tired of the BS

Colleges and Universities A-Z Swarthmore College
1

<p>As you can tell by the username, I'm a Freshman at Swarthmore. For the most part, I'm happy here even though I have a few qualms with the school (but I think everyone does). I've been reading this forum out of curiosity for the past couple months now.</p>

<p>However I've been dismayed by the attitude of certain posters here on this board toward other posters and various Swat institutions. For one, "interesteddad" here has been on a crusade against the Fraternities since October. I am not a member of Phi Psi or DU and don't plan on joining either one, but I have to say that his views are contradictory of the campus community's opinion. Even after these incidents, the Frats are not seen as the main reason for the change in the alcohol policy (a certain senior's opinion has also helped out). I have friends in both frats, and I don't think you can let a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch. And while the frat parties aren't the best, they sometimes provide a decent alternative to the loud and sketchy Paces parties. </p>

<p>Also I don't understand this "kellymegreener" person. Why the hell does she want to pick a fight with people on these boards? It seems like she has some bone to pick with Swarthmore and I don't know why. But even if she is a 17-year old high school student, am I the only one who thinks it's a little creepy for 50-year old parents to be arguing with this girl? Just leave her alone and she will disappear. Also, when you celebrated her "acceptance to Yale" (meaning she wouldn't be attending Swat in the fall) it sounded very weird and elitist. Although I agree that her Yale acceptance is BS, I know if I were still a prospective student I would feel very odd about parents celebrating someone else not going to a school. When at Swat, it feels like the school is a very open, tolerant, and inclusive campus. I do not get the attitude from these boards. </p>

<p>So really, I just want to stress to the rest of the world that neither the "interesteddad" nor "kellymegreener" reflect the views of the larger campus community. After all, neither of them spend much time here. Oh yeah, the Jolt is more a place for seniors to make fun of each other or discuss campus hotties than it is for discussing serious issues. And the Phoenix is pretty good and comparable to other college papers. That's all I have time to say now, maybe the reason why so few current Swatties post here is that we are busy working or doing other substantial things with our time.</p>

2

<p>I deal with a lot of people with personality disorders in my profession, and it is of interest to me that someone would adopt a cutesy name such as "kellymegreener" and try to annoy people anonymously. In my real life as an employer, I would fire her. </p>

<p>I don't think s/he will go away, but actually seems to be heating up more. I agree that s/he should be ignored. It would be nice if there were moderators who control this kind of person, but they don't respond to requests for help. I doubt s/he is a 17 yo girl, but the moderators do not seem interested in verifying identity or modifying behavior that is beyond the norms of usual acceptable behavior. They leave it up to individuals who post on the forum, which is not very effective.</p>

<p>I generally am in a position where I can modify things in my environment, generally for the good of others, as well. Hence the frustation, but your point is well-taken.</p>

3

<p>swattie 09:</p>

<p>What you say about the frats is pretty consistent with what I hear. For the most part, the frat boys are regular Swatties, fully integrated into campus dorms, academics, and all the rest. Many drift away from the frats after initially joining.</p>

<p>I don't think another student referundum on frats at Swarthmore would have predicatable results. As you point out, there are three schools of thought on the topic. Some would just get rid of them. Others have no use for the frats, but are glad that the frat parties are out of their hair. And, still another large part of the campus thinks the frat parties add variety to campus life, even if they don't go to them very often.</p>

<p>The last time a student referendum on the frats occured was in the 1950s, led by an undergrad named Mike Dukakis. He couldn't generate to votes to abolish the frats. However, that was a different era. At the time, there were, I believe, seven active frats at Swarthmore with significant membership. It was also an era before frats were widely viewed as anathema to elite northeast colleges.</p>

<p>The dwindling of frats at Swarthmore from seven to two indicates a natural erosion of interest that continues to today. Phi Psi was all but dead a few years ago, unable to generate sufficient membership or dues to pay their annual rent on the lodge to the college. They were seriously in arrears and had to work out a plan with the college. Both frats have received semester-long probations from the college during the last few years. The end of football was a major blow to membership. The baseball, basketball, and lacrosse teams have picked up the slack, but membership continues to be a challenge.</p>

<p>I disagree entirely that Arthur Chu's editorials had anything to do with the tightening of the SAC party-receipt policy. That tightening was triggered by discussions with the College's legal counsel regarding the railroad track incident lawsuit against the college and the frats and the consideration of lawsuits against the frat in the frat-pledge table throwing incident. The table-throwing incident generated considerable legal maneuvering (and expense) behind the scenes that involved the now-departed table thrower, the College, and the fraternity. Legal liability issues are the number one threat to fraternities nationwide and I'm not sure that Swarthmore's two remaining frats will be able to survive the cost of liability coverage over the long haul. </p>

<p>The incidents involving frat members and frat pledges this year are not helping. For example, just consider how much effort Bob Gross and Myrt are going to have to invest in relationship building with the local police after the frat boy resisted arrest and hit a policeman Saturday night. It takes a lot of work for the College to maintain the kind of relationship that benefits every Swarthmore student. Incidents like Saturday's arrest pull the rug right out from under all that hard work.</p>

4

<p>Wow, I agree with Swattie09, this is getting ridiculous. Interesteddad is clearly incredibly biased against the fraternities, and refuses to accept the fact that he could be wrong about them. Some of his sentiments are merely contradictory. In the thread started on this subject by kellymegreener he praises the students for their self-governance and their rejection of the proposed measures for substance-free or multi-cultural housing, where as else where he criticizes the students for not organizing a referendum to kick fraternities off campus. If the students are good at getting rid of things they don’t like, and they haven’t gotten rid of fraternities, or even talked about it, what does that tell you? Even in “agreeing” with Swattie09 that not all fraternity brothers are bad people, he can only justify it in the context that they aren’t actually active within the fraternities. That is simply not true in the majority of cases, and is in fact I know of several students who have become more active in the fraternities as seniors than they were in the past. As for his “three kinds of students” they are all varying degrees of dislike for the fraternities and the people in them. How ID could reach this conclusion with out interviewing a broad spectrum of the student body baffles me, and I guess it’s no surprise that he is again wrong, as in many ways the fraternities have been very successful this year, with the strongest recruiting classes since football got cut and a large number of very, very successful social events, taking a wide variety of forms, from parties to poker tournaments, and the changes to the alcohol policy are actually likely to entrench the fraternities further. </p>

<p>Most of these arguments can be dismissed as matters of opinion, however. What cannot be dismissed are the numerous blatant factual errors or misrepresentations that Interesteddad has posted. Firstly I would like to say that there have been a large number of cases of Alcohol Poisoning in the two years that I have been here, including hospitalizations and one kid actually stopping breathing that involved students who were not fraternity members and had not been at fraternities, in other words the frats had absolutely nothing to do with them. Obviously a lot of these cases are not made public, but the number I have heard of are equal if not exceed the number of cases I have heard of involving fraternity members. As for the police dozens of citations are handed out every year, some to fraternity brothers, many, if not most, to other students. The biggest incident involving the police since I have been here, apart from the annual Halloween party citations (I believe there were 7 this year, none of which went to fraternity brothers) was at a Paces party last year, and the student arrested was not affiliated with either fraternity. In the case of both the table incident and the incident last weekend the students were both juniors with records of previous misconduct. The first real party I went to my freshman year I got to watch the cops arrest the same kid they arrested last week. The student who was kicked out for dropping the table was not allowed to become a full brother by the fraternity and was not initiated, for reasons completely unrelated to the table incident. As for the train tracks fight, that occurred before I was even a student here, not over the last year. Interesteddad’s portrayal of the role of the police on campus is also completely wrong. The College does not encourage a police presence on campus and does not encourage or even endorse a police cruiser outside parties. The only reason that the police are allowed to patrol on campus is due to an agreement the college made with the department years ago when there was an arson scare. The agreement in theory restricts where the police can actually patrol on campus. Patrols that stray are often confronted by public safety. In addition the college did not call the police to come arrest the student last weekend; they called an ambulance to come pick him up. The police responded to the call, as they always do, and made the arrests and citations subsequently. Even thought they made these arrests right outside both fraternities they made no attempt to enter either building. </p>

<p>I really don’t understand why Interesteddad is so vehemently anti-fraternity, especially given his lack of first hand perspective, and he strikes me as both dangerously irrational and inflexible on this topic.</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
Firstly I would like to say that there have been a large number of cases of Alcohol Poisoning in the two years that I have been here.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There were NO alcohol poisoning hospital transports from Swarthmore in 2003-04 and not a "large" number last year (3 reported in the Phoenix, there may have been a couple more). I don't believe that any have been reported in the Phoenix so far this year, but I know of one that did occur -- not a terribly serious one, not particularly high BAC levels.</p>

<p>
[quote]
As for the police dozens of citations are handed out every year, some to fraternity brothers, many, if not most, to other students. The biggest incident involving the police since I have been here, apart from the annual Halloween party citations (I believe there were 7 this year, none of which went to fraternity brothers) was at a Paces party last year, and the student arrested was not affiliated with either fraternity.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Check your facts. The number of liquor law violation arrests are published each year as required by the federally mandated Cleary Act. The numbers for the most recent three years were 2, 5, and 7.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The College does not encourage a police presence on campus and does not encourage or even endorse a police cruiser outside parties.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The College administrators have said repeatedly that they welcome the police presence on campus. Read between the lines. Having police cruisers parked on campus on Friday and Saturday nights is, IMO, an integral part of Swarthmore's alcohol policy. Have a good time and behave responsibly, no problem. Leave a party acting like Otis the town drunk, and you have a good chance of getting arrested. Bob Gross isn't stupid; I doubt that he views the a deterrance as a bad thing. Myrt has said so explicity.</p>

<p>BTW, I have never criticised the students for not getting rid of the fraternities. A referendum would take the alignment of an usual set of circumstances and a strong campus leader. </p>

<p>I have criticized the College for allowing the fraternities to continue in existence. I think it's a black mark against Swarthmore and runs counter to the mission of the school. At $40,000 a year, I'm entitled to a critical opinion. You are certainly welcome to disagree.</p>

6

<p>Citations are not arrests and I was including students admitted to Worth Health Center but not transported to Hospital when I was talking about Alcohol Poisoning. That occurs FAR more frequently than actual hospitalizations. As for a police presence, there is no police presence on campus on an average Friday or Saturday night. I only see/hear about police on campus during social events, even just patrolling, a couple of times a semester. Citations usually only occur when the Police respond to a call for an Ambulance (they usually patrol the following weekend too) or when the students are “off” campus, like at the Halloween party. The college most definitely does not want students being cited or arrested, and one of the functions of the PA system is to help deal with the police. I simply don’t see this police presence you say the College is encouraging, and I my experience with the deans and the rest of the college is quite contradictory to the impression you are giving of the College using the police as watchdogs to try and curtail fraternity activity.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
That occurs FAR more frequently than actual hospitalizations.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No kidding. I think that Worth providing 24/7 assistance is a huge plus for Swarthmore. Worth won't keep a student with alcohol poisoning. Worth will keep a student who has had too much to drink as long as they are alert and can walk under their own power. That's not really at the level of alcohol poisoning. In collegiate terms, alcohol poisoning events are those the result in hospitalization. Swarthmore (knock on wood) has very few of those, relatively speaking.</p>

<p>Linda Echols told me that they average about one overnight in Worth per weekend for excessive drinking over the course of the school year. As I say, I think hospitalizations have ranged from 0 to perhaps 5 in recent years. The most that have been reported in the Phoenix for a single year going back about eight years is 3 in a year, but not all of them get reported.</p>

<p>Of course, the College would prefer that students not act like Otis the town drunk and get themselves arrested. But, I really don't think the College minds seeing students who do act like Otis the town drunk getting hauled off the pokey every once in a while. It serves as a deterrent. Go back and read Martin Warner's comments following the ML Halloween party a year ago:</p>

<p>"I don’t mind Swarthmore students’ being confronted with the realities of living in American society, and part of that is that you have to be responsible for your actions." </p>

<p>BTW, the PA system was strengthened back in the late 1990s in response to a Pennsylvania Alcohol Board undercover agent walked into a college party. The PA system was strengthened to check student IDs, in the hopes that the next time that happened the agent would be refused entry to the party.</p>

<p>IMO, the Swarthmore police are amazingly cooperative with the College. They could make life miserable for Swatties -- that's one of the reasons that I am so vocal about some of the stupid frat boy tricks recently.</p>

8

<p>Does anyone else think that it is strange that Interesteddad is obsessed with the Swarthmore forum? I understand that his daughter goes there and both of them love the school, but aren't there better things to do then post long winded and detailed accounts of everything Swat related? In addition, if I was to listen to a parent or a student, I would listen to the student. Stats are always a little off - personal experience tells a lot more about a place than numbers, no matter how accurate.</p>

9

<p>" personal experience tells a lot more about a place than numbers, no matter how accurate"</p>

<p>"Personal experience" is just that - an experience of one person. Different students have very different experiences at Swarthmore, and it would be VERY unwise to base your opinion on personal experience of a person you don't even know. If you look at variety of "experiences" collectively, it provides a much better picture - that's why, I think, reading archives of Phoenix or posts and comments on LiveJournal Community is worthwhile for prospective students.</p>

<p>You may or may not agree with IDs opinions on various Swarthmore-related issues, but his post do provide enormous amounts of useful information (as well as sources of information) for prospective students and parents. I am sure that posters on many other forums wish they had someone that dedicated in their ranks...</p>

10

<p>Some interesting stats that I was just emailed a few minutes ago:</p>

<p>College Judiciary Committee: 2 cases
1) behavorial misconduct; guilty, suspended and pay for damage
2) academic misconduct; guilty, fail the test
<strong>This cases are outlined in the Judicial Case on the East Hall of
Parrish 1st</strong></p>

<p>Minor Adjudication by the Deans: 35 cases (some students had more
than 1 case) plus 4 group adjudications
7 students placed on probation with parental notification
29 students or groups given written formal warning
14 fines and damages assessed</p>

<p>Borough or area Police Citations: 10
9 citations for underage drinking, DUI, or drunk and disorderly
1 citation for drug possession
<strong>2 of the above 10 spent time in jail</strong></p>

<p>Dean referrals for Drug and/or Alcohol Evaluations: 19</p>

<p>So 47 incidents total. And only 9 citations for drinking.
That doesn't seem like "dozens of citations" to me. At all.</p>

11

<p>Arador:</p>

<p>Thanks for some fact-based reporting. What's the time frame? This year or last year?</p>

<p>Also, I think there is some overlap in those numbers. For example, if you get a Swarthmore police citation, you are also likely to be counted in the "Dean's Justice" category as well. For example, the kid who ran his car into the bridge over the railroad tracks got a DUI citation from the Swarthmore police. I'm fairly certain that he probably had a sit-down with the Deans, too.</p>

12

<p>The stats that Arador mentioned were in an email that was sent out to all students this afternoon, and I believe they refer to either all of 2005 or just this past semester.</p>

13

<p>For the fall semester only.</p>

14

<p>Those stats were for last semester. 9 citations in a single semester isn't dozens, however there have been five already this semester reported in the Phoenix, and I believe there were more on a weeknight last week which probably won't get written up in the Phoenix. On another note I know two students who were hospitalized due to alcohol poisioning and a third who was hospatilized for injuries sustained while drunk in 2003-04 and am curious what the college classified those as. Also, as far as I know the DUI was the only citation that went to a DU brother last semester. There might have been another one, but the vast majority, including the other arrests were most definitely not fraternity related.</p>

15

<p>Also, as an aside, at Saturday night's DU party the brothers (with the help of the PAs) marked the hands of all Students 21 and over and served alchol only to those students. This did not happen at Paces. Did that hurt party attendence. Yes. Did underage students who couldn't drink at DU drink underage at other SAC funded parties? Yes. Did DU have to mark hands? No. But they did anyway, make of it what you will.</p>

16

<p>
[quote]
am curious what the college classified those as.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Almost every trip to the hospital is accompanied by a police citation for underage drinking. The Swarthmore police follow the ambulance calls.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, as far as I know the DUI was the only citation that went to a DU brother last semester. There might have been another one, but the vast majority, including the other arrests were most definitely not fraternity related.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's just semantics. Everyone on campus knows that the table-thrower had been drinking at a DU pledge event. Why do you think DU boys testified at his CJC hearing about their pledge activities that night? </p>

<p>Shall we talk about who is getting sued over the railroad track incident? I don't think it's the Swarthmore Women in Science club.</p>

<p>
[quote]
make of it what you will

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I make of it that there have probably been some serious conversations between the Deans and the fraternities in the last week.</p>

17

<p>The amount of time that I-dad spends on these forums is absolutely staggering!!!</p>

<p>Good grief.. Being independently wealthy and not having to work must be nice.</p>