What's So Bad About Stereotypes?

PROPONENTS of randomization have resorted to hackneyed generalizations to support their argument. Their reasoning on this issue is both misguided and divisive.

For one, those who condemn the perceived lack of diversity within the houses base their analysis on a view that the student body is composed of easily discernible and isolated groups of like minded people--artists, athletes, Andover graduates, etc. In doing so, they seriously undermine the diversity that exists within these groups.

To suggest that all varsity athletes or all humanities concentrators think and behave in the same manner perpetuates the false stereotypes which a Harvard education is intended to break down.

The admissions process ensures that each individual brings to the Harvard community something special that makes him or her unique. A single commonality which attracts individuals to a particular house does not preclude diverse perspectives, varying tastes, and different interests among its residents.

Furthermore, the editors seem to assume that Harvard students confine their social and extracurricular lives to the houses in which they live. Of course houses play a significant role in the lives of students. But we can and do interact with people outside our assigned houses--in classes, clubs, and other houses.

IF the proponents of maximum diversity and full randomization believe that the current system "breeds intolerance and fear and sometimes even loathing," then why don't they call for next fall's randomization of every Harvard student--not just first-years? Or what about randomized rooming groups? These bold and obviously unpopular proposals seem consistent with the editors' desire for a homogenized housing system.

But most importantly, the editors have overmoralized the whole randomization issue. In relying on divisive steretypes, they dismiss the practical and personal factors which influence a first-year's housing preferences.

Many students favor a particular house not because of the perceived stereotype of its students but because of its facilities, its campus location, or its physical beauty. Some students prefer houses with large rooms while others simply desire the tranquility of the Quad.

Why should a paternalistic and moralistic quest for homogenization prevent first-years from enjoying some degree of choice in this very basic and very important decision?