The University has a sordid history of discrimination against disadvantaged groups. However, it is much harder to identify unfair treatment of non-disadvantaged groups and condemn it. In the case of Greek life at the University, there certainly is much to be desired, but it is fair to say the policy that Inter-Fraternity Council fraternities are not allowed to have certain alcoholic beverages while all other organizations including non-IFC fraternities such as those housed under the Multicultural Greek Council, National Pan-Hellenic Council and others have no such restrictions is flawed and discriminatory. The policy is intended to combat the patterns of sexual assault and binge drinking prevalent in Greek life — an important goal — but setting the line at certain drinks no matter how they are served is an arbitrary distinction that incentivizes bad behavior and is discriminatory in nature.
It is hard to be upset when the group being discriminated against has such a historic reputation with alcohol abuse, hazing and sexual assault in addition to being a relatively homogeneous and affluent group. Some condone this discriminatory policy because of the propensity to criticize fraternities that has permeated dialogue at this University. But discriminatory practices, such as the unequal treatment IFC fraternities receive, must be fought regardless of whom they affect.
The fact that other groups are not bound by similar restrictions is openly discriminatory. Fraternities cannot have kegs, liquor or any sort of mixed drink at a party and non-IFC fraternities and organizations can. Economically, this is unfair to IFC fraternities because kegs and punch are the most cost-effective alcoholic products for fraternities and smaller fraternities struggle with the cost of hiring external bouncers for every party. If the University is going to ban these types of drinks for being too dangerous, it should require the ban of all organizations, not just fraternities. The right to host events the way students want has been restricted solely for IFC fraternities, which were essentially coerced coerced into this agreement.
If the University wants to assert its power to restrict the potential for sexual violence then it should uniformly apply this rule to all parties where drinking may be involved or, if that option is not feasible, to none at all. Fraternities are not solely responsible for the epidemic of sexual violence at the University and should not be the only group regulated for the actions of a relatively small number of individuals who permeate the community at large and not just Greek life.
The choice to limit what drinks fraternities can serve is well-intentioned. However, using unilateral authority to force fraternities to accept new rules that do not apply to any other student organizations is morally indefensible. Despite different operating agreements, fraternities are student organizations just as much as other CIOs and to implicitly condone drinking and parties in one case and not the other is unfair.
Furthermore, there is no guarantee that these rules have been or will be followed, so the only people who are really losing out are those who follow the rules; invariably, this mainly restricts the same fraternities that do the most to prevent sexual assault and overconsumption in the first place. Asymmetric rules and asymmetric enforcement of those rules is a guarantee that the intention behind a good rule is ignored.
The University needs to recognize that its current methods of enforcement are discriminatory and develop a plan so all organizations are treated equally. The current course of action to limit just IFC fraternities in these ways is an ineffective and discriminatory. The decision to extend these restrictions or remove them is a decision the University community needs to make as a whole, not one that should stem from unilateral administrative decision making.
Sawan Patel is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at s.patel@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: True financial aid must be transparent
By Paul Kurtzweil | 2 days agoThe implications and revelations of the lawsuit should inspire greater transparency at the University in order to ensure that financial aid is properly and equitably distributed.
SULLIVAN: Ramp up physical accessibility on Grounds
By Scarlett Sullivan | 3 days agoThe University must take responsibility for the inaccessibility of Grounds and work to promote accessibility for all students despite misguided laws.
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
