Beneath the surface of this week's headlines which saw mentions of felony charges, harassment and arrests lies a greater and perhaps more important debate about the meaning of "brotherhood." The arguments go both ways: on one hand, a true brother wouldn't endanger or offend others by taking drugs in a common area, while on the other hand, a real brother shouldn't bring an internal problem to the public sphere particularly the legal sphere. In either case, the debate surrounding the events at Sigma Alpha Epsilon in the early morning hours of May 13 ("Fourth arrested after drug incident at SAE," May 25) underscore the broader question of what the limits of obligation to a fraternity, sorority or any other organization are, if they exist at all. If any productive result is to come from these recent events, it will be to serve as a catalyst motivating every organization to have a conversation about what membership especially "brotherhood" or "sisterhood" means.
Members of any organization be it a sports team, an a capella group or a house on Webster Avenue are typically well versed in the set of platitudes passed down from classes gone before. In Greek organizations, this frequently occurs during recruitment, and then again during pledge term when older members try to instill in newcomers the values of the house. As the past week's events have shown, members of a single organization can hold astonishingly distinct views about what it means to be a part of that group. In order to prevent these schisms from growing too large, every community on campus should take the time to realistically determine what their social organizations have become and to evaluate what they still aspire to be not be chained to notions of what we "ought" to say based on ideals that are no longer relevant or respected.
What does it mean to be a "brother" or a "sister" or simply a "member" in your organization? When does your responsibility to safety be it mental, emotional or physical allow you to break these bonds and turn outward for help? The animosity that drastically increased following students' arrests may not have been so severe without the discrepancy in how SAE's members had perceived the house's values ("SAE national suspends members facing charges," May 26). But it would be a mistake to think this is endemic to a single Greek house. Something of a similar nature could have just as easily occurred with many other organizations, Greek or otherwise.
Ultimately, the values of an organization must be revisited on a regular basis. An organization's character can change yearly, and every new member brings a new perspective on the standards to which the organization aspires. There must be a structure whereby, when concerns are raised, all involved understand with whom authority lies and how to go about finding a resolution that fits within the group's values.
The issues that must be assessed in these discussions extend beyond drug use. One week ago, members of numerous campus organizations gathered together to discuss a campus issue as serious as illegal substances or harassment: sexual assault ("Kim, students address sexual assault at forum" May 24). The reality of sexual assualt, another campus issue for which our standards and protocols must be defined, is another reason why real discussion is needed now.
We've seen the explosive outcome of letting problems fester beneath engraved truisms like "fraternity." Let's prevent it from happening again.
