Harvard cracks down on Greeks

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...

I'm not sure about that - The Fox is right in the middle of Harvard Square. It's near a dorm, but also right across the street from a Peet's and (what at least used to be) a Newbury Comics.

robeiae said:

They're not. Fraternities and sororities at Harvard are off-campus.

Click to expand...

Ah, okay. I thought that was the case, but then someone said something that made it sound like they're on campus at Harvard, so I got confused. Most of the schools I know, the Greek houses are off campus (often on a couple of streets informally dubbed a "fraternity row," or are even more diffuse organizations that don't even have a local house). At my own alma mater (UC Davis) there was a Panhellenic Association and Interfraternity council that tied these organization to the campus and were about following certain rules that allowed certain Greek houses to be "officially" recognized or sanctioned by the school, giving them access to special activities, on-campus recruiting events, and (for sororities) a special "fall formal rush." It always stuck in my craw, actually, that organizations that discriminate (not just by gender, but by race, culture, appearance, temperament, social class etc) would be officially recognized by a public university at all.

Harvard's private, though, so what they're doing is on par with what some religious schools do--placing extra restrictions on students' activities and associations off campus. I don't agree with this, but it seems to be legal (or BYU's chastity pledge would have been knocked down by now).

robeiae said:

Some schools most assuredly do have on campus Greek systems. Not all fraternities and sororities have houses at every school; in some cases, schools have facilities specifically for these orgs. UM, for instance, has a Panhellenic building to this end. I'm pretty sure many other schools have similar--if not almost identical--things.

Click to expand...

Yes, and one change at my alma mater (which has tons of undeveloped land, because it's got a huge ag program) is the building of on-campus "villages," which include outreach centers, more dorms, faculty and student and staff housing (including houses that can be purchased, under certain terms, by faculty). And some Greek houses and student organizations now have on-campus buildings in these "villages." I assume there are stricter terms imposed on the organizations that have facilities in these on-campus villages, but I somehow doubt that they're forcing fraternities and sororities to stop discriminating in their membership (they are by definition gender-segregated and not open to all who wish to join). It's a public university, so I don't know how they reconcile this with their mission.

I don't know that Harvard sororities and fraternities all have actual houses, at all. I don't think they do. But any official functions still have to take place off campus.

Click to expand...

This is the case with some colleges and universities, including private ones. The Greek system at my husband's alma mater didn't have "official" houses, owned by the chapter, though some had unofficial ones that had been rented by members for many years. It definitely changed the flavor of the Greek system there, though there were still issues (ironically, SAE had several reported alcohol poisoning and rape incidents at his campus, just like it did at mine, even without an official house).

Just sticking my nose in to mention that I'm pretty sure the term is 'final club', as in once you join a final club you can't ever be in any other one, so it's final. Not finals as in final exam.

Carry on.

c.e.lawson said:

Just sticking my nose in to mention that I'm pretty sure the term is 'final club', as in once you join a final club you can't ever be in any other one, so it's final. Not finals as in final exam.

Carry on.

Click to expand...

I know that only from the movie The Social Network. I get Harvard Alumni newsletters in an old email box (I did not go to Harvard, but I attend Radcliffe Institute events occasionally). I scrolled through months of emails but I don't see this in any of the old newsletters. It's all over my Facebook feed, though, as several friends were in sororities and are not impressed.

The Assassin's Guild is more fun, anyway.

There are some oft cited clains that men in fraternities are about 3x more likely to commit rape than the general college male population.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/24/rape-sexual-assault-ban-frats

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2014/oct/21/fraternities-and-campus-sexual-assault-problem/

http://gawker.com/every-rape-reported-at-fraternities-this-year-1671299377

Of course, finding active links to the original journal articles that originally presented these data in the popular media articles is an exercise of frustration. There was a big study published in the journal Social Problems in 2006:

http://gendersexuality.uchicago.edu/projects/sexual_assault/pdf/2006_armstrong_ethnography.pdf

that looked at the problem of college rapes, but it's devoid of figures, tables and other compact and easily assessed data. I skimmed it, and the Greek system is clearly part of the problem, but one question I have is how much of the correlation because the gender-segregated system that revolves around prodigious drinking and pursuit of hook ups actively cause (or at least encourage) rape and teach men how to be rapists versus how much is because the kinds of guys who would be rapists no matter what gravitate to these organizations. Or to put it another way, how much of the rampant rape committed by fraternity men is simply a reflection of what's going on elsewhere but it's more concentrated in the places where male students of these types aggregate?

My hunch is that it's a mix of factors.

When I was a police officer a common call on weekends was complaints about loud, out of control parties.

A lot of times these were in minority communities who had no love for police. But the absolute worst, in terms of both verbal abuse and actual physical injuries received by officers during confrontations, fueled by alcohol, were the frat parties at the off campus frat houses -- commonly known as fraternity row.

A more arrogant and unpleasant group of young men I have seldom seen.


ETA These were often indeed, the future leaders of society. Which may explain a lot about the state of our nation.

rugcat said:

When I was a police officer a common call on weekends was complaints about loud, out of control parties.

A lot of times these were in minority communities who had no love for police. But the absolute worst, in terms of both verbal abuse and actual physical injuries received by officers during confrontations, fueled by alcohol, were the frat parties at the off campus frat houses -- commonly known as fraternity row.

A more arrogant and unpleasant group of young men I have seldom seen.


ETA These were often indeed, the future leaders of society. Which may explain a lot about the state of our nation.

Click to expand...

Interesting observation. I'm not in a position to confirm this, but it wouldn't surprise me.

I'm honestly surprised that many calls made it to the police. Universities generally drill the idea of "don't call police, call campus security!!!" into their students.

Cyia said:

I'm honestly surprised that many calls made it to the police. Universities generally drill the idea of "don't call police, call campus security!!!" into their students.

Click to expand...

If I read RC's post correctly, these were parties at off-campus fraternity houses, ones that would be concentrated in specific neighborhoods near campus on a "fraternity row." In these cases, residents annoyed by loud parties have no choice but to call the city police, as campus security (or campus police) can't help them.

Roxxsmom said:

These were parties at off-campus fraternity houses, ones that would be in neighborhoods near campus. In these cases, residents annoyed by loud parties have no choice but to call the city police, as campus security (or campus police) can't help them.

Click to expand...

Exactly.

rugcat said:

A more arrogant and unpleasant group of young men I have seldom seen.


ETA These were often indeed, the future leaders of society. Which may explain a lot about the state of our nation.

Click to expand...

That's basically the same argument I've been making here for years.

Don said:

That's basically the same argument I've been making here for years.

Click to expand...

Thanks, Don. I was in a fraternity - back in the 60's - and loved it.
I never thought of myself as arrogant and unpleasant.

Gregg said:

Thanks, Don. I was in a fraternity - back in the 60's - and loved it.
I never thought of myself as arrogant and unpleasant.

Click to expand...

Perhaps the fraternity you belonged to did not get drunk every weekend nor fight with the cops once a month.

Nor rape women foolish enough to pass out at one of those drunken parties. Nor accidentally kill fraternity pledges with stupid and violent hazing rituals.

Or perhaps fraternities were quite different back in the 60s.

Or perhaps not everyone who belongs to a fraternity is a jerk, and some fraternities are actually really great places and really do have great young man living in them. In all seriousness, I'm quite sure that is the case.

But not the ones I came in contact with.

Gregg said:

I was in a fraternity - back in the 60's - and loved it.
I never thought of myself as arrogant and unpleasant.

Click to expand...

Chances are a lot of other people did, though. Whether or not you deserved that.

The exclusionary and snobbish nature of college social fraternities and sororities, in general, is offensive to many. And often meant to be so.

caw

When I was in school, some frats had better reputations than others. There were some where the guys were considered smart and studious. They tended not to be the ones that had the big keggers or had alcohol poisoning incidents during hazing. Other fraternities thought of them as "pinheads" or "losers."

Some had reputations for having guys who were more mixed in terms of character, though in hindsight the fact that the "nicer" guys in these frats hung out with the not-so-nice ones surely said something about them. There were at least a couple at my campus, though, that were considered pretty dangerous places for women to go without someone at your back.

Both were known for serious hazing mishaps and rapes that were actually called rapes, even back then (and more incidents that we didn't quite think of as rape yet but we knew we didn't want to happen to us).

As for the snobby and exclusive part, that rep was reserved mostly for the sororities (though the fraternities were also exclusive). This is because the sororities did their recruitment via a fall formal rush which cost a lot of money, and while most women who participated got bids from at least one house, there were a few who didn't get any (lots of catty whispers about those). The fraternities had informal rush that involved a lot of drinking parties in the fall, so the initial process was more affordable, though I'm guessing it still cost a lot to be in one.

Another thing that was hard not to notice was how racially segregated most fraternities and sororities were.