Living under constant supervision, be it staff or babysitters (RAs), coupled with the lack of responsibility, I found it difficult to feel like the adult I was told I was. I can understand the opposition this train of thought will produce, but despite one’s opinion, you cannot deny that there is little difference between an MSU freshman and a child; both have food constantly available to them, both are constantly monitored and both are not trusted with their own safety.

Last year, I wrote an article criticizing card scanners — which were new to Case Hall where I lived, but admittedly old news for many other halls. In this article, I argued that along with being inconvenient, the scanners were nothing more than an effort to appear to be making dorms safer. This was, and is, my opinion because after living without the scanners, and then with them, I was able to see, firsthand, the lack of difference they made. That being said, if inconvenience was the only drawback to these ineffective measures, my article would be nothing more than a glorified Facebook post, a college student complaining of “first-world problems.”

However, these scanners were more than an additional patronizing effort by MSU — I will be referring to the Residence Halls Association, or RHA, and other residential services as MSU throughout this article to save space — that affected students without their consent. These card scanners were not just an inconvenience, they were an expensive inconvenience.

This only is one example I am using to demonstrate that, as a whole, the residential branches of MSU (such as RHA and Residential and Hospitality Services) do not care about inconveniencing students. This is not MSU’s fault — it is a huge organization. One does not expect our national government or huge corporations to care about individuals. For the same reason, we cannot expect the same from MSU. The point I am trying to make is students need to be aware that the “Live On” campaign is simply an attempt to get more money because, after all, MSU gets far more money from a student who lives on campus than one who lives off campus.

Speaking of money, if funds are available to put technology like this in, one has to ask why students often sleep on mattresses typically found at summer camps. One has to ask why most dorms do not have air conditioning. One has to ask why the cafeterias are renovated to look beautiful, with many unhealthy food options displayed on their menus (such as in Case Hall, where some items are over the daily requirement for saturated fat). I shudder to think what students would look like if they tried to get their money’s worth — even at the cheapest plan, a student would have to eat more than $160 worth of food each week.

At this point, one can probably tell I am a little annoyed at how students are treated in the dorms. The recent overload of freshmen is the most recent display of lack of regard for freshmen. Common complaints (from my time in the dorms and now) include slow service on maintenance, shoddy work when done and overcrowding.

I am not arguing that the mandatory year in the dorms should be done away with — it is a useful life experience. Unlike nearly everything else in the coddled dorm life, the experience of being jammed into a small overpriced room is one many adults can identify with as they struggle to survive in this economy.

Granted, I am probably going to get a lot of disagreeing opinions in the comment section, but that is all right. This is just my opinion, and many people feel differently. I have heard many people declare their love for the dorms — although few of them have ever tried any alternative, so they are slightly biased — including my mom, who lived in the dorms for three years and even became an RA when she attended MSU in the ‘70s.

It should be noted, however, in her time, tuition still was in the double digits per credit hour, rooms were supplied with two pull-out couches and parties with alcohol — kegs on ice in the showers — were typical, as the drinking age was 18. I just thought I’d throw in that anecdote to show how times have changed along with peoples’ experiences.

I am only trying to point out the flaws in the likely expensive “Live On” (propaganda) campaign and point out there are many issues within dorm life that should be addressed and solved, rather than trying to get more even more students to voluntarily live on campus even as capacity remains limited. The goal of the “Live On” campaign is that of MSU, and it seems like the goal of MSU is first to accommodate as many students as possible and later, if convenient, ensure their comfort.

Jameson Joyce is a guest columnist at The State News and a James Madison sophomore. Reach him at joyceja1@msu.edu.