<p>I am so sorry for your loss. While it is not much consolation, this chapter’s history will always include the story of what happened to your friend. I don’t think there could be a more profound way to make the point about drinking and hazing. </p>
<p>The one this weekend was at SUNY Albany at an “underground fraternity” or an unrecognized fraternity</p>
<p><a href=“http://albany.twcnews.com/content/news/786082/ualbany-student-dead-after-alcohol-related-incident/”>http://albany.twcnews.com/content/news/786082/ualbany-student-dead-after-alcohol-related-incident/</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just because the membership turns over after four (or five or six, depending on graduation rates) years does not mean that the fraternity’s culture will change. Indeed, colleges as wholes do not tend to radically change their student culture in just four to six years.</p>
<p>Re: <a href=“http://www.coloradodaily.com/ci_13968516”>http://www.coloradodaily.com/ci_13968516</a></p>
<p>It looks like CU derecognized the IFC and all fraternities in 2005 after they refused to agree to some reforms, including having rush only in the spring. It looks like CU still does not have any recognition or affiliation with the IFC, according to <a href=“http://www.coloradoifc.org/system/documents/2360/original/Belief_Statement__Fraternity_Community_Jan_2014.pdf”>http://www.coloradoifc.org/system/documents/2360/original/Belief_Statement__Fraternity_Community_Jan_2014.pdf</a> .</p>
<p>Here are the conditions that CU sets for a fraternity to be recognized: <a href=“Fraternal Organization Policy | Campus Policies | University of Colorado Boulder”>Fraternal Organization Policy | Campus Policies | University of Colorado Boulder;
<p>That such conditions were (and still are) considered unreasonable by the fraternities says something about those fraternities… and that 11% of male CU students still join the unrecognized off-campus fraternities also says something about those students…</p>
<p>You’re kidding right?</p>
<p>your daughter is the kind of kid who is most at risk, chinamom. Please talk to her about safety and how to protect herself at parties. It’s the naive girls who get into trouble on campus, not the cynical ones. There is a reason that the first semester up to thanksgiving is considered the “red zone” for rape for college women. They do stupid things because they have no experience and do not know when they are in a dangerous neighborhood on campus. Dangerous neighborhoods and dangerous situations on campus do not look like dangerous situations elsewhere. They look perfectly safe to the untrained eye. </p>
<p>And she may experiment with drinking as soon as she is away from your watchful eye. With no experience with alcohol, she is at greater risk of drinking too much and endangering herself, or making herself vulnerable to a criminal.</p>
<p>Do not let this poster fool you! </p>
<p>chinamomof1 I cannot believe the people in this discussion area. They probably don’t know the values that hard working Chinese parents instill into their children. They don’t have to worry about things that other ethnic groups might have to worry about. My DD will never drink or do drugs because I instilled in him these morals, the ones that you have as well.
Even if my son by chance, gets touched by Satan, and does these awful things, I have prayer on my side. Really that is the only thing you need to be a successful parent.</p>
<p>Chinamom is [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/17777043/#Comment_17777043]funny[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/discussion/comment/17777043/#Comment_17777043]funny[/url</a>]. </p>
<p>CU-Boulder has an IFC, uses ‘University of Colorado at Boulder’ in its literature, so is not operating underground. All fraternities that have houses are off campus, not owned or operated by the university. I do not think the fraternities use university facilities for meetings or events, and the IFC office is no longer in the student union and no student funds are given to the IFC. That’s about the only difference from when the IFC was a student group. Why wouldn’t the fraternities agree to the University’s demands in 2004? I think many of them couldn’t have afforded to survive. Several own houses that are very large, and Boulder zoning ordinances require a certain number of people to live in the houses in an 18 month period or the capacity is lowered (currently grandfathered in). This happened to my sorority house and then we couldn’t afford to run a house that slept 50+ people when the city only allowed 18 (and that would have included the house mother and house boy if we had them). Sold that house and moved into another, much bigger, house. No frats in Boulder had house mothers! Many of them didn’t have kitchens. Some were just a rented house with 10-12 brothers living there and this new rule would have closed those houses. When comparing the pros and cons, there were more pros to the IFC continuing as it was and giving up their office at the Union. </p>
<p>There was a campaign on to switch all Rush activities to spring (nationwide) and while that worked at some schools, it didn’t work at others (again, numbers need to be maintained, budgets need to be met), so many schools reverted back to fall rush (sorority and fraternity). </p>
<p><a href=“http://coloradoifc.org/”>http://coloradoifc.org/</a></p>
<p>But this is how Greek organizations are operated at other schools too, like Harvard. Off campus, but chapter with national affiliations do join together and agree on rules, and usually form an IFC and a Panhellenic group.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>According to <a href=“Fraternal Organization Policy | Campus Policies | University of Colorado Boulder”>Fraternal Organization Policy | Campus Policies | University of Colorado Boulder; , the requirements are:</p>
<p>
</code></pre>
<p>The previously linked news article indicates that #1 (no fall rush) was something that they did not want to agree to. I would not be surprised if #3 (obey all laws, presumably including liquor laws) and #2 (have someone else around who may keep them honest about #3) were also considered problems by them.</p>
<p>Now, those rules sure seem quite reasonable – frosh have a lot on their plates adjusting to college in their first semester, and fraternities really shouldn’t be places where liquor and other laws are routinely violated. That the fraternities consider them unreasonable says a lot about them. Does not having fall rush actually matter in terms of housing occupancy, since the frosh pledges are presumably living in the dorms in the frosh year and then only move in to the fraternity house sophomore year, whether they pledge in the fall or spring?</p>
<p>Yes, it is true that there are places where the fraternities (or some of them) are completely off-campus and unrecognized, but are hardly “underground”. That may be more likely where the previous ties to the campus (if any) were relatively weak, but the fraternities were able to be self-sustaining even if only a relatively small percentage of men joined despite official discouragement.</p>
<p>Yes, having members join in the fall and not in the spring can mean thousands of dollars difference. If dues are $300-500 per semester (I have no idea as they all differ), and you pledge 20 guys, that’s a lot of money. The sororities are pledging 80+, so those dues add up. </p>
<p>I’m not saying the rules don’t make sense from the University’s point of view, but many of the fraternities couldn’t meet them (house supervisor living in, no fall rush) and others didn’t think the payoff (using university facilities) was worth it. NONE of the fraternities took the deal and decided to organize off campus. It is no different than a religious group that wants to form on campus but won’t agree to let anyone join or follow the rules set for student groups on campus. They can still be an organization, just don’t get student fees and can’t meet on campus.</p>
<p>At some schools, the houses are right on campus and the university is the landlord. That isn’t the case in Boulder, so the university didn’t have a lot of leverage. The University offered the deal and said ‘take it or leave it’ and the IFC said no deal. These weren’t just the college students making the decisions but their advisers (alums), many of whom are lawyers and accountants. It’s worked fine for 10 years and I don’t think there are plans to change. The sororities, also not tenants, could easily agree to the university’s requirement (except they do still do fall rush) as they all had house mothers, couldn’t serve alcohol (Panhel requirement), do follow all laws (as do the fraternities and the fraternities do not, I believe, buy alcohol from the treasury but, like the dorms, individuals buy it) so sororities got to keep their office on campus and use the campus facilities if needed (they use the meeting rooms for Rush, and sometimes host activities on campus but not often). Why should the fraternities subject themselves to university oversight if there is no benefit? They are already supervised by their national organizations, their alums, IFC and (believe me) the Boulder police.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, please again.</p>
<p>Rolling Stone today:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-20141119”>http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-20141119</a></p>
<p>Thanks, @HarvestMoon1, for that link which I unfortunately read before trying to eat breakfast. Bay? Bay? We need a denier!</p>
<p>My son shared the rolling stone article with me yesterday. I have not been able to stop thinking about it. We live in Virginia and words cannot even describe how I feel about this. It is beyond horrible. Heartbreaking. The fact that other women would want the victims to keep their mouths shut so that their own social status is not ruined is just unbelievable, reprehensible. I read the university president’s response. Hopefully this will spur UVA and other colleges to make meaningful changes. One can hope.
This just makes me so sad. </p>
<p>@hawkbird, In HS, my DS called 911 when a classmate became unresponsive at a party. Thankfully, after a night in the hospital, he was okay, and nobody got into legal trouble (Good Samaritan laws). The shocking thing to me was the students (and parents!) who were upset that a good party had been interrupted and who felt that, since the boy lived, the 911 call was unnecessary. </p>
<p>People’s callousness and self-interest seem worse than years ago, but maybe I’m deluding myself that it was ever better. </p>
<p>@hawkbird “This just makes me so sad.”</p>
<p>What really makes me sad is that the President of UVA is a woman and so is Dean Eramo, the head of UVA’s Sexual Misconduct Board. That is really tough for me to take. </p>
<p>And just think about the type of men that they set loose on society having never been held accountable for their actions. The article cites Jesse Matthew who was accused of 2 sexual assaults in college but never prosecuted. </p>
<p>At this point I just hope the girl takes the matter to the police. </p>
<p>Re the Rolling Stone article: Did anyone look at the comments? Mostly people calling it a smear, saying the reporting was shoddy because the author called it a “campus” not “grounds”, claimed the wrong singing group performed the song, and that personally the commenter had never heard anyone call it UVrApe. Also that UVA wasn’t the only school were people were raped…</p>
<p>In other words, not focusing on the big issue. </p>
<p>Jackie’s story was horrifying. Based on the article I did get the sense that the prevailing attitude there is different than at other schools, with practically no one willing to believe a victim, or even if they do believe, willing to sweep it under the rug. With some of the cases we’ve discussed at other schools, you see women being told by friends, “yes, you were raped, go report it.” Yet at UVA, (in the instances reported in the article) it seems like the people who reported were shunned rather than supported.</p>
<p>I understand we really only got one side of this story (an extremely compelling side), but it appears the administration effectively shut down the ability for anyone else to talk, and students somehow feel more loyalty to the name of their school than to specific students in their community who have been wronged in many ways.</p>
<p>The entire thing is horrible in the extreme. Even worse that the act of a single predator is a bunch of guys treating a human being like a piece of meat in a planned gang rape. They called her “it”? Then, the so-called friends not wanting to report it because of their social lives? Is there no point at which people would say if that’s what social “success” is like around here I want no part of it? But I can’t get over the fact that someone called her names and threw a beer bottle at her which broke on her head, leaving a bruise–she’s lucky it wasn’t far worse–and her response was not to pull out her phone and call 911 on the spot. And take a picture of the guys. Kids take pictures of everything else. How intimidated and down-trodden do you have to be to shrug off something like that! It is horrifying. Poor kid. </p>
<p>I wonder what it would be like if they put out a youtube video with every one of those 50+ girls telling their story. Not showing their faces. Would something happen? How about a facebook page with one story a day? They don’t have to name names. Just tell the stories.</p>