Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZ-kai-
Is it a policy today that new chapters and re-orgs are substance free? My thoughts are they are not, only substance free housing is one of two reasons. A. The chapter voted this in themselves or B. It was a requirement of the GF and/or the HC Board of said chapter for re-colonizing (IE, Nebraska).
|
I finally had some free time to go through and read the entire document, and I agree with your assessment. The "checklist"- as I would describe it- is fairly clear and it seems to me that this line may be worded to encourage substance free housing, but it certainly does not indicate it is required.
It has never been a requirement of Men of Principle in any form that a chapter have a substance free house- and in my experience that is the number one misunderstanding out there in the brotherhood, for whatever reason.
I personally do not like the idea of required substance-free houses. Too much babysitting at a time when young men should be making their own decisions and living with the consequences.
If a chapter is so bad off that they need to be policed to this extent, there is a serious problem that no rule such as this (which is not easily enforced if a chapter does not want it in place) is going to address.
And some of the most grave RM violations and willful damage of property we have seen in recent years happened in substance-free houses.
That said, there are legimitate arguments that form the basis for substance-free houses which I think could take a better aligned form.
For example, it is not a bad idea to prohibit organized parties in chapter houses. These are the times when strangers come in and do bad things, when houses get torn up, when furniture gets damaged and when guys like me who actually studied at night were kept up to 4 in the morning (though it did not bother me- I tuned it out- it certainly did not make for a very scholastically supportive environment.)
With a policy like this, you do not police and babysit the actives- avoid a significant number, if not the majority, of risk management nightmares.
Better still, you cut way down on damage to the house. In the past 30 years, my chapter's previous house had 2 major renovations to the tune of several hundred thousand dollars.
Considering the costs of even acquiring a new house today on many campuses, alumni are even less interested in (or likely to) write checks to do 6-figure renovations to torn up houses every 10-15 years. And with rising property taxes and costs of occupancy, rent and chapter dues are less able to offer a share towards a long-term fund to do those renovations every decade or so.
A few months ago, I printed out a map of West Campus here at the University of Texas and made a few copies.
On one copy, I marked where all the major fraternity and sorority houses are today.
And on other copies I marked where those same houses were 10, 20 and 30 years ago.
Plus I reflected on events in my time at college and talked with alumni about major events in their time.
If you compare the maps, over time the sororities have remained in place- many of them in prime locations within a block or two of campus.
The fraternities on the other hand, have gradually moved further away- plus the number of houses has been reduced. And in MOST cases, I was able to trace a chapter house movement to the chapter having been shut down due to a serious risk management incident.
And today with all the redevelopment and West Campus going condo- there are not many more places for a fraternity to move anymore. This story is very powerful at UT, but it plays out in some form at many other colleges too as cities become more dense and university enrollment rises.
I am not going to be a hypocrite and babysitter and say all chapters need to be substance-free. I do not see that as the answer.
But we have to do something in a way that makes today better than yesterday and also prepares us for a present and future environment that is different from the past.
Stereotypes about the old days are just that- stereotypes. Texas is full of decades of men who were Greek at UT and are major leaders, businessmen and property owners who have achieved enormous success.
If you want to say the past was all bad, then you are disparaging a pretty illustrious list of our alumni at any school- and prepare to suffer the same fate when a new generation decides you did it wrong.
The answer is, I think, to preserve self-governance and choice- but also provide certain basic rules (like no organized parties in chapter houses) which will make sense to the actives and which they can endorse without feeling like they are giving up their right to learn from experience as did those who came before them.
And again- if a chapter and/or Housing Corp want to go substance-free, more power to them. I cannot think of a single reason why that is a bad idea if the men whose work and effort will sustain the chapter want to do it.
Linear Mode
