Harvard cracks down on Greeks

robeiae said:

You know, I'm not sure I get your "point." You say it may not be fair, that it may not be the right approach, but...what? That this is what they're doing, regardless? Yeah, okay. That's the point of the thread: "this is what Harvard is doing for xyz reasons," offered as a topic for discussion.

Click to expand...

My point, as succinctly put as possible, is this: people may want to act like it is some horrible out of the blue decision, but it isn't out of the blue. It's based on an existing view.

Cyia said:

No joke -- I posted this and now my Google-ad at the top is for toilet paper!

Click to expand...

I say we buy a lot of it and TP the building that houses Faust's offices.

I vaguely recall reading something about this (or the lead-up to it) last week - my sense is that it's mainly aimed at the Finals Clubs. The quote I saw was from the president of one of them, saying they'd never admit women because it'd just mean they'd be more likely to get raped at their parties.

I'll have to see if I can find it, though I might need a gallon or two of brain bleach first.
side note: Have been to a few Finals Club parties in my younger days. In my experience, the stereotypes about their members are not exaggerations. That's about all I'll say.

eta: Found the article:

Given our policies, we are mystified as to why the current administration feels that forcing our club to accept female members would reduce the incidence of sexual assault on campus. Forcing single gender organizations to accept members of the opposite sex could potentially increase, not decrease the potential for sexual misconduct

Click to expand...

I think this is a bit of a misguided policy, but my sense is that the administration has decided that douchieness is the only thing these guys understand.

Lillith1991 said:

My point, as succinctly put as possible, is this: people may want to act like it is some horrible out of the blue decision, but it isn't out of the blue. It's based on an existing view.

Click to expand...

Who has been acting like it is some horrible out of the blue decision?

Amadan said:

Who has been acting like it is some horrible out of the blue decision?

Click to expand...

Well, many of the clubs that Harvard has been trying to get to be more inclusive for one. For another, I've certainly seen the implication, imo, that this is somehow completely out of the blue and unfair. Harvard tried other routes, the clubs generally refused to comply with what Harvard was trying to do. The only other viable option than the one they want to implement that I can personally see, which is much more radical, is banning the clubs outright. Which is much more problematic than the current policy change.

Lillith1991 said:

Well, many of the clubs that Harvard has been trying to get to be more inclusive for one. For another, I've certainly seen the implication, imo, that this is somehow completely out of the blue and unfair. Harvard tried other routes, the clubs generally refused to comply with what Harvard was trying to do. The only other viable option than the one they want to implement that I can personally see, which is much more radical, is banning the clubs outright. Which is much more problematic than the current policy change.

Click to expand...

I guess the better question is what right does any institution have to dictate the bylaws of an organization that isn't a part of that institution. These are *extra* curriculars; the school shouldn't be involved, period.

Lillith1991 said:

Well, many of the clubs that Harvard has been trying to get to be more inclusive for one. For another, I've certainly seen the implication, imo, that this is somehow completely out of the blue and unfair. Harvard tried other routes, the clubs generally refused to comply with what Harvard was trying to do. The only other viable option than the one they want to implement that I can personally see, which is much more radical, is banning the clubs outright. Which is much more problematic than the current policy change.

Click to expand...

I don't see anyone reacting as if they were unaware of the context or the fact that they've been under disapprobation for a while. Where and by whom have you seen this?

I certainly think many are of the opinion that it's a bad and unfair policy.

raburrell said:

I vaguely recall reading something about this (or the lead-up to it) last week - my sense is that it's mainly aimed at the Finals Clubs. The quote I saw was from the president of one of them, saying they'd never admit women because it'd just mean they'd be more likely to get raped at their parties.

I'll have to see if I can find it, though I might need a gallon or two of brain bleach first.
side note: Have been to a few Finals Club parties in my younger days. In my experience, the stereotypes about their members are not exaggerations. That's about all I'll say.

eta: Found the article:


I think this is a bit of a misguided policy, but my sense is that the administration has decided that douchieness is the only thing these guys understand.

Click to expand...

It is part of an effort to address sexual assault on campus. From the OP:

"Formed in response to the recommendations of a University-wide report on sexual assault prevention, the policy mirrors an idea that Khurana floated at a behind-closed-doors meeting with final club leadership in April."

I'm reading the linked report now.

In its report, the task force—composed of professors, administrators and students from around the University whom Faust appointed to study sexual assault prevention on campus—offers a wide-ranging and frequently critical assessment of the “deeply troubling” realities of sexual assault across Harvard’s 12 schools, with a particular focus on the resources and social scene of the College

Click to expand...

Cyia said:

I guess the better question is what right does any institution have to dictate the bylaws of an organization that isn't a part of that institution. These are *extra* curriculars; the school shouldn't be involved, period.

Click to expand...

None. But that leaves Harvard with two options 1) do nothing about the culture of these groups, which by the admission of some members would lead to more rape should women or whatever be allowed to join or 2) completely ban the groups. Neither is tennable and the second leaves recognized groups ran by students, which have to basically be resanctioned on a yearly basis, even more vulnerable than the current policy does.

Actually, they also have the option of allowing students to join whatever extracurricular groups they like, continue to educate everyone about sexual assault, and prosecute those who engage in such behaviors.

Lillith1991 said:

None. But that leaves Harvard with two options 1) do nothing about the culture of these groups, which by the admission of some members would lead to more rape should women or whatever be allowed to join or 2) completely ban the groups. Neither is tennable and the second leaves recognized groups ran by students, which have to basically be resanctioned on a yearly basis, even more vulnerable than the current policy does.

Click to expand...

I think what they'll find is that they drive the groups underground. Some of the guys that go in for this stuff are crazy serious about it. The "secret societies" at these schools are the basis of lifelong and multi-generational business contacts. They're not just tradition, they're legacy and social status.

On the same hand, being in a leadership position within the school is also a matter of the same. And no one is going to want to give up either.

This will take the groups off the books, but it won't disband them.

Cyia said:

So what about the folks in the Hasty Pudding Club or Section X? Are Harvard traditions on the chopping block, too, or are they going to make the boys allow girls in the clubhouse? The old money guys won't like that.

Click to expand...

That's the point. Not Hasty Pudding, but the other clubs, the finals/eating clubs, etc. - the orgs people really want to join, heh.

Amadan said:

Actually, they also have the option of allowing students to join whatever extracurricular groups they like, continue to educate everyone about sexual assault, and prosecute those who engage in such behaviors.

Click to expand...

That's crazy talk.

Amadan said:

Actually, they also have the option of allowing students to join whatever extracurricular groups they like, continue to educate everyone about sexual assault, and prosecute those who engage in such behaviors.

Click to expand...

This seems more than a bit smug to me is essentially a do nothing and pray option. The problem isn't education, Harvard has been educating its students about sexual assault for several years as far as I know but they're still not satisfied with what is happening with regards to rape on the campuses. Education doesn't work when you are also contending with groups like the all male finals clubs who essentially take a the view that any woman who tries to join would be setting themselves up to be raped, which hold enormous influence over student attitudes to preventing rape on campus.

Lillith1991 said:

This seems more than a bit smug to me is essentially a do nothing and pray option. The problem isn't education, Harvard has been educating its students about sexual assault for several years as far as I know but they're still not satisfied with what is happening with regards to rape on the campuses. Stuff doesn't work when you are also contending with groups like the finals clubs who essentially take a the view that any woman who tries to join would be setting themselves up to be raped, who hold enormous influence over student attitudes.

Click to expand...

I think you are presenting a strained interpretation of one student's poorly thought argument in defense of his little club. The idea that all these private groups are basically rape clubs and Harvard has to get rid of them in order to reduce sexual assault seems based on both poor methodology and poor logic.

Even if they are all as bad as you and raburrell think, trying to regulate what extra-curricular organizations adult students can participate in seems unlikely to change attitudes or behavior - those who are invested in these groups will just take them further underground, while those who might actually benefit from them more will not find them more accessible, but the opposite.

I also would still Iike to know where you saw people reacting to this policy as if it came out of nowhere.

robeiae said:

You're generalizing a great deal. I don't think every groups that will be impacted by this new policy has the same "culture." That's not only ridiculous, it's also insulting. And the either/or you've set up here is a false dichotomy, as Amadan has already noted.

Click to expand...

I disagree that it is. Fraternities, sororities, and many of the finals groups have a very similar culture that has great influence on the various Harvard campuses with regard to being receptive to the education Harvard is attempting to provide its students with about sexual assault. Not all groups mind you or even all various groups within those pecific types do, which is the unfortunate aspect of the new policy, but a great many. That's what makes just trudging along with education essentially a pray and do nothing approach. It has been proven to not work, at least in the minds of those in power at Harvard.

Amadan said:

Harvard has not officially recognized Greek societies since the 19th century. All of these organizations are unofficial, and Harvard is now saying that any student who joins one that is not coed faces the aforementioned sanctions.

Click to expand...

Wow. I'm not a fan of the traditional Greek system, and I know Harvard is a private university, but this sounds an awful lot like the issue where private employers being able to limit your associations and activities outside of work, even if it has no bearing on your job performance or ability to represent said organization in a professional manner. There's precedent for this, but it leaves a terrible taste in my mouth. Imagine if a college or university (or an employer) starts telling its students or employees that they'll be sanctioned if they belong to (say) a religious group that discriminates against some people, or engages in any hobby or activity they deem distasteful?

Though religious colleges and universities sometimes do just that (and will actually expel students), so maybe this is an extension of the same kind of thing--sanctioning students for partaking of activities that contradict the institution's core mission.

Amadan said:

I think you are presenting a strained interpretation of one student's poorly thought argument in defense of his little club. The idea that all these private groups are basically rape clubs and Harvard has to get rid of them in order to reduce sexual assault seems based on both poor methodology and poor logic.

Even if they are all as bad as you and raburrell think, trying to regulate what extra-curricular organizations adult students can participate in seems unlikely to change attitudes or behavior - those who are invested in these groups will just take them further underground, while those who might actually benefit from them more will not find them more accessible, but the opposite.

Click to expand...

Don't put words in my mouth - I said the behavior I witnessed justified a lot of the stereotypes about Finals clubs. That includes a sense of entitlement, but no, I don't think they're equivalent to rape clubs, or that Harvard needs to get rid of them.

As I said before, I think Harvard is basically yanking their chain because they're not getting the cooperation they want, they know it'll piss off the right people, and there's a chance those people will tell the current students to cut it out. Do I think it'll work? Doubtful.

Roxxsmom said:

Wow. I'm not a fan of the traditional Greek system, and I know Harvard is a private university, but this sounds an awful lot like the issue where private employers being able to limit your associations and activities outside of work, even if it has no bearing on your job performance or ability to represent said organization in a professional manner. There's precedent for this, but it leaves a terrible taste in my mouth. Imagine if a college or university (or an employer) starts telling its students or employees that they'll be sanctioned if they belong to (say) a religious group that discriminates against some people, or engages in any hobby or activity they deem distasteful?

Click to expand...

These places are on campus property, mostly, which I think makes it very different from saying something like 'if you go to Scientology meetings at the Scientology church in town, you're in trouble.'

So maybe they should also deny leadership positions and scholarships to any students who go to a party after hours or where alcohol is served. Also, they should probably end athletics programs and any other activities associated with incidents of sexual assault.

cornflake said:

These places are on campus property, mostly, which I think makes it very different from saying something like 'if you go to Scientology meetings at the Scientology church in town, you're in trouble.'

Click to expand...

Wait. If these places are on campus property, how can the university bar students from participating in them? If they don't approve of the Greek houses because they discriminate and are involved in sexual assaults, shouldn't they kick them off campus?

Amadan said:

So maybe they should also deny leadership positions and scholarships to any students who go to a party after hours or where alcohol is served. Also, they should probably end athletics programs and any other activities associated with incidents of sexual assault.

Click to expand...

Some schools have very strict rules about student conduct off campus. BYU (for instance) requires its students to take a chastity pledge. In the old days, even state schools would kick students out for drinking, sneaking out of their dorms at night, having sex and so on, though it's rarer than it used to be for universities and colleges (aside from religious ones, again) to place these kinds of restrictions on their students.

I don't agree with this kind of thing. I think university students are adults, and what they do while off campus is their own business, as long as it's not against the law, but I do think the university should kick the Greek houses off campus if they think they're problematic. And it would be interesting indeed if they held athletics to the same level of scrutiny as they do other student activities.

Can I also just say that the mobile version for AW is terrible - trying to edit a post causes it to be deleted. Argh.