Newsflash: Fraternity Deaths and Rape

Article URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/us/22hazing.html?scp=2&sq=fraternity&st=cse

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/28/us/28wabash.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/opinion/lweb06fraternity.html?scp=2&sq=fraternities&st=cse

Martin, Patricia, and Hummer, Robert. “Fraternities and Rape on Campus.” Feminist Frontiers. 7th ed. New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 2007. 417-24.

In today’s higher education system, Greek life is one quality many students seek when searching for a University or College to attend. However, while it is also known that many rapes that occur on a College campus are committed by fraternity men, very few studies have been documented examining the fraternity structure and its culture. It is true that fraternities place emphasis on their qualities of masculinity, but what about their core functions and values encourages them to rape women or attempt to show their superiority over women? With recent events about hazing and deaths of fraternity men on multiple College campuses, some questions must be raised; why do fraternities, rape, and death occur simultaneously? Two articles and one letter to the editor place fraternities in the spotlight in the New York Times. The first article discusses the burning of fraternity men as an act of hazing ritual, and the second article discusses the death of a fraternity man on an Indiana campus. Both articles convey the need for research and change within the fraternity system on all college campuses across the US.

The first article, “7 Students Pledging a Fraternity Are Burned,” by Katie Zezima sets the stage for analysis into the culture and pledging process of a fraternity. The pledges were all lined up and received a brand of about seven inches long across their chest, close to their hearts. The article also cites that police have had to obtain warrants because of the unwillingness of the members to cooperate with the investigation. The article also cites that hazing has been on the rise on the University of Maine campus: 55% of students involved in Greek life, clubs, or other activities have been hazed. Also included in the article is a brief mention of hazing committed by cheerleaders in Katy, Texas. It is said that their new members were bound, blindfolded, and pushed into a swimming pool. Their charges could result in jail time or a $2,000 fine.

The second article, “Rift on Indiana Campus after Student Dies,” by Dirk Johnson, tells the story of a freshman dying at the fraternity house Delta Tau Delta at Wabash College’s campus in Indiana. Afterwards the fraternity was ordered disbanded and the school took over the lease on the house. There have been multiple discussions between students and with the faculty as to the fairness of this punishment; many members as well as other students feel that it is unfair to punish the entire fraternity. The school operates on one rule: the Gentleman’s rule, which is said to encompass all other necessary regulations. While the president of the College punished the whole fraternity because of an intoxicated minor, many students feel that his actions violate the Gentleman’s rule and that he is punishing innocent students. The members of the fraternity are also upset that they have had to move and feel like they have lost 20 brothers instead of just one.

As a response to this article, one letter to the editor comments that this was a completely avoidable and preventable death of a fraternity brother. He comments that the real failure is the failure to see the real problem, while only focusing on individual behavior. He notes that investigation needs to be done on the values and norms of the entire fraternity system (Myers, pg. 1). She also notes that it is the colleges that enable this behavior in houses that are neither owned nor governed by school officials. She believes that until fraternities are completely revoked, or until their houses are owned and governed by their colleges, that this dangerous behavior of fraternity men will continue, and more men will die.

These articles are extremely intertwined with Martin and Hummer’s article, “Fraternities and Rape on Campus” (Feminist Frontiers, pg. 417-424) and serve to illuminate the obvious problems within the fraternity system. As can be seen in the first article, not only are these individuals being subjected to extreme physical pain as part of a pledging process, but both the members and the pledges put themselves in a legally sticky situation. In New Hampshire, where this college campus is located, hazing is illegal and those who are hazed can be charged with misdemeanor offenses if they don’t report it. As the article reports it, it appears that neither the initiated members, nor the pledges will admit to any hazing behavior. One common trend between these articles, as well as other research, is the unwillingness of fraternities and fraternity members to cooperate with the law and investigations into their actions. This is fully discussed within Martin and Hummer’s article as one piece of the culture of fraternities. Loyalty is a key value in fraternity culture and cooperating with investigations is viewed as being disloyal to the fraternity. Loyalty is demonstrated within fraternities as being secretive and protective of both their members and their rituals. This can clearly be seen in these two instances: members are refusing to divulge information to protect their brothers who committed the crime. Even when a minor was killed due to fraternity actions, their brothers find issues with the school officials who intend to disband the fraternity. While it is obvious that the actions of the fraternity members are responsible for the freshman’s death, they view themselves as innocent, and blame the student for his own death. They refuse to accept punishment or point fingers at any of their own.

While these articles do not discuss the relation between fraternity members and rape, the link is clear and detailed in Martin and Hummer’s article. Along with their ideals of loyalty and secrecy, come their desire to prove their masculinity; they are also characterized by their violence, commodification of women, and use of alcohol as a weapon. Men in general, and fraternity men in specific, are known to use alcohol to get women drunk and thus more easily sleep with them. When women are drunk they are less likely to be able to turn down sex, and men are more likely to have sex with them even without their consent. Fraternity men also blatantly use women to attract “better” and more masculine men. If they obtain the image of being able to attain attractive women, other men will want to join their fraternity and obtain those attractive women as well. There also exists a large gender hierarchy among men and women within the Greek system. Fraternity men use women as “Little Sisters”, or in other words, servers. They expect these women to cheer at all the brothers sporting games, show up at parties, and even pay money so the brothers can have parties. These men involved in Greek life also often host parties that are known to turn into orgies, or have parties in which they can have sex with women other than their girlfriends. All of this evidence points to the fact that fraternity men abuse women, are more likely to rape women, and that the culture of fraternity life is in desperate need of revamping.

If further proof is needed, Martin and Hummer also make the same case as the articles in the New York Times that fraternity houses are composed of all male, same-age students who live in houses that are not regulated by school authorities. This will ultimately lead to illegal and dangerous activities, sometimes including death, as seen on Wabash Campus. To take a step farther, there is no diversity in these houses. Because of the recruitment process, the current brothers are bound to select the men that are most similar to themselves. This leads to a house full of men who think and act the same, which means there is no sane voice to say that something is dangerous or illegal. There is no smart man to stand up to his brothers. Also, because of the pledging process, the new members are threatened by their older brothers and are eager to please them. This means that they will most likely complete any task asked of them, and even when they are initiated, they will not be able to stand up to their older brothers. In any form of society or group of people, we know that this system does not work. That is explicitly the reason for our system of checks and balances within our government. In fraternity houses, there is no system of checks and balances, and the older brothers will likely take complete control. Martin and Hummer also comment on this, especially the idea of a group leader. They say that this group leaders’ desire to show off to his brothers or prove their masculinity will ultimately lead to coercion of women into sexual acts which further enforces the gender hierarchy present on college campuses.

In conclusion, because of the inherent cultural and moral standards existent within fraternities, and due to the commodification of women and the gender hierarchy, fraternities are in desperate need of change. We need to examine the entire fraternal structure, rather than individual behavior displayed in such articles as those in the New York Times. Ideals of the fraternity, as well as its environment exist no where else, and it is no surprise. Because of its unique position on college campuses, rapes are more likely and violence towards both women and pledges is more rampant. They are exposed to little if any regulation or supervision, and even when faced with charges, because of their values of loyalty and secrecy, investigations are usually forced to end. Because of these reasons, and their destructive behavior towards women, fraternities need to be investigated, and significant changes must be made to ensure the safety of women and college students across the US.

Class 12_3

Gloria Steinem’s article, “Supremacy Crimes”, gave good insight into the world of hate crimes and violent acts committed by white, heterosexual males. While most stereotypes focus on black males being aggressive, this article gave a different perspective, citing that the majority of hate crimes, or sexually based crimes. This is a statistic not often cited, as many would probably like to cover it up. It is true though, while reading through her examples, I remembered all the killers, most of them being extremely well known cases. All of them were committed by white, heterosexual males. I find this issue of supremacy of these males disturbing, that people feel the need to kill or attack innocent people just because they feel they are superior to others and have the “right” to kill them. She is also accurate in saying, “…the group most likely to become hooked on the drug of superiority. It’s a drug pushed by a male-dominant culture that presents dominance as a natural right” (Steinem, pg. 429). I find it interesting that males view their dominance as a natural right when they have nothing to base this off of. I am irritated that they see themselves as being above women or racial minorities and then find the need to kill those “below” themselves.

These crimes that have occurred in the past still scare me today, being a woman. I am always nervous walking alone at night, or even in my room at night, with the door locked, after hearing of men coming in through the windows. I always feel the need to check the backseat of my car when I get in it, and I don’t think that this should be necessary. Women should be able to go about their normal lives, even in dangerous areas, without being scared for their lives. I think our culture needs to get over the idea of male dominance and move toward a society without gender hierarchies.

Kimberle Crenshaw’s article was also interesting, reading about the immigrant women and their struggle to be legal citizens. I am glad that the amendment was passed at least, allowing for women to try and get out of their marriages while still pursuing citizenship. Although, I am sad to hear about the amount of difficulty these women must go through just to get a waiver. I never would have even thought that some of these women do not have access to telephones, or that their only source of information is from their husbands. I think that these women should be able to find their own sources of information and be knowledgeable on their own, so they are not taken advantage of by their husbands.

Class 12_1

The four articles for class this Monday were all kind of depressing in nature, but also very interesting to read about. The first article, “Fraternities and Rape on Campus”, was especially interesting given the Greek life at our school. I find the pledging process and terminology in Greek life ridiculous beyond belief. The fact that they only recruit certain people due to masculine qualities and their upmost importance of “loyalty, secrecy, and protection” almost disgusts me. With the case of the gang rape at a Florida University, to whom are they being loyal? What about human life, the law, or just plain kindness? I feel like so much importance is put on such trivial matters in fraternities, and the culture of the fraternity really needs to change in order to address important issues such as violence against women, and the hierarchy between men and women. This reminds me of the patriarchy article read earlier this semester, about how we need to look at the entire system as a whole, not just the individuals involved. While it would be nice to persecute individual members based on individual actions, I think that the entire system needs to be made over, and to question the system and the ideas behind what made those boys act the way they did. I also was upset reading about the gender hierarchy that existed between the “Little Sisters” and “Big Brothers” in the fraternity system she examined. I was disgusted by the role that these women play, catering to men. I was also sick reading about how males who are in relationships can have sex with their girlfriends, but at open parties their girlfriends aren’t allowed, and they are free to have sex with other women. I don’t believe in cheating and I don’t think that women should stand for it. I feel that these “women servers” are being used just for sex and to attract good “brothers”. I feel that the entire system needs to be changed, and the gender hierarchy abolished.

I enjoyed reading the second article, “Men Changing Men” because I believe that more projects such as this need to be mandatory for certain men. I liked the fact that some men have come to the conclusion that it isn’t ok to batter women, to call them property, and to take their emotions out on them. I think more men need to think this way and try to make a difference in their behavior, as well as other men. I think so much of men’s behavior is behavior of a pack. Similar to the fraternity article, most crimes happen because of men testing other men. Gang rapes happen to prove their masculinity or prove a point; instead men should focus on themselves. I think we talk the most about women being insecure with themselves, but I think a lot of male violence occurs because of the same reasons; men are insecure about the way other men view them, so they prove their masculinity or toughness through violence or rape.

Morgan’s article in Listen Up was almost hard to read. I was very saddened to read it, and mad about the way that her rapes were handled. Her parents and friends reactions to her rape were ridiculous; no supporting parents would ignore an action like that or punish their daughter for it. I think that is absurd. I was also sad that nothing more came out of any of her confessions. While she did the right thing by coming to her parents, the police, and the hospital about her rapes, which many women don’t do, I was shocked that nothing was ever followed up on. The police never made an effort to try and convict any of her rapists, and no one was there to support her or give her counseling after the attack.

The final article for Monday was nice to read, because it was about empowerment of women. I agree with her that women should be trained in self defense, as it works as a surprise attack on their attackers. Most men don’t believe that women are trained or will even try and fight back. I admire her for training herself, and it makes me want to be trained, especially if I ever live alone. I want to be able to defend myself in case of an attack, and protect myself.

Overall, the articles for Monday were sad but also interesting to read as they gave good insight into male organizations, and advocated for women to protect themselves, and be able to defend themselves from an attacker. I think that men and male organizations have a long way to go before there can ever be an equal status between men and women, however.

Class 11_24

Today’s articles reminded me a lot of our current economic situation and the fight over globalization. With the recent controversy over WalMart and their use of globalization, this article is especially interesting since it discusses the actual workers that are claimed to have produced WalMarts’ products. I found it especially interesting in Enloe’s article about how the industry relied on third world women’s beliefs that they had to accept their role in society. If these women realized their potential and “reimagined their lives as daughters, as wives, as workers, as citizens” (Enloe, pg. 459), the entire industry would collapse. I was also disgusted at the treatment of these women and their countries by the big sneaker corporations. As Enloe describes, Nike, and other companies, did not place their factories in third world countries to help the countries, but instead to exploit the cheap labor and gain profits. I also found it interesting how at the end of the article, she discusses the role of countries playing women off of each other and setting up competition. This was one of the first issues we discussed in the class; the fact that women can’t help each other, and instead compete against each other and wish the worst on others. I think that for our country and the world to grow and women to gain equal rights as citizens and workers (and erase the wage gap between men and women), women need to stand together, not against each other.

Grace Chang’s article was also extremely interesting, especially about the LCP with the Filipino women. The beginning of the article was interesting as well about the Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs). I found it interesting that because of the SAPs, women have experienced increases in poverty and decreases in nutrition, health, and work conditions, yet no one seems to care as long as indebted countries can take out loans that are approved by financial institutions. I find that time after time, issues surrounding women are always intricately laced with economic issues between first and third world countries and businessmen. It was also interesting to read about the entire program and it’s severity. It seems as if this article also embodies the figure of a bird cage, since women are trapped for two years by sometimes abusive employers, and they are stick with the strict immigration policies by the US and Canada. On top of this all, the Filipino government makes extraordinary salaries by just processing these migrant workers. Women are also excluded from welfare benefits and workers rights because they are not citizens. This article perfectly exemplifies the conditions these women are put through all to support their families. This all seems even more absurd when reading about the nursing shortage in Canada, yet the laws remain unchanged because the government insists on exploiting these highly skilled and educated women, and giving them extremely low wages and subjecting them to abuse for enough years until they can obtain citizenship.

Overall these three articles make globalization seem a much bigger issue than this country is leading us to believe. I wish that this country could get an honest government who would be frank with its citizens and not turn a blind eye to serious problems occurring with the women in this country. Instead of financing a war against terrorists, which was started on false pretenses, the government should care more about other issues that are often left unnoticed. I think women’s rights should be a problem that is paid more attention to, brought under public scrutiny, and ultimately dealt with by our government. Without their cooperation, unfortunately, nothing will most likely be done. We need to work with our government to spread the word and garner support for these issues, both in the US and Canada.

Class 11_19

The two articles assigned for today refer back to our class discussion on Monday about Muslim women and the policy pursued after 9/11. I especially liked reading Susan Darraj’s article, “It’s Not an Oxymoron: The Search for an Arab Feminism” because it told her story of her search for feminism. I also liked how she identified her father and husband as feminists, although that might seem to be a contrary statement. The article related a lot to our class when discussing Betty Friedan and Western Feminism; a do think a lot of the time we don’t even think about feminism around the world. I admired her when she stood up to her class as well about house cleaning and the liberalization of white women getting to work outside the house. While I do think that this is liberalizing for some women, for others, they have never had the option, so I think feminism needs to be open to all types of women, from all different backgrounds and cultures.

The other article by Lila Abu-Lughod also relates to our class discussion on veils and the “saving” of Middle Eastern women. She makes the argument that these women who lived under the Taliban in Afghanistan weren’t oppressed because of the burqas they were required to wear. She says that even after the Taliban was removed women choose to wear them, and if not burqas, they still choose to wear heavy, modest, coverings (scarves, etc). I think the United States needs to be more open to other cultures and nationalities, and not just assume that these women are being oppressed. Even as I write this, I notice that the word burqa is not in the Microsoft Word dictionary. I think Western cultures need to be more educated on other cultures before they can even consider trying to “save” them or change their culture.

Relating to the other assignments this week, the Taliban was a government who ruled in Afghanistan from 1996-2001 until it was removed from power by NATO forces. Currently they still exist as an underground movement and fight in a guerilla war. The Taliban came into power because of political unrest among the warlords present in the country. It is also recorded that originally the Taliban received aid from the US in the form of weapons and funds. Under the Taliban many activities were banned including movies, television, dancing, hanging pictures in homes, kite flying, and beard trimming. Men were required to have long beards, short hair on their head, and wear head coverings. Women had even more restrictions including no employment or education, no interaction with men who weren’t family or their husband, and they had to wear burqas. If they were found cheating they were stoned to death. They were also lashed or beaten in public.

In general, while it may seem on the surface that these women were oppressed, research into other cultures needs to be done before coming into a country and changing their policy and their government. Relating to our reading from last class, we need to research more and not just slap labels on women in other cultures. In general our country needs to be more educated and welcome to other cultures, beliefs, and women.

Class 11_17

Handra Mohanty’s article, “Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses” describes how men have portrayed themselves as the all important, while women are the “other”. She goes on to describe how women are supposed to play the dependant model in the relationship, and this is obtained in many countries through genital cutting. Genital mutilation is seen as taking away a woman’s pleasure when engaging in sex, so her only purpose is to reproduce. As she explains, female genital mutilation occurs, “to assure female dependence and subservience by any and all means” (pg 66). With domestic violence, there is an undeniable alliance of men against women. She also explains how women are always grouped together because of their oppression and as victims of abuse.

Mohanty also goes into detail about women as universal dependents and the grouping of women based solely on their status as a victim. She describes that Vietnamese women and Black American women are linked together because they are victims, although they have almost nothing else in common. I think this is wrongly grouping because women shouldn’t be characterized and grouped based on being victims. Women as a whole shouldn’t be able to be grouped because they are victims. I think women need to escape the position of being dependent on men and avoid being recognized and put together because of their shared status of victims.

The other article, “Whose Security?”, by Charlotte Bunch, goes into detail about the national security measures taken after 9/11. She describes how the Bush administrations goals and actions actually served to hurt the women’s rights movement and take away their efforts towards human security. As she explains, 9/11 could have, and should have, generated efforts to bolster women’s human rights campaigns, whereas instead, the Bush administration took advantage of it to invade Islamic countries and take military action. I was also outraged to read about Mary Robinson and how she was stripped of her job because she stood up for women’s rights movements and pointed attention to human rights abuses. I think this sort of action is ridiculous and need to be made available for public scrutiny. I think if a story like this was made more public, something could have been done about it, and things like this could have been prevented in the future. I also found it horrible that the Bush administration used women’s rights as a tool to garner support for the war. He claimed abuses to women’s rights in the Islamic culture, which would boost women’s support of invading Islamic countries. I think this is awful to trick the American people into supporting a war in which they did nothing to aid women’s rights, and instead acted militarily and justify certain uses of torture.

I think that these military resources need to be used to address women’s rights both in this country and abroad. Bush did have a good idea on helping women’s rights efforts abroad, but I think the administration need to actually follow through and do something good for women. As Bunch explains, it is hard to determine what is best to do to help both the domestic and the global community, but we can all benefit from feminist activities around the world.

Class 11_12

Maria Cristina Rangel’s article, “Knowledge is Power” discusses her experience as a college student with children, and her experience with welfare. She details her constant fear meeting with the welfare representative and fearing that her benefits will be taken away. She says that if her benefits are taken away, her education is taken away, and her education is everything. This article is significant because of the welfare reforms that happened in 1996. Many single mothers are living across the country, all trying to live off of welfare, or even trying to just get on it. As Rangel writes about, she gets barely enough benefits to live. She expresses her frustration at the system and the reforms that took place. This is a complicated issue which women in our government helped to pass. It is a crazy law that a woman cannot pursue higher education and receive welfare at the same time. I also find it a little weird that this law was passed because the government felt that women on welfare were “gimme girls” who were taking advantage of the government. I do not know how the government could think that, when extremely poor women need welfare so badly.

The other article, “The Lady and the Tramp(II): Feminist Welfare Politics, Poor Single Mothers, and the Challenge of Welfare Justice”, by Gwendolyn Mink is about her role in her most recent job, Women’s Committee of 100. Initially she struggled with her job because she felt like she was becoming like the women she criticized in her book. She talks about the war against poor women and discusses that poor women are, “the only people in America forced by law to work outside the home. They are the only people in America whose decisions to bear children are punished by government” (pg. 497). This is such a critical statement because the government and legislative authorities do not consider mothers as working people. They don’t compensate women for their work inside the home, but instead force them to work outside the home and shirk their responsibilities as mothers. She also brings up a good point that women aren’t awarded for their jobs as mothers, but CEO’s of companies who make outstanding salaries are praised extensively. The main point that stood out to me is that these working mothers are, “forced either by law or by economic circumstance to choose wages over children” (pg. 497). This is a crucial point, but one that I never would have thought of on my own. I never viewed it as a choice, wages or children, because my mom was able to stay home with me, as were other mothers. However, in many families across the country, women do have to make that choice, and since the natural choice for women is children, women end up in poverty and need to aid of welfare. This is a serious problem in our country, because of the welfare reform programs passed in 1996.