The campus experienced yet another shouting match this fall between the pro-Greeks and the anti-Greeks. And aside from the shouting, some of the more hard line anti-Greeks plastered the campus in graffiti that carried messages quite extreme and in some cases, quite inaccurate. I do not wish to belabor the already tiring arguments, but a few very important points have yet to be made regarding this issue.
As I have seen it, the arguments of the anti-Greeks were as follows: the Greek system fosters sexism and homophobia; the single-sex nature of the houses currently on campus is exclusive; and this exclusion violates the college's policy of equal opportunity. In addition, some of the proponents of these arguments suggest that we adopt a system such as Middlebury's, where any such organizations must be co-ed in order to exist.
To combat these opinions, pro-Greeks took a stance that the system does allow for change and that if one does not like the Greek system in general, then one can opt not to rush. In effect, we must not remove the choice we currently have - to join a single-sex or co-ed house or remain unaffiliated.
I think these counter-arguments are very viable but I have noticed a very disturbing trend in the whole debate which merits some discussion.
Let's consider the University of Arizona, or Florida, Georgia, Texas, Kentucky or Oklahoma. They all have Greek systems and there is not the same talk of forcing the houses to become co-ed in the interest of "equal opportunity" or the alleviation of sexism or homophobia. We see this kind of talk in the Northeast, especially at our "Ivy League" schools and bordering small liberal arts colleges. Which schools have eliminated their single-sex Greek systems? Williams, Middlebury, Harvard, Yale and Princeton, to name a few.
So what's the message? I'd say that we, in the northeast, at our "superior" institutions, think we are wiser and smarter and know better than anyone else nationwide how people should live and behave. It's the same old simplified solution to a complex problem. I would guess that sexism and homophobia still exist at Williams or Middlebury even without a single-sex Greek system.
At most schools, such as the state universities mentioned above, the presence of a freshman fall rush creates a polarization of the student body into Greeks and non-Greeks. Here at Dartmouth, we should enjoy the cohesion of an inter-Greek and an intra-Greek society.
On the subject of equal opportunity, how many groups on campus are exclusive? We have many organizations with very noble causes, though they are still directed towards one fraction of society. Think about it. Are these groups condemned for being exclusionary or promoting segregation or inequality?
Certainly these groups have different purposes and agendas than Greek houses. However, the same type of exclusion occurs and no harm appears to be done. Consequently, no one speaks of abolishing these organizations.
The same attitude should be adopted towards the Greek system. It is an institution with a rich tradition and tremendous possibilities. The system could definitely use a few changes. A good idea might be the addition of one or two new sororities.
So instead of engaging in another shouting match when Winter term rush begins, let's approach the issue constructively. If some believe there are problems, they should raise them before the Coed-Fraternity-Sorority or Inter-Fraternity councils rather than vandalize Webster Avenue or make inaccurate statements on posters.
We have seen in referendum results that the student body overwhelmingly supports the continued existence of our Greek system. Our "superior" northeastern standards are not even mainstream here in the northeast.
