Tuesday, February 18

Aram Ghoogasian: Gender divisions in Greek life promote sexism, should be banned

(Daily Bruin/Harishwer Balasubramani)

The state of fraternity houses reflects the condition of fraternity culture: virulent and reeking of vomit.

A fraternity at Old Dominion University became the latest in a long line of such organizations to garner national attention for a reprehensible act. Fortunately, sexual assault was not involved in this case, but female students and their mothers were greeted with sexist banners. A fraternity at Ohio State did the same.

If you’re surprised at this relatively minor occurrence, you haven’t been paying attention. It isn’t a novel idea that these aren’t isolated incidents but symptoms of a sexist culture that is codified in federal law.

Under Title IX, participation in any or activity receiving federal financial assistance must be open to all people regardless of sex. During the legislative process, however, Congressman Joe D. Waggoner, himself a member of a fraternity, sponsored a successful amendment to exempt Greek life.

Until federal lawmakers come to their senses, the UCLA administration, particularly the Sexual Harassment Prevention Office, must take the lead and ban single-sex organizations from campus if its commitment to fighting sex assault on all fronts is to be taken seriously.

Fraternities prompt numerous incidents of rape and other forms of physical violence per year. Fraternity brothers are three times more likely to commit rape than the rest of the student population, and sixty died in fraternity-linked incidents from 2005 to 2013. These problems are exacerbated by this odd amendment in a famous piece of legislation.

While UCLA’s fraternity system may not seem exceptionally dangerous, it saw a publicized rape allegation and a hazing investigation in a less than 12-month period. In 2011, an 18-year-old was found dead in the Theta Chi fraternity.

Our Greek system isn’t as notorious as Oklahoma’s or Alabama’s, but our campus climate can benefit from the fostering of more gender-inclusive attitudes.

When caught, the students behind these crimes are often punished by their universities and condemned in the court of public opinion. While this may embarrass individual students and organizations, it lets the fraternity system as a whole escape unscathed and ignores the problems posed by the existence of gender-exclusive social clubs.

Though the move would be bold, UCLA wouldn’t be stepping into uncharted waters. Middlebury College attempted to combat misogyny on campus in 1990 by banning single-sex organizations after a unanimous vote by college trustees, resulting in all-male fraternities either going underground at the risk of suspension or dissolving altogether. In 1994, The New York Times covered one of the college’s underground fraternities, which by then was only holding “furtive meetings,” stripping it of any allure it might have once had. A Middlebury librarian said that “the misogyny sometimes associated with fraternities has disappeared” since the ban was instituted.

Under such rules, sororities would also undergo fundamental changes, and it may be argued that this robs women of safe, exclusive spaces. But members of sororities are more likely to be sexually harassed than other women living on campus, probably due in large part to the fraternities they often interact with. These spaces are far from safe in their current form.

The Sexual Harassment Prevention Office needs to prompt a member of the Los Angeles Division of the Academic Senate to propose the single-sex ban. It will no doubt be a lengthy process, but the sooner it begins, the sooner we will end an archaic and nonsensical policy of discrimination that originated with a fraternity boy in elected office who protected fraternity interests.

The potential benefits of extirpating fraternities are clear, but there is still the problem of taking the fight to this staple of the American universities of nearly two centuries.

Fraternities have powerful lobbying capabilities that protect their interests and have large legal and financial networks that have been built over decades. They even have their own political action committee, the dubiously nicknamed FratPAC. One hundred forty-one members of the 113th Congress were members of fraternities or sororities. Student safety, however, must be prioritized, regardless of how difficult the battle may be.

Surely Greek organizations would protest such measures, pointing to the fact that they provide services to their members while doing charity work for society at large. But nationwide, such organizations donate only about $7 million per year, a small price to pay for decreased risk of sexual assault on campuses. Even so, banning single-sex clubs shouldn’t hinder their ability to raise money or network in any considerable way. Coed clubs already exist for these very purposes and do so successfully without heightened risks of sexual assault.

Fear of a legal and political fight with fraternity brothers and their supporters shouldn’t be an obstacle. Schools that have banned single-sex organizations have been taken to court over the matter and won, as was the case with Middlebury. The potential benefits of reforming a sexist institution are worth the fight.

Of course there are also some fraternity members fighting sexual assault at UCLA, such as the group Greeks Against Sexual Assault. But a few people with a conscience that still participate in a system that turns out proportionally large numbers of sex offenders can’t fix the system from within. Change must come through university regulations, not self-policing.

Reforming Greek life won’t end sexual assault on campus, but it will, at the very least, stop officially recognized organizations from being high-risk zones before they cause even more damage.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on Reddit
Opinion columnist

Aram Ghoogasian is an opinion columnist and a member of the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. He often opines about labor issues, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the University of California.

Comments are supposed to create a forum for thoughtful, respectful community discussion. Please be nice. View our full comments policy here.

  • DJ

    Interesting idea, but I’m not convinced that such a drastic ban will have a significant effect on reducing sexual assault on campus.

    The only proof this article mentions is a quote from a librarian and a statistic about frat guys being more likely to commit an assault, which has two problems. One, that statistic might not be true on our campus, and two, it might only just be a correlation rather than a causation.


      my mate’s aunt makes $98 consistently on the PC………After earning an average of 19952 Dollars monthly,I’m finally getting 98 Dollars an hour,just working 4-5 hours daily online….It’s time to take some action and you can join it too.It is simple,dedicated and easy way to get rich.Three weeks from now you will wishyou have started today – I promise!!….HERE I STARTED-TAKE A LOOK AT……uz……

      ➤➤➤➤ http://googleonlineauthorisedopportunitiesstart/get/98$hourly…. ⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛⚛

  • Isaac

    I think this proposal doesn’t go far enough. I think if we really want to respect everyone, then we should ban everything. Only when we are literally sitting in total silence and darkness will we be a truly pure and inclusive student body here at UCLA.

  • Loner Stoner

    Old article, but in case people read this or even care for discussion…

    Removing the title IX exemption is the same as abolishing fraternities and sororities. You don’t just make a 100+ year organization with tradition and wealth become something it’s not. You effectively kill it. So what grows in it’s place?

    Let’s say part of the reason sexual assault happens is misogyny, and men in groups breeds misogyny. Would killing fraternities prevent male-only organizations from forming? Cultural organizations technically allow people from all cultures, but they are for the most part self-segregated organizations. And that’s why you don’t just transform fraternities into co-ed ones. Co-ed fraternities do exist; they’re just less popular. People associate because they identify with a group of people more. Good luck stopping people from associating and good luck eliminating gender as a social construct any time soon.

    And what would be the end result if you did eliminate fraternities? My guess are either of two possible scenarios:
    1. You may indeed reduce sexual assault. What accounts for most of the correlation with fraternity members and sexual assault is that they simply party more. If no longer being in a fraternity means they consume less alcohol and meet less people, then you reduce incidences of sexual assault. This is the more unlikely of the two scenarios. Alcohol and substance use is tied to social life which is college life. That doesn’t disappear with the elimination of fraternities.

    2. The social scene will be similar to high school. Most of your friends are involved in the same activities as you. Like high school some kid and his friends decide to have organize a massive party; things get out of hand the kid gets in trouble and it all happens again the next week with a different kid at a different place. The difference with this and fraternities is the University can’t regulate it. The alcohol and sexual assault workshop they give at orientation, fraternity members are obligated to attend one every year. Now you can’t target your education towards the population most at risk. There are many regulations to fraternity parties (reporting parties to police, no kegs…read their social policy if you’re interested). Fraternities are incentivized to follow these regulations or they can be put on social probation or shut down. They are incentivized to prevent sexual assault in their own house. A sexual assault allegation is a death sentence for a fraternity.

    There are areas where Greek Life can improve though. Equality is one. There is this idea that if sororities were allowed to have parties, that it would reduce sexual assault as there is a power imbalance between men in fraternities and women. There’s articles online that discuss this more.

    Co-ed fraternities might be the future, but they aren’t the answer to sexual assault in the present. Equality is. Changing rape culture is. Of course, they won’t be simple fixes.