Research Blog #9

Argument and Counter-Argument

Argument: Fraternities have been persecuted in the recent media for acts of alcohol-related incidents, sexual assault, and racism/discrimination. They received similar negative attention in the 60's and 80's for being too institutionally aligned with universities and too uptight/stuffy. These fundamentally opposite representations of fraternities are both negatively perceived by their respective mainstream cultures. The grand culture changes that occurred within Gen X, labelled fraternities as counter-culture, and perpetuated that stigma through the popular movie Animal House. In order to survive, fraternities adopted this misrepresentation, and became popular as a result. Fraternities are now again counter-culture, except in the opposite way-they party too much. Seeing as how fraternities have the ability to adapt and change, there should be ways to manage risk and ultimately ween them off of the "party pathway".

Counter-Argument: Fraternities are dangerous places that promote binge drinking, sexual assault and discrimination. On paper they make sizable donations to charities, perform generous amounts of volunteer hours and prepare their members for the workforce through leadership development and alumni network. Yet this falls into the mentality of "work hard, play harder". The positive contributions they make to society don't outweigh the negatives they do they frequently do. Alcohol-related deaths, hazing, and race discrimination shouldn't be permissible by any means. The Greek System should be done away with entirely in order to keep our students safe.