A snippet from the article: "An 1857 letter that a Sigma Phi member named Jenkins Holland sent to one of his fraternity brothers suggests the new system was already hitting full stride: 'I did get one of the nicest pieces of ass some day or two ago.'"
Jesus, this article gets better and better the further you get through it.
> Gentle reader, if you happen to have a son currently in
> a college fraternity, I would ask that you take several
> carbon dioxide–rich deep breaths from a paper bag before
> reading the next paragraph. I’ll assume you are sitting
> down. Ready?
> “I’ve recovered millions and millions of dollars from
> homeowners’ policies,” a top fraternal plaintiff’s
> attorney told me.
Friends don't let friends climb up things while intoxicated. We watched a guy come inches away from utter annihilation at a warehouse party once. Right in front of our faces, if we hadn't been there he would have fallen several more storeys on top of the three he did. Had to get airlifed out by helicopter.
Now I'm the party pooper every time. I've almost gotten into fights trying to stop people from climbing trees. It's always worth it.
As a former employee of a fraternity I read this whole thing, and am confused about its point. I guess the author was trying for "Fraternities are bad because bad things happen to people that visit them" but all of the cited cases have nothing to do with the fraternity and have everything to do with a bunch of 18-year-olds being drunk and in a house together. Am I missing something?
I think one could also tell a biologist or psychologist that their objects of study are just a bunch of atoms stuck together.
Systems (like human institutions) have organizing principles, which are at least a level above the members which comprise them. Two different institutions can have the exact same people in them, but show vastly different outcomes.
What I'm missing is how this article is HM-relevant.
The fraternity house is generally scapegoated in the article as the locust of bad deeds because they tend indeed to be a locust for collegiate social interaction. Some bad things really do happen in fraternities.
I'll say though, the ~"60 people died in incidents related to fraternities over 10 years" stat is almost laughable if the author wasn't apparently serious. From a risk management perspective, focusing on 6 people a year out of 10's of millions that interact within a fraternity environment doesn't seem like the right prioritization.
Sexual assault happens more frequently and concern there is well-placed. But I do wonder if its incident rate wouldn't simply transfer to the general school population should, for example, fraternities be close on a campus.
It just seems to make sense to me that, if folks are going to come together and socialize with inhibition-inhibiting substances, some people with bad intentions are going to act on them, whether at a fraternity house party or a non-fraternity house party.
[+] [-] tiler|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] peteretep|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JonnieCache|11 years ago|reply
Now I'm the party pooper every time. I've almost gotten into fights trying to stop people from climbing trees. It's always worth it.
[+] [-] spacemanmatt|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MrBuddyCasino|11 years ago|reply
Warning: this is quite a shocking read about what was going on in frat houses at UVA, and the administrations utter failure to handle it.
[+] [-] golemotron|11 years ago|reply
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/12/sabri...
[+] [-] unknown|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] alinenache|11 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] twosheep|11 years ago|reply
[+] [-] calibraxis|11 years ago|reply
Systems (like human institutions) have organizing principles, which are at least a level above the members which comprise them. Two different institutions can have the exact same people in them, but show vastly different outcomes.
[+] [-] mattlutze|11 years ago|reply
The fraternity house is generally scapegoated in the article as the locust of bad deeds because they tend indeed to be a locust for collegiate social interaction. Some bad things really do happen in fraternities.
I'll say though, the ~"60 people died in incidents related to fraternities over 10 years" stat is almost laughable if the author wasn't apparently serious. From a risk management perspective, focusing on 6 people a year out of 10's of millions that interact within a fraternity environment doesn't seem like the right prioritization.
Sexual assault happens more frequently and concern there is well-placed. But I do wonder if its incident rate wouldn't simply transfer to the general school population should, for example, fraternities be close on a campus.
It just seems to make sense to me that, if folks are going to come together and socialize with inhibition-inhibiting substances, some people with bad intentions are going to act on them, whether at a fraternity house party or a non-fraternity house party.