Since we’re nearing the end of Pride Month, I wanted to share this IG post from my alma mater, Morehouse College. It triggered a reaction that reminds me we’re not entirely out of the woods when it comes to “woke” or DEI influences in academia.
 |
| Via Morehouse IG |
Here’s the caption that accompanied the post:
The House is Stronger Together.
This Pride Month, Morehouse College celebrates the diversity of experiences, perspectives, and identities that enrich our community and strengthen our collective pursuit of excellence.
As an institution grounded in the values of dignity, respect, belonging, and leadership, we recognize the contributions of LGBTQIA+ students, alumni, faculty, staff, and supporters whose lives and work help shape The House.
We affirm the importance of creating a community where every individual is valued, every voice is heard, and every person has the opportunity to thrive.Happy #Pride2026.
My Personal Memories from Morehouse
I was at Morehouse long before Pride became commonplace on campus. I saw the issues of homosexuality up close, including one young man harassed by another student who objected to his demeanor. I also witnessed cross-dressing firsthand among some students. It reached a point where, not long after I graduated, then-President Michael Franklin instituted a common-sense dress policy. That policy aimed not only to address cross-dressing but also to curb overly casual dress among students.
Those experiences shaped my view. Morehouse has always been a place for forging Black manhood through discipline and focus. The push to celebrate every identity equally can feel at odds with that historic mission.
The Policy Shift on Admissions
In 2019, Morehouse adopted a Gender Identity Admissions and Matriculation Policy (effective Fall 2020). It allows individuals who self-identify as men—regardless of sex assigned at birth—to be considered for admission. This includes FTM transgender men (biological females who identify as men). Once admitted, students are expected to self-identify as men throughout their time at the college. The policy excludes those who identify as women and states that students who transition from man to woman while enrolled are generally no longer eligible to matriculate.
Does This Dilute Morehouse as an All-Male School?
Yes, in a meaningful way. Morehouse was founded as a space specifically for biological males to develop into leaders through shared male experiences, brotherhood, housing, and cultural expectations around manhood. Admitting biological females—even those who identify as men—changes the fundamental environment.
Biological sex shapes development, socialization, and needs in ways that matter for single-sex education. Shifting to a self-ID model moves “all-male” from a clear, sex-based reality to an identity-based category. While the policy tries to maintain focus on “men,” this represents a substantive evolution of The House’s original mission.
A Parallel at Spelman and Privacy Concerns
Spelman College took a mirrored approach, admitting those who consistently self-identify as women (including MTF transgender women) while excluding those who identify as men. Admitted students who later transition to male can still graduate.
Many parents—especially fathers—raise legitimate worries about daughters in these environments. The practical concern is shared dorm rooms, bathrooms, showers, and other intimate spaces designed for biological females. Even with accommodations, a young woman could end up rooming with or sharing facilities with someone who is biologically male. Single-sex spaces have traditionally existed for privacy, safety, and comfort during vulnerable moments. Surveys show that while general support for gender-identity access in public settings can be majority or plurality, comfort often drops in more private or intimate contexts like dorms or shelters. Many women and families quietly prefer sex-based boundaries for modesty and protection.
Final Thoughts from a Group Chat and on Mission
I shared the IG post in a group chat with some of my classmates—many of whom, like me, came in as transfer students. Many of them support the inclusion of LGBTQ students. We’ve talked about young men from conservative backgrounds who struggle with their orientation. I look at someone’s sexuality as a deeply personal issue. I will advocate for anyone to be true to themselves instead of trying to live up to an ideal they know they can’t fully embody.
Morehouse has an image to uphold as a prestigious institution of higher education—one that could stand with the top colleges in America regardless of its HBCU history. To see it head down the road of DEI—which is where my mind immediately went—goes against its distinct mission.
A school like Morehouse is still very much needed for ambitious and academically gifted Black men, especially the young ones who need a focused place to develop into truly brilliant men.
Strong manhood and womanhood matter. Clear roles and boundaries matter. I want The House—and its sister institutions—to continue producing leaders who build lasting legacies while respecting individual struggles.
What do other Morehouse Men and Spelman sisters think? Alumni from my era and beyond? Share your thoughts in the comments. Let’s have real dialogue about strength, mission, and what truly makes our communities stronger.
Sources
Official Policies
News & Context- NY Times Coverage of Morehouse Policy (2019)
- NBC News on Single-Gender Colleges Including Spelman
- Washington Informer on Spelman Announcement
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are now moderated because one random commenter chose to get comment happy. What doesn't get published is up to my discretion. Of course moderating policy is subject to change. Thanks!