Sororities seek to change fraternity culture
 

A story out of Penn State:

http://www.philly.com/philly/educati...-20180130.html

I must have missed where being able to wear your letters as soon as you get your bid equals not having a pledge program.

Same article, I think, but no pay wall:

https://www.usnews.com/news/educatio...k-life-culture

This sort of thing reminds me of an orchestra rehearsal I had earlier this week where my section [1st violins] was just mauling the first movement of a particularly difficult symphony. Not only does it contain some really tough licks, but the rhythms seem to be almost at random, the notes come very quickly, are often waaaay up on the instrument where you have to be very precise and so you have this difficult blend of things happening which make it very difficult to play the thing well. It also goes on for pages and pages. We sounded like a pack of wounded cats I'm sure.

A woodwind player suggested that we practice with metronomes. (explanatory note: if you know what this means, you should lol here because no shit we should practice with metronomes [metronomes are beat boxes which help you keep tempo when practicing])

This seems to be a very similar situation. Sororities have for years offloaded all of their liability onto fraternities. We host all of the functions involving alcohol. We host all of the parties on our properties. Sorority members are always happy to attend.

I'm really not interested in what NPC organizations want to tell us we should be doing regarding reducing our liability unless part of that involves NPC organizations setting their own guidelines for their own members to host functions involving alcohol.

This is like the woodwind player, whose part isn't easy, but it's not all that difficult either, coming up with "helpful" suggestions. Fortunately, we're not in a world where the woodwind player can't help the strings do their job better. Sororities actually could do some things to help offload some of the liability. I didn't see any specifics about what suggestions they were offering and I'm happy to know what suggestions they have, but they are in a position where they could actually help. I won't hold my breath though.

I have to admit, the following paragraph shocked me.

"At Penn State, 13 fraternities are under suspension for violations, including hazing and alcohol-related infractions. In comparison, only one sorority — one that is not under the National Panhellenic Council — has been banned for hazing."

Thirteen?! Out of 36?!

Right, but how many sorority members were guests when those alcohol-related infractions occurred?

Exactly Kevin! As a sorority woman, I'm all for reforming the systems that are broken, but the women need to take some responsibility for it as well. They might not be the ones throwing the party, but they know that it's against the rules. Sororities rely on fraternities to host the parties. They bring the booze, we bring the women. Right or wrong, that's the way most do it.

It's not the sororities' job to change the fraternity culture. It's the men's responsibility to change their own culture, if that's what they desire. If the women don't like the fraternity culture, they ought to stop participating with the fraternities.

While I definitely agree it's not their job or responsibility to try to affect our culture, I can see that they are definitely affected in many of these circumstances due to guilt by association.

The solution for fraternities will not be the same as the solution for sororities/women's fraternities. Members of men's organizations don't have the option of simply partying at someone else's house because there is nobody else's house to party at.

If there was a solution to underage drinking, then one of the 50 states which already outlaw it would have figured that one out by now.

Well that's kind of what I am saying. I find it troublesome that the women should say that they want to change fraternity culture, all the while they are partaking in the allegedly inappropriate activities with the fraternities. Like you said upthread somewhere, it's all well and good to say that when you're not the one taking on the liability.

I think, though, that it's the general culture of over-indulgence that needs to be addressed. There's no good reason for any student to be slogging back so much alcohol that it kills them.

The issue is and always will be that young people are programmed to make bad decisions and overindulge.

I would agree with most everyone above, except... look at many of the cases where students are dying due to alcohol. The four cited incidents in the story alone involved the death of a pledge, and all (aside from maybe one) involved hazing.

It's one thing for someone to accidentally get too drunk at a party. It's another to be hazed so heavily by your brothers/sisters that you end up with a BAC well above a .25.

Let's pretend all Greeks start following the FIPG rules and guidelines to a tee when it comes to throwing parties. Do you think the hazing with alcohol would end?

(btw, just to reiterate: I do agree with the posters above that it's not the sororities' place to "fix" the fraternities)

I wonder how many of the students who participated in hazing incidents where alcohol was involved - as instigators or victims - had any experience with or exposure to alcohol before college.

I mean, to me, pressuring someone to drink is so...high school. If one of my sisters didn't want to drink, I couldn't have cared less. The prevailing opinion was "whatever, more for me."

30 years ago, we also didn't have as many people on medications for ADD, depression, what have you. We just didn't. And I think there's probably kids that have been on these meds most of their life and think about it no more than a vitamin, and therefore don't say to themselves "this drug plus alcohol is going to be a hot mess."

If you're following FIPG rules and guidelines, you aren't hazing.

I also don't think we'd have nearly the number of hazing fatalities if alcohol was not involved in the process. If my HQ called me up tomorrow and asked what my recommendation would be to end these fatalities, it would be to remove alcohol from the new member program entirely and make that the focus rather than eradicating hazing right now, today.

In a lot of things, we fail to realize that there are different degrees of bad things. Perhaps we can tolerate the Aziz Anzari version of hazing if we're able to actually do something about the Harvey Weinstein version?

That said, I just want to reiterate that I have a tough time wrapping my mind around how these deaths happen. My chapter does not haze and has never felt the need to haze. Our candidate program is also not six weeks of gifts and it works.

If you mean not allowing NMs to drink while they're pledging, I kind of don't think you can tell someone what to do in their free time. Especially if they happen to be of age.

You can't allow underage brothers and sisters to drink while pledges don't, that's been recognized as hazing since the 1970s.

I don't think that's a thing. As it stands, you aren't supposed to let underage people drink, period.