The idea of in loco parentis, or that the college is acting in the place of our parents, is neither a new one, nor are the objections to it particularly novel. In fact, I would guess that students have disliked this idea since it's inception. The notion of a college's responsibility to act in the place of students' parents comes from the understanding that 18-year-olds, with all of their wisdom, are not fully mature, do need guidelines, and frequently need rules. The majority of college students oppose this concept, wanting more freedom and privilege, not less. I disagree with this position and think that the old, crusty, fossilized policies are beneficial and should not just be allowed to go the way of the dinosaurs.
The benefit of dorm visitation rules is quite simply that they show courtesy to fellow students. I frequently hear the complaint that the dorm visitation policy in pointless because it fails to prevent those who really want to get into trouble. I am certain that the school is not naïve enough to believe that their rules are protecting students' virtue.
However, that is hardly the point: The purpose of visitation rules and regulations is to encourage virtue and to provide an atmosphere congenial to study. If you choose to break one of them, there is a high probability that you won't be caught; on the off chance that you do, the school is not in the practice of administering capital punishment. The fact is that opposite gender visitation inconveniences your dorm mates, not just your RAs. Most of us enjoy the benefits of times when we don't have to worry who might be in the dorm. Dorm visitation rules provide two benefits: They lay out the principle that we are at college to study, not just to party or spend time with significant others, and they make it impossible for rude individuals to turn their room mates into sexiles (and this definitely happens at other colleges). I can relate more than one instance when a roommate has spent the majority of the semester on the lobby couch because she was made uncomfortable in her own room.
Benefits aside, the real question is whether or not the college has any business standing in the place of our parents and telling us what to do. I would argue that it does. Our parents have ceded the right of guidance to it. As our parents' dependants, we are not truly responsible only to ourselves because they care for us they have both right and duty to give us directives and college students frequently need those directives. Eighteen-year-olds at school are far more prone to value short run benefits over long run consequences than are more mature adults. If you wish to verify this statement, I would challenge you to consider the binge drinking statistics for college students as compared to thirty-year-old businessmen.
Having talked to many friends at colleges where there is no notion that the college should set rules and behavior standards, it has become clear to me what a blessing we have here. Not only do we avoid getting ourselves into a system where the majority rules and the minority lives with a situation they find morally abhorrent, we avoid the essentially amoral atmosphere of opinions such as: “anyone's individual choices are as valid as everyone else's.” Given the wide range of American colleges, I have very little patience for students who come to Hillsdale and immediately begin complaining that they disagree with its rules on all points. Given that there are countless schools with far less stringent dorm rules, why are you here if you so hate restraints? Personally, I like the fact that Hillsdale stands out in this respect.
Eleanor Pettus is a Hillsdale College junior majoring in History and Classics.