Forbes: Drunk Female Guests Gravest Threat to Fraternaties
 

http://gawker.com/forbes-columnist-d...est-1638518934

Lovely.

There is something to be said for the fact that women, even in their intoxicated state need to be responsible for their actions and their intake. As women we cannot expect those around us to always take care of our well being. Constant vigilance is all that will protect an individual from harm. Women can be taken advantage of in any state sober or otherwise. However, We. can all look out for each other and if there are women who are beyond their capacities then one would hope that someone would step in and figure out a way to take care of her. So even though this article is crass the writer does have a point, when you see someone inhibits beyond her limits either run far away or call some cops to take care of her. Limiting liability is an unfortunate consequence in this lawsuit ahoy world that we live in.

http://time.com/3426044/forbes-drunk...ernity-hazing/

Here is a rebuttal to that article...

Wow, that Time article has so many errors I don't know where to start.

This is why it's bullshit that women are forced to use fraternities for their social and alcohol spaces. It breeds piggishness and resentment like this.

Fortunately, this dick was fired already.

This is a byproduct of the NPC's determination that all of their houses would be substance free.

Yup.

I would like to see someone to do a study of campi that have local systems where the sororities are just as likely to hold house parties as the fraternities and whether or not the male-female relations are markedly different from systems with NPC groups where that's not permitted (and actually enforced).

It's also a reaction to squeezing of alcohol policies that lend itself to fast drinking in dorm rooms before leaving and the banning of kegs.

What's ironic is that we're seeing on colleges a reproduction of what happened during prohibition. Extreme rise in risky and unhealthy drinking patterns, rather than a reduction in alcohol consumption.

I think we have an unhealthy relationship with alcohol in our country that underlines the whole conversation: binge drinking, irresponsible drunkenness (both male and female), gender dynamics and availability of alcohol at Greek facilities.

First of all, I think the 21-year-old age limit is just incongruous with our notion that you should be a full adult, saddled with full responsibilities and privileges at age 18. Secondly, I think the illegality of drinking for most college students just drives drinking underground, promotes binge drinking and pre-partying, and inhibits real education about responsible drinking.

I would love to see at least some legalization of alcohol consumption at 18 - maybe beer and wine at 18 with full liquor privileges granted at 21. If we legalize it, we can much more effectively regulate it. If students can legally buy a drink when they go out to a bar or event, then they don't have to try to build a quick buzz early in the night that will last them the whole night.

I support this 100%. This American Life did a whole show called "#1 Party School", not a very flattering picture of Penn State life, but what struck me was the beer distributor, who traced the beginning of a lot of the alcohol problems to the rules against kegs at parties.

We didn't pre-game, and NO ONE ended up in the hospital. We drank beer (sometimes too much) but it never got so bad that we poisoned ourselves or relieved ourselves in the townies' shrubbery.

Plus what we're seeing, as fraternities respond to the liabilities of providing alcohol within the house it's now turning to the liability of even letting people in who have consumed before hand.

Some members I've talked to have stated that a person who seems perfectly fine when they walk in the door can be slurring there words in ten minutes when the alcohol hits them.

I'm not sure what the answer is, outside of changing the liability laws and putting some onus back on the students. I know the Indiana Supreme Court heard a case about Wabash College and ruled the fraternity nationals was not to be blamed because they provided enough educational opportunities that they fulfilled their duty to their members. I wonder what would happen if the focus shifted towards education and policies as the way to rule responsibility vs just this was the location where this behavior happened.

I agree with all of this and I wanted to add that a very similar pattern also develops in the military when it comes to underage binge drinking and sexual assault.

I've never understood how at 16 we're "old" enough to take on the responsibilities of operating a motor vehicle, but not "mature" enough to vote or join the military and then you hit 18 and you're "old" enough to vote and go to war, but can't drink until you're 21. It's ridiculous.

You can actually join the military at 17 with parental approval. We need to start teaching students particular strategies to slow down their alcohol intake.

No one is going to change the drinking age before the drinking culture in this country changes. It may seem like a "chicken and egg" thing, but at this point there are tangible benefits to having the drinking age set at 21. At the root of all of this is an unhealthy culture with regards to alcohol. No administration in their right mind would mess with changing the drinking age if the root problem of an unhealthy relationship with alcohol persists. If there are going to be any changes in the drinking age, this will need to be preceded by changes in the drinking culture, specifically young adults learning about responsible behavior toward alcohol before college and demonstrating that they are responsible enough to warrant changing the laws.


From: http://www.livescience.com/43605-dri...ves-lives.html

From: http://www.boston.com/health/2014/07...r7I/story.html

I agree that I would love to see more parents teach their children about responsible alcohol consumption in the home, but I think culture change is much more effective when organizations, schools and governments can coherently enact policies and programs that encourage moderate drinking and strongly discourage heavy drinking.

This is actually a perfect example of what I was just talking about - it often requires a lot of work from many directions in order to affect desired change. I think this quote is misleading, because the entire nation was in the midst of cracking down on drunk driving in multiple ways. The drinking age law was passed in 1981, but MADD was founded in 1980 - which action can you credit the most with that 50% decline in drunk driving? What about heavy national crack-downs on drunk driving, including increased penalties for DUIs and regular police checkpoints? What about the mass media coverage and ad campaigns that really demonized drunk driving in our culture? What about programs that offer free taxis or other rides on big holidays or events? What about amnesty programs that allow underage drinkers a free pass to call in for those free rides or to report illegal activity?