While the FIPG certainly asserts constructive policies to address alcohol abuse within fraternity chapters, I think those very critical of the entire Greek system have personally seen that the fraternities are not walking the walk. CYA activities are not going to fool anyone.

HOW, specifically, are individual chapters going to enforce these policies? HOW are the fraternities going to proactively protect these young women? HOW are fraternity brothers going to demonstrate that they take these policies seriously backed up with action, not words? HOW are they demonstrating that they value women?

Until the behavior of fraternity brothers consistently changes, there will be no change in the public perception.

Curious about what GC members think.... do sororities continue to flourish or exist without a fraternity system? NPC Sororities are not causing the problems, but we seem to be gathered up in the condemnation of the Greek system. For that matter, is there any impact on NPHC or MCG orgs?

I think much depends on why young women join a sorority. If it is for the greater association with the men in fraternities and their parties, then I think that the demise of fraternities would affect some recruitments in some sororities.

Back in my day -50 years ago!- the sororities certainly flourished with far fewer ties to the fraternities. We joined up with one fraternity to give a Christmas party for local orphans. And the fraternities sponsored a women, most often a Greek, for Homecoming Queen. And we all participated in Greek Week in the spring with many intermurals and the like.

What we did NOT have were frequent mixers, events where alcohol was served on campus. Women were not allowed in the fraternity houses, nor were the men allowed in ours. And that was very firmly enforced. Larger and more formal fraternity parties with alcohol being served were held in hotels in a neighboring large city. There was also a large and dark nightspot in this same city with live music that served alcohol that many of us went to on the weekends, often with a borrowed ID from a sister.

Many sorority women of course dated, became pinned to, and married fraternity men. But many did not. Same thing with the men in fraternities.

My campus certainly had a party culture that involved the fraternities, but it was very tame and not a prominent feature of life within a sorority. There was one exception with close ties to one fraternity that would have been more profoundly affected without the tie to that fraternity. But not so with all the other sororities on my campus.

It is very likely very different today.

A recent article on nbcnews.com about some steps that UVA will be taking.................

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...roblem-n259326

And here's an article reporting that some Virginia legislators intend to introduce bills dealing with campus rapes:

http://www.wdbj7.com/news/local/lawm...-laws/30006834

The legal folk should be able to address this.

Aren't there federal laws that state that the university must provide all students - regardless of sex - the right to equal campus activities? (I know the wording is off.) What I mean is, does a university that allows GLOs for one sex have to allow GLOs for the other sex? If so, then it seems that the university would not be able to ban male-only GLOs while allowin female-only ones.

I think that sororities could survive without fraternities although I'd imagine we'd see their scope and size change depending on the campus climate. Could fraternities survive without houses? What if, instead of removing the orgs, they removed the housing? I am from and work on a campus that has both housed and unhoused fraternities and it seems to have little bearing on recruitment for the fraternities.

Studies have been done.. whether they are credible is up for debate.

Expecting college kids not to drink, period, is an unreasonable expectation. NPC groups have avoided a lot of liability by allowing fraternities to assume a lot of it. Things like dry housing also come with a lot of unintended consequences. Alcohol.edu is actually a pretty good program and ensures that members at least have access to information before making poor life choices. Are 18/19 year olds going to still make poor life choices? Of course.

In 99% of our chapters, there is absolutely nothing wrong. We are talking about a small minority of problem chapters.. and as we saw with schools like UVA, both Pike and Sigma Nu were proactive. Before anything serious happened, those chapters (Pike's Alpha chapter and Sigma Nu's Beta chapter) were shut down. Some national groups probably do a better job of taking the initiative and some groups are a little hamstrung by their own legislative processes seeing as this was an issue which was suddenly huge on the radar, many of us can't react in a huge way until our major legislative assemblies take place.

That's a little offensive. This issue, kind of like school shootings, kind of like terrorist attacks, etc., while real and while needing to be addressed is not nearly so pervasive as your above sentence would suggest. Fraternity chapters are not consistently places where women can expect to be raped. The problem is real, but let's not blow it out of proportion.

I disagree. NPC sororities are not causing the problem, but certain things they do are enabling it.

-Sororities continue to socialize and support fraternities that are well-known to act like a-holes (this isn't just rape, this is a host of other things) if they are "popular" enough. Men will continue to join a fraternity that engages in questionable practices if it's known that attractive women hang out there.

-The prohibition on alcohol in NPC groups' housing makes sorority women dependent on men for a social space. Most of the time, this ends up meaning fraternities. It's an attitude from the 50s - the 1850s - and it needs to be scuttled. Putting the hosting ability in women's hands means men that engage in unpleasant practices won't be welcome. (Saying this as someone who has thrown a-hole men out of her house) As long as women are seen as "unable" to handle alcohol in their houses - by their own sisters - it'll breed a patriarchal and unequal atmosphere.

This is another huge part of the problem. The 21 year old drinking age makes fraternity houses the only place for the majority of college students to socialize - when in reality, they'd sometimes probably be safer at a bar, even a dive bar. The problem is places just can't look the other way as far as fake IDs and such anymore. The stakes are too high.

I'm not so sure... I even buy the premise that it should not be difficult to convince men not to rape women. I think it's an incredibly reasonable proposition.

I hate to ask this question, but I will do it anyway.... WHY is alcohol allowed in fraternity houses, ESPECIALLY those that are on campus? Is it the "I would rather that they drink at home" justification? Alcohol seems to be at the root of many of these incidents.

Way too late, that train has already left the station and is barreling down the tracks.

Some reporters have finally started using their critical thinking skills and are raising some questions about the Rolling Stone allegations. It won't matter. The author has even responded by stated that we shouldn't concern ourselves with the facts, it's the overarching theme that's important.

It's up to each of on our own campuses to get in front of the issue then, even if leadership from our HQs or the FIPG isn't really there.

I'm personally going to make a point of reaching out to my officers and to our Greek Life office to see what kind of sexual abuse/domestic violence prevention programs we are utilizing on campus and I'd like to make sure that we have programs in place to educate students and to encourage victims to come forward and deal with the issues which will happen.

A lot of campuses have "that" house and it's high time we start identifying those chapters and dealing with them more proactively and aggressively when their HQs refuse to in order that we don't all suffer for something their members do.

I have no quarrel with this, it's a very common sense approach to a specific problem. The issue I have is the ever expanding definition of the problem (which is a direct result of blowing the problem out of proportion). I've read some of the cases that have gotten some high profile media attention....not just the media version, but the actual case records where available. In so many of them, the facts are the same. Two very drunk (but not incapacitated) students having sex that they probably wouldn't have if they were stone cold sober. I'm not sure how education is going to change that. And it's a very different problem than the much more rare problem of the predator who uses alcohol in a deliberate way to facilitate sexual assaults. But the fear mongers are treating them exactly the same.

That's not the same as a rape and definitely not the sort of thing which allegedly happened at UVA. And these situations where sex is consensual and the female decides she wants takesie backsies and asks for charges to be filed are true horror stories which many schools' implementations of Title IX have led me to believe the male student could be victimized by a process rigged in the favor of the alleged victim.

And again, we are -->here<-- on that issue. The best we can hope for is to have open dialog with the schools, take appropriate steps for prevention and when it does happen, we want to avoid an us vs. them approach with our host schools. Our national organizations need to take good looks at shutting down some of the problem chapters regardless of how much $$ those chapters generate. Schools need to do a better job communicating with national groups as to which of their organizations merit inquiry and schools need to look at policies of exclusion for national organizations who do not play ball with universities which are trying to protect their students.

No, I don't agree. School shootings, and especially terrorist attacks, are orders of magnitude rarer than rapes in fraternity houses or by fraternity men.

I'd be willing to bet that most of us on GC are aware of one or more sexual assaults that occurred within the Greek system of our own campuses. I know survivors from my alma mater. In fact, it might be easier to count those of us who are not aware of any such events from our colleges. But the vast majority of us attended colleges where there has never been a school shooting. And that is true even though rapes can and do stay secret, and school shootings do not. We're talking about many thousands of rapes vs. dozens of school shootings at most.

I think that depends on what we're talking about when we talk about rapes and sexual assaults for purposes of the comparison Kevin was drawing. Are we talking about any instance where alcohol abuse by both parties makes consent murkey or meaningless, or where consent is withdrawn? Or are we only talking about those instances where there is a deliberate and conspiratorial intent and plan to rape or assault, such as what has been described at UVA. I think when Kevin made the school shootings and terrorist attacks comparison, he was speaking only of the latter kinds of rapes and assaults, not date rape and the like.

Which is not say one is a problem and one isn't; not at all. But they're not exactly the same problem.

I agree, it's not the same thing as the alleged crime at UVA, but the media, as well as the OCR and many campus admins are treating it as all the same problem. That's my point. That's where all these scary statistics come from. I believe the Rolling Stone article made the claim that one in three females at UVA is assaulted at some point. Sorry, but that just defies common sense logic. What parent in their right mind would continue to send their daughters to such a dangerous place? And with the article's emphasis on the horrific gang-rape, it is definitely written to conflate some very disparate problems all into one ugly "rapists are everywhere at UVA" reaction.

And they would not benefit from the same solution. A predatory rapist isn't going to be amenable to being "taught" not to rape. And thinking that college expulsion is a proper resolution seems insane.

So why are so many activists (and media) using this "it's all the same big problem" approach?

How, exactly, are you defining date rape? The RS article involved a woman who was raped by a man she knew and was on a date with. That pretty classically meets the definition of "date rape."

Kevin, I did not mean or even imply that the description of the truly craven behavior of the fraternity men described in the RS article applies to all fraternities or all men within any given fraternity. What I AM saying is that the public perception of MANY -and even before the RS article- is that the fraternities are characterized by heavy drinking, sex-obsessed young men. And to change that perception, fraternity men on campuses will need to take a very firm and consistent stand that they in no manner defend or support that kind of behavior. What can you do? Enthusiastically sign on to things like the blue armband bystander programs which are developing on college campuses. Form escort groups to see young women safely home to their residences. And many more affirmative programs that I'm sure you all can develop.

As part of the non-aired emergency meeting at UVA held with its Board of Visitors, Administrators, and student leaders, the IFC President said (paraphrased) that as much as it hurts him to acknowledge it, rape is a serious problem within the UVA fraternities.

Candor and a courageous acknowledgement of the reality of the problem is what parents, alumni, students, and community members are looking for. And constructive steps to deal with it. Looking for those very rare instances of false rape reports or other attempts to minimize a very serious problem are not being seen at all favorably. Wrong focus for now!

I was very surprised to see that Sigma Nu is no longer on my undergraduate college campus. Sigma Nu was always a very solid chapter and remained so when I took our youngest to look at the music department there. One of its members drove us around and escorted us to the buildings we needed to go to. A complete gentleman.

I just hate seeing what is going on now in what were once very respected fraternities!

An example of "raising some questions about the Rolling Stone allegations":

http://www.timesdispatch.com/opinion...084c116e2.html

The Seven Society at UVA is offering money ($57,777.77) for bystander training and other training-- the gift is offered to honor several students, including "Jackie" (of the Rolling Stone story):

http://inthecapital.streetwise.co/20...ates-57777-77/

This is a great start! Now I HOPE that fraternity men rise to the occasion and get bystander training for themselves. Would be a great pledge activity!

How dense can you be? According to the article, she was raped by 7 men. She was NOT on a date with 7 men. This was NOT date rape. It was a horrific gang rape.

It started out with "Drew" taking Jackie on a date. After a dinner at a restaurant, they went back to the Phi Psi house. There "Drew" acted like the Judas goat and led her upstairs where she was gang raped by the other seven men.

Pretty dense. Please educate me on which types of rape rise to the level of "horrific" and which types we don't really have to worry about.

Where did she say anything about there being types we don't really have to worry about?

This is the lead example from a in-depth 7 page article on rape at Swarthmore.

Read more at http://www.phillymag.com/articles/ra...ZQp0kvx6mIf.99

Would anyone characterize this as equally horrific to the gang rape described in the RS article? Anyone?

I realized after I posted and was away from any computer that I did not phrase my post well. My point was simply that I didn't read Kevin to be drawing an analogy between the frequency of school shootings or terrorist attacks and the frequency of all kinds of rape or sexual assault. I took him to be drawing an analogy with the frequency of rape and sexual assault that is the result of conspiracy between and participation of numerous fraternity members and that is explicitly or implicitly tolerated if not encouraged by the chapter as a whole.

Please identify one, just one, person on this thread who has suggested that there ever is any kind of rape we don't really need to worry about.

It is unclear whether honorgal is ranking rape.

Well, I'm looking at the whole quote, including the sentence it was responding to:

There's nothing there limiting the comparison to premeditated and chapter-sanctioned gang rape -- and I doubt many victims care whether the act was premeditated/sanctioned or not, anyway. Fraternity houses ARE consistently places where women are at risk of rape. So are parties in dorms. It's smart for women to view them as potentially dangerous and take certain precautions (buddy system, not putting down their drinks, etc.). That's nothing like a school shooting.

Why are they not giving $77, 777.77???????? This bothers me.

As for that T-D article, I really really really hope that RS isn't pulling a Janet Cooke, although with the levels they've sunk to in their journalism overall, I wouldn't put it past them. They're desperate to remain relevant. And yes, it DOES matter if the story is real, regardless of what the school's culture is.

... And here is an advantage of joining a sorority: A sister has your back.

I once had to withdraw cash from an ATM in a somewhat sketchy part of town. My sorority sister "D", who grew up in a sketchy town, walked with me to the ATM. I'd have been ok on my own, but I was more than glad for her company.

I can see both of your points. However, reading what you quoted in the context of everything that honorgirl and Kevin have said in this thread—including their suggestions that the totality of instances of rape and sexual assualt may be over-reported and honorgirl's response to DBB a few posts up— as well as in other threads on this and related topics, those aren't the conclusions I come to about Kevin's analogy or about whether honorgirl has suggested that there is a category a rape or sexual assault we don't need to worry about. Even if there some "ranking" of rape going on that treats some kinds of rape as worse than others, that doesn't lead to a conclusion that some kinds rank too low to worry about. The law treats some forms of rape and sexual assault as worse than others based on things like the age of the victim, use of weapons or whether the perpetrator is aided and abetted by others.

If I was a representative of my national HQ who was sent to a chapter to investigate a rape charge, I would find it VERY relevant to my rec to HQ as to whether the rape was a case of date rape between an individual member/per and his victim or whether it was a chapter-sanctioned gang rape. In one instance, perhaps the sanction is to put the chapter on probation, educate them and expel the perp while cooperating with law enforcement vs. shutting the chapter down for several years, expelling all members involved and possibly recolonizing once all of the former members were no longer matriculates at the university in question.

There's a HUGE difference from a prevention standpoint. Is one "worse" than the other? That's entirely subjective.

No.. not "consistently." The vast majority of fraternity houses are totally safe places for women so are dorms. This UVA situation is obviously intolerable and horrible. It is not the norm by a long shot.

Maybe other schools are different, but at least in my school, parties in Dorms had three characteristics that made them safer.
1) The parties couldn't be as loud.
2) Alcohol in the Fraternity houses (even though they were owned by the school) was relatively winked at, in the Dorms it wasn't. (yes, a soda could be hit with a roofie, but the roofie's effects would be more noticed if the early effects couldn't be attributed to Alcohol.
3) While a gang rape could happen in a dorm room away from the party, the chances of the men raping knowing where a room where sounds wouldn't be heard (Say a room immediately under the speakers) is, IMO, less likely to be true.

Note, *none* of these are directly tied to being a Greek Letter Organization, they would be equally true if the <Fill in the Blank> Sports team has a house they live in.

naraht, you're right.

Agreed, but I'm looking at this from the perspective of young women at the school, not HQs.

Yes, consistent RISK. No place in the world is "totally safe" unless you're looking at events retrospectively. We can look back and say that there were zero rapes. But you don't know that 100% of your brothers would never rape anybody in the future. Maybe they're a lot lower risk than guys at some house that celebrates misogyny, but there's risk. Women live in a world with this risk. That's what I'm focused on.

No, of course it doesn't lead to that conclusion. But some people would rather just throw the outrage card instead of have a reasoned discussion.

It's objectively clear that the RS article describing a pre-planned seven person gang rape has lead to a understandably different reaction from a whole host of people (including, but not limited to, reactions in this thread and reactions at UVA) than the article detailing what the Swathmore co-ed went through.

We could find numerous examples of various criminal or unsavory behavior classifications where one fact pattern is more horrific than another. That's one reason why some of our laws have mitigating and aggravating circumstances.