[629] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
my opinion on dartmouth - brand names
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (asarahm)
Sat May 12 18:29:39 2001
Message-Id: <200105122229.SAA30398@Press-Your-Luck.mit.edu>
To: mit-talk@MIT.EDU
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:29:15 -0400
From: asarahm <asarahm@MIT.EDU>
hi all,
(standard disclaimer about these being my own opinions, take them for
what they're worth, etc etc yadda yadda)
though i think that the considerations of free speech, harassment,
and lodging licenses are important in this dartmouth and zp case, i
think the most important consideration, at least on the
administration's side, is dartmouth's "brand name".
when a dartmouth alum goes and applies for a job, what is their
employer going to think? if this same alum is trying to let an
apartment, what will their potential landlord think of them, based on
what s/he knows of dartmouth? if all the outside world hears of
dartmouth are these kinds of incidents, this does not bode well for
the dartmouth "brand name". perhaps this might sway a freshman
to come to dartmouth or to attend another school - perhaps a
misogynist will go to dartmouth, perhaps a feminist will not. thus
the cycle repeats, and dartmouth is known as the "animal house"
school. (sound familiar anyone?)
mit made the national press when scott kruger died not b/c a freshman
died of alcohol poisoning in a fraternity (about 40 students a year
die of alcohol poisoning, though, to be fair, i don't know how many of
those deaths are connected with fraternities or frat parties), but
because it happened at *MIT*. and mit's brand name doesn't imply
big drinking parties, or even fraternity. or should i say, mit's
brand name *didn't*. and now it does.
over the past few decades, mit has been admitting more women into the
'tute. i'm sure that some of that has to do with the larger numbers
of qualified female applicants, and with a decline in sexism. but
personally, i think quite a bit has to do with a conscious decision
made by the administration that they didn't want mit to be known as
that "**white** **male** **engineering** school that's in that same
city as harvard". (repeat same argument for students of color,
and for the growth of course 15 as a major)
my gut reaction about a lot of this stuff is that it's petty, and
unfair, and unbecoming universities that claim to teach their students
to be free-thinkers, able to question others' decisions and methods,
to create their own moral code. but at the same time, the over
$100,000 that i have paid to this school (yes, me, not my parents, not
a scholarship, me) have purchased not just a set of knowledge, but
also the letters "MIT" on my diploma and on my resume. and the value
of that name is important to me. after some thought, i think fair
treatment of my fellow students and human beings at this institution
in general is worth a bit of tarnishing in the national (or local)
press, even if that means those three letters on my diploma might not
mean as much at first glance. but i have a feeling that others may
feel differently.
which makes me wonder - why did harvard suffer all kinds of bad
press over the living wage incidents the past month or so when
caving in would have been less expensive in terms of publicity
and in terms of money... any ideas?
take care all,
-asm
______________
Sarah McDougal
Environmental Engineering
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
asarahm@mit.edu
