Seth Whetzel had a few things right about parietals.

Pushing for an extension to the opposite-sex visiting hours, Whetzel, a Campus Life Council member and sophomore St. Edward's Hall resident, made sense in action and in speech at the CLC meeting Monday.

"This is simply a request for members of the opposite sex to have more hours each day to interact with each other in the privacy of their own rooms," Whetzel told the council composed of Notre Dame faculty, staff and students. Right on, I say.

Of course, he didn't get everything he wanted on Monday. Whetzel watched, pleased, I'm sure, as the group voted 13-3 to push parietals back an hour to 9 a.m. every day. But his pleas for a 60-minute extension to the hours through the week fell on 10 seemingly deaf ears, as Whetzel and each student CLC member saw that move shot down 10-6 — a vote short of the majority needed for passage.

Depending on whom you looked at following the rejected resolution, the scene — members representing all facets of University life seated, hands clasped or, in some cases propping up heads — was either oddly disturbing or strikingly familiar.

On the one hand were students visibly deflated by the failed measure. Moving morning parietals to 9 a.m. was a no-brainer, but garnering support for the late-night parietals change was the challenge. It failed. They failed.

And as far as they were concerned, they failed the student body. In March, a senate survey polled undergraduates' opinions on changing the longstanding hours. According to the results of survey, 2,429 of 3,038 respondents said they were in favor of extending parietals past midnight. That's about 80 percent of surveyed students who think an extension would be beneficial.

"When 80 percent of students make it perfectly clear that the extension of parietals is in their best interest, I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt," Whetzel said Monday. He was right. But he was also speaking to a group of University staff members who were sitting pretty happy with themselves after their defeat of a proposal that, according to one Notre Dame official threatened "a healthy lifestyle" in residence halls.

It's a low blow to write off as unhealthy something of as much importance to students and on-campus gender relations as parietals, but Whetzel — and probably most students — saw that coming. Even before a vote moved to the floor, Whetzel got another point right: "There is a pervading sense that administrators don't allow students to think for themselves. If this resolution gets shot down, don't pat me on the head, say I did a good job but tell me that daddy knows best," he told the body.

It screamed boldness. I'm not just talking about Whetzel's comments directed at Bill Kirk, the University's vice president for student affairs.

What I'm getting at is the move to bring the parietals votes before the CLC in the first place. The issue certainly found a home in the Student Senate; the proposals came after months of surveying students and talking with administrators.

But for Whetzel and other student CLC members to introduce and advocate the measures into a body far less welcoming than the senate, was an act of courage and true student leadership. That makes the results of their efforts — even if expected — no less a service to the student body.

And at a time when many criticize student government representatives' initiatives as insignificant and unneeded, this should serve as an example of what's right with the Student Union and with fighting the good fight.

• Covering the CLC