The Oct. 17 Verbum Ultimum resulted in a glut of responses that agreed and disagreed with everything from the article to the decision to run the piece on the front page of The Dartmouth. However, lost in the sea of responses are answers to the myriad claims made by the editorial board. While there are some valid concerns raised by the authors, the assumptions, emotional appeals and lack of facts follow a typical vein shared by those calling for the end of the Greek system.
The authors first argue that the Greek system results in negative publicity and damages the College’s reputation. I must agree that at times the Greek system has created negative publicity, regardless of whether or not it is founded. However, there are times where administrators are all too willing to allow the Greek system to take the fall for behavior which the administration is responsible for. The sensationalism put forward by Huffington Post, Gawker, Rolling Stone and others is left unchallenged by administrators who fail to respond to a one-sided narrative — the knee-jerk reaction of administrators to the Beta Alpha Omega fraternity emails obtained by Gawker is a perfect example.
Next, the board asserts that “for many, Greek life takes precedence over academics.” The authors take this position as fact, but they ignore the fact that affiliated students have a higher GPA than unaffiliated students. Many of our valedictorians, including four of last year’s, were affiliated.
The authors do cite examples of historical Greek misbehavior to support their argument. However, actions by individuals do not necessarily reflect upon the whole, and the redaction of the “Beta-vision” allegation reflects the weakness of their evidentiary support. I fail to see the logic that led them to conclude that “the Greek system undeniably enables and institutionalizes harmful behaviors.” Some harmful behaviors, such as using drugs and high-risk drinking, are societal problems of today’s youth and are not an embodiment of Greek institutions. The authors present a list of conclusions without citing any reliable data or even anecdotal evidence. Saying that the Greek system “facilitates binge drinking and sexual assault” is an accusation masked as a truth unless there are supporting facts. The editorial board provides none.
This is the biggest problem perpetrated by those who write pieces attacking the Greek system and Dartmouth in general. For example, last winter, columnist Rebecca Rothfeld ’14 wrote that “there is a veritable boatload of evidence that Dartmouth represents a hostile environment for certain communities,” without providing one piece of that boatload of evidence. That same term, a piece by Sarah Fernandez ’14 claimed that fraternities result in behaviors such as “sexual assault, racist, sexist, classist, homophobic and transphobic acts” which are “are largely defended as unfortunate byproducts.” Fernandez failed to even attempt to prove her first claim and put words into others’ mouths with her second. The Verbum takes the same tack, citing numerous conclusions with no supporting evidence. The editorial standards of The Dartmouth should be better than this.
The authors then use the next section to provide an alternative to the Greek system, which does need more of an emphasis. However, they deny that the Greek system can be part of these changes, maintaining but never explaining why “our antiquated system cannot be reformed.”
The board concludes by citing the recent crackdown on the Greek system, which destroys what made the system initially attractive. I agree that the response by administrators is hurting what was once a more welcoming place. However, this is a problem about administrators’ response to high-risk drinking and other issues. In fact, the current spat of alcohol incidences — 12 first-years were sent to Dartmouth-Hitchock Medical Center the first weekend of this term — proves that campus problems extend far beyond the Greek system. This piece of the argument is really more against current policy than the Greek system itself.
Ultimately, the Verbum fails in adding to the conversation surrounding Greek life because of its assumptions and unfounded conclusions — and it certainly does not provide a strong argument for abolishing it. The editorial board must provide a better response and should be held to a higher standard than last week’s Verbum reflects.
