The Inter-Sorority Council’s “no contact” policy is often perceived as tedious, but can it also be dangerous? A recent blog post suggests it can. The author claims the “no contact” policy causes sorority women to appear cold and prevents them from making first-years’ partying experiences more comfortable and safe. She concludes the policy is overly restrictive while ineffective at preventing “dirty rushing,” so its restrictions should be lifted. I disagree with her critique, but her writing illuminates common misperceptions surrounding the policy that reduce its value and, unfortunately, can cause situations in which a first-year in distress fails to see sorority women as a viable source of help. The solution is increased awareness of the restrictions of the policy, not its elimination.
The “no contact” nickname of the ISC’s “Responsible Contact Policy” is a misnomer. The policy previously forbade most contact between first-year women and sorority women before spring rush, permitting only short greetings to high school acquaintances. Today, it actually encourages sorority women to befriend and mentor first-years, provided they follow restrictions such as those on bid promising, gifts, visiting each others’ residences or locations far from Grounds and, most contentiously, contact surrounding alcohol. Sorority women are forbidden from providing alcohol to first-year women or inviting them to parties.
Although the policy is designed to protect first-year women, it can harm those unaware of its presence. It is logical for them to perceive the sorority women they see at parties as cold, and to be confused by older friends treating them differently when drinking. In situations where an intoxicated and distressed first-year is seen at a party and a friend cannot be found or getting her home seems difficult, the blogger is correct that sorority women could be the ideal source of help. However, it is the misconceptions surrounding the policy, not the policy itself, which may prevent them from acting as such.
The rules of the policy may prohibit “preferential treatment” and any interaction beyond a “common courtesy” greeting and conversation in situations involving alcohol, but helping a first-year in distress should be “common courtesy” for all University students. The ISC Vice President of Recruitment, Patricia Lee Menges, agrees: “One of our community's five pillars is support. We would never discourage a sorority woman from helping a first-year woman in need if the situation arises.” Hopefully, a first-year aware of the policy would realize the upperclassmen girls who have not talked to her much are still fellow students concerned about her, and likely willing to offer advice on how late busses operate, calling SafeRide, getting a cab or dealing with more dire situations. Ideally, sorority women would remember the policy’s goal of being “gracious and welcoming” to first-year women and not feel discouraged by the rules from reaching out to a first-year in need.
Therefore, I advocate increased education about the policy for both first-year and sorority women, explaining its rules and underlying purpose. This year, the policy was distributed to potential new members at the first Go Greek Night on September 9th and via the go-greek listserv. Though this was early in the semester, communication about the policy before first-year students arrive on Grounds would be preferable. This could be done via a Formal Recruitment listserv created over the summer and prominently displayed information on the ISC website. While the policy may cause the ISC to appear intense to first-year women, explaining it to them outright can make first-year women, if not appreciate the policy, at least feel unharmed by it. Awareness could also increase compliance: first-year women would not expect sorority women to buy them alcohol and would know when they were being “dirty rushed.”
The blog post is correct that women who intend to “dirty rush” cannot be stopped unless reporting is a real threat. However, I disagree that noncompliance with the regulations of the policy warrants their elimination. The policy restricts not just bid promising but also activities like taking first-years on trips, buying them drinks at bars and inviting them to date functions — activities that could be legitimately perceived as preferential treatment by a first-year woman, thereby causing her to expect a bid. The policy compels sorority women instead to meet and mentor first-years in dry settings, giving them a more complete picture of Greek life at the University. For sorority women who do choose to “dirty rush,” the policy is also important: it lets them know they should feel guilty and that they’re hurting the first-years’ rush experience and the rest of the ISC in the process.
Elaine Harrington is an Opinion Columnist for The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at e.harrington@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 4 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | 6 days agoIn addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
EDITORIAL: Pedestrian safety is an institutional imperative
By Editorial Board | April 15, 2024Amid a national crisis of pedestrian safety, Charlottesville and the University are also struggling to properly maintain pedestrian safety.
