The Panhellenic Association held a “Grand Chapter” Monday night to educate the community about issues chapter presidents have discussed this semester. I went in skeptical, and I left both inspired and frustrated.
The meeting covered three main topics: “Bid-Nights,” “Progressives” and “Unity.” This semester has been chock full of discussions of Duke Culture, but few prescriptions for action have been provided for how to equalize gender, sex and housing inequities. The presidents talked about what are known as bid nights, in which fraternities host parties for new members and then the sorority moves on to a club for an open event. There was a consensus that the status quo is going to change; moving semi-formals earlier was suggested as an alternative.
The problem is that even as positive initiatives happen, women still feel uncomfortable going public with their opinions. Rose Filler, president of Pi Phi, recounted how she was singled out after being quoted in an article about fraternity e-mails earlier this semester. It can be empowering to publicly defend your opinions, but many women I talked to for this column wanted anonymity. I hope more women can achieve that sort of empowerment instead of pouring on the chocolate sauce in pursuit of confidence.
Bogna Brzezinska, president of the Panhellenic Association, said in an e-mail that “a lot of women think they are alone in their opinions, or are afraid to speak out because they feel others don’t care or aren’t interested. Having chapter presidents get up and take on tough issues that affect their members demonstrates that they aren’t alone.” She added that many view Panhel as “very fragmented,” and although greater unity is needed, “standing in a united front on several key topics is a first step.”
One sorority last year had to call EMS multiple times during their bid night because of alcohol. The bid nights are huge legal liabilities because these are open events, and it seemed like most were in favor of this initiative. I’ve written about how, relative to the Interfraternity Council, Panhel does little to encourage its members to run for leadership positions on campus; that didn’t come up, and it really needs to. However, the abstract acknowledgment that we’re severely lacking unity was encouraging.
The big-ticket topic at the meeting was progressives. Brzezinska defined those as ranging from mild events to ones that are “dangerous and degrading situations in which women are subjected to sexual treatment and excessive use of alcohol.” I’ve never attended one, but from what I’ve heard, themes range from “World War 3” to “Republican National Convention” (jk about the last one). Some women I’ve talked to regret past decisions to participate, while others don’t. In conversations with those who don’t object to progressives, they say they feel empowered and know exactly what they’re getting themselves into.
Progressives exploit women by putting them in situations in which they can’t consent to sexual activity (drinking alcohol makes that impossible) and in service of men who are seriously intoxicated. This semester’s discussions of problems with campus culture necessitate a tangible response, and a simple one would be to change or eliminate progressives altogether.
Questions must be asked, like: Why do women see this as taking control of their sexuality? Why are alcohol and theme parties prerequisites for empowerment? Do we have to degrade men to not feel... degraded?
And why will no one go on the record about this? This isn’t WikiLeaks; it’s the Chron for fourlokossake.
IFC President Erskine Love said in an e-mail that it “does not approve of any inappropriate behavior that has taken place in the past at parties that have been collectively labeled ‘progressives,’ and has never considered events like these acceptable for recruitment or for any other reason.” I would like to still believe in the Tooth Fairy and that “personality matters”, but let’s be real... I believe that fraternities will be forced to reform if Panhel women produce a collective action success with a petition condemning progressives, which was passed around at the meeting Monday.
If you (I saw rows and rows of you at the Grand Chapter) felt pressured not to sign in public, sign online. If you don’t sign, hopefully you’re thinking critically about why. Brzezinska is optimistic that it will make “a huge difference.”
People are enthusiastic about changing campus culture until they are asked to give an opinion about this (cherished) event. It’s illuminating that so many Duke students wouldn’t go on the record to express an opinion; let’s bring the conversation to light and invite more than just a room of presidents into the conversation.
Samantha Lachman is a Trinity sophomore.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.