Ban on closed parties a myth

In last Friday's staff editorial, published Sept. 19, 2003, The Chronicle fell victim to a common myth surrounding University policy--that on-campus parties must be open to all students. In fact, no such rule prohibiting closed social gatherings exists. As stipulated in the University Alcohol Policy, "Duke University recognizes the value of group-sponsored social events. Groups are permitted to hold open or closed (by invitation only, through the use of guest lists) social events." The Chronicle regrets the error, and we hope that our mistake will help to dispel this misconception in the minds of other members of the student body.  

 

In light of this proper understanding of University policy, The Chronicle's recommendations remain very similar to those in last Friday's editorial. Selective organizations should exercise their judgement in striking a balance between open and closed events, as both types have benefits and detriments associated with them.  

 

Open parties are an integral component of many students' social lives, and an important part of community interaction on campus. Open parties allow unaffiliated students to participate in the party culture without having to join selective organizations themselves, in addition to facilitating interaction between individuals who might not gather together otherwise. Open parties contribute greatly to the University's commitment to community building and desegregation on West Campus. 

 

Further, Duke's much-heralded second semester rush process is supported in large part by open parties. First-year students are free to attend any party on West, and can get to know a wide range of selective groups before making decisions concerning where to rush. If closed parties took precedence, the current rush format would be placed in jeopardy. 

 

It is also necessary to highlight the unique benefits offered by occasional closed or guest-listed events. First, student safety is easier to monitor due to the fact that the host group is aware of the approximate number of people in attendance. This allows for easier identification of individuals who are in danger of becoming ill, or have become ill. The distribution of alcohol would also be easier to police, because fewer unknown guests would enter the party simply to obtain alcohol and then leave. Also, hosts would ideally be distributing drinks to individuals they know, rather than to strangers. 

 

Current University policy leaves the choice to hold open or closed events up to the discretion of the host organizations themselves. Ideally, these groups will strike a balance between open and closed events in the future, choosing the most appropriate format for their situations.  

 

Discussion

Share and discuss “Ban on closed parties a myth” on social media.