<p>So, behaving according to your rules is now the law of the land. That’s a TALL order to fill. What other decrees do you have? How do you feel about the (un)dress of WV Roma girls? I find it rather disturbing. Must be ended.</p>
<p>Decree? Law of the land?</p>
<p>How horribly wrong is it to think that “And that solution is to get rid of those organizations that never care to learn to behave.”</p>
<p>Did somebody die at this party?? I must have missed that. I can understand your veiwpoint on fraternities Xiggi and have read your thoughts on that subject in other posts. I don’t understand the vitriol toward the school, but whatever…I guess everyone has an axe to grind. As a usual lurker here, I do tend to enjoy most of your comments though.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this is an excellent question. I think what gets jumbled up in these situations is racism v. nationalism. Is communicating that one does not like or respect France by mocking its socialistic policies, the body odor or cowardice of the French, and calling them “Frogs,” the same as communicating one’s racist hate for Whites? If not, why not? By the same token, is making fun of Mexico by stereotyping its citizens the same thing as expressing racist hatred toward Latinos? </p>
<p>Racist treatment of Americans is unlawful in this country. Expressing hatred for or derision of foreign countries is not even remotely criminal in this country. The law treats these actions very differently. Why is that? This is why I wish people of all races in this country would drop their country/continent-of-origin self-description, and call themselves something else, like Blacks and Whites do. Then a “Mexican” or “Asian” themed party would obviously not be about Americans. (Note what the attendees were wearing - do Asian-Americans dress like that? I’ve never seen any, and I live in CA.)</p>
<p>“Please don’t let this influence your decision to come to Duke.”</p>
<p>But herein lies the problem. These things continue to chip away at the reputation of a very fine institution. This is just the most recent of the many fiascos that always seem to erupt on that campus. I place the blame squarely on the administration, who just refuse to come down hard and take back the reputation of this University. They are moving in a direction that will not serve them well.</p>
<p>Maybe we should throw a Duke-themed party!</p>
<p>Bay - thanks. I really did mean it as a serious q. </p>
<p>For example, one of the photos posted (with the face blanked out) showed a presumably non-Asian girl wearing one of those pointy types of hats that I recognize / associate w Asian origin. Is that offensive in and of itself?</p>
<p>agreatperhaps at #13 gave a great answer to Pizzagirl’s question. </p>
<p>There’s a gulf of difference between having cultural themed parties and ones which cross the line into racism. It would take someone who’s lived under a rock or extremely/deliberately obtuse to be unable to tell the difference in this or other similar cases. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since some French do consider themselves to be of a certain race, the “Frog” epithet would be considered racist and wrong by many. If you haven’t noticed, it’s also no longer considered acceptable to call a German or someone of German descent a “kraut”. </p>
<p>As for making fun of the French for their supposed cowardice…IMO you’d just be betraying not only ignorant jingoistic attitudes, but also complete cluelessness about the actual French history. </p>
<p>In reality, it wasn’t due to the lack of French bravery that France fell within a matter of weeks in 1940 as 85,000+ dead French soldiers alone would attest. It was outdated strategy/tactics and poor leadership among the senior brass combined with better German military leadership and their ability to seize and exploit quick opportunities. </p>
<p>I’ve heard even some WWII German war veterans who fought in the Battle of France felt the American tendency to portray the French as cowards is not only in extreme poor taste, but a slur which is grossly undeserved.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know. Neither do I know whether sombreros are offensive at a Mexican party, or berets at a French party, or bowlers at a British party… They are just hats associated with certain countries, as far as I know. I’m sure cobrat will label me “ignorant” for not knowing, but I have no racist intent in not knowing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In this case, the proper spelling is Dook. Ask any tarheel. ;)</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The party was held off-campus in housing not affiliated with the university in any capacity.</p></li>
<li><p>The university was informed by another student that the fraternity was throwing a potentially offensive-themed party (off-campus), called in members of the fraternity, told them to cancel the party. </p></li>
<li><p>The fraternity responded by holding (again, off-campus) a party titled “International Relations. A celebration of all cultures and the diversity of Duke.” (clearly the new title is tongue-in-cheek and meant to pacify administrators but actually did nothing to stem the offensive-factor).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The actual language of the email the fraternity members sent to their guests (?) after being told to cancel their party was:
</p>
<p>I agree that the party is offense and in poor taste.</p>
<p>However, I don’t understand what Duke could have done to stop it?</p>
<p>Does anyone have any ideas on how/what a university can do to prevent a group of adults from holding a get-together off-campus with an offensive, but not illegal, theme? Certainly a school could decide after it occured that a student violated some sort of community standard/value, but I don’t know how Duke - or any institution - could have prevented this.</p>
<p>Nor is this something limited to Duke…racially-insensitive parties and/or students in racially insensitive gear has happened at Harvard ([Columbus</a> Day-Themed Bros and Hos Party at Harvard Sociological Images](<a href=“http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/10/26/columbus-day-themed-bros-and-hos-party-at-harvard/]Columbus”>Columbus Day-Themed “Bros and Hos” Party at Harvard - Sociological Images)), Northwestern ([Northwestern</a> Students In Blackface Spark Outrage](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Northwestern Students In Blackface Spark Outrage | HuffPost Chicago)), UC-San Diego ([‘Compton</a> Cookout’ Backfires by Attracting Actual Compton Residents](<a href=“http://jezebel.com/5529714/compton-cookout-backfires-by-attracting-actual-compton-residents?tag=integration]'Compton”>http://jezebel.com/5529714/compton-cookout-backfires-by-attracting-actual-compton-residents?tag=integration)), University of Texas ([Fraternity</a> Thought it Would Be Awesome to Let Partygoers Cross a Fake Mexican Border During a ‘Fiesta’](<a href=“http://jezebel.com/5946929/fraternity-thought-it-would-be-awesome-to-let-partygoers-cross-a-fake-mexican-border-during-a-fiesta]Fraternity”>http://jezebel.com/5946929/fraternity-thought-it-would-be-awesome-to-let-partygoers-cross-a-fake-mexican-border-during-a-fiesta)), and Penn State ([Penn</a> State sorority girls busted for offensive photo at Mexican-themed party* - NY Daily News](<a href=“http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/sorority-girls-busted-mexican-themed-pic-article-1.1213746]Penn”>Penn State sorority girls busted for offensive photo at Mexican-themed party – New York Daily News)) – just to name a few.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>ΚΣ is a recognized fraternity at Duke, although it does not have housing on campus.
[Chapters</a>, Organizations & Councils | Duke Student Affairs](<a href=“http://studentaffairs.duke.edu/greek/chapters-organizations-councils#node-815]Chapters”>Duke Student Affairs)
Presumably, a school which has some sort of official recognition for fraternities can apply various kinds of penalties, such as limitations on recruiting, or complete de-recognition. Complete de-recognition is likely the most severe possible penalty, but the school also then gives up any means of control over the fraternity if it continues to survive as an off-campus group with no official affiliation.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Private colleges can institute community standard rules which include the possibility of violating them by being a member of a group disapproved of by college authorities. </p>
<p>This is how my LAC has not only able to ban fraternity/sorority organizations from campus since the 1870’s, but also prohibit enrolled students from being members of any such organizations off-campus or “underground” at the risk of being disciplined by the college. This includes the possibility of expulsion on disciplinary grounds. </p>
<p>While enforcement usually don’t go anywhere to the extreme of expulsion or even suspension, the rulebook does technically allow for those penalties for underground/off-campus fraternity/sorority membership. </p>
<p>This isn’t something which comes up as most aspiring undergrads who gravitate towards fraternities/sororities tend to avoid schools like Oberlin where fraternities/sororities aren’t available. </p>
<p>Then again, this fact tends to be a major attractive factor for aspiring students who aren’t into the fraternity/sorority scene or more so, reject such organizations on philosophical/cultural grounds.</p>
<p>For the purpose of these rules, how are “fraternity” and “sorority” defined? How would a college making such rules draw the line between “fraternity” or “sorority” and some other type of off campus organization, possibly with housing, like a co-operative house?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s covered under the rule that all non-academic student organizations must not be highly exclusionary(inclusiveness was highly encouraged) in its selection practices and be transparent in its practices(No secret student societies or pledges to keep organization activities secret from the college community) and currently enrolled students may not be members of organizations on or off-campus which don’t comply with the above. It wouldn’t surprise me if this rule was implemented in the 1870’s not only to combat the perceived exclusionary membership practices of fraternity/sorority organization, but also due to religious factors* and perceptions their presence was having a negative effect on the campus community. </p>
<p>The “non-academic” term was put into place so organizations which are highly selective due to academic merit such as Phi Beta Kappa won’t be banned under those rules.</p>
<ul>
<li>Oberlin was founded by Presbyterian ministers who were part of the “Great Awakening” religious movement in the early 19th century.</li>
</ul>
<p>
</p>
<p>Seems to bleed over into one’s right to free association, however.</p>
<p>For example, as heinous as this example might be - what prevents an of-age college student from going to Ku Klux Klan meetings off campus on his own time, provided the specific activities themselves aren’t illegal? </p>
<p>(Yes, I know, cobrat - a student who went to KKK meetings on his own time would “be regarded” as a jerk and not worth associating with and wouldn’t have any friends and be ostracized. That’s not the point.)</p>
<p>Of the hat isn’t racist, but its use amongst a bunch of disrespectful brats strips it, imo, of culture and makes it the brunt of some insensitive joke.
Fried chicken isn’t racist, right?</p>
<p>Still used to mock blacks.</p>
<p>I’m more for individual accountability but since lawsuits can be brought and won at a corporate level, I know he school will try to suppress such activities. </p>
<p>So for me, I don’t blame the school for kids being silly, dumb or racist or anything unless it was brought up in the application process, was evident to see and they accepted a student regardless of it.</p>
<p>And truly the harshest penalty a school can give is to kick the individuals out of school. </p>
<p>Adios muchachos!!!</p>
<p>But would that ever happen to preppy elites?</p>
<p>*Of course
*the butt </p>
<p>Ew, typos.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Private colleges are not government/public entities. As such, the above doesn’t really apply and if a student was foolhardy enough to use that line of argument to sue such colleges in such a context, most judges would laugh said student and his/her lawyer out of the courtroom.</p>
<p>Moreover, the private colleges could turn the free association argument around and argue that under that very same right…the government doesn’t have the right to force them to accept students they feel are acting/behaving in ways which violate the their respective campus’ cultural and community values*…and likely have a much stronger case as the courts are an arm of the government. As such, their argument that a court order compelling them to keep on a student who violated community standards by joining such organizations would actually be an actual applicable example of violating their right to free association. </p>
<p>Now if we were talking about state universities, however, such a student may have a good case as those institutions are considered a bona-fide arm of the government and thus, held much more strictly to constitutional standards than their private counterparts.</p>
<p>Regarding the KKK, my college’s rules would not only find membership in such an organization problematic in terms of violating community standards due to the organization’s violent history and racist attitudes, but also on grounds it had a history as a secret society and requires pledges from its members to keep certain organizational practices a secret from outsiders. In short…it also fails the transparency test. </p>
<ul>
<li>Values which are written down in the college bylaws and guidebook and ones students agreed to when they accepted the private college’s admission offer.</li>
</ul>