<p>Princeton has a residential college system that has been gaining traction steadily since the introduction of four-year colleges. Some colleges are actually extremely active and cohesive – Forbes and Whitman probably most so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>More, but still not fair. You do not live in an eating club unless you are an officer. The culture of the eating clubs is substantially different in other ways from the Greek system. You get to know the members, but I would say that on average there is not as much intimacy as in a fraternity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is untrue. We do not need Justin Bieber as a music presence, yet he exists as much. More accurate would be to point out the existence of a desire among some for fraternities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again not necessarily true. Smart people make dumb decisions (or continue to make the same ones over and over) all the time. I am not saying that fraternities fit into this category, but simply pointing out that smart people participate is not an argument. A tangential example: I know very smart people who have gotten hospitalized for alcohol poisoning. Binge drinking is not smart despite the fact that smart people participate regularly.</p>
<p>“I am not saying that fraternities fit into this category, but simply pointing out that smart people participate is not an argument.”</p>
<p>You sound very logical. Do you currently attend Princeton? Do you realize you will have to deal with illogical arguments for the rest of your life? That you can do so while remaining calm augurs well for you.<br>
Good luck.</p>
<p>“It is silly to argue that there is no need for sororities and fraternities or that they are stupid institutions. If there wasn’t a need, they would not exist. If they were stupid institutions, there would not be so many smart people participating in them or continuing to support them throughout their lives and into old age.”</p>
<p>Lots of things in the world exist out of habit and tradition that make little sense, and lots of smart people participate in them.</p>
<p>Justin Bieber individually is not “needed,” but there apparently is a “need” out there for a certain type of non-threatening pop singer/entertainer who appeals to pubescent girls and the like. There wasn’t a “need” for his specific precursors–David Cassidy springs to mind, but there are many examples–either. Someone is always filling the need.</p>
<p>Similarly, there is apparently a “need” for whatever is provided by social organizations on campuses, and fraternities, sororities, coed houses, secret societies, final clubs, eating clubs and the like appear to fulfill it. Even colleges with a well-developed residential college system–unfortunately too few in number–and other options such as honors dorms and special interest housing have them.</p>
<p>Having gone through college without any such affiliation, I don’t fully understand it, but it would be foolish to deny that the need/desire is out there.</p>
<p>Rice comes to mind. But their efforts are somewhat undermined by the lack of the ability to provide on campus housing for all four years. As of 2009 (when I last looked at them), they were building more dorms–which should help.</p>
<p>instead of saying need, lets say a demand. </p>
<p>At 3 bucks, I “need” a cup of latte, but only now and then.</p>
<p>If latte were a buck, Id probably “need” one every day.</p>
<p>If latte were 15 bucks, Id never “need” one, except maybe on my birthday.</p>
<p>Some folks “need” latte more than I do, others less. Some need it less because they simply dont “need” a hot dose of caffeine. Some need it less because they prefer tea or hot chocolate, or good old fashioned American coffee.</p>
<p>The underlying purposes that frats serve could be served by other institutions, though that would not be the optimal way to serve them for SOME people. If no substitutes were around at all, folks would still live, though at considerable cost in unmet “need”. I suppose a few might avoid college altogether.</p>
<p>Every college graduate should be required to take at least a semester of economics.</p>
<p>The cost benefit of say, banning them at Princeton, could still be different. (OTOH its not like princeton is banning either. I mean its puzzling that since the title of this thread says banning FRESHMEN (which is the same treatment the eating clubs get) that this keeps coming back to Princeton being unfair to frats and banning them.)</p>
<p>Actually, right now they are necessary. There are not enough dining halls on campus to feed all undergraduates. The eating clubs’ primary purpose is to feed students.</p>
<p>While it’s true that Princeton isn’t banning frats, but just banning freshmen from joining them, the justification is pretty broadly critical:
It does seem a bit hypocritical to me, considering the role of eating clubs in campus social life. I guess the word “prematurely” in the last sentence makes it all OK.</p>
<p>Many of these kids learned their way around a cocktail at exclusive prep schools well before they got to Princeton. And while summering in New England or wherever.</p>
<p>“A major concern is that they select their members early in freshman year, when students are most vulnerable to pressures from peers to drink, and before they have had a full opportunity to explore a variety of interests and develop a diverse set of friendships.”</p>
<p>Seems like the major concern is EXACTLY relevant to the proposed policy. So yeah, it DOES make it okay.</p>
<p>I am surprised that someone who so consistely counsels people to ignore what others think, when it has no tangible impact on them, is so worried about the wording of the justification Princeton uses for a policy that is only setting a level playing field (and to which CC member who attends Princeton or has children attending Princeton has yet objected to)</p>
<p>Hey, I don’t particularly like frats or selective eating clubs, but I also don’t like colleges telling students that they’re forbidden to join off-campus organizations.</p>
<p>I happen to agree that the “old school” policy of rushing during first week freshman year likely isn’t as good as deferring it, whether it’s to second semester or to sometime in sophomore year. No argument with that whatsoever. And, of course, that would apply to eating clubs too.</p>
<p>Seems to me that even if there’s a demand for Greek life on campus, it isn’t incumbent upon Princeton to allow it. I don’t have strong feelings about the wisdom of this policy. I just think that it makes sense for a private school to strive for a particular campus culture and make rules that it thinks foster that desired culture.</p>
<p>One example is the way Harvard requires everyone who lives on campus (which is basically everyone) to buy a 7-day-a-week unlimited dining plan. At many schools, even other Ivies, that kind of policy limiting students’ freedom of choice would be wildly unpopular. Some people prefer to buy fewer meals because they could save money eating ramen in their rooms; others prefer to buy fewer meals because they frequently eat out at expensive restaurants. But Harvard forces everyone to buy every meal served because it wants students from different social groups to eat together as often as possible.</p>
<p>This kind of thing is what private schools are all about, IMHO. You often give up some freedom in exchange for an environment where certain values are fostered.</p>