Unlikely the University of Oklahoma will go totally dry; I wouldn't be surprised that even stricter rules on possession and consumption of alcohol in University housing (to include the fraternities and sororities) will be enacted, along with possible mandatory alcohol education sessions in the dorms and Greek houses. The Greek houses that aren't already dry as a matter of national fraternity policy could be forced to go dry or risk withdrawal of recognition by the University. But these are only possibilities; I have no idea what OU's administration has in store in the near future.

Back in my days as an undergrad, the drinking age for 3.2 beer was 18; 21 for "strong beer", wine and liquor. ("Contains in excess of 3.2% alcohol by weight - Oklahoma" used to be stamped prominently on cans and bottles of strong beer, now the less obtrusive cipher "OK+" appears on "strong beer" labels.) Shortly after the fall semester of 1983 began, the drinking age for 3.2 was raised to 21. Correspondingly, the dorms enacted new rules on their residents: if you're of legal age you can possess it in your room, but you could not consume it in public areas of the dorm floor. So, much of the underage drinking (along with the drugs) continued, only this time behind closed doors.

This is a tragic situation. However, I don't think that anyone has the right answer in regards on how to fix it.

Some of you here seem to think that harsher the penalties will do the trick. That alcohol should have no place in greek organizations. Others say that more education will do the trick...

I don't think either will work. On the one hand; dry housing, strictly enforced parties, bigger fines/reprocussions for drinking etc is a horrible idea in my opinion. I personally think that the drinking age should be lowered. Alcohol is a part of our society. No matter how much you prohibit it's use, there will always be ways to get it. People need to be able to deal with the effects that alcohol has on them and know what their limit is. Drinking is present in almost any professional org. you join. Whether it's a social function in Corp. America, the military, gov't, etc. The other side is that I don't think I have (and many others I'm sure) have ever sat in an educational seminar dealing with drugs/alcohol and took it seriously.

By lowering the age, at least people will be introduced by (more than likely) their parents and be in a situation in which there is little risk.

Coramoor, I'm not really sure there's anything wrong with the entire system at OU. From what I've heard and seen, it was more a case of something being wrong with that particular chapter. I doubt that the University will share my view though.

Well, considering we have teens/young adults on The Real World, Road Rules etc who get ridiculously drunk and sleep with anything in sight - and then are rewarded with speaking engagements at college campuses (which they get paid quite well for) and sometimes further entertainment opportunities - why is it surprising that embarrassment is considered something for old people?

DeltAlum, I don't think there should be such a thing as an "anti-drinking campaign" at ANY age. It's one thing to tell a 6 year old that alcohol is bad, but when they get older and realize they won't die from a sip of it, the entire program, along with any legitimate information they've learned, is negated. (This is why some schools stopped the Just Say No program.)

Um I agree with Ktsnake. The Sigma Chi's are notorious for their partying. They have been on probation numerous times. Nothing against them. It's just what they are known for. Over the summer my family employed two Sigma Chis. One was the chapter's VP, he never showed up to work and had very poor work ethics, because he was always partying, not just thurs-sat.. but mon-sat.. which can get pretty hectic, I'm sure. Not that one individual makes up the whole chapter.. he was high in office though. I have friends that are Sigma Chi's and this is all very unfortunate. However Sigma Chi will most likely be back on campus within 5 or so years. This has happened to them before where they have been asked to leave campus. They have a HUGE alumni chpater here.. I don't think OU should be looked down upon.. nor any other sigma chi chapter.. or any other university,, it was just a tragic thing to happen.. if you choose to learn seomthing from it.. good.. if not..let's jsut pray nothing like this happens elsewhere.

If I remember correctly, the Sigma Chis are one of the oldest fraternities at OU in continuous existence. Likewise, they own the house, but not the land, as all the land on South Greek belongs to the University of Oklahoma. (The North Greek houses, if I remember are fully owned (land and house) by the fraternity or sorority.)

Sigma Chi will more than likely stay dormant for a few years until they have an opportunity to recolonize. In the meantime, the alumni corporation will probably lease out the house to a fraternity or a sorority that's colonizing (with the university's blessing).

well right now.. we already have one vacant house on south greek... sigma chi will be our second vacant house... so im not sure we can lease it out quickly.. rumors are delta chi are trying to get a house.. tke's also are here at OU with no house.. and a black fraternity was looking into getting a house.. umm .. the vacant house is owned by alpha phi.. heard they might be coming back.. another rumor that one of the fraternitys here might be leaving ... so that would be another vacancy.. geez.. who knows..

TKE actually has a very nice house from what I've heard. It's just they currently can't afford to pay electric bills, etc. (unless they did very well on Rush). I heard they had a 6-man house pre-rush.

nope.. no house.. delta chi is doing very well though.. i actually went to a lil' party a member threw friday night.. decent sized....not too many tkes .. and def. not enough to afford the houses that are vacant on campus... sigma chi put A LOT of money into their's ... they even have senior quarters in the back.. and made new bars over the summer... it's a shame

Did I say something about an "anti drinking campaign?" I thought what I said is that the present kinds of campaigns (which mostly are how alcohol affects, not anti-drinking) should continue but begin earlier. But the main thing I'm thinking now is that peer pressure for moderation may be the only thing that works.

I couldn't agree more on MTV.

Again, I'm on record as saying the age for drinking beer (at least) should be lowered to 18.

Nah. While I agree that the drinking age should be 18 rather than 21 (for lots of reasons), the fact that the drinking age is 21 is not what's killing people -- they died when the drinking age was 18, as well.

It doesn't matter how low the drinking age is; people who are under that age will continue to drink. (I was drinking at 16 when the legal age was 18.) The fact that it was legal for us to drink beer and wine in college did not make us any less stupid or any less likely to abuse alcohol.

The core parts of the problem are that (1) we talk about anti-drinking campaigns rather than responsible drinking campaigns, and (2) as a society in general and college and Greek communities in particular, we continue to treat alcohol abuse, particularly among young adults as an expected, enjoyable phase of life rather than as a life-threatening problem.

I think DeltAlum is right -- peer pressure is perhaps the only thing that will work. If we as Greeks say "this is not what we're about, and we won't allow our brothers or sisters to abuse alcohol," we might get somewhere.

ETA: I know I'll make lots of folks angry about this, but I'm going to say it anyway:

I think a case in point can be found in the thread on drinking in letters. Why in the world so many GLOs take time and energy to make rules that members can't drink in letters (and then the resulting hyperanalysis on whether a tatoo constitutes "letters" and prevents one from drinking ever) is totally beyond me. Here are the messages such a rule entails:

-- drinking is bad and shows a lack of class, so don't do it; and

-- we know you're going to drink anyway, and we don't trust you to be able stop when you need to stop, so make sure that when you drink you're not wearing letters or doing anything else that would bring the group into disrepute.

If a GLO had a rule that members are not to get drunk in their letters, I could respect that. But this business of "don't drink in your letters," imho, does nothing to encourage responsible drinking and lots to discourage it.

Have at me.

Well said, MystiCat81. I agree.