<p>In related news, USC is kicking out its second fraternity in as many months, this time ATO for sexual assault. National CEO of ATO whining of mistreatment,</p>
<p>
<a href=“http://dailytrojan.com/2014/11/17/usc-withdraws-recognition/”>http://dailytrojan.com/2014/11/17/usc-withdraws-recognition/</a></p>
<p>How far have we come?</p>
<p><a href=“What the Cosby uproar says about how far we've come”>What the Cosby uproar says about how far we've come;
<p>Not nearly far enough.</p>
<p>Punishing an entire organization for the acts of a handful of people is not new. The Greek systems where I went to school are large and active, and yet chapters get put on probation or kicked off campus for “lesser” violations (violating the rules on serving alcohol, even if no one has been injured, etc.). One fraternity got kicked off campus for unbecoming behavior by a few members at a formal event in downtown Chicago. While I sympathize, that’s what happens when you join teams and claim some sort of kinship. Sports teams can be disqualified from games and playoffs by the actions of a few; that’s how it goes sometimes.</p>
<p>ATO is well-known, let me put it that way.</p>
<p>And you know that if one kid has an illegal pass in sports, the whole team is banned. You also know that in HS sports, if one player is ineligible, everyone is punished by forfeiting the games.</p>
<p>My criteria for punishing the entire organization on a campus:
<p>Now, if colleges keep these things inside their walls, technically they can just punish the student. And that’s why the police must be involved.</p>
<p>The first step is if a fraternity or sorority, or any other college organization, has a member who is arrested, and the first two conditions are true, the organization is put on a watch list. That should include zero tolerance for violations of university policy, including alcohol and so on. </p>
<p>What if no one is convicted? If no one is convicted, how can we truly know what the truth is? That is, unless the case is thrown out on a technicality.</p>
<p>Many fraternities don’t have houses or even if they do, the members don’t all live there. There is always this weird notion on CC that the moment that someone joins a Greek house, they move in immediately and everything they do socially is within those 4 walls. </p>
<p>To me, the issue is more “did others know and not do anything about” that is problematic. If Joe Frat Guy takes a girl back to his room – or her room for that matter – and assaults her, I certainly hope his brothers spurn him and cooperate fully in any investigation, but they weren’t aware of it going on when it did. The UVA gang-rape thing (which is still literally turning my stomach) where the others knew and egged one another on and no one called the cops or stopped the whole thing – that’s a punish-the-whole-frat kind of deal in my book. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not excusing the guy in the first incident in the least. I’m just saying that there is a difference between individual acts that were unknown to the rest of the house, and acts in which multiple members participated / were aware of / did nothing to stop.</p>
<p>^Exactly. I know some people on this thread hate facts, but we don’t know anything about what happened in the ATO incident. If say, the perpetrator had sex with a woman in his room behind closed doors while she was inebriated and no one else knew anything about it, including during the aftermath, how is that any different than the same scenario happening in a dormitory? As far as I know, they don’t shut down dorms and kick everyone out when a rape occurs in someone’s room. Fraternity houses are living quarters that have been rented and paid for by their occupants.</p>
<p>I’m going to guess that ATO has had issues in the past, and this was the straw that broke the camel’s back, or else that other fraternity members knew about the incident and did nothing about it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This might be unfortunate in the eyes of some, but it is probably the only positive way to send a message of zero tolerance. The objective is that the peer pressure that is often conducive to bad behavior might veer into the other direction. If there is a black sheep in a group, how does an organization react? History shows that the organization is often tasked and expected to defend its own until the end. That is how sportteams react and how unions defend the teachers who are … often beyond reasonable defense. As such if an organization takes the side of one its own, it should also bear the full extent of the punishment. All for one and one for all, or something of that nature. </p>
<p>The reality is that about the BEST we can hope for is for the greek organizations and other associated groups to police themselves and kick the offenders to the curb or under the proverbial bus. Not until that day will anyone with common sense believe that there is a strong willingness to abandon the egregious practices. </p>
<p>Until then, the necessary push to “better” organizations is to decapitate the easy targets (easy for perennial and repetitive abuses) and send a strong message that the schools are coming after all the ones that do not change their behavior. Permabanning a few might lead to a change among the milder ones. Holding groups responsible for the action of individuals is the best chance for the same group to understand their responsibility is to eradicate the bad behavior and not foster and condone it. Throwing a few babies with the bathwater is a small price to pay when the outcome is an increased safety for all the babies on campus. </p>
<p>The problem with holding the entire group responsible is, I’m sure, obvious to everyone. Most fraternity members do not even live in the house. The freshmen live in the dorms, and the upper classmen on many campuses move out of the house because it is not big enough to house everyone. If we are going to punish everyone in the fraternity by banning the organization for actions by one member, are we also going to do that when say, a band member rapes? Or when a member of the Christian fellowship club rapes? Does the band get disbanded and the club banned from existence? What is the bright line test for which organizations get the group death penalty?</p>
<p>If it’s happening in their house at their parties, they are responsible. </p>
<p>Ok, what if it happens in a dorm, after a dorm party? Who gets the group death penalty then? The university?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The resulting problems might be obvious, but over time, organizations that continue to play fast and loose might realize that the time of real sanctions that hit deep and hard has come. The issue of “we are just as bad” as others is a canard. Fraternities that provide housing are not the sole culprit. Other groups, including prized athletic teams, should be treated the same way. And perhaps schools should increase their responsibilities to provide reasonable housing and, in fact, prepare themselves to the eventual relocation of misbehaving organizations. </p>
<p>The point of all of this is that something must be done as accepting the excuses and praying for self-control has proven to be an unmitigated disaster. The ball is in the court of the schools. </p>
<p>If a guy who happens to be a tennis player sexually assaults a woman in his or her dorm room, how is the tennis team (in its entirety) responsible?</p>
<p>I’m sorry, I do think you have to distinguish between situations in which the fraternity (or organization) either created, egged on, participated en masse, or knew-afterwards-and-did-nothing to inform authorities, and a bad act perpetuated by someone who <em>happens</em> to be a member of a fraternity. </p>
<p>If a member of the tennis team sexually assaults a woman at a tennis team function and there is reason to believe that other tennis team members knew or suspected something was wrong and did nothing about it, then yes, the team as a whole should be punished. I think there is a distinction between someone who happens to be a fraternity member assaulting someone “in private” (e.g., not at a fraternity function, not with potential complicit knowledge of other fraternity members), and assaults that happen <em>at fraternity functions</em> (whether on fraternity property or not). But the large majority of what we’re discussing is not “private incidents”, but incidents that happen in conjunction with fraternity functions. As a result, the fraternity as a whole is part of the issue, even if the actions are of one individual.</p>
<p>I agree with that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>PG, why would you think that our system would NOT distinguish various situations? What has been the history so far? How many unilateral decisions that were adverse to organized groups can you count in the past 10 years? </p>
<p>The history shows an endless streak of mild sanctions, settlements, and overall attempst to bury. As it stands, one might have to bludgeon a pledge with a hammer to generate a wave of indignation. That, or daring to videotaping a roommate who invited a non-sanctioned adult to the shared bedroom. I would not be surprised that the expulsion for petty academic “crimes” are a multiple of the ones that resulted into criminal charges. </p>
<p>Inasmuch as switer reactions from the schools in answers to egregious behavior are more than overdue, it would be naive to think that this will happen anytime soon. We are bound to have a lot more interventions a la Dr. Kim than fast and irrevocable punishments. I would not worry for a second about the fact that it will take a LOT for a school to act with a … punishment commensurate with the offense as, in the present environment, sanctions DO reflect poorly on the school. </p>
<p>After all, do you think many enrollment managers, insurance brokers, and bond underwriters welcome the disclosure of murders, rapes, and other sexual aggessions on a campus? Nobody wants to see XYZ.edu being known as the school that had 3 frats closed for hazing or rape incidents. It is bad for business! The fact that the alternative is bad for the students is always an afterthought. Students are paying customers and occasional collateral damage. The first part is of paramount importance; the latter … a lot less. If there were no negative implications of expelling “bad” students and closing fraternities, it will have happened. This is the same kind of logic that saved the the sacrosanct Paterno U as the death penalty that should have been imposed was negotiated down to preserve the “bidness” of foootball and the coffers of the NCAA. </p>
<p>Having the courage to do the right thing WILL cost schools. Few are prepared to accept such proposal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m fine with “punishment,” but how about complete banishment? Will the tennis team be forever banned from existing on campus again? Universities don’t <em>need</em> tennis teams any more than they need fraternities. At least fraternities provide needed housing in many cases. Tennis teams don’t.</p>
<p>I’ll admit I don’t know much about the function of fraternities other than to house frat boys and host parties with underage drinking. What positive function in the life of the university do fraternities serve? Tennis teams at least, in theory, provide inter-scholastic athletic competition. Vital? No. But I’d argue it’s more “valid” than the essential function most fraternities appear to serve.</p>
<p>Fraternities can provide fellowship, social/organizational skills, leadership opportunities, social support, and so forth. All of those things can be very valuable to members, and part of their maturing process. That’s the <em>good</em> side. Even my S, who was a fraternity member but thinks his school should abolish them, will admit that he benefited from some of these things.</p>
<p>Seems to me that the fraternity system as a whole is facing a huge PR problem … what may be something that only represents a small minority of fraternity houses/members is something that colors the perception of them generally. Want people to think you (fraternity system) are actually concerned about this? Then maybe the national chapter of Phi Kappa Psi should mandate that <em>all</em> of its chapters stand down any parties until after the new year, and not allow parties to resume until each chapter has re-examined with some level of national chapter supervision, its policies and the protections it has in place for its guests. UVa’s chapter got caught … but is there something about the culture of the overall frat that somehow encouraged this behavior? Time for some soul searching, gentlemen. Wouldn’t be a bad step for every frat that has had a chapter shut down/banned/sanctioned to take; if it is truly a brotherhood, then the actions on one campus affect the perception of all. </p>
<p>Did the Duke lacrosse scandal reflect on all lacrosse teams across the nation?</p>
<p>Does the athletic scandal at UNC (fake classes for athletes) reflect on every single school that offers athletics?</p>
<p>Do the sorority girls of Miami of Ohio who attended a formal and trashed the facility that it was hosted at reflect on my sorority, which did / does no such thing? </p>
<p>You, ailinsh1, have an issue with fraternitiies in general given your posting. </p>
<p>Like anything else, there are good apples and bad apples in every crowd. </p>