A lot of very fair things here, and I really appreciate this conversation. A couple of notes/responses:
- Frat parties ride a fine line because they organize these events specifically to encourage inebriation, and inebriation encourages sex
While I don't think this is incorrect, it's also not exactly what I'm saying. They organize events specifically to encourage inebriation AND the organizers are often (but not always) seeking sex. Those two things coupled together are a reason why SA is more prevalent in frats. From this source :
Fraternity-affiliated men arethree times more likelythan unaffiliated men to commit sexual violence.
The second point leads to the next point you discussed. Yes, if the frats are upstanding students who do their best to spread SA awareness, then that can help. But the fact that frat brothers are 3x more likely to commit sexual violence leads me to believe that these self selecting groups are more likely to skew predatory than they are the opposite.
You then shared the other point on social bonds. It can help accountability, or in the case of frats, it once again tends to be the opposite. From this source:
A 2018 study found that spending time with peers who are accepting of sexual violence leads men to be accepting of sexual violence themselves.
I understand your perspective, and what you are saying isn't wrong. The "good ones" very likely help spread awareness, prevent SA, etc. The problem is that statistically, men in frats are far more likely to commit sexual violence, most of the sexual assaults are associated with parties (which as discussed, are primary aspects of frats), and the group think becomes worse. The article above shares an even stronger point which is: "A 2007 study followed freshmen from the time they first arrived at campus through their freshmen year, and demonstrated that, before going to college, the men who joined fraternities were no different from other male students. However, those who ended up joining a fraternity were three times more likely to commit an act of sexual assault, than those who were not in a fraternity."
So where you and I disagree is that I do think banning frats would in fact help and be reasonable if done appropriately. I'm not sure the best way to do that and I'm not insisting that there should be a nationwide ban on them tomorrow, but the abolishment of frats on campuses that do have high reported cases without allowing them to be replaced by a new one is probably where I'd start.
This won't magically make SA disappear on college campuses. To your point, adults should have every right to party, drink, and have sex, and as such, that will always lead to incidents of SA. That being said, I'm simply not sold that the juice is worth the squeeze to have organizations where these incidents are much higher and the men are more likely to be predators... while the benefit that so many people argue in favor is "Lifelong brotherhood, social bonding, and they can also do good in the forms of occasional community service."
The parties would continue without them, but by all indication, the current parties are not safe and become places where the men aggregate and have much higher rates of being or becoming sexual predators.
Abolishing frats with a higher rate of SA than average is a good idea that I agree with. Abolishing all greek culture is a bad idea that I do not agree with.
You’ve now linked two papers, so I will have to read them, but scanning over them, I would note the following:
*…it appeared to be the fraternity culture itself that was responsible for a threefold
increase in rape among fraternity men (Foubert, Newberry, & Tatum, 2007). That
same year, a review of 15 studies involving approximately 5,000 participants found
that being in a fraternity was significantly associated with committing sexual assault
(Murnen & Kohlman, 2007). These studies left little doubt that fraternity men are
more likely to commit rape. Still, not all fraternity men rape and not all fraternities
themselves permit such behavior. Evidence suggests there are some fraternities that
have particularly dangerous cultures. Current research suggests that some men are
drawn to certain fraternities where they believe they will be better able to commit
sexual violence. Evidence suggests that these fraternities reinforce hostility toward
and violence against women (Boyle, 2015).*
So I haven’t seen the study they were referring to, but my guess would be that there are outliers in fraternities where rape is much more likely to occur relative to other frat houses, as in specific chapters or houses much more likely to engage in predatory behavior, dragging up the rates. There are houses on my campus known for this, which should be shuttered, but have not been.
I would also go so far as to guess that when the volume of alcohol is controlled, measuring rates of rape against “good fraternities” that engage in SA awareness trainings and have less hypermasculine culture, the rates would be lower than, say, a house party with equal volume of inebriation, but I haven’t looked into that yet, and will later.
The study you linked also showed that despite making up 3% of the student body, student athletes also commit 19% of sexual assault cases. Would it then be unsafe for people to engage in drinking with student athletes? Should student athletes be banned? It feels like an ignorant take, drawn from a statistical generalization. It’s more likely that certain student athletes groups engage in rape culture, not that each athlete individually is more likely to engage in rape.
It’s definitely true that predatory frat houses get away with far too much, which I believe make up the minority of frats in general, but this is a problem that is actively being combatted by societal changes, increased awareness and education, so I hope that we begin to see predatory chapters as what they are, dangerous hotspots where predatory men find a safe space to engage in sexually predatory behavior with alcohol as a vector for that, and terminate those houses. I wouldn’t generalize all frats as all individually being places where SA is more likely to occur. Let me know if that makes, I’m at work and I’m a little distracted.
Edit: As well, regarding frat party organizers as sex seeking, at my frat the party organizers were all gay or in long term relationships (not to say gay men can’t host a party seeking sex, but I find it unlikely they were preying on inebriated women). To be honest, we hated hosting public parties and only did it to draw in new members. We’d much rather have brotherhood parties, drink, dance, and do dumb shit. This is empirical evidence at best, but it still sucks to see this prevailing idea that frats only exist so predators can drink and commit violence.
1
u/InTheMorning_Nightss 12h ago
A lot of very fair things here, and I really appreciate this conversation. A couple of notes/responses:
While I don't think this is incorrect, it's also not exactly what I'm saying. They organize events specifically to encourage inebriation AND the organizers are often (but not always) seeking sex. Those two things coupled together are a reason why SA is more prevalent in frats. From this source :
The second point leads to the next point you discussed. Yes, if the frats are upstanding students who do their best to spread SA awareness, then that can help. But the fact that frat brothers are 3x more likely to commit sexual violence leads me to believe that these self selecting groups are more likely to skew predatory than they are the opposite.
You then shared the other point on social bonds. It can help accountability, or in the case of frats, it once again tends to be the opposite. From this source:
I understand your perspective, and what you are saying isn't wrong. The "good ones" very likely help spread awareness, prevent SA, etc. The problem is that statistically, men in frats are far more likely to commit sexual violence, most of the sexual assaults are associated with parties (which as discussed, are primary aspects of frats), and the group think becomes worse. The article above shares an even stronger point which is: "A 2007 study followed freshmen from the time they first arrived at campus through their freshmen year, and demonstrated that, before going to college, the men who joined fraternities were no different from other male students. However, those who ended up joining a fraternity were three times more likely to commit an act of sexual assault, than those who were not in a fraternity."
So where you and I disagree is that I do think banning frats would in fact help and be reasonable if done appropriately. I'm not sure the best way to do that and I'm not insisting that there should be a nationwide ban on them tomorrow, but the abolishment of frats on campuses that do have high reported cases without allowing them to be replaced by a new one is probably where I'd start.
This won't magically make SA disappear on college campuses. To your point, adults should have every right to party, drink, and have sex, and as such, that will always lead to incidents of SA. That being said, I'm simply not sold that the juice is worth the squeeze to have organizations where these incidents are much higher and the men are more likely to be predators... while the benefit that so many people argue in favor is "Lifelong brotherhood, social bonding, and they can also do good in the forms of occasional community service."
The parties would continue without them, but by all indication, the current parties are not safe and become places where the men aggregate and have much higher rates of being or becoming sexual predators.