Lately, residential life has been at the forefront of campus conversation. I think there are two issues worth discussing.

The first major issue on campus concerns Lip Sync. In the interest of full disclosure, I was unable to attend Lip Sync this year, so I can’t comment on which group deserved to win, nor would I want to lower myself to that mundane task.

For those of us unfamiliar with the controversy, check out the heated response by Amherst Student writer Robyn Bahr ‘10. With allegations of “rampant sexism, racism, sexual impropriety and lack of creativity,” and my personal favorite – “douchebaggery” - she gives a strong condemnation of the process and this year’s result.

You all received an email from Dean Torin Moore, the Director of Res Life. It’s a nice gesture, and he has some good ideas.

I actually think that Lip Sync is stupid and a waste of time. I would have no problem seeing its elimination. But I’m cranky and I hate to have fun. I think that most students want it on campus. So if we have to keep it, here’s what we should do:

1. The judging board should be three individuals: A Dean, a faculty member, and the outgoing President of AAS. They should confer, using whatever criteria they deem appropriate, to pick the winner.

2. Make rules for propriety and actually enforce them by automatic disqualification. Set clearly defined rules for romantic contact, cross-dressing, suggestive dance, etc. and post them on the website.

3. Auditions should be one day before Lip Sync. A team that doesn’t audition in accordance with the ground rules isn’t allowed to participate.

4. Dean Moore should preside over the music. He pulls the plug if the team strays from their audition, breaks rules of propriety, or goes over the time limit.

These are not earth-shaking ideas. Just define the rules and enforce them. Maybe this won’t be fun. Maybe it will take all of the excitement out of the event. But at least it will be fair.

As far as I’m concerned, there is a bigger issue facing Res Life – the selection of next year’s RCs in the social dormitories. Astute observers will notice that the RCs in Pond both play men’s hockey, the RCs in Davis both swim (M+F), and the RCs in Stone both play lacrosse (M+F). Crossett is our beacon of diversity; one RC runs women’s track and the other plays men’s soccer.

There are two things wrong with this situation.

First, the fact that the 8 RCs in the largest social dorms are all varsity athletes gives reason for worry. It is possible – even probable – that they were the most qualified candidates who had a high preference for the socials. But true as this likely is, it sends the wrong message to the student body. It enforces the stereotype and complete misnomer that the social quad is for varsity athletes only. We mix athletes and non-athletes in the freshman dorms to promote integration and encourage diversity. The RC placement process should also reflect this ideal.

Second, in three out of the four dorms, RCs play on teams in the same sport. This is a real shame. We at Amherst hold the concept of diversity near and dear. The homogeneity serves as a total rejection of that ideal.

I also believe that the position of the RC is impaired by this placement. RCs should be available and approachable. When two members on the same team have an away game together, there is no one left at the dorm to take care of situations that require an RC.

A better system would split the athlete RCs from the same team into separate dorms (a novel concept, I know). Under this system, the RCs wouldn’t always be unavailable at the same time. And it’s not only student-athletes. I would extend this policy outside of sports to include the debate team, quiz bowl team, etc. – any activity that involves significant time off campus.

A little common sense goes a long way. It’s time to put it back into Lip Sync and the RC system.