And by my title I'm not referring to Zeta Psi fraternity -- it's me that's looking for trouble, or so it would seem. And trouble on this campus has been very easy to come by lately.
The Zeta Psi issue is a very serious one. I hope you will excuse me if I treat it with some levity, because the truth of the matter is, as I see it, that the fate of Zeta Psi has already been sealed. They will without a doubt be derecognized and with great haste too. So, yes I understand the futility of my attempts to reason with people about the "injustice of it all." No one cares. Or rather, they care too much to ever see that derecognizing Zeta Psi will achieve very little. I say very little as opposed to nothing, because it will achieve something -- a false sense of security and a few weeks of peace on this campus -- until something like this happens again. Derecognizing Zeta Psi would be like most acts committed in a blind rage. It will have the same effect as this opinion. Nothing.
Anyway, there are two things I would like to clarify: the first being that I am not a Zeta Psi. And to be perfectly honest, I had never given Zeta Psi enough thought to form an opinion other than that of indifference. But, if I'm making the case that we shouldn't derecognize Zeta Psi, it's certainly not because I have any vested interest in them; in fact, I promise if by some random act of patience and justice they aren't derecognized I will never enter their house again. Secondly, I do not condone the behavior of the brothers of Zeta Psi. What they did was stupid and crude. But, I can see the distinction between socially unacceptable behavior and criminal acts. And Zeta Psi is only guilty of the former, but they are most certainly being treated as if they were guilty of the latter.
So, finally, here is my argument: Zeta Psi has committed no crime. The facts of the matter are that, we have no idea what their opinions on women are. All I can say is that they made some jokes which I found completely tasteless, and this suggests to me that they are misogynists. But is that really fair? Taste is after all a very subjective issue, what I find tasteful, others might not, how can we take such drastic action against a house based on something so subjective? I think that's a question, that has been overlooked in the discussion surrounding Zeta Psi -- everyone seems very sure of the fact that they are misogynists, while there aren't entirely convincing reasons for this. Alright, I doubt I will win any support with that argument, nevertheless, even if they are misogynist, much like any other racist or sexist view in and of itself, that is not a crime. It is only an opinion, and in a free society we are entitled to our opinions. An individual by his very existence is entitled to his opinions, be they right, wrong or bizarre. You can't take that right away from an individual, far less from an entire fraternity of individuals, and you can't prosecute them under the letter of the law, no matter how offensive their opinion is (if you could, every Red Sox fan would be in jail).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that we should tolerate everyone's opinions. We shouldn't, and we don't. When you're offended by something, you always have the right to disassociate yourself from it. In the event that something offends us, we have the choice to simply turn our backs, walk away and to ignore it. Why are we dealing with this Zeta Psi issue as if we have forgotten that we have these choices?
If we distill the issue it comes down to this: we want blood, we want scapegoats, we want to believe "bad" things don't happen. It's the mob mentality at its finest hour, a Parisian mob might only be a trifle quicker in dragging Zete off to Madame la Guillotine, without trial, defense and with an absolute presumption of guilt. Regardless, does anybody believe crucifying Zeta Psi is going to change a damn thing? But, still it's too painful to just ignore them, and believe me I agree wholeheartedly that action should be taken. But, not by the administration and not by the Coed Fraternity Sorority Council; as I keep repeating Zeta Psi has committed no crime, hence this matter doesn't concern either of those bodies. There is a duality of standards at work. Despite the fact that Zeta Psi's opinions and actions are socially unacceptable, they are not legally liable for any crime. There are many ways for a mature, intelligent community such as ours to respond to this social deviation; we may decide to personally disassociate ourselves from them, we may organize calm protests/demonstrations and we can write articles and letters for newspapers. Most importantly we can do it in a manner which will not scare the crap out of all the'05s! In essence we should avoid going on a crusade and derecognizing Zeta Psi. Instead, I believe the social checks and balances of the Dartmouth community will spring into action and see to it that Zeta Psi is forsaken.
Observe the merits of this plan over one of derecognition. Firstly, the brothers of Zeta Psi will be forced to choose between socially unacceptable views and permanent social isolation. Hence, they will probably develop some respect for their peers, especially those known formerly to them as something other than "females," and even if they don't, they're not likely to be in much of a position to do further damage. Derecognizing their house will make them bitter and defensive. The significance of the issue will be completely wasted upon them.
Secondly, derecognizing Zeta Psi is the easy way out. We all know it is. Misogyny is prevalent in fraternities and eliminating Zeta Psi will do nothing to change that. It would look good like any other symbolic gesture, but change nothing. Worse still, it would make us rest easy, safe in the false assumption that we had solved the problem. However, if we choose to ignore Zeta Psi, their miserable exile will serve as an example for other would-be misogynists. A clear message denouncing misogyny will be sent by the Dartmouth community, and I stress the community, and not by the folks in Parkhurst. Furthermore, as long as Zeta Psi remains on campus, they can be useful scapegoats for providing the impetus for reform. The problem really isn't as simple as derecognizing all fraternities either. We really must be honest with ourselves about this, without fraternities would the men at Dartmouth become better people overnight? No, this behavior would be shoved further underground, far even from the far-reaching tentacles of the Administration.
Thirdly, Zeta Psi is finished anyway. Whether it is derecognized by the administration or forsaken by its peers, its days are certainly numbered. So why not let them be, isn't it far more fulfilling to have Zeta Psi close down by its own choice, forced to accept that the Dartmouth community will not stand for misogynistic behavior, than to see them closed down by an already unpopular administration?
Fourthly, derecognizing Zeta Psi is enforcing an artificial standard. In the real world, if a woman walks into a bar and is mistreated, she leaves and never returns. She doesn't run to the CFSC pleading for derecognition of the bar! I know we would like Dartmouth to live up to a higher ideal than the real world, but the fact of the matter is, if we don't learn to realistically deal with issues such as these before we go into the real world, we never will. After all, Dartmouth is an educational institution and thus they have a responsibility to prepare us for the real world. Otherwise, why the heck are we paying 30 grand a year? To find ourselves incapable of dealing with unpleasant social circumstances? If the college derecognizes Zeta Psi, they are not only making a mistake, but they aren't doing their job!
And finally, derecognizing Zeta Psi would be giving the administration arbitrary power, to act even though no crime had been committed. It would set a precedent that the administration could in effect derecognize any house that held an opinion sufficiently contrary to their own. Surely that kind of power in the hands of what is a crusading administration should be disturbing to all of us. Even if you try and limit this kind of power, how would you be able to do so? How do you differentiate between what is admissible behavior and what isn't? Will any fraternity bearing a copy of Mein Kampf or Mao's little red book also be derecognized? Or do they have to quote it in their newsletter? Or do they need posters in the house advertising their philosophy? How offensive is too offensive?
Here then is my final statement, well it's more of a challenge really. With a motto like "Vox Clamantis in Deserto," how can we justify forcefully silencing our own?
