The Greek System Should be Removed From College Campuses

I would like to address the misunderstanding with the 1 in 5 statistics. I seem to have misread my information, which is my fault. Upon rereading articles, one that you seemed to use, I found that the 1 in 5 only included completed assaults. That means, there could potentially be hundreds of other attempted assaults. Regardless, I don"t really think it matters that the 1 in 5 isn"t specifically about rape. What matters is that these boys are sexually assaulting women. Just because it"s "just a kiss" doesn"t make it okay. They are touching women in ways they shouldn"t be and are getting away with it. And although my 1 in 5 statistic may have been flawed, the fact that frat boys engage in more non consensual sexual activity than non Greeks at exceedingly high rates IS true - proven by numerous studies. Ever heard of "Rush Boobs"? Frats all across the country encourage and sometimes require their pledges to ask women to take their tops off and write "Rush *insert frat name here*". "Rush boobs" is a prime example of the common frat boy objectification of women. (not exclusive to frats, I understand) There have been countless cases nationwide of frat boys taking advantage of women and being encouraged by brothers to do so. At Georgia Tech in 2013 there was a frat-wide email sent out to brothers about "luring your rapebait", which explained how to find a victim, weaken them with alcohol and take advantage of them. *A frat chapter at the University of Vermont was closed after the frat brothers surveyed each other on whom they would rape. A frat brother at the SAE chapter at George Mason openly admitted that there was a sexual assault problem within their chapter and at the university as a whole. These aren"t isolated incidents either, cases have been coming to light on campuses across the country. And clearly this isn"t just a non-Greek"s biased opinion - Greek members have acknowledged the issue themselves. There was even a survey completed in the late 1980"s about male peer support in regards to violence against women. It was modified in the 90"s and again in 2013, all saying the same thing. These men are encouraging one another in these activities. And believe me, I know that this isn"t every frat, but these fraternities are indeed being used as sexual assault opportunities. Crime is said to be comprised of two things : motive and opportunity. Clearly the boys that are committing these sex crimes, even if it is "just a kiss or grope" have the motive, but why provide them with the opportunity? I"m not saying that they wouldn"t find parties elsewhere and potentially do the same damage, I"m not that naive, but I"m sure it would limit the assault numbers by a dramatic amount. You brought up the point about all but 2 presidents were member of fraternities. I hope I"m not the first one to tell you this, but that statistics simply isn"t true."A quick look at the North-American Interfraternity Conference (NIC) web-site points out the truth that "At this date 44% of U.S. Presidents have held fraternity membership." I would check your source again. But although not every president has been part of a Greek community, there are a shocking amount of powerful men and women that have. I think the fact the a large number of United States Senators, Congressmen, Fortune 500 CEOs and even a few past Presidents being frat members speaks more about elitism of fraternities and their alumni. According to Cornell University, only 2% of America"s population is involved in fraternities yet 80% of Fortune 500 executives, 76% of U.S. senators and congressmen, and 85% of Supreme Court justices have been frat men. Look at those odds and the opportunities those lucky bastards were given. These men/women are often getting jobs and promotions from former fraternity/sorority alumni, and if that"s not nepotism, what is? I mean frats/sororities are "families" right? Now, I"m not saying that all of these people aren"t qualified for the jobs they receive, but they do seem to be getting an unfair advantage to non Greeks. I"m also not trying to say that the Greek system causes nepotism, but they definitely encourage it. And the fact these men and women have to pay hundreds and often thousands of dollars to be a part of these organizations is slightly absurd and excludes a good portion of college attendees. I"ve heard "you pay for any organization you join", which is slightly ridiculous if you ask me. There are a plethora of organizations, social, athletic, and academic that don"t require payment, and if they do - it"s either optional or not thousands of dollars. The GPA argument is a common argument; however, I encourage you to look deeper into the statistics university Greeks are dishing out. (I also encourage you to read this article to give a little background understanding - http://www.dailyemerald.com... ) Basically the GPA statistics given are often averaged between Greek men and women. Women typically carry the higher GPA - sorry guys. The ratio of women to men in Greek life is also generally higher than non Greek. So when you average the GPA"s it looks like Greek GPAs are higher because more women = more high GPAs for the average, but really, more often than not, Greek and non Greek GPAs are practically the same. So I don"t really buy that my 3.94 would have been a 4.0 had I rushed. The main problem I have with the charity argument is this: You don"t have to be Greek to raise money. I"m not going to deny that Greeks raise and donate millions of dollars to a variety of charities, but who says you have to be part of a Greek community to do that? At my university non-Greeks raised over a quarter of a million dollars for Riley Hospital one year. That"s awesome! Is it a million dollars? No. But it helps. The other problem I have, which also happens to be a flaw in my defense, is that this charity work is mandatory. In all honesty, if there were no Greek organizations to mandate how much community service is done, these students probably wouldn"t donate their time or money, which sucks. Although Greeks put on facade of service, I don"t think there are actually that many members passionate about charity work. (That is solely opinion and conjecture). The idea that overall difference in health and consumption isn"t significant is just wrong. I would argue that 20% is most definitely significant. Come to think of it 20% is also 1 in 5, and I bet those 20% of women who were sexually assaulted by frat boys would agree that it is indeed significant. And I"m glad they get sleep, I definitely envy them in that regard. But is a refreshing amount of sleep a worthy trade off for the liver and kidney problems they"ll potentially face for the rest of their lives? I understand that Greek alumni give a large portion of donations received by universities, but I don"t believe it"s 75%. My research shows the highest number any university received from alumni as a whole was about 65%, but that was not a common occurrence. So maybe 75% of that 65%. However, I get that that is still a significant amount. But it is also true that those who receive financial aids and loans are less likely to donate after graduation. What connection does that have? Those that can afford to participate in Greek life are already more likely to donate than those who cannot. Just food for thought. And if there were no more Greek communities, you must be under the assumption that alumni who may have been involved in the Greek system simply wouldn't give back or those that were, would just stop giving. I have a hard time believing that. I'm not trying to say that there are no redeeming qualities about the Greek System, nor am I saying that every person or every chapter is bad. But the cons most definitely outweigh the pros here. Just because some good things are happening, doesn"t mean the overall system is good.