Monday, June 16, 2025



Reclaiming the sovereignty of themed housing

Like many other students applying for program housing this time of year, I’ve been thinking a lot about what I want out of my residential college experience. As an incoming frosh, I checked the “absolutely necessary” box for WestCo because I wanted something more than the typical college dorm life. Living there has been one of the highlights of my first year at Wesleyan. However, it’s become clear to me that the arbitrary designation of “Community-Based Living” (CBLV), as the administration’s lack of support for their success, have undermined the ability of themed housing like WestCo to adequately fulfill its purpose.

WestCo’s ability to realize its mission of cooperative living and self-government is continually undermined by its subjugation to arbitrary ResLife policies and administrative meddling. One of the more notorious manifestations of WestCo’s living style and character—clothing-optional living—has been quietly repressed despite unanimous agreement among WestCo’s residents that we should get to determine our own standards of what is appropriate. Our two most prized traditions, Duke Day and Zonker Harris Day, have been ludicrously censored, their original names being banned for their supposed druggy connotations. More substantially, the placement of Residential Advisors (RA) in WestCo is generally without regard for their desire to contribute to the mission, which is contrary to our standards of community.

WestCo is not alone here; students are often placed in the other CBLV options without their consent if it is logistically convenient. This policy is most offensive with respect to 200 Church, in that being forced to accept students not interested in social justice and anti-oppression issues surely undermines the mission and purpose of 200 Church.

In its present situation, it’s hard to say why WestCo should even bother to have its Community-Based Living status. Most of the formal differences between WestCo and other dorms have been rendered insignificant. The WestCo Presidents have little legitimate authority, and Guidance is, in essence, just another student group that receives SBC funding. WestCo’s authority over the WestCo Café is almost meaningless given that it can be revoked at any time by the administration, and frequently is. Not only do the existing structures fail to contribute in a meaningful way to WestCo’s mission, they systematically undermine it. WestCo works as a community almost entirely due to the fact that its residents decide to live there, ostensibly to contribute to its mission. Yet even this characteristic is micromanaged and subverted by ResLife policy.

I should note here that I’m speaking as an individual and don’t claim to represent the views of anyone but myself. These complaints seem small, and individually, I admit they are far from intolerably oppressive. But together it becomes clear that they are symptomatic of a general attitude of contempt on the part of the University towards the significance of themed housing situations and towards the ability of students to manage their own lives. What does it say about ResLife that they believe independent, student-run music festivals named after Doonesbury characters would be so offensive and dangerous that it justifies administrative intervention? Whenever program houses and CBLV do succeed, it is usually in spite of administrative policy, not because of it.

In order for alternative housing options to be truly meaningful and relevant, we must continually reevaluate our housing system and demand that themed housing meet the needs of Wesleyan students. WestCo has survived only thanks to student tenacity against administrative opposition, and other themed housing options like 200 Church have emerged out of years of student struggles that argued for the necessity of alternative housing options. Community-Based Living programs are (unfortunately) the only option for themed housing for first-years. As current students, we have a duty to preserve and improve these institutions.

Program houses and CBLV need to do more to establish their sovereignty over their living situations and join together to protect their common interests. The administration should encourage and recruit RAs who are interested in participating in WestCo and stop allowing students to be placed in themed housing situations that they don’t want to be in. More than anything, both students and ResLife should redefine the purpose of program housing/CBLV so that communities like WestCo have the opportunity to realize their potential.

At no other time in your life will we be so constantly surrounded with as many intelligent, diverse, and profoundly interesting human beings of our own age. We ought to be given the opportunity to make the best of it.

Comments

7 responses to “Reclaiming the sovereignty of themed housing”

  1. Jesse Ross-Silverman Avatar
    Jesse Ross-Silverman

    To clarify: I realize now the claim that “the placement of Residential Advisors (RAs) in WestCo is generally without regard for their desire to contribute to the mission” was poorly worded. RAs will be put in WestCo if they apply to live there and are accepted. Most RAs did not apply to live there, but only because few RAs apply to WestCo, not because ResLife deliberately prevented RAs who wanted to live in WestCo from doing so.

    The problem is that, as I pointed out, WestCo works because people choose to participate in its mission, but the individuals who are disproportionately influential in creating a sense of community usually did not choose WestCo for whatever reason. As a matter of principle, this undermines our mission. ResLife doesn’t seem to care about remedying this discrepancy and attracting applicants to live here; for example, there is nowhere on the RA application to denote that you are interested in WestCo (though there is such a place for 200 Church).

    Also, I didn’t mean to seem like I was complaining about the RAs in WestCo, who are all actually awesome.

  2. Student '12 Avatar
    Student ’12

    My concern about Westco is if it actually has a “mission” or cause for CBLV other than the obvious change in dress code and “governing.” In addition, I’d be curious to know the racial/ethnic makeup of Westco. It seems to be a harbor for white students who apply to a self-proclaimed “artsy” or “alternative” aesthetic. Even though they might deny it. I’ve known problems in the past (maybe four years ago or more) with Westco being a far too white establishment on campus. I wonder if that’s changed…

  3. former prez Avatar
    former prez

    but the administration doesn’t give a shit, and hey know that if they change things slowly, no one will remember how things were.

  4. '12 Avatar
    ’12

    westco’s mission is arts music and community governance. it’s unfortunate that more students of color dont choose to live there, but you cant demonize westcovians because many of them happen to be white.

  5. a;djsfds;g Avatar
    a;djsfds;g

    the people who fit the WestCo personality type in the outside world tend to be white, i guess. thats why its white-washed. hipsters and stoners who do art and music all the time because they dont have to provide for themselves are usually white. i can see why reslife is ambivalent to letting westco’s status as a community-based dorm; their mission statement doesn’t even sound that constructive. If you’re so gung-ho about community-based living, wait until youre a sophomore and apply to program housing, ,which is also somewhat bullshitty in my opinion

  6.  Avatar
    Anonymous

    wow, #5; way to be stereotypical.

  7. former westco resident Avatar
    former westco resident

    I don’t know if this has changed, but when I lived there (two years ago) the percentage of SOCs in the dorm was roughly equal to the percentage in the greater wesleyan community, maybe higher. people tried to come at us with that “art fag white kids” bullshit but it just wasn’t true.

    and I think the problems with westco and 200 church mirror larger problems on campus. we have to realize that it’s up to us; our failures are all about apathy. look what happened to co-ops. look what’s happening to student spaces. people are afraid to DIY, afraid to take chances.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Wesleyan Argus

Since 1868: The United States’ Oldest Twice-Weekly College Paper

© The Wesleyan Argus