I agree that applicants should avoid Greek-dominated campuses if they are not interested and would be offended by it. For BoolaHI to hold up ASU, PSU and USC as Greek-party campuses is stating the obvious to anyone who did even a little research about those colleges. One would assume that students who choose to attend those campuses are totally fine with the culture, and if not, then they are the ones who made a bad decision and should consider transferring.
Sorry for the provocative headline but why would any parent pay for their kid to be in a fraternity?
To be fair, I purposely submitted my experiences at those notorious campuses, only to balance out the assertion that these are tranquil entities of esoteric pursuit (ok, that’s overboard). That said, these are the largest flagship schools in their states, and thus represent a rather large and dominant populous. Similar things can said about similar institutions in Ohio, Michigan, New Hampshire…and the list goes on and on.
Hyperbole, maybe, but I doubt it…this look an information meeting for application to graduate school at Oxford? see–http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/19/frat-culture-clashes-with-riot-police-at-keene-n-h-pumpkin-festival.html
I read the article and the only time “fraternity” was mentioned was in the title? And I missing something?
Never said it.
Never even implied it.
They seem to have lots of value… for those that are allowed to participate.
My point (and my only point) is that they use arbitrary social criteria to decide who gets in and who doesn’t. At some schools, fraternity membership appears to be a prerequisite to deriving full benefit to the social experience of the school and those students who are rejected are receiving a diminished experience (even though they are paying the same as everybody else).
But they aren’t “paying the same as everybody else.” Fraternity and Sorority members pay annual dues that can run as high as several thousand dollars. People who don’t join the Greek system aren’t required to pay these fees.
Yes, it appears to be, but it is not. Life and happiness is not a simple equation where fraternity membership = flourishing social life. Who is to say that if you don’t get into a fraternity you cannot have a satisfying social life?
Let me present a slightly different scenario:
- Pretend that there are no fraternities
- A school has many parties, social activities, fundraisers and philanthropic events that are school sanctioned and sponsored. These constitute the bulk of the social activity on campus.
- In order to attend these activities, you need a "party pass"
- In order to obtain a "party pass", during your freshman year you go in front of a committee of upperclassmen who decide if you're "good enough" to socialize with them.
Would you folks be ok with this?
Please explain how this is in any way different than the fraternity system?
Close.
I object to setting up a system of exclusion during your college years which should be the most inclusive part of your life. Like I said, you can always join a restricted country club later in life.
Soze,
On many campuses, fraternity parties are open to anyone. The sororities invite any guys they like; they do not have to be in fraternities. And, I think you overestimate how much exclusive partying is going on. At S’s college, where the houses are owned by the u, no parties are allowed to be held at the houses.
You should find out more from your S about Syracuse, because every campus does it differently.
Do you object to (say) the Korean students setting up a Korean Student Alliance (insert other religious, racial, ethnic group of your choice)?
The point was to show that the claim that “everyone” (outside the internationals, athletes, non-traditionals, commuters, and part-timers) at Syracuse was in fraternities and sororities is overclaiming, although the presence is high enough that a student who finds fraternities and sororities repellent may want to pause before choosing Syracuse.
I take the position that any university-sanctioned organization should have free and open membership to anybody. So the Korean students should be able to setup a Korean Student Alliance, but the membership should be open to all.
P.S. My alma mater has such a policy and I remember from my student days that the “Woman’s Coalition” had to admit men as a result.
What if, in reality, no one other than Korean students particularly wants to join the Korean Student Alliance?
“To be fair, I purposely submitted my experiences at those notorious campuses, only to balance out the assertion that these are tranquil entities of esoteric pursuit (ok, that’s overboard). That said, these are the largest flagship schools in their states”
USC isn’t a flagship school for California - it’s a private school. Your ASU and Penn State examples, fine.
Fraternities are social organizations and, as such, social skills of potential new members are evaluated. Recruiting the weird kid with questionable hygiene habits would run counter to the entire purpose.
Social organizations have social gatherings, some open to said weird kid, some closed for different logistical reasons. This will not change after college. If anything, the social scene during HS for my kids was less accessible than the greek scene at college. Neither S1 nor D had an interest in joining despite the fraternities at their college dominating the party scene. Both have plenty busy social lives doing other things.
That is a nice thought, but it is just not practical at any campus I am aware of. If the orchestra needs only 5 viola players, then no one else is going to get a chair, and really, the difference between the 5th and 6th best players is probably negligible. The guy who decided to take it up the viola a month ago, won’t get a realistic shot at all. I’m not sure why you would be okay with that “sanctioned” organization, but not a fraternity that can only take say, 50 guys. Or maybe you are not okay with it, and the orchestra should be allowed to have 1,000 musicians if that many want to play?
Then so be it.
Brandeis has this policy.
Always has.
The only exception is for those organizations that require specials skills or talents.
(such as sports teams or music groups).
Here’s Brandeis exact policy BTW:
The Board of Trustees reaffirms University policy of recognizing only those student organizations which are open to all students on the basis of competency or interest. Exclusive or secret societies are inconsistent with the principles of openness to which the University is committed. Therefore, social fraternities and sororities, in particular, are neither recognized nor permitted to hold activities on campus or use University facilities.
It would be interesting to try to sell this concept to Phi Beta Kappa.
How about UCLA’s football team? If students want to walk on and be on the team, should they be able to, regardless of how many? So what if they don’t get playing time, they want to be on the team. Why should they be denied that opportunity, when they are probably paying way more to be at UCLA than the recruited football players (unless they are on FA).