On paper, the answer to that question may be yes. Admissions brochures practically dare young men to live in a community with only one rule, the subtle implication being that responsibilities increase as a result of the freedom they acquire. But a number of students have somehow received the opposite message. They have come to believe that the Gentleman’s Rule represents unlimited freedom to act without regard to any restrictions whatsoever—legal, moral, or otherwise. And it would seem that many students received this impression from their early visits to campus.

This is evidenced by the discontent of last semester. Much of the anger that Wabash students directed at their college administration last semester can be traced to a sense that the administrators were being disingenuous. The phrase “a gentleman always follows the law” was repeated often in the wake of Johnny Smith’s death, and we were assured by the Deans that it was in fact repeated often before his death as well. But many students sensed that the College was changing the rules mid-game. They felt that the sudden calls from the Administration for Wabash men to follow drinking laws amounted to self-righteous hypocrisy, and that Wabash always allowed underage drinking, at least implicitly.

That was certainly the impression I received from my first tour of the campus three years ago. I remember attending a question and answer session with college representatives, and the question of alcohol inevitably arose. I do not remember anyone saying, “a gentleman always follows the law.” If it was said, the fact that I do not remember it testifies to its relative insignificance in the conversation. What I do remember is something along the lines of, “we’re not going to come looking for you.” The emphasis was on what the College was not going to do, rather than on what the students were expected to do.

For the second part of the event, the administrators left the room and allowed current and prospective students to talk amongst themselves. Blunt questions were asked, and honest answers were given. It was clear from these talks that underage drinking occurred often at Wabash, and, from the perspective of the students, the College did not care. Violence and plagiarism would get you in trouble, we were told. Nothing else.

I tell this story to demonstrate how easy it is for prospective Wabash students to get the impression that the school permits underage drinking. And my story, of course, is not unique. Since the disbandment of Delta Tau, it has become clear that the student view of the Gentleman’s Rule with regard to underage drinking, and the Administration’s view as articulated since the death of Johnny Smith, are very much contradictory.

President White has dubbed the phenomenon of students believing Wabash College endorses underage consumption of alcohol “the winking effect.” The actions of Wabash’s representatives during student visit days, whether intentional or not, can lead prospective students to the belief that the school gives a pass to lawbreaking. This is a significant problem. The division between Wabash students and the Administration last semester was not healthy for our college environment, and as long as we continue to send prospective students contradictory messages, that division will not go away.

So how do we address this problem?

First, the Administration should acknowledge its fallibility. Last fall, when “a gentleman always follows the law” suddenly became the defining corollary of the Gentleman’s Rule, the Administration chose to feign shock that underage drinking was taking place. In President White’s mandatory Chapel Talk, he announced with disappointment that investigations had uncovered underage drinking in Johnny Smith’s pledge class, and he proclaimed that such actions “cannot stand.” Unfortunately, this was probably the first time that the Wabash community had heard such a clear and definitive statement on the issue.
The effect of this was to make the Administration seem self-righteous in its response—especially after the disbandment of Delta Tau Delta. It was a very painful semester, and all the blame for that pain was shifted onto the students. It was students who were being lectured, and students who were being punished. It would go a long way toward healing our old wounds if the Administration would admit that they are imperfect too—that the expectations for drinking at Wabash were not always made clear, and that they too have made mistakes in the course of the past year.

For our part, we students need to understand the responsibilities inherent in the Gentleman’s Rule. Freedom and responsibilities have a positive correlation: the more you have of one, the more you get of the other. If and when we drink, we need to do so responsibly—or else invite more rules and regulations from the Administration. And if and when our friends drink, we need to make sure that they do so responsibly as well. We have a responsibility to govern ourselves and look out for each other.

These ideas must be implemented in the Admissions Department. Their message on the Gentleman’s Rule must be unified, both in their mailings and their personal contacts with students. Last semester—and every year, for that matter—our student tour guides faced inevitable questions about alcohol. Some were put in the uncomfortable position of not knowing the correct answers. When the Administration and the students were so divided, how could they know? It is important that we as a college work out a shared understanding of gentlemanly behavior with regards to such important issues, and it is important that every tour guide understands those expectations.
Most importantly, we need to sell the Gentleman’s Rule with a strong emphasis on responsibility. This goes for all of us—students, Administration, and Admissions. We all come into contact with prospective students, and we all have an obligation to explain what the Gentleman’s Rule really means. Too often, students come away from visits to Wabash with the impression that the Gentleman’s Rule means, “you can do whatever you want.” If we sell the rule like this, we are selling the College as easy.

It is not difficult to run into troubles once in a while trying to sell a college as unique as ours. We lack certain superficially attractive features that other colleges have. How do you sell a college without women to a bunch of teenaged high school prospects? There are two common answers: either lie to them about weekend buses full of women, or promote Wabash’s unique level of freedom. The latter being the more honest, it is probably the wiser argument to make. But true freedom can never be unchecked. In an autocratic society, or an autocratic school, the people are kept in line through the power of an imperious authority. In a free society, as Wabash seeks to be, the people must keep themselves in line. They cannot use their freedom to do anything and everything they want, and push the boundaries too far. If they do, then they will inevitably face the increasing power of the government, or in our case, the College administration. Free societies cannot be maintained without responsible citizens.

Responsible citizenship should be a prerequisite for admittance to Wabash College, and prospective students need to understand that. They need to understand the concept of personal responsibility, and they need to be good at exercising it. They need to understand their responsibilities to their friends, and they need to be willing to act on them. Without students who understand and demonstrate these values, our traditional idea of Wabash will quickly fall apart.

This is not the easiest sell for a college. You are not telling prospects that they will have unlimited freedom to do whatever they wish. You are telling them that they will have to govern themselves. They will have to make tough decisions about responsible actions. They will have to look after their friends to do the same. You are telling them that no one will be there to make tough decisions for them. No one will be there to keep their behavior in check. You are telling them that the freedom they will experience at Wabash will not be easy. But it will be worth it.

Related posts:

1. A Risky Rule?
2. March 2009 Phoenix
3. Tradition at Wabash: Moral Idiocy, Piety, and the Gentleman’s Rule

As the Preamble to the “Constitution of the Student Body of Wabash College” states, the student government is responsible for the regulation of any “…matters delegated by the College to student control,” which today have come to be a myriad of duties. Chief among these, however, are these: first, the dispersion of finances; second, the promotion of campus unity; and third, the representation of the Student Body en masse to the Administration of the College.

Probably the most publicly visible and most often criticized duty of the student government at Wabash is the dispersal of the vast sums of money allocated from the students each semester via the “Activities Fee”, which, over the course of the year generally adds up to around a half-million dollars. These funds are allocated to the more than fifty clubs recognized by the Student Senate through its Audit and Finance Committee, which must prepare the budget spreadsheets, handle all rela-tive affairs with the Business Office of the College, and operate under the policy guidelines set by the Senate as a whole.

While that duty may often prove to be a divisive one (to which this semester’s budget disputes speak), the student government is also charged with doing its utmost to bolster the unity of the student body. Given the oft uneasy state of relations between Greeks and Independents – which is thankfully becoming one of less prevalence these days – maintaining a cordial and interactive student body can prove to be a challenging affair. Nonetheless, this duty is one entrusted to the student government to deal with appropriately.

Though both of these duties are of importance, the most consequential role played by the student government at Wabash is ultimately the representation of and mediation between the “…members of the Student Body, and the faculty and administration of the College.” In the Student Senate, every Wally is represented by at least a half-dozen members – four Class Representatives, one or more Living-Unit Senators, and the Vice-President – and in the Senior Council, each one is also represented by at least two members – the President of the Student Body, and the President of either the Independent Men’s Association or the Inter-Fraternity Council, respectively. These, as well as the other members of each particular governing body, serve as the direct voice of the students to the authorities of the College, and are permitted to have a say in the selection of curricula and other affairs that concern every Wabash man.

So what is so important about these duties, and how do they provide those involved with a more well-rounded educational experience? Well, quite unlike Vegas, what happens in the Senate and the Senior Council does not stay there. The duties delegated to each member of the student government require the development and refinement of many of the practical skills that we men of Wabash will need upon graduation. Indeed, what better training grounds could there be for dealing with potentially divisive financial matters than the AFC of the Student Senate? – or for maintaining the unity of a company, state, or family, than by maintaining unity amongst the members of the Student Body? – or for mediating between parties in a legal dispute than by making sure the Student Body and the Administration of our dear Alma Mater are in harmony? These are most certainly not inane or useless abilities, but rather embody the essence of our mission statement, causing participants to “think critically”, “act responsibly”, “lead effectively”, and “live humanely”.

Therefore, while it remains true enough that the effectiveness of some of the methods of student governance at Wabash by right ought to be a subject of debate, there can be no denying the inherent value of letting the students of this great school learn by experience the skills necessary to life in this increasingly-complex world. Perhaps if every Wabash man took a chance to try his hand in student government, we could all learn more quickly and effectively what it means to be a more gentlemanly and responsible citizen.

Related posts:

1. Being a Gentleman: A Critique of Sax’s Words on Wabash
2. The Death of the Student Judiciary: The Inside Story of the Idea’s Rise and Fall
3. A Wink and a Nod: How Do We Sell the Gentlemen’s Rule

During the tumultuous events of last semester, these issues bubbled to the surface again and again. Any effort to move past last year’s pain must involve taking a serious look at the way we recruit and the way we admit new students. In this issue, we attempt to do just that—and to give our advice for how to best move forward. First, Editor-in-Chief Austin Rovenstine discusses how the Admissions Department sells the college to prospective students. The other cover feature by Luke Blakeslee provides readers with a sneak peak into the workings of the department itself.

As always, we have a variety of other features as well, including a conservative commentary on the Gentleman’s Rule by Adam Brasich, and a truly touching tribute to the late Professor Bill Placher by Dr. Webb. Bob Cassady, Adam Current, Steve Henke, Michael Nossett, Kevin Stevens, and Zach Rohrbach round out another full and interesting issue. We hope you enjoy.

Read the full March 2009 issue

Related posts:

1. Around Wabash – March 2009
2. March 2009 Back Page Cartoon
3. March 2009 – Front Page Cover

Oh the Gentleman’s Rule, how
often art thou referenced. Much is
made of the rule, especially for freshmen,
who hear a great deal about it
during orientation. Lauded by many,
yet inevitably criticized at least once a
semester as being “dead”, the Gentleman’s
Rule creates at Wabash a kind of
experiment, an environment of constant
learning. Such an experiment,
however, has both risks and rewards.
We as a college community have
much to lose when it comes to the
Gentleman’s Rule. It provides us with
a large amount of freedom, probably
more than almost every other college
in the nation, but such freedom comes
with problems. The difficulty is in its
ambiguity. How do we define being
the word “gentleman”? What behavior
violates the rule and what doesn’t?
What happens when my interpretation
of the rule conflicts with someone
else’s interpretation? When should the
administration get involved? Doesn’t
it just mean we can do whatever we
want? The list goes on and on and on.
In a system with so many questions,
there are bound to be disputes, but
the important issue is how we handle
them.
The greatest risk to the Gentleman’s
rule is not necessarily its removal, but
instead it’s re-interpretation. This is
why the selection of the Dean of Students
is so important. I should mention
here that over my four years I think
Dean Bambrey and now Deans Raters
and Warner have, barring a few criticisms,
done a great job of maintaining
the spirit of the Gentleman’s rule. The
point though, is that it would simply
take one aggressive Dean of Students
to change everything. “That will never
happen” you might say. It will most
certainly happen, though, if as Wabash
students we fail consistently to live up
to our part of the bargain. If we don’t
hold each other accountable and deal
with problems amongst ourselves, and
behavioral problems grow and grow
over the years the College may be
forced to re-interpret the rule.
We could easily have all the restrictions
of major universities that
include massive rule books without
writing any of them down. It would
simply take a change in the way the
Gentleman’s Rule is interpreted. What
is considered a violation? Allow me
to digress for a moment into some
of the unbelievable things that have
happened on other college campuses
around the country, most of them
violating the free speech of students,
in order to demonstrate the possible
risks of the Gentleman’s Rule.
At Valdosta State University, a student
named Hayden Barnes criticized
the university president for building
a large and expensive parking garage
on campus. Barnes felt the parking
garage was an unnecessary expense
($30 million) designed to establish
the President’s legacy on campus. He
began a public campaign against the
project including newspaper articles
and small protests. Later Barnes posted
a collage on his face book page critical
of the President and his project. The
President responded by having Barnes
“administratively removed” from
school, or in other words kicked out.
At Johns Hopkins University a
student was suspended for an entire
year for “an offensive Halloween invitation.”
This case hits close to home
for those of us that were here when
a visiting professor wrote a letter to
The Bachelor signed by many faculty
members accusing the student body of
sexism and referencing, among other
things, a party hosted by a fraternity
called “CEOs and Office Hoes.” The
party in this case was called “Halloween
in the Hood.” While personally I
think these are dumb ideas for party
themes, I don’t think that a college
should be able to suspend you based
on what kind of party you have. The
student was charged by the University
for violating the rights of others,
harassment, and intimidation. The
Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education (FIRE) took the case, and
the FIRE Director of Legal and Public
Advocacy Samantha Harris had this to
say: “Hopkins should teach its students
that the way we deal with speech we
dislike in a free society is with more
speech, not with severe and life-altering
punishment.”
In another situation just 45 minutes
away at IUPUI, a man named
Keith Sampson who worked for and
attended the university, was charged
with racial harassment for reading
a book in his break room. The book
was called Notre Dame vs. the Klan:
How the Fighting Irish Defeated the
Ku Klux Klan, which details how
Notre Dame Students fought the KKK
in 1924 in order to battle prejudice
against Catholics and others. One of
his coworkers suggested that bringing
a book like this to work was equivalent
to bringing pornography, and another
coworker told him that she found the
KKK to be offensive. Sampson tried
to explain to both of them what the
book was about, but they wouldn’t
listen. A few days later he was told by
the school’s Affirmative Action Officer
that a co-worker had filed racial
harassment charges against him. The
school ordered him not to read the
book in front of coworkers.
In each of these cases, as I men-tioned in the Hopkins case, The
Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education intervened on behalf of the
accused. FIRE won the Valdosta State
and IUPUI cases when the rulings
were overturned and is still hard at
work on the Johns Hopkins case. These
cases seem extreme at first, but as you
browse FIRE’s website you begin to
see that they are all too common in
American higher education. Surely
this would never happen at Wabash
though, right? I pray that it does not,
but it would simply take an overly
active administration with a broad interpretation
of the Gentleman’s Rule.
Imagine being suspended for having
a party someone finds offensive or for
reading a book that others find offensive
regardless of its actual content.
I am grateful that these things have
not happened at Wabash College. I
know that if they did this publication,
The Bachelor, and many others
would be liable for criticizing the administration.
Some may be liable for
certain parties and various other possible
violations of a rather subjective
rule. Clearly our freedom would be
severely limited under the same rule
that currently extends said freedom.
I have been lucky these four years to
have enjoyed such great freedom. This
article, and these examples, is meant
as a caution about what could happen
if we aren’t careful. We must keep an
eye on the administration, be mindful
of who is chosen to lead this college,
and be active in what is going on in
administrative policy. These things are
all important, but the real responsibility
to maintain the Gentleman’s Rule
though, lies with the students.
The greatest benefit of the Gentleman’s
Rule is that it provides an
opportunity for self-governance. The
encouragement and the motivation
to hold each other accountable for
actions are implicit in the rule and
must not be forgotten by the student
body. This freedom is an incredible
opportunity to learn from one another.
Some of the best learning moments are
the most difficult ones. I remember a
few of them from the past few years
because they are difficult. They usually
involve someone telling you that
you are wrong, to which the natural
response is resistance and resentment.
People don’t like being told they are
wrong, but we all need to understand
that we aren’t always right. I’ve been
corrected many times throughout my
Wabash career by professors, upperclassman,
and even already this year
by Wabash men younger than me, but
it hasn’t been easy. I don’t intend to be
“preachy”, by no means am I the expert
on this subject, nor have I been all that
good at taking criticism from others
over the years. Instead it is something
I have recognized over the last four
years and something that I hope to
improve upon throughout my life, and
I think it is vital to the maintenance
of the Gentleman’s Rule.
Everyone in our community has
something unique to offer, we just
have to be willing to see it and learn
from them. Good fortune and wise
leadership have prevented abuses by
the administration in the past, but
the risk is very real. I hope that the
examples above have demonstrated
the importance of preserving the
Gentleman’s Rule and the freedom we
are lucky enough to enjoy, but I also
hope that everyone realizes that the
responsibility lies with us more than it
does with the administration. A major
change in the way the rule is enforced
or interpreted will come only as a reaction
to our failure to hold each other
accountable. If we want to maintain
the freedom we have, we must do so
by holding each other accountable,
because if we don’t do it ourselves,
eventually, the administration will.

Related posts:

1. A Wink and a Nod: How Do We Sell the Gentlemen’s Rule
2. Tradition at Wabash: Moral Idiocy, Piety, and the Gentleman’s Rule
3. Being a Gentleman: A Critique of Sax’s Words on Wabash