To the Editor:
I have heretofore avoided adding any commentary on the Greek community to these pages, for the most part finding such columns by their nature unable to seriously address many of the deeper issues that trouble our community when it comes to drawing circles of exclusion. So, I won't even attempt to express all my thoughts regarding the sorority op-eds (including Nicolas Duquette '04's truly baffling column on Feb. 13, "Sororities' Exclusion Not Just for Women"). I'll stick to the points I find most obvious, and so simple, that they have been mostly overlooked.
Everybody is right. If we weren't, then the whole debate would be very easy to resolve because we could draw our normative conclusions directly from our factual ones. To briefly recap the descriptive (and relevant) points that have been made: sororities are richer and whiter and more exclusive than the rest of campus, they are single-sex institutions. Sorority women are also stereotyped; we are not all white, well-groomed, straight, Christian and wealthy. Sorority rush is a tough process to coordinate; sorority women are well-intentioned and have feelings too.
I imagine that most people still interested in the debate would agree with this assessment and the legitimacy of these points. The question then becomes, what do we do now? What conclusions do we draw? How do we balance our view of a system that, on one hand, has afforded women like me so many opportunities that have defined and enhanced their Dartmouth educations and, on the other hand, is clearly and fundamentally flawed in ways that are an affront to our notions of what it means to be a community?
My point is this: if we, as a community of individuals fully capable of intellectual thought, are ever to change the debate over campus social life into a productive dialogue, we must first start talking to each other and not over one another. The alternative is to remain, each of us and equally so, painfully muddled in our own self-righteousness.
