That the 168th Hasty Pudding theatrical show features an all male cast should come as a surprise to no one. The production was put on for nearly two centuries in this same way, but 17 women decided to challenge this tradition by auditioning for the Pudding cast last week. They, were, however, not cast this year as the production decided to maintain its all male cast. This choice is not one made out of any sort of desire to exclude women, but one made simply with the past 167 years in mind. The addition of women would change the nature of the play at a fundamental level, altering or removing the homo-erotic subtext that draws in large crowds with its light-hearted approach to what otherwise might be a sensitive subject. Additionally, the women came of their own volition and were rejected because the production chose to honor its lengthy history by using male drag. Additionally, Hasty Pudding was in no way obligated to even consider these women for an audition or for a role. Using women (even crossdressing women) would change the humor in the character’s interactions that make the production so iconic, and that have kept it alive through the centuries.
Final clubs have faced a recent gender-related challenge as well – deciding whether or not to include women. I would like to emphasize here that the Hasty Pudding and the final clubs are in somewhat different situations: the former faces pressure from students and the latter face immense pressure to be more inclusive from an increasingly vocal college administration. The Spee Club’s decision to include women in the punch class of 2015 comes with its own problems. First, the inclusion of the opposite sex could undermine some of the club’s inherent value as a single-sex institution. Similar to the brother- and sisterhoods of fraternities and sororities, or of all-female career and political groups, final clubs (both male and female) facilitate connections that mixed-gender communities simply cannot create. Second, the move to include women in the punch undermines the female final clubs. By taking a position that allows them to punch 100% of the students, Spee has effectively doubled their impact and damaged the prestige of women’s final clubs, clubs that took the initiative to form their own, female communities and histories when the opportunity was not otherwise afforded them. If all the clubs are competing for the same pool of candidates, Spee effectively doubled their market and implicitly diminished the influence of the women’s clubs.
I believe there is one important comparison to be made about the situations of both the final clubs and Hasty Pudding, which is that both are independent institutions, unrecognized by Harvard, that are under duress to change their traditions by those who believe they have the authority to do so. At its root, this view is false. The Hasty Pudding and the final clubs are under no obligation to include women, and could lose some of their purpose in doing so, which is compounded by the fact that Harvard is threatening to police their activity, activity that is officially not the College’s responsibility. If Harvard refuses to recognize the clubs then it has no right to be imposing their will on them. Harvard College wants to be able to do as it pleases in these situations, but if it refuses to take full responsibility for these historic independent organizations, then it is in no position to impress its will as it sees fit.
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.