Max Bryer '08 missed the point about sexual assault ("An Unfair Generalization of Frats," Feb. 22). He attempts to disassociate Greek culture from the phenomenon of sexual abuse at Dartmouth by claiming that the individuals who commit sexual crimes are going to do so regardless of a Greek affiliation. He is under the impression that were there to be no Greek system, the same "schmucks" will be coming to Dartmouth and will be prone to the same tendencies of objectification, exploitation and assault in a different, Greek-less environment.
As a sexual assault peer advisor and fraternity member, I do not advocate the abolishment of the Greek system. However, the recognition of a structure's flaws is distinct from the belief that it should be abandoned. I believe that some of the benefits of Greek life are undeniable. But that does not mean I do not recognize severe problems with it. Sexual assault is undoubtedly tied to the Greek system. Three things delineate Dartmouth from other comparable institutions: an intensely prominent Greek system, unusually high rates of sexual assault and the fact that we arguably drink more beer than anyone else. Everyone seems only to connect beer to frats, and sexual assault to beer, when really they are all three integrally related.
Bryer neglects to acknowledge that the only social spaces on this campus are male-dominated. This creates problems. Even if frats do not turn people into rapists, providing male-dominated environments in which people are losing their senses is dangerous. Not all of those men have to be criminals for that to be true. Only one person taking advantage of that situation is enough to exemplify the environment as problematic. Part of a solution might lie in the policies of sororities. Most national sorority organizations forbid houses from throwing parties. These rules nullify sororities as an effective response to the male-fraternity system as they are unable to provide the alternative of female-dominated social space.
Bryer's attitudes are pragmatically unsafe. Even if being a fraternity brother isn't correlated with being a sexual criminal, the fact that most men on campus are in frats means that most criminals are as well. His claim that the only concern we need have is our own "personal initiative and responsibility" is insane. We need to be aware of the actions of everyone around us. Personal responsibility too easily becomes an excuse for complicity. The disassociation he seeks to achieve by arguing against a direct cause-and-effect relationship between the two phenomena may be flat out wrong, but even if it isn't, it still provides Greeks a rationale for neglecting to address a real problem.
The place for personal responsibility is the monitoring of attitudes. Among homogenous ethnic groups, playful joking racism often breeds more sincere opinions, even if they are subtle, subconscious or discreet. The same is undoubtedly true of a group homogenous in any other way. Individuals should make it their business to be careful of humorous rhetoric that is allowed in single-sex settings but not elsewhere.
I still have hope. Within my own fraternity I've yet to experience anything overtly objectionable with the exception of some verbal insensitivities. I credit this to luck on my part for joining what I believe is a house full of largely good people. I do, however, acknowledge my own limited attentiveness based on the fact that I am merely one set of eyes and ears.
Ultimately, Bryer's point that abolishment of the Greek system is not the solution is probably true. Besides being unfeasible, it would not completely eliminate assault. Even the most radical skeptic would agree with Bryer in saying that most frat brothers aren't themselves direct perpetrators of assault. But as long as the Greek system exists and sexual assault within it, we must recognize the system as a catalyst and become self-aware of the problem. All of us, especially Greeks, need to not only be personally responsible, but attempt to change what is undoubtedly an imperfect system.
