recognized it as platonic and was so happy to have met someone who was so comfortable around me. Later my freshman year, I met another friend in the spring term. This guy and I, we got along. When I met this person, I thought to myself, we have the potential to be friends. This excited me. Unlike the first friend I mention, I found this friend to be extremely physically attractive. More than that, he was very forward and nice to me. I could tell he really wanted to be my friend and I do not think he came on too strongly at all but nevertheless it completely freaked me out. I think on one hand, I was so happy to have found a friend but on the other hand I was repulsed at myself for being initially attracted to him and I hated that I was capable of some sort of friendship sabotage.

Andrew Sullivan touches upon this through his locker room metaphor in his book Virtually Normal. He describes how every adolescent boy dreams of being invisible in the girl’s locker room to gaze with wonder at the body of the other. Gay adolescent boys get this wish granted except it becomes a cruel cosmic joke. The objects of our desire get hung all around us but we cannot touch them. We shouldn’t stare either. From a very young age, every gay person learns the rituals of deceit and repression. Some people may call this dynamic oppressive; I refer to it as a harsh reality of being a minority in terms of sexual orientation. Most people are not gay. Unfortunate for me, but that is the truth. It is a cross that I will always bear and I deal with it just fine most of the time. My developing new friendship was not one of those times. I was afraid my new friend would know my secret feelings. Combined with my pre-existing daddy and abandonment issues, the friendship was too much for me to handle. So I pulled away. I invented every reason to justify my backing away from him, even though it was complete and utter self-projection.

I have grown a lot since freshman year. I have recognized the issues I have and worked on them. I consider both of these individuals my friends to this day, and I feel comfortable showing them physical affection. We all have problems. Some of us just have different problems to have. While I am a cuddly person, I think I show a healthy, regular amount of physical affection and I owe my ability to do that to the friends I have made here. Both of these individuals I have described so far are brothers of Psi U.

I lived in Psi U this past summer and had an opportunity to get to know some of the brothers that were staying there as well. That summer was a really spiritual experience for me and I grew up a lot. I overcame a lot of my abandonment issues and some of my daddy issues as well and I really felt like a mature person at the end of it. I also developed a friendship that is particularly important to me. This brother in particular is an extremely non-judgmental person and isn’t afraid of showing physical affection. The way he communicates with everyone is physical. It’s little things, a slight touch on the arm, a head scratch, a pat on the leg. Sometimes he puts his foot against yours if you’re sitting next to each other. I don’t think he does this on purpose but he does do this to everyone he is friends with. We even shared the same bed a couple of nights. It was awesome. It took me right back to the fourth grade— my dad was still alive so there were no abandonment issues and I hadn’t hit puberty yet so there was no awkward chemistry. It was really great. Even better, it gave me the confidence to show other friends more physical affection. It was a ripple effect in the best sense. Once I was drunk and was resting my head against another Psi U brother’s shoulder for a second but I immediately picked my head up. I did it partially out of habit and out of respect— I didn’t want him to think I was getting too touchy-feely with him. He immediately got pissed and demanded that I put my head back where it was. I eagerly dug my head back into his comfy shoulder. I remember feeling so happy that he was so comfortable with me. That I was just like one of the boys and that this very basic, and essential human interaction, was finally accessible to me.

When the administration decided to co-educate the fraternities, I had such a visceral reaction. I was pissed. I believe the reason it affected me so much, is because fraternity culture literally improved my mental health. Every person I have described so far is currently an active member of Psi U. I could tell similar stories about a DKE brother. Fraternity culture was able to do this and there were no girls involved. In fact, I would say that fraternity culture accomplished all of this because there were no girls involved. While I have made some incredible friendships with women at Wesleyan, girls here have done next to nothing for my abandonment issues, and I do not think the members of Psi U would have been able to do this if girls had been present in the society.

Before I explain, I need to make a couple of points. First, I would never pledge a fraternity. It doesn’t interest me, not even a little bit. Secondly, if Psi U was a co-ed society my freshman year, I think I would’ve been more interested in pledging (I know freshmen cannot pledge anymore but bear with me), but I do not think I would have had such a positive experience with it if it were co-ed. Some people at Wesleyan may think its sexist to say that guys and girls act differently around one another. I think it’s realistic and true. As a gay guy, I have a lot of girlfriends. I also have a good number of guy friends. I almost never hang out with them at the same time. I am not suggesting that they are incapable of being friends with one another. In fact, some of them are rather close to one another. But different people bring out different sides of you. I connect to my guy friends and girl friends in different ways. It’s part of that connection I talked about— that sense of recognition and belonging. That sense you get when you’re talking to one of your good friends and you have one of those moments. Those moments those say “Hey! I’m like that too. I understand. This is why we’re friends.” I am not saying that guys and girls are incapable of having these moments, they surely are. But my friendships with men are complicated by my sexuality, and heterosexual friendships are no different.

Furthermore, this wasn’t something I initially bought into. I always pictured my guy friends and girl friends getting along but when I would bring one of my girlfriends to Psi U or a guy friend to lunch with my girls, it never really worked out the way I pictured it. They weren’t totally themselves. Not even the most down-to-earth of my friends were. Not quite. Perhaps it was just that they were not showing the side of themselves that they show with me. As I’ve said, people behave differently around different people and that’s ok. It’s fun to be a boy or be a girl; just because gender is a social construct doesn’t mean there is no value in “playing the role” society gives you. I am much more effeminate around my girl friends than I am around my guy friends and vice versa but I am not being fake. I am being social. Judith Butler calls gender an “agent of freedom and expression.” So while she warns about the dangers of oppression (which are all too real and scary), she touches upon something I have already brought up. She recognizes that we are social creatures. We look and crave that connection. That recognition. That moment that says, “this is why were friends.”

Some of the friends I have made, specifically the ones in Psi U, have given me this connection in a way they could not have possibly done so had they been co-ed. I believe this to be true because I was on the swim team and water polo team, both of which are co-ed. While I have shown and will continue to show my male teammates physical affection, the friendships I have made with my teammates have not affected me in the same way. I believe this partly has to do with the constant presence of girls on the team. The first couple of away tournaments, I spent the night in the hotel room with the girls, not my male teammates. I became friends with the female members before the guys. At the time, I still had trust issues with men, but I didn’t with women. It was easier for me. When I started hanging out in Psi U, I didn’t have this convenience but I am a more stable and better person because of it. This isn’t to say that I do not treasure and cherish the friendships I have made on the swim team. I have made friendships that I hope last a lifetime. But that’s not what this is about.

This is about the death of my father, my life since, human connection, and the co-education of Wesleyan’s fraternities. The absence of fraternities on this campus, for me, would’ve meant the absence of such significant life experiences. I consider this journey I have described as essential to my development as a person and I am not even a brother. Recognize how important the presence of an all-male group on campus was for me and then think about what it must mean for a member of one of these societies. While I have friendships with some brothers that I hope last a lifetime, I am still not a brother and never will fully understand what that bond of brotherhood must feel like. They have a connection to each other that I do not. I remember clearly when the WSA was having meetings discussing co-education and a girl I know was laughing when she told me about how some of the brothers were visibly upset that people wanted to take their fraternity away from them. How one was almost teary eyed and how “stupid and overdramatic” she thought he was being. Because after all, “It’s just a stupid frat,” she jeered. “Get over it.” I do not think she meant any harm. I think she viewed fraternity culture as exclusively having to do with parties. She couldn’t see why it was so important to him.

I fear that now that co-education is mandatory, students won’t be able to feel that connection that I found. They won’t be able to feel that recognition, that moment that says, “This is why were friends,” all of which that is so essential to the human experience. Now the experience I have had with fraternity culture certainly does not reflect the norm. Most members of fraternities on this campus probably cannot relate to my personal experience, but the point of this article isn’t to talk about my life as a gay person. The point isn’t to play the dead dad card. The point is, unless I tell you about my life, there is no way you would ever know what the presence of an all male group means to me. The human experience is complicated. When you say that a group of guys cannot live together, you are potentially robbing somebody of a truly special and consequential experience and nobody should have to describe their life at length and in detail to justify being in a fraternity.

Joseph Nucci is a member of the class of 2016. 

  • In Agreeance

    Fantastic. The administration has completely failed to acknowledge the valuable functions that residential single-sex societies provide. Mr Nucci has provided a moving example of one such function.

    I have not entirely made up my mind on the matter of coeducation, but the administration has done nothing to make me believe they have fully considered the disadvantages (as well as the benefits) of their decision.

    • english major

      agreement?

  • Human v Male Connection

    “when you say that a group of guys cannot live together” – they cannot live together in the same way that most groups of friends/people on this campus (over 6 people) cannot live together ..

    Unfortunately this article is reading as yet another example of male privilege. You focus on “potentially robbing somebody [males] of a truly special and consequential experience” instead of the fact that none of your female friends have access to such a space or experience. The reason these friends aren’t as comfortable in Psi U is likely because of the “boys only club” dynamic you say has been so crucial to you .. in your experience as a boy. So while you get to hang out in the mini-mansion clubhouses on campus your friends are either barred entry, invited over solely for sex, or allowed to hang out there with the discomfort of knowing the space is in no way theirs and they in no way belong.

    I agree that we should be less dismissive of people when they describe the many ways that fraternities have impacted their lives, and you’re right, “nobody should have to describe their life at length and in detail to justify being in a fraternity.” But it is very easy to say gender roles can be “fun” when the institution at hand is built for and recognizes the gender you identify with.

    None of this is to invalidate your personal and positive experiences with Psi U. But please remember that though you were not a part of the fraternity its members look just like you do, and for this you still found acceptance as one of the boys. Your “new perspective” on the issue once again excludes women and their lived experience from the conversation.

    • Snail

      Your inability to read this personal story without a gender lens makes me a bit sad. This isn’t simply “another example of male privilege,” rather it is another example of a “lived experience” that should be simply read for what it is. That you felt it necessary to enter “[males]” into a line that read “somebody” doesn’t show that you have lifted some sort of veil, or correctly interpreted the authors story. Rather, it shows a lack of empathy, the same type of lacking that does so much harm to women in our world today because of its scarcity in men. The author isn’t not focusing “on the fact that none of your [his] female friends have access to such a space or experience.” I would argue that he’s not focusing on anything. He is simply sharing his own experiences. What makes the world so beautiful is the fact that it isn’t as black and white as your interpretation implies. It is the myriad of individual lives, the chaos of interweaving stories, that make our book’s worth turning. So please, take Mr. Nucci’s for what he is, and try not to de-legitimize his story for what you are. You say you don’t want to “invalidate” his personal and positive experiences, yet that seems to be all you’ve done. No real progress comes without sacrifice, and I hope the next time you read a personal story like this that gives you a bad taste in the back of your throat, you won’t rush to speak out against it, and clear out the feeling. Instead, just maybe, you’ll decide that that taste is the sacrifice that both men and women might sometimes need to make if we hope to ever reach our full potential together.

      • right but

        … but this article was written with a gender lens. It is very much about the author’s sexuality, his loss, and his affinity for single-sex fraternities which means it is also very much about gender. This personal story does not live in a separate realm from the politics it concerns itself with. (it literally fleshes out an opinion on coeducation … )

        “It’s fun to be a boy or be a girl; just because gender is a social construct doesn’t mean there is no value in “playing the role” society gives you.”

        “I would say that fraternity culture accomplished all of this because there were no girls involved.”

        etc.

      • Joseph Nucci

        I would argue that anything any of us write is with a gendered lens. Even people who decide not to identify on the gender continuum write with a bias lens because that life experience is so unique.

      • Guest

        First, I disagree that Nucci’s post should be understood simply as a personal catharsis, and nothing more. While the specifics are unique to him, the general thrust of what he is describing is highly relatable to other men who have experienced the special camaraderie that exists in fraternities and other all-male environments.

        One of the more salient points he raises is that the brotherly bonding and intimacy he found so beneficial to his personal development is not something one typically finds in a coed environment. This is true for a variety of reasons, both social and biological. The fact of the matter is, the presence of women fundamentally changes the way men engage with one another–sometimes very subtly, men become more adversarial, more insecure, more guarded.

        When you respond to Nucci’s observation by insisting that male camaraderie is an example of “privilege” that must be deconstructed, what you’re really saying is this: “if women can’t have it, no one can.” Unfortunately, forcing fraternities to become co-ed will not make fraternal bonding accessible to women. It will simply make it less accessible to men. And, as Nucci’s story reflects, that is a cost we should not trivialize.

      • Sad alum

        Why can’t men love together? Is it so hard for you to comprehend that males and females may want to bond within their own genders? The fact that people as close minded as you now populate this campus is disgusting to me. People who think so narrowly and selfishly are actively ruining Wesleyan’s tradition.

        Also “single-sex fraternity” is redundant. All fraternities and sororities are single sex. They are supposed to be safe spaces to form bonds between people of the same gender identity. The idea that coeducation doesn’t end fraternities is a fallacy.

    • Yes

      There is value in single-sex organizations for many people, both male and female. A simple solution to satisfy your issue would be to encourage the development of sorority life on campus, and to provide several (or at least one) sororities with housing. To dismiss this offhand is to prove that your issue is not truly with male privilege or sexual assault – it is instead a blatant prejudice against all greek life.

      • Michael M Roth

        Roth has repeatedly blocked Rho Ep from getting a house and blocked sororities from starting in the first place. The new rule would also theoretically apply to sororities as well. The school has declared that no gender can have an organization that caters to only there gender. Men may not choose to bond with other men, women must be forcibly included and the same applies for women. Sorority and fraternity life are no dead at Wesleyan and will not be developed further. It is far too late for that.

    • Joseph Nucci

      thank you for your critique. I really do appreciate it. Now I’m going to critique your critique because that is what we love to do at Wesleyan. First of all, you bring up a few good points. Female identified students here do not have the same access to social groups as guys do and the groups that do exist do not have access to the same spaces. I am not arguing that at all. But when you say “none of your female friends have access to such a space or experience” you are reaffirming what my article is about. Single sexed spaces can be beneficial in ways that co-ed spaces are not. I wish Rho Ep had a house. I wish there were more options for all genders to bond in social groups on campus. Unfortunately, the administration has been very against that and that is something you will have to take up with Roth. Encouraging more social groups that could accept a variety of genders (female and genderqueer) would be preferred to dismantling ones that exist that cater to males, in my opinion.

      I personally never saw Psi U as a “boys only club” and never viewed their house as “a party mansion,” because while it is a male controlled space, I see girls there ALL THE TIME. Not just when they are having parties but during the week upstairs in the bedrooms hanging out and doing homework. I am sure that some girls DO feel uncomfortable walking into a space dominated by men like that, but its really important to not make specific experiences the over arching norm. The fact that some girls DO feel comfortable going to Psi U (as just friends by the way. I cannot speak for them but from what I’ve witnessed is girls are capable of hanging out there without sleeping with anyone and they feel pretty comfortable doing so) is evidence that this institution is not as oppressive as you are making it out to be. I think the fact that they are able to more or less accept me as well as other gay brothers is further evidence that they are able to transcend heteronormative stereotypes that are perpetuated by much of fraternity culture at other schools. Furthermore, I have never felt like the space was “mine” (except for when I lived there briefly over the summer). I am NOT a brother yet I still feel comfortable hanging out there, just like the girls they are friends with.

      The point of sharing my story wasn’t to brush over male privilege. In fact, I would say its a really weak critique to point out that I do not address the reality of my male privilege in this article because thats not what the article was about. You can interpret everything I do, think and say as “male privilege” because we live in a patriarchy and that’s unfortunately how things are. I didn’t bring up gender equity, sexual assault, or any of that because lets be honest, you’re not saying anything new on the subject. The difference is, I didn’t try. I attempted to expand the conversation into other areas. thats all.

      • Guest

        First, I disagree that Nucci’s post should be understood simply as a personal catharsis, and nothing more. While the specifics are unique to him, the general thrust of what he is describing is highly relatable to other men who have experienced the special camaraderie that exists in fraternities and other all-male environments.

        One of the more salient points he raises is that the brotherly bonding and intimacy he found so beneficial to his personal development is not something one typically finds in a coed environment. This is true for a variety of reasons, both social and biological. The fact of the matter is the presence of women can fundamentally change the way men engage with one another–sometimes very subtly, men become more adversarial, more insecure, more guarded.

        When you respond to Nucci’s observation by insisting that male camaraderie is an example of “privilege” that must be deconstructed, what you’re really saying is this: “if women can’t have it, no one can.” Unfortunately, forcing fraternities to become co-ed will not make fraternal bonding accessible to women. It will simply make it less accessible to men. And, as Nucci’s story reflects, that is a cost we should not trivialize.

    • Openyoureyes

      You are going out of your way to claim “male privilege” just because this man is writing an article in defense of male bonding. Get over yourself. Wesleyan has repeatedly rejected attempts by sororities to get their own houses. Many women come over to fraternity houses to hang out with platonic friends and your claims that they do not only underscores your true ignorance of the role fraternities used to play on this campus.

      I encourage you to open your mind. Your gender bias is coloring your perception to the point that you can’t even comprehend what this young man is trying to show. Its honestly quite pathetic.

  • Unbelievable article

    Thank you so much for writing this

  • lolno

    Ahhh dude, if you feel close to someone just because they also happen to have a penis and you think to yourself “Hey! I’m like that too.” and “wow, this guy isn’t a disgusting homophobic asshole!” that’s really just……sad. Also, your very last sentence “When you say that a group of guys cannot live together, you are potentially robbing somebody of a truly special and consequential experience..” so how is that not ok to you but it is ok to say a group of guys AND girls and maybe some others who can only identify as humans live together? what kind of a good comes out of excluding people like that? if it were such a great experience for you, because you were always welcome there, regardless of your sexual identity but DEFINITELY because of your gender identity, why shouldn’t other people get to experience that sense of belonging too? (and yes, sense of belonging does not have to have anything to do with gender/sexuality if you simply make the decision to remove yourself as a subject from stupid societal norms) i have all kinds of friends from every level of the gender spectrum and the sexuality spectrum and yes, SURPRISE, i do feel a very strong spiritual connection to each and every one of them. i understand that in our society many people feel close to other people solely because they share the same gender and/or sexuality. But just because this is the norm does not mean it’s good, does not mean we should just roll with it and try not to change it because it’s more comfortable that way. We strive to make things BETTER, we strive for equality and the abolition of discrimination. We do this one fraternity, one college campus at a time. And hell, maybe we won’t be able to get this to a larger global scale, but still, we are at least making this one college campus better, or this single institution better. And if that makes anyone uncomfortable, well, that’s just too bad. If you can’t put aside your comfort and what you’re used to for the general betterment of this campus, I honestly don’t think you don’t deserve to be a part of this community. Before Psi U, before Beta, or Eclectic or DKE or ADP or whatever else there is, there is Wesleyan. Have a nice day.

    • Angry

      I suppose that everything you say is automatically considered as true. Who are you to judge exactly what is better for the campus as a whole?

    • duh

      students have the option to live together in coed environments all over campus. that’s a given. the point is that there is value in the single sex ones as well.

      • ..

        The point is that these single sex options should not be the largest residences on campus, allowing its members to disproportionately control nightlife and social events when many students might feel less than comfortable there.

      • Not

        Which is why the all male hall in the nics is so fucking popular!!!!!!!

    • Joseph Nucci

      I’m going have to break your paragraph into two parts.

      So you say: “Ahhh dude, if you feel close to someone just because they also happen to have a penis and you
      think to yourself “Hey! I’m like that too.” and “wow, this guy
      isn’t a disgusting homophobic asshole!” that’s really just……sad. Also,
      your very last sentence “When you say that a group of guys cannot live
      together, you are potentially robbing somebody of a truly special and
      consequential experience..” so how is that not ok to you but it is ok to
      say a group of guys AND girls and maybe some others who can only identify as
      humans live together? what kind of a good comes out of excluding people like
      that? if it were such a great experience for you, because you were always
      welcome there, regardless of your sexual identity but DEFINITELY because of
      your gender identity, why shouldn’t other people get to experience that sense
      of belonging too? (and yes, sense of belonging does not have to have anything
      to do with gender/sexuality if you simply make the decision to remove yourself
      as a subject from stupid societal norms)”

      In case you skipped over the part about my fathers death, the reason an all male space was so important
      to me is because I had (and still have) intense trust issues with men that
      couldn’t be resolved in a co-ed space. I talked about my experiences on the
      swim and water polo team (both of which are co-ed) and I describe why I believe
      that they didn’t help me with my abandonment/trust/ daddy issues. I wasn’t talking
      about oppression I was talking about why a single sexed space was important to
      me personally. You should refer back to that section of the article in case you
      are still confused.

      You also say: “i have all kinds of friends from every level of the gender spectrum and the sexuality
      spectrum and yes, SURPRISE, i do feel a very strong spiritual connection to
      each and every one of them. i understand that in our society many people feel
      close to other people solely because they share the same gender and/or
      sexuality. But just because this is the norm does not mean it’s good, does not
      mean we should just roll with it and try not to change it because it’s more
      comfortable that way. We strive to make things BETTER, we strive for equality
      and the abolition of discrimination. We do this one fraternity, one college
      campus at a time. And hell, maybe we won’t be able to get this to a larger
      global scale, but still, we are at least making this one college campus better,
      or this single institution better. And if that makes anyone uncomfortable,
      well, that’s just too bad. If you can’t put aside your comfort and what you’re
      used to for the general betterment of this campus, I honestly don’t think you
      don’t deserve to be a part of this community. Before Psi U, before Beta, or
      Eclectic or DKE or ADP or whatever else there is, there is Wesleyan. Have a
      nice day.”

      In case you missed the part about me identifying as gay, I am totally with you. I have friends across the
      gender and sexuality spectrums as well
      and I too feel very close to them. But I wasn’t talking about closeness. I was
      talking about feeling a connection and a sense of recognition. As a gay person,
      I often feel lonely. Even in Psi U with my friends I feel lonely because none
      of them have lived the same experience as me. I know trans* people who feel the
      same way. That is why it is so important for LGBTQ people to be represented in
      the media and on TV because when you see yourself on TV, you feel validated. You
      feel recognized for who you are. You’re right, the norm doesn’t mean its good
      but just because the norm is problematic doesn’t mean it’s completely bad. If
      gender and sexuality didn’t exist and we all fit into our unique little boxes
      of identity, and nobody was like anybody else, I believe that everyone in the world
      would feel very lonely.

      I cannot tell if you’re a troll but if you’re not you remind me of some of the radical kids that sit in my sociology and FGSS classes here and just want to hate on everything. I think its silly to believe that we can simply transcend social institutions that have existed since man first started walking. At least I am willing to work within these institutions to make them a better and safer for everyone, unlike you who
      just wants to dismantle everything. When you find a way to create your hippy, communist, utopia outside of capitalism, let me know where it is because I’ll probably come check it out. In the meantime, I’m going leave the ivory tower and work with what we’ve got right here on planet earth.

      • Suck my ass

        Nucci, I think you missed this poster’so point as well as the crux of the coeducation debate on the whole. No one is forcing the dismantlement of these male exclusive organizations, our community is simply demanding that all it’s spaces provide equal opportunity for all students with the aim of creating a safer and more inclusive campus. There are plenty of fraternities on campus that do not occupy these privileged spaces and manage to successfully foster the same sense of brotherhood and male camaraderie here described. No one is arguing the point you seem to be defending (and is moot at that) which is that fraternities are beneficial to frat brothers and other male students who seek a sense of belonging. The bottom line is that no other demographic on campus is awarded privileged living spaces and our community will no longer tolerate his type of dangerous exclusion. The brothers of Psi U are free to fraternize and relate to one another in communal living spaces the same way everyone else on campus does, by applying to GRS, getting a randomly assigned number and hoping for the best. Alternatively, should they feel that the space is more important than the all-male component, they are more than welcome to open their doors and accept female members.

        Your rebuttal to lolono is extremely condescending and unhelpful. Need I remind you that at its inception, Wesleyan was a male exclusive institution that finally admitted women with students kicking and screaming at the thought of educated women? The argument that we should uphold the status quo is ridiculous and you must be smarter than that. Do you really “think it’s silly to transcend social institutions that have existed since man started walking?” I challenge you to defend that ludicrous blanket statement. As a gay man, you should know better than to defend “social institutions” that have discriminated against queers since before this country was founded let alone the first fraternity. Come on.

      • Joseph Nucci

        Dear “Suck my ass,”

        Thank you bringing up condescending remarks, because that all I’m getting from these anonymous posts. Not once in my article did i discuss gender equity or sexual assault or any of those things. But I keep reading, again and again, these long descriptions about male privilege, and equality and the power that male dominated spaces have and I feel that it’s condescending because 1. thats really not the point of my article. I’m not arguing against any of those things and 2. You act as if I am clueless about these issues. Let me assure you, I am not. Not only am I aware of the issues on campus but I have taken the sociology, social theory, psychology, and FGSS classes on the subjects. I am in Cutler’s “Paternalism and Social Power” class right now and its solely dedicated to a discussion about privilege and power dynamics. I never once say in the article that I think the decision co educate should be reversed. I simply tell my story and state that the coeducation of Psi U, for me, would’ve meant the absence of several really important life experiences. thats it. everything else you bring up is something YOU are bringing up. not me.

        Furthermore, comparing wesleyan accepting women and women getting to live in a frat house is pretty weak comparison. Oh and challenge accepted: yes, it is silly to think that we can simply and spontaneously transcend the institution of gender (maybe you think I was referring to fraternal institutions? thats not the point I was trying to make). We have all have a gender expression and i personally do not foresee a future where we can escape that. Gender exists in every society and has existed for a very long time. I acknowledge that gender can be oppressive in my article but to say that gender is worthless just because it can be problematic is not a claim that I am willing to back up.

        And finally, I’m gonna copy and paste this from an earlier response: The point of sharing my story wasn’t to brush over male privilege. In fact, I would say its a really weak critique to point out that I do not address the reality of my male privilege in this article because thats not what the article was about. You can interpret everything I do, think and say as “male privilege” because we live in a patriarchy and that’s unfortunately how things are. I didn’t bring up gender equity, sexual assault, or any of that because lets be honest, you’re not saying anything new on the subject. The difference is, I didn’t try. I attempted to expand the conversation into other areas. thats all.

  • Upperclassman Gay

    Honestly this article is so bad. Selfish and ignorant at the same time. Nucci, you and your friends don’t and cannot speak for how other people on this campus interact with each other. Your situation is unique enough that this will unlikely relate to anyone else. How you define masculinity is also so warped that its not surprising that you dont account at all for the role women play in coeducating the frats. Cant wait for the dumb frat bros to use this as “evidence” of how the frats are supposedly safe spaces.

    • Joseph Nucci

      I say in my last paragraph: “the experience I have had with fraternity culture certainly does not reflect the norm.” So thank you for reiterating the obvious. If you would like to write a Wespeak about your experiences, I would encourage you to do so, instead of just saying how you disagree with mine, I would love to hear about your personal stories. I don’t have many gay friends and therefore cannot relate to what your experience must be like.

      • Upperclassman Gay

        Not just your experience with the frat culture but your experience with men and women in general, Nucci. Not everyone changes how they interact with the opposite sex, not everyone has such an infatuation with “male touch”, and not everyone has this constant need for gratification and acceptance by others. Your oversimplification of gender and sex is astounding. You are saying in this article that because you got something out of this then you can simply ignore everything else going on with the frats. A personal anecdote doesnt add much about the situation at all ESPECIALLY if you keep on ignoring the real heart of the matter, women. You even continue in the comment section to say that you aren’t speaking about that because you seem to think it isn’t important somehow. This isn’t about you and your own problems to overcome, Nucci. Nevermind all of the other power dynamics that come into play as a gay man that you cannot even grasp because your gayness only comes into play with straight people or hook ups. You are the worst kind of gay if you are pissed about how coeducational frats will make your relationships with MEN suffer and you ignore the hoards of women you seem to be friends with.

      • aesg

        the women he’s friends with agree with him.

        your condescending tone is disgusting.

      • Upperclassman Gay

        Yeah and so is this article frankly. At its core its rape apologizing and meant to discredit women.

      • Joseph Nucci

        Everyone changes how they act depending on who they are with. Everyone. If you have taken a single sociology, psychology, or FGSS class here, you would learn about the power and influence of the situation. For God’s sake, the whole argument against single sexed greek housing is based on that idea! The idea is that when a group of guys control and live in a space the way fraternity brothers do, it can be potentially dangerous for women.

        I am not “infatuated” by the male touch (honestly i kind of laughed at this. i don’t see how a reasonable person could think that based off the article). I had and continue to have issues with men because of the death of my father at such a young age. That was the point.

        I never said that women are not important. I said that I did not write this article to talk about them. I did it to talk about me and how MY experience with a single sexed society was truly life changing. I wrote this to expand the conversation beyond sexual assault and gender equity. That is all. I am also not “pissed” the frats are coeducation. That was surely my initial reaction but the fact of the matter is coeducation changes my life in zero ways. The point was I am afraid it will prevent other students from finding what I found in a single sexed group.

        And finally, I do not consider my gayness an identity but a part of my identity so therefore you’re right, it really only comes into play with my hookups and friendships (I gotta hook up with other gay people and i gotta be friends who are cool with gay people lol). I am sure I am fully aware of the other power dynamics you allude to but I am not going to touch upon those my fingers are getting tired.

      • Joseph Nucci

        Also, if I am “the worst kind of gay,” then I certainly do not want to the the best kind. whatever that means.

  • Orelia Jonathan

    I just wanted to commend you on how you deal with all the above hateful comments from anonymous people. I find it ridiculous when people write nasty things but are too afraid to put their face and name to it.

    • Orelia Jonathan

      I also just want to thank you for sharing your story.

    • eh

      Very few of them are hateful and there is nothing wrong with critique.

  • Anon

    Why do your “daddy issues” trump a progressive action towards gender equality? Your piece hinges on sentimentality. It is hard to question something that relies heavily on the death of a father and the struggles of being gay to argue its point. It is great that you had such a positive experience, but that is not enough to warrant reversing the decision. I’m sure without Psi U, your issues would have changed eventually. But life is hard; a lot of people have similar issues as you with one gender or another and do not cope with them as easily as you did.

    • life IS hard

      I mean, it’s not like any one argument should be enough to make any decision on this level. And it is pretty sentimental, but this piece also humanizes fraternity brothers affected by the coeducation decision (unless, maybe, we want to just continue homogenizing them into these “agents of inequality” or whathaveyou). Those supporting co-education are gaining something, fraternity brothers are taking a hit to their identity, and the decision will likely not be reversed. Let’s be a little more sensitive to that.

    • Joseph Nucci

      I think i make my point that my issues didn’t change till i was around single sexed groups on campus (notice that i discuss how I do not believe the swim team or water polo team helped me) so I think its a little too general to say my “issues would have changed eventually.” And maybe people who are experiencing issues with a specific gender could benefit from the presence of single sexed societies on campus! we can only speculate. I also do not call for a reserving of the decision. coeducation is going to effect my life in zero ways. I do not state that my “daddy issues” should take precedent “over a progressive action towards gender equality.” That wasn’t the point of article but if thats all you could take from it, that’s too bad.

      • Harry Rafferty

        I think, regardless of any of our own individual opinions on Co-Educational Frats, we have to respect Joseph Nucci’s courage in writing (and posting) this article. To me, it didn’t seem like his intentions were anything outside of just sharing his own personal experiences regarding frat life here on campus. As someone who has never had the chance to meet you, Nucci, thank you for sharing your individual story. I greatly enjoyed hearing your words at “In The Company of Others” and I did again here

  • TAapplieddata

    You are operating in a gender binary. You have not considered gender accurately and seem to think that the only people who need bonds with others are those who identify as male or female. What about trans students? What about someone who is non gender conforming? Also, what is your argument against organizations that are already co-educational? Have you spent any time there? Do you know that the bonds members of Alpha-delt or Eclectic have are any weaker then those at Psi U and DKE? I understand that you had a wonderful personal experience but maybe you should do some research about the history of fraternities. Maybe you should talk to a woman who has been sexually assaulted or raped in one of these frats. Maybe you should stop putting your male relationships above your female relationships. Maybe you shouldn’t put your daddy issues above the safety and well-being of over half the Wesleyan’s population. This is wildly selfish, I agree with Upperclassmen Gay.

    • F-off

      The vast majority of the population subscribes to the gender binary and as such should have the opportunity to express themselves in light of it. Having an all make society in no way discriminates against trans students. It’s not ever anything more than optional for those who seek it.

      Furthermore, how dare you assume Joseph cares more about his male than female friends, and hasn’t spoken to a female who has been sexually assaulted?

      I was sexually assaulted twice at Wesleyan. Once by a frat brother, once by someone in eclectic. I think coeducation was a huge mistake. Don’t you dare try to speak for me or what is in my best interests.

      • F-off

        Sorry, all male*. Darn autocorrect.

      • TAapplieddata

        First of all, I wasn’t trying to tell anyone what they should or should not do… I actually didn’t make any comment on whether or not I think frats should co-educate. I also wasn’t asserting a co-educational space is completely safe for women, at all. You made those assumptions yourself.

        The vast majority of the population also operates under systems of racial hierarchy, sexism, homophobia etc. Should they have the opportunity to “express themselves in light of it?” Just because we exist under certain social ideologies doesn’t mean that they aren’t exclusive and oppressive. That is extremely ignorant.

        Furthermore, I have also been sexually assaulted on this campus so don’t think that it makes you some damn authority on whether or not all male spaces are unsafe. You can be sexually assaulted and still support male hierarchy.

  • thenew110

    I think it’s great that you were able to share your story. It’s clear that the fraternity setting has had a big impact on you personally, and I’m happy for you.

    However – I think there is an attitude of entitlement here that has nothing to do with your gender or sexuality. Your point, distilled to its most basic elements, is that because you had a positive and empowering experience in a fraternity, they should be allowed to stay on campus unchanged. But no one is arguing that members of these fraternities, or their close friends, do not enjoy their time there.

    Rather, we are saying that those positive moments matter far less than the countless negative effects of on-campus Greek life. How much does your happiness really weigh against the students who are afraid to enter parties in the nicest buildings on campus? How much does it weigh against the students who were harmed – physically, sexually, or otherwise – in these environments? You mention in your article that you separate your time between male and female friends. It seems that you could have had the same experience outside of the fraternity setting, with your male-exclusive friend groups. Why does Wesleyan need to maintain monuments to your fulfillment? I for one would prefer a safer campus to one where select students enjoy themselves especially well.

    • JG

      “Monuments to your fulfillment” — that’s a bit of put down, don’t you think. College is absolutely suppose to be a place for personal growth and self-actualization, and the more outlets a college provides for that the better.

      As for the highly coveted status of one of the “nicest buildings on campus,” do you really believe that this is the issue? Did anyone ask the brothers if they would be willing to trade down to a less desirable campus location in exchange for remaining a traditional fraternity? I think that choice would have been an easy one for them.

      But, as I’m sure you well know, this is not about access to a building. Its about breaking up a male dominated living environment, because that is seen as a threat.

      “Safety” is a non-starter, because the link between single-sex fraternities and increased threats to physical safety has not been conclusively established. How many sexual assaults is this going to prevent? How many slips and falls is this going to prevent? Is there any empirical data whatsoever to support this change in policy? And assuming there is some correlative data, is there any reason the same result could not be achieved by less restrictive means?

      See, if you are going to rely on a cost-benefit argument, then you need to be a little more exact about what is being gained here, because, whether or not you care, something of great value to others is being lost.

      • Right, bye

        “This is not about access to a building”—- actually it completely is about that. Did you not read President Roth’s email? The ultimatum is coeducate the frats and keep the houses or ditch the houses and stay all male. How are people still missing this.

      • JG

        No. The ultimatum is coeducate or you will no longer be an on-campus fraternity. The ultimatum is not about one on-campus residential building versus another.

      • Hshd

        And of course they also ruled if you are not an on campus society than you are not recognized and any student going there will be suspended or expelled.

      • Concerned Alum

        What you are missing as most everyone else is that the residential all male fraternities own their houses. Wesleyan does not own them. They are private property.

      • Angry alum ’12

        It’s about liability, it has nothing to do with access to the buildings. Other buildings like 200 church or Alpha Delt are scarcely used for social events. The frats are being turned into program houses as part of the plan to reel in the social life on campus. So many of Wesleyans traditions have been ended – Foss Cross, the sex party, fraternities, senior cocktails, tour de franzia… If you believe the limited explanation that the school put before you, you are being a fool. Coed frats aren’t frats, they are program houses

      • Concerned Alum

        It’s about control of the buildings and student life. It always has been. Past presidents have tried to gain control of the frats as the last 3 pieces of property the university doesn’t own always trying to wrap it in some other issue. Roth tried this time to cravenly wrap it in the sexual assault issue. When the facts proved that a false assumption he said it was about control of social space and gender fairness. When that was fully addressed, it became about “equity and inclusion” very Orwellian down to having a VP of Equity and Inclusion.

  • Joe

    “,” <- That is a comma. Become friends with it.

  • Valid personal benefit

    Your personal experience is valid and I am happy that all male frats helped you. The article proves why you need all male frats but doesn’t prove why our campus needs them. It is very easy to prove an argument about retaining male privilege when you decide to omit women’s issues, non male issues, sexual assault etc. Analogous to an argument for slavery for economic, personal benefit while ignoring the oppressive issue at hand (oppression of black people).

    • Wes

      Fraternities aren’t akin to slavery of women. You are being completely absurd. “Retaining male privilege”, how about the “female privilege” to say ridiculously sexist things against men and constantly disenfranchise men without any repercussions? Must be nice, anything in defense of men around her is labeled as misogynistic or male privilege. People use the terms so much that they don’t even think about what they are saying. Your ignorantly narrow view disgusts me and I hope you grow up in your time at Wesleyan.

    • Sickofsjws

      Why does everything have to be about women, and “non-male” issues? Can’t you wrap your head around the fact that men have issues too? The world doesn’t revolve around you, stop including women’s rights in every single thing. Can’t women improve their condition without attacking and undermining men?

  • Blob

    First, I agree about people behaving differently around people of the “opposite” gender, but that isn’t necessarily a good thing, or something that should be promoted. You argue that “just because gender is a social construct doesn’t mean there is no value in ‘playing the role’ society gives you,” but don’t actually state what that value is, or why it outweighs the often unhealthy gender norms it perpetuates. If anything, it would seem to me that your argument only strengthens the idea that social constructs such as gender act as unnecessary barriers in social relations.

    Second, and more broadly, since you seem to agree that gender is a social construct (or continuum, as opposed to a binary), why should any residential organization have the right to arbitrarily select where on that continuum is the cut-off point for who can join? For instance, an all-white fraternity would never be accepted at Wesleyan, due not only to the exclusion of other people, but because “whiteness” is arbitrary, and trying to define or (especially) exclude people that aren’t white has proven to be unhealthy to societal development (and morally wrong, obviously). What makes the gender continuum different? What makes the exclusion of people with certain sexual organs, or combinations of hormones, or identity itself, any more valid than discrimination based on skin color?

    For what it’s worth, I thought you did give a valuable perspective, and made good points. It is brave to share such personal experiences. In the end, I disagree with your conclusion, but still…

    • JG

      The fact that men and women behave differently with members of the opposite sex is neither “good” nor “bad.” It is an immutable reality. It also happens to be essential to human survival, for what thats worth. Your attempt to draw a moral equivalency to racial segregation crosses the boundary of the absurd.

      But at least you purport to value Lucci’s perspective. Thats a small step in the right direction.

      • Blob

        1) Putting good and bad in quotes doesn’t make you sound smarter
        2) It was an immutable reality in 1850 in Alabama that blacks and whites behaved differently than each other. Besides that, even if something is an immutable reality, it doesn’t inherently become amoral.
        3) Just because an example (in this case, racism) seems extreme, doesn’t mean it can just be dismissed out of hand.
        4) Just by using the term “opposite,” you seem to be debating me in a different arena. That language is indicative of a gender binary. My arguments are grounded in the belief there is not.
        5) People having sex is essential to human survival. That doesn’t mean that people have to separate into two categories that act differently.
        6) The “small step in the right direction” subtle jab at the end is really unnecessary. Having a different opinion than you doesn’t warrant demeaning. Grow up.

      • JG

        Blob, responding to your points in turn:

        1. No, but it does effectively communicate my discomfiture with using value-laden language to describe a scientific reality. Is the pull of gravity good or bad? I dunno. It just is.

        2. The differences you are raging against are not just immutable, they are essential to what we are and indispensable to human propagation. You can’t negate or transcend gender without negating or transcending humanity itself. Quoting Jack Donovan:

        “Advocates for a neutered world pretend to be humanists, but sexual dimorphism is a fundamental part of the human experience, and has been not only for all of human history, but for all of human prehistory. ‘Changing what it means to be human’ by removing the human universals of differentiated sexes and genders is like ‘changing what it means to be mammals’ by engineering mammals without female mammary glands or hair. At that point, humans are no longer human, but something else.”

        -That’s Ms. Potato Head to You: Transexuality, Transhumanism, Transcendence, and Ecstatic Rites of Highly Conspicuous Consumerism, Jack Donovan

        In summary, efforts to transcend or erase “gender” seem to stem from a transhumanism that is fundamentally anti-human. If there is a moral dimension to this issue, that’s it.

        3. I didn’t dismiss it out of hand because it is “extreme.” I dismissed it out of hand because it is patently wrong, and I don’t feel like explaining the obvious.

        4. I am fully aware that your argument is grounded in a denial of the gender binary. I reject that premise.

        5. “People having sex is essential to human survival.” True. “That doesn’t mean that people have to separate into two categories that act differently.” I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Are you suggesting that human beings didn’t have to evolve this way? If so, you might be right. But the fact is, they did.

        6. I take it back. You are again stepping, nay, leaping, in the wrong direction.

  • JG

    It is really disheartening to see self-described progressives resort to shaming language, blatant gay-baiting, and personal attacks. I wish I could dismiss this as mere trolling, but the length and ideological ferocity of these posts suggests otherwise.

    Characterizing Nucci’s story as an irrelevant “anecdote” is not just rude, it is intellectually dishonest. The argument against fraternities is, itself, premised on generalizations often extrapolated from anecdotes. Is it wrong for someone on the other side to offer an anecdote of his own, as a possible basis for reflection? Likewise, arguments regarding “gender stereotypes”/”hetero-normativity” etc. frequently focus on “exceptions” to disprove supposed “rules” or over-generalizations. Yet, when someone dares to offer a point of view, or personal experience, that does not neatly conform to the progressive narrative, the word “exception” is used disparagingly. The hypocrisy is astounding.

    Nucci’s story is not unique to him, I can tell you. It is the kind of story you would hear over and over again if you asked brothers what was important to them about their fraternity experience, in an environment that was free from judgment, ridicule, or ideological agenda. There is an emotional dimension to the other side of this issue that is not being adequately explored (or even acknowledged). One of the reasons for this is that men, frankly, tend to be less comfortable discussing that sort of thing openly with strangers. The judgmental response to Nucci’s post helps to show why.

    • Joseph Nucci

      I don’t know who this, but I love you.

    • Another upperclassmen gay

      Shaming language is being used because this article is shameful. Outright embarrassing even. Also no one here has outwardly described themselves as a “progressive”… Also where is the gay-baiting? You honestly don’t know what you are talking about. Frankly this IS nothing more than anecdotal, idiotic self indulgent babble because of the many faults in his definitions of gender, sexuality, masculinity, frats, coeducation, and basic human interaction. Plus the overarching point that he doesn’t think women, sexual assault, or any of those issues are CORE to the conversation regarding coeducation and the frats or even WORTH mentioning at all is beyond comprehension. To call hypocrisy is also a pathetic attempt to undermine any of the other points made in the comment section without actually understanding the complex issues at hand that Nucci is clearly blind to. As for me and my opinion on this being called judgmental and vitriolic, its crazy how many blowhards are touting as “progressive” or “refreshing” just because its a gay man. Sorry but not only does Nucci come off as wildly ignorant but everyone posting this article as “positive” seems to be ignoring any of the real dialogue.

      • JG

        K. Now I know you’re just trolling.

      • ugh

        That’s incredibly dismissive of someone making a strong and valid argument.

        “The overarching point that he doesn’t think women, sexual assault, or any
        of those issues are CORE to the conversation regarding coeducation and
        the frats or even WORTH mentioning at all is beyond comprehension.” Agreed.

  • james

    meh your positive experience doesn’t negate the slew of negative experiences that people have had with them. i’m happy for you and the fact that you get to cuddle with psi u boys, but it’s not like these guys can’t hang out together. And since you place so much weight on the importance of single-gender spaces where people can “truly be themselves,” why are female-identifying people denied that right? I agree that co-education probably wasn’t the best (I would have been more in favor of the beta house becoming rho ep or something like that)

  • Ted Shabecoff

    I was deeply moved reading Nucci’s Oped piece, as he articulated many of the same feelings I have had as an openly gay brother of AEPi. Being in a fraternity has been a wonderfully empowering experience, and helped me to better understand myself as a gay male. It saddens me that so many people at Wesleyan prescribe to the view that gendered organizations must perpetuate male dominance. I don’t believe this is a zero-sum game. I agree that in some instances, fraternities allow rape culture to fester. But whose to say all-male environments can’t do just the opposite? There’s nothing as terrifying as a lonely male (see Elliot Rodger, Adam Lanza). In our society boys aren’t taught to bond and develop healthy emotionally supportive relationships with other boys and men. The result is that too many young men resort to anger and abuse to let everything out. That’s where fraternities come in. Fraternities teach young men to behave cooperatively and respectfully with one another and with women. Older brothers make great role models for younger fraternity members who are still grappling with their masculinity, and coming to terms with being out in the world on their own. Fraternities can provide a safe space for young men to finally open up and to vent their frustrations in a productive manner. With all this talk about societal power dynamics we forget basic psychology. You want to stop young men from disempowering women? Put em into a fraternity where they can learn to become healthy, respectful adults.

    • blob,again

      Lonely males aren’t automatically dangerous. That is an outrageous stereotype. Beyond that, why do lonely males need an all-male group to help? Pretty sure a co-ed group can ease loneliness as well…
      I’d also love to know how you make the determination that, among all possible reasons in society, the reason young males resort to anger and abuse is because of the lack of male-male relationships. I think the reason males resort to violence is that violence is fostered by an all-male environment. What makes your version right, and mine wrong? You just can’t make blanket statements about society like that.
      Also, just because fraternities tech something does not mean other institutions can’t teach it as well. Fraternities don’t hold a monopoly on fostering brotherhood.

      Also… Basic psychology, in the modern age, is that people can’t be separated into group m and group f.

      • Female privilege

        Well why do we need to outlaw male spaces on campus. Men can’t bond anymore because a small, vocal group of women find it threatening? It’s absurd and offensive to male students.

    • JG

      Good post. Couple of points:

      First, you mean “ascribe to the view.” Not “prescribe to the view.” (I know thats pedantic, but, hey, this is a college site after all).

      Also, as soon as you adopt their ideologically-invented terminology like “gendered,” you have effectively lost the argument.

      Otherwise, good stuff.

  • J. Ulrich ’14

    Beautiful piece, Nucci. This was one of the few articles published in the Argus over the past 4+ years that I’ve been a part of the Wesleyan community that I truly enjoyed reading. I applaud your courage in sharing this with the world. Don’t let the hateful anonymous critiques (I use the term “critique” loosely) in this comment section get you down: this was well-written, well-thought-out, and not at all deserving of the pseudo-intellectual vitriol that some of your cowardly peers felt necessary to share with the world.

Twitter