Coming from a town where the nearby college has a dry campus, it immediately struck me as odd that Dartmouth's administration takes such an interest in student life, drinking or otherwise. Even after being here for almost two years, it still has not quite clicked for me. I do not understand why it is the College's business to legislate how and where adults drink and party.
If we consider Dartmouth to be an institution of higher learning, its main focus should be education. Of course, since almost all students live on or near campus, students' safety is also an equal, if not greater, priority than education, but that does not justify the College's overbearing presence in our social lives. It should be left to students themselves to handle themselves responsibly and, if desired, through outlets that run alternatively to the Greek system. It is the College's business to treat the symptoms of partying rather than to engage in a futile attempt to eradicate the cause.
This is not to say that the Greek system has not caused serious problems. From my experiences closer to home, private house parties do not engender many of the issues we find so problematic here. Students do not experience the same claustrophobia and lack of options as they do on our campus. Dangerous drinking is more of a liability at a private residence due to the higher risk for police involvement, as opposed to the more tame and understanding presence of Safety and Security. Hazing is obviously not a problem when it comes to individual residences. Regardless of the added risks inherent in Dartmouth's social climate, though, it is clear to me that the Greek system is here to stay, in one form or another. Whether current students like it, Greek life has become a tradition. Many fraternity houses grew up with the College itself.
That is not to say that we should ignore the plethora of problems that are induced or exacerbated by the Greek system. However, we should focus on treating the symptoms through a victim-centric approach instead of articulating lofty concerns with Greek culture in general.
Sexual assault and binge drinking can be addressed in more practical, helpful ways than they currently are. Persons found "responsible" for sexual assault should receive more than a slap-on-the-wrist punishment: the vaguely threatening sounding "probation."
Rather, if one is found guilty, he or she should suffer legitimate consequences, both as punishment and as respite for the victim. Offenders should be at least suspended for a term at minimum to allow the victim healing time without having to see his or her attacker's face every other day. The probation option should not even exist.
Regarding binge drinking, the College should go further with its already-helpful Good Samaritan initiative. As it currently stands, the Good Sam procedure is costly for those not on the student health insurance plan. This concern over cost and, by extension, parental notification can cause some students to hesitate calling Safety and Security, even in dangerous situations.
Ultimately, I am not convinced that it is the College's prerogative to interfere in students' party lives. Partying is not a right. Neither is underage drinking. And the College should not be pressed to provide for such a party entitlement.
What the College should do is focus on the safety of its students, whether the harm is partying-induced. If it wants to address such safety issues adequately, harsher punishment for perpetrators of sexual assault is key. It is unconscionable to me that a student found responsible for cheating is faced with the very real possibility of expulsion, whereas a student found responsible for harming the health and psychological well-being of another student, never mind breaking the law, is allowed to remain at the school. This is unacceptable and should not be tolerated in an environment that supposedly prioritizes the safety of its students.
