Quote:
Originally Posted by sugar and spice
I'm sure it's taboo to say this on GC, but the problem is that NIC fraternities are largely wedded to this idea that the collegiate chapters are capable of self-government despite the fact that this has been proven untrue for the majority of them.
|
You make lots of good points overall, but I question this one. Has it actually been "proven" that "the majority" of chapters are incapable of "self-government" (which is a much bigger thing than just preventing hazing)? If it has, what's the proof? It's not the statistic you cited:
Quote:
|
SAE's own documentation shows that they've disciplined more than 100 of their 250 chapters since 2007--and that doesn't include the ones who are doing things but haven't gotten caught, or--like with the Salisbury hazing case--ones where the university found the chapter guilty of hazing but SAE failed to act.
|
That's just one fraternity, and it's not a majority of chapters of that one fraternity, unless you can include 26 otherwise unidentified chapters (well, 25 not counting the Salisbury case) that are hazing but haven't gotten caught. Proof means actual data, not anecdotes, showing that more than half of chapters of NIC fraternities are incapable of governing themselves.
I'm not denying there's a major problem. There certainly is. I just question what seems to me like an over-generalization.
Hybrid Mode
