UCLA 1991 Theta Xi songbook lyrics
Mike Coleman
lyrics from the song which seems to have caused the most outrage on campus.
They're pretty revolting, so you should probably HIT 'N' NOW if you don't want
to see them.
The campus has been in a minor uproar for about the last two weeks, though I
can't recall having seen any national press. The LA Times didn't print the
lyrics, so their story was pretty muted.
The on-campus reaction has been pretty much what I would have expected.
Women's groups, ethic groups, liberal groups, and a good fraction of the
general student body seem outraged. The greeks are basically saying how
they've been misunderstood, they didn't do it, they won't do it again, that
the Daily Bruin shouldn't print such pornographic songs, etc., etc., ad
nauseum. The main surprise for me has been that sorority WOMEN are generally
taking the side of the frats in the dispute.
Being a free-speech advocate, I don't think the frats should be barred from
singing such songs. Nonetheless, I think it's quite worthwhile for the rest
of the campus to realize that they do so. My main complaint, personally, is
that my reg fees subsidize these lyrics and the frats who wrote them.
Mike
Lupe
Twas down in Cunt Valley, where red rivers flow
Where cocksuckers flourish, and maidenheads grow,
Twas there I met Lupe, the girl I adore
My hot fucking, cocksucking Mexican whore
Now Lupe popped her cherry, when she was but eight
Swinging upon the old garden gate,
The cross member broke and the upright slipped in,
And she finished her life in a welter of sin
She'll fuck you, she'll suck you, she'll tickle your nuts,
And if you're not careful, she'll suck out your guts,
She'll wrap her legs round you, till you think you'll die
I'd rather eat Lupe than sweet cherry pie
Now Lupe's dead and buried, and lies in her tomb,
While maggots crawl out of her decomposed womb,
The smile on her face, is a sure cry for more,
My hot fucking, cocksucking Mexican whore.
--
--Mike Coleman (col...@cs.ucla.edu), Lord High Executioner of Anhedonia-----
In the '70s, you laughed at Frank Burns. In the '80s, you voted for him.
Kevin Fong
>Someone requested to see some of the Theta Xi songbook lyrics, so here's the
>lyrics from the song which seems to have caused the most outrage on campus.
>Being a free-speech advocate, I don't think the frats should be barred from
>singing such songs. Nonetheless, I think it's quite worthwhile for the rest
>of the campus to realize that they do so. My main complaint, personally, is
>that my reg fees subsidize these lyrics and the frats who wrote them.
(carefully trying to avoid starting a flame war)
Well, I think only 4,000 dollars goes to the Greek system as a whole.
When you consider that's out of the reg fees of 30,000 students and it's
split among several thousand fraternity and sorority members, there's very
little actual subsidization involved; it's just a token measure of
affiliation. I think now the latest controversy is that the fraternities
have rejected the money and pulled out of USAC, and people are now whining
because that takes away their main measure of punitive action.
As for the money spent on the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Relations,
getting rid of that would be stupid, as that is the main way for the
*university* (not the students) to watch over and police the fraternities.
If anything, I see the office and its staff being beefed up next year.
Let's put this into a little perspective. All the name-calling, the
sanctions, and the protests are not caused by hazing, alcohol abuse,
or rape, but by people who sang songs.
Look at the actual crime involved--members of the organization distributed
offensive material a year and a half ago to new members of the organization.
Does that justify this much anger and attention? IMO, no. Were the
songs offensive? Yes, I think most people have found them so. But let's
work toward positive change. The fraternities won't change their ways if
you kick them off campus. But positive steps include requiring the frats
to include rape awareness seminars in their pledge education, opening
up discussion between the offended groups and the fraternities, and
encouraging cross-pollination of membership between these groups and
the Greek system. If more members of the women's and ethnic groups were
in fraternities and sororities, they would see that not all Greeks
are insensitive and elitist. If more members of the Greek system were
in women's and ethnic groups, they would see that the stereotypes aren't
true and that these songs offend many people and shouldn't be sung.
If we want to just punish the fraternities and pretend that we have
eliminated the probelm, fine. I've been around UCLA for a long time and
I can tell you that it hasn't worked in the past. If we want to
work toward positive change in the attitudes, understanding, and
tolerance of our community, that's a longer, more expensive, and
more difficult path. In my opinion, it's also much more worthwhile.
Disclaimer: Obviously, I'm biased. I have been a member of a UCLA
fraternity for nine years, both as a member and now as an alumni
advisor. I find the lyrics very offensive, and would never sing them
myself nor tolerate them in my fraternity. But I'm also offended by
the lack of tolerance, unwillingness to communicate, and bandwagon
namecalling shown by the campus community. As a member of the
Greek system, I have been called a white elitist racist homophobic
pig. I'm definitely not white. I hope I'm not any of the rest.
Sorry for the length. Once I started, it was hard to stop. Send
constructive comments to the newsgroup, flames via email please.
"People, can't we all just get along?"
--
Kevin Fong ke...@netcom.com
Los Angeles, CA
"You are standing at the end of a road before a small brick building."
Jason Robbins
>Keven Fong Writes:
>Well, I think only 4,000 dollars goes to the Greek system as a whole.
I think it was $4000 to much. Its notso much that I want to keep my
share of the registration fees that go you frat boys, it is more that
I just hate the idea of condoning their behavior with my money. If
anything I think that frats should pay UCLA some sort of compensation
for the negative image that they give the school with all their
drinking, vulgarity, and bad press.
>I think now the latest controversy is that the fraternities
>have rejected the money and pulled out of USAC, and people are now whining
>because that takes away their main measure of punitive action.
Thats not whining, that is us planning to make you desponsored for
good. In what I am sure will be an land slide campus refferendum.
>As for the money spent on the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Relations,
>getting rid of that would be stupid, as that is the main way for the
>*university* (not the students) to watch over and police the fraternities.
>If anything, I see the office and its staff being beefed up next year.
I would rather see you dealt with by real police.
>Let's put this into a little perspective. All the name-calling, the
>sanctions, and the protests are not caused by hazing, alcohol abuse,
>or rape, but by people who sang songs.
They sang about rape, under the influence of alcohol. I couldn't care
less about you losers hazing each other. Think of the situation at
those frats and others: they get drunk and write songs, they get drunk
and aprove the use of those songs in their pledge packet, they get
drunk and sing songs, the just plain get drunk and stupid. Hardly the
image that I want as a UCLA student, hardly the kind of enviorment
that I like to live anywhere near, hardly the kind of people that
whould be able to call themselves UCLA students.
>If we want to just punish the fraternities and pretend that we have
>eliminated the probelm, fine.
In terms of the bad image that frats give UCLA and mankind, yes the
problem is effectively handled by getting rid of frats at UCLA and
elsewhere. If you are refering the problem of rape on campus, I doubt
that it could hurt to punish frats: I don't think that it can get much
worse unless every frat member quits his day job and drops out of
school to rape full time. There were 18 reported rapes in the greek
system last quarter. If you assume that 1 in 10 rapes is reported
(maybe less since sorrority girls protect the greek system) then you
get 180 rapes last quarter or 540 rapes last year. I am not sure how
many frat houses there are, maybe 20, which means on average 27 rapes
per house per accademic year. We only have 30.5 weeks of regular school.
Mike Coleman
|I think now the latest controversy is that the fraternities
|have rejected the money and pulled out of USAC, and people are now whining
|because that takes away their main measure of punitive action.
I think you're entirely missing the point here. The people "whining" as you
put it (1) don't want their fees spent on this sort of thing, and (2) would
really like this endless greek pageant of racism, sexism, homophobia, elitism,
and felonious behavior to just go away.
I could have this wrong, but I thought I heard that UC Santa Cruz had rid
itself of frats and sororities and that it had turned out pretty well.
|*university* (not the students) to watch over and police the fraternities.
To echo another poster, I don't *want* the university to police frats. That's
what the LAPD is for.
|If we want to just punish the fraternities and pretend that we have
|eliminated the probelm, fine. I've been around UCLA for a long time and
|I can tell you that it hasn't worked in the past.
I agree with you that punishing frats is pointless. Frats haven't changed in
the past, and it would be foolish to expect that they will now. I don't want
them punished--I want the university to disclaim all association with them.
|Disclaimer: Obviously, I'm biased.
I agree.
|But I'm also offended by
|the lack of tolerance, unwillingness to communicate, and bandwagon
|namecalling shown by the campus community.
It's a sign of how strongly people feel about this that almost anything gender
and ethnic activist groups do at this point seems reasonable compared to the
sleazy and hypocritical behavior of greek adherents.
Mike
Kevin Fong
community against hyperbolic accusations from people with no first-
hand knowledge of what fraternities are really like. And before you
start, any Greek will tell you that there is *much* more to fraternity
and sorority life than drinking. If you think that is the main or only
aspect of Greek life, you are wrong.
I tried to defend my associations and presented some constructive
suggestions for improving the situation. In return, I was called
a "loser" and "sleazy and hypocritical." I've got better things to
do than yell at a brick wall.
Constructive conversation welcomed via e-mail.
--
Kevin Fong (ke...@netcom.com)
UCLA Fraternity Member
UCLA Computer Science graduate
Mike Coleman
|In return, I was called ... "sleazy and hypocritical."
For the record, I was referring to the authors of recent opinion pieces in the
Daily Bruin (UCLA's newspaper), not you. You seem quite reasonable in
comparison, though I still disagree with you.
Mike
--
--Mike Coleman (col...@cs.ucla.edu), Lord High Executioner of Anhedonia-----
"I pray to God that I will not accumulate hatred."
--Marcos Antonio Ramos, beaten in the 1992 LA riots
Jason Robbins
>I tried to defend my associations and presented some constructive
>suggestions for improving the situation. In return, I was called
>a "loser" and "sleazy and hypocritical." I've got better things to
>do than yell at a brick wall.
Loser, sleazy and hypocritcal are exactly the words to use when
describing frat boys. I just don't see how we can have any kind of
conversation aboy frats, constructive or otherwise, withouyt those
words coming up over and over.
Loser: Alcoholics are at a serious disadvantage in all endevors,
including academic ones. I would love to see the average GPA of
fraternity members and the rate at which they drop out of UCLA and
also the rate at which accusations of cheating are brought against
them. Non-academically I would say that they are losers also because
they do such stupid things: wouldn't you call that poor boy who lost
his fingertip trying to steal a statue in a frat prank a loser?
Sleazy: frats a dirty, dark, smelly, and sleazy. I have never been
in a frat, but I have lived on the west side of campus for a few years
and the stench is widespread. Also the IFC's powerbrokering in campus
elections in past years can only be described as sleazy. Frats are a
minority on campus but they have a solid block of votes which makes
student government biased in their favor. That is the only reason I
can think of that would explain why it took a whole year to get the
IFC desponsored after the first song book incident.
Hypocritical: The adjective I think works best. The idea of a
_student_ living, and in your case defending, a lifestyle of excessive
drinking, partying, jockism, and in general anti-intelectualism is so
hypocritical. The only thing that I can think of that is further off
the deep end is the editorial written by the head of the sorroritys
who said that she was a feminist and that she "felt under attack from
all sides." Well, I guess that is what happens when support womens
rights and roles in society, but at the same time you organize women
to "get drunk and rage."
>And before you start, any Greek will tell you that there is *much*
>more to fraternity and sorority life than drinking. If you think that
>is the main or only aspect of Greek life, you are wrong.
No I am right. It happens every thursday, every friday, and every
saturday at one house or another. Not once in my memory have I been
able to walk from school to my apartment without passing by some
party: and drinking is ALWAYS in evidence at greek parties.
>In an e-mail message Fong writes:
>You seem to be forgetting the fact that there is no way that UCLA, as
>a public institution, can get rid of fraternities...Concentrate on
>treating the causes of the problem (alcoholism, poor sexual attitudes,
>etc...) rather than tossing blame around and hoping it will go away.
I give in: you guys are welcome to do yourselves in as much as you
like as private citizens. Although I think that I would be helping
some people out if I can do anything to reduce the number of greeks.
Blame is my method, and I _do_ think that it will work in this case.
You seem to think that frat boys are basically a nice bunch of guys
who are being singled out because they are examples of the problems of
society. You seem to think that the most responsable think for the
campus to do is to help educate the frat boys about what rape and
alcohol are and why they might be bad. I think that frat boys are like
first time offenders sent to the state pen. where they are exposed to
an entrenched group of hard core criminals who teach them the ropes of
hard core crime. I think that the older frat members teach pledges to
"party-hardy" which includes how to hold their liquior, how to "handle
bitches" and to never rat on you "fellow brothers." Its a factory for
sex offenders, alcoholics, and sleazy, hypocritical losers.
-jason
Citecheck Hell
>col...@rocky.cs.ucla.edu (Mike Coleman) writes:
>
>>Someone requested to see some of the Theta Xi songbook lyrics, so here's the
>>lyrics from the song which seems to have caused the most outrage on campus.
>
>>Being a free-speech advocate, I don't think the frats should be barred from
>>singing such songs. Nonetheless, I think it's quite worthwhile for the rest
>>of the campus to realize that they do so. My main complaint, personally, is
>>that my reg fees subsidize these lyrics and the frats who wrote them.
>
>(carefully trying to avoid starting a flame war)
>Well, I think only 4,000 dollars goes to the Greek system as a whole.
I doubt it. I've seen quotes in the paper from UCLA administration officials
whose sole job is to overlook the frats. I'm sure that the university
pays them more than $4,000. Add the additional costs of police supervision,
the occasional lawsuit by a rape/hazing/frat-brawl victim, and it's a
substantial cost to a university.
>little actual subsidization involved; it's just a token measure of
>affiliation. I think now the latest controversy is that the fraternities
>have rejected the money and pulled out of USAC, and people are now whining
>because that takes away their main measure of punitive action.
Nonsense. If the school really wanted to do something about it, they
could abolish the fraternities instead of coddling them.
>As for the money spent on the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Relations,
>getting rid of that would be stupid, as that is the main way for the
>*university* (not the students) to watch over and police the fraternities.
Of course, if UCLA got rid of its frats, then it wouldn't *need* the
Office to begin with.
>Let's put this into a little perspective. All the name-calling, the
>sanctions, and the protests are not caused by hazing, alcohol abuse,
>or rape, but by people who sang songs.
It's a shame that the hazing, alcohol abuse, and rape gets ignored, isn't it?
>If more members of the women's and ethnic groups were
>in fraternities and sororities, they would see that not all Greeks
>are insensitive and elitist.
Last I saw, women weren't allowed in most UCLA frats.
--
ted frank | th...@ellis.uchicago.edu
also at quib...@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
Tim Smith
>of the campus to realize that they do so. My main complaint, personally, is
>that my reg fees subsidize these lyrics and the frats who wrote them.
>Swinging upon the old garden gate,
>The cross member broke and the upright slipped in,
>And she finished her life in a welter of sin
I don't think you are paying for the people who wrote this. Considering
that it (a) rhymed, (b) had the right number of syllables in most
lines, and (c) used uncommon words like "welter," it's clear no UCLA
student wrote this! :-) They must have borrowed it from someone else.
Considering the attention paid to the mode of structural failure of the
gate, my guess would be Caltech. :-)
--Tim Smith
Erik Warren Selberg
hey, I have a few minutes to kill, as I'm in a fraternity and as such
have no interest in doing the work I should be doing...
jrob...@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Jason Robbins) writes:
> Loser, sleazy and hypocritcal are exactly the words to use when
> describing frat boys. I just don't see how we can have any kind of
> conversation aboy frats, constructive or otherwise, withouyt those
> words coming up over and over.
Well, it's good to know that you know every single fraternity member
personally to make such a judgement.
> Loser: Alcoholics are at a serious disadvantage in all endevors,
> including academic ones. I would love to see the average GPA of
> fraternity members and the rate at which they drop out of UCLA and
> also the rate at which accusations of cheating are brought against
> them. Non-academically I would say that they are losers also because
> they do such stupid things: wouldn't you call that poor boy who lost
> his fingertip trying to steal a statue in a frat prank a loser?
Well, let's see... on most campuses, the average GPA of most
fraternities is higher than the all-male or all-campus. I personally
have a 3.3 overall with a 3.8 in major. In September, one of our
original founding members gained his Ph. D. in ECE from CMU at the age
of 24 (he was 20 when he graduated). I suspect that fraternities at
UCLA can say the same thing (I know my mother's sorority could at one
point -- Kappa Delta).
Non-academically -- and you mean to tell me that ONLY people in
fraternities do stupid things? And that ALL people in fraternities do
stupid things?
> Sleazy: frats a dirty, dark, smelly, and sleazy. I have never been
> in a frat, but I have lived on the west side of campus for a few years
> and the stench is widespread. Also the IFC's powerbrokering in campus
It's amazing what one dumpster will do. Tell you what: when you've
gone into each fraternity house, then come back and make this claim. I
suspect some are rat holes; however, I suspect the majority of housing
at UCLA (public/private) also qualifies. I also suspect that there are
several well-kept houses there.
> elections in past years can only be described as sleazy. Frats are a
> minority on campus but they have a solid block of votes which makes
> student government biased in their favor. That is the only reason I
> can think of that would explain why it took a whole year to get the
> IFC desponsored after the first song book incident.
If you have a problem with an active minority, then get your folks
together and VOTE! The only reason any group -- fraternities,
gay/lesbian groups, etc -- can take power as a minority in student
government is if the campus LETS THEM! Which means that the campus as
a whole AGREES BY ACCLAMATION to how things are being run. Apathy by
the campus is not sleazy.
> Hypocritical: The adjective I think works best. The idea of a
> _student_ living, and in your case defending, a lifestyle of excessive
> drinking, partying, jockism, and in general anti-intelectualism is so
> hypocritical. The only thing that I can think of that is further off
Very few people I've met will defend a life of excess that you
describe. Also, very few people I've met live in the excess that you
describe for very long.
> the deep end is the editorial written by the head of the sorroritys
> who said that she was a feminist and that she "felt under attack from
> all sides." Well, I guess that is what happens when support womens
> rights and roles in society, but at the same time you organize women
> to "get drunk and rage."
If you believe that sororities are organized for the sole purpose of
getting drunk and laid, then I suggest you get your head out of your
ass and think about things.
> No I am right. It happens every thursday, every friday, and every
Well, it's good to see you're open minded about the slight possibility
that you're wrong.
> saturday at one house or another. Not once in my memory have I been
> able to walk from school to my apartment without passing by some
> party: and drinking is ALWAYS in evidence at greek parties.
You know, drinking is ALWAYS in evidence at every single party I've
ever attended at CMU -- Greek or otherwise. In fact, the smaller the
parties get, the more drinking seems prevalent -- the smaller,
independent parties tend to be rather lushful.
Besides, you have absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to tell someone that
they shouldn't drink unless they're causing a problem. If you dislike
walking by parties on your way to your apartment, well, DEAL WITH IT!
People have a RIGHT to socialize and a RIGHT (yes, it's a RIGHT, see
the 22nd? ammendment) to drink.
> I give in: you guys are welcome to do yourselves in as much as you
> like as private citizens. Although I think that I would be helping
> some people out if I can do anything to reduce the number of greeks.
Knock yourself out. Of course, Hitler thought he could help some
people out by reducing the number of Jews.
> Blame is my method, and I _do_ think that it will work in this case.
> You seem to think that frat boys are basically a nice bunch of guys
> who are being singled out because they are examples of the problems of
> society. You seem to think that the most responsable think for the
> campus to do is to help educate the frat boys about what rape and
> alcohol are and why they might be bad. I think that frat boys are like
> first time offenders sent to the state pen. where they are exposed to
> an entrenched group of hard core criminals who teach them the ropes of
> hard core crime. I think that the older frat members teach pledges to
> "party-hardy" which includes how to hold their liquior, how to "handle
> bitches" and to never rat on you "fellow brothers." Its a factory for
> sex offenders, alcoholics, and sleazy, hypocritical losers.
> -jason
Yup, you might be right here. Guess that's why fraternity and sorority
members tend to do fairly well in life.
play: (412) 268-5534 (CMU-5-KEG) _____ __ ___
work: (412) 268-3795 (CMU-ERYK) /__ / / / /_/ /__
else: (412) 683-0741 / /_ /__/ / ___/ @cmu.edu
JOSEPH ALAN GREATHOUSE
In article <1992Oct25.0...@midway.uchicago.edu>, th...@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
|>In article <1992Oct22.1...@netcom.com> ke...@netcom.com (Kevin Fong) writes:
|>>little actual subsidization involved; it's just a token measure of
|>>affiliation. I think now the latest controversy is that the fraternities
|>>have rejected the money and pulled out of USAC, and people are now whining
|>>because that takes away their main measure of punitive action.
|>Nonsense. If the school really wanted to do something about it, they
|>could abolish the fraternities instead of coddling them.
I think you miss the point here, Ted. UCLA is *not* a private institution. It is
public, chartered by the State of California, and as such can not deny a student
the freedom of association. A private school, such as Brandeis, can do whatever
they wish...
|>>As for the money spent on the Office of Fraternity and Sorority Relations,
|>>getting rid of that would be stupid, as that is the main way for the
|>>*university* (not the students) to watch over and police the fraternities.
|>Of course, if UCLA got rid of its frats, then it wouldn't *need* the
|>Office to begin with.
Again, UCLA could no more get rid of fraternities than it could get rid of any
other campus organization. Private institutions have much more leeway when it
comes to disallowing student organizations to form or operate.
|>--
|>ted frank | th...@ellis.uchicago.edu
|>also at quib...@uchicago.edu | standard disclaimers | void where prohibited
|>the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
--
GO WOLFPACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *
* *
Joseph A. Greathouse * *
* * * *
jagr...@eos.ncsu.edu * * * * *
* * * * *
Theta Chi Fraternity ** * * *
* * * * * *
Delta Rho Chapter ** * * * *
* * * *
North Carolina State University * *
* *
GO WOLFPACK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! *
JOSEPH ALAN GREATHOUSE
|>> Kevin Fong wrirtes:
|>>I tried to defend my associations and presented some constructive
|>>suggestions for improving the situation. In return, I was called
|>>a "loser" and "sleazy and hypocritical." I've got better things to
|>>do than yell at a brick wall.
|> Loser, sleazy and hypocritcal are exactly the words to use when
|>describing frat boys. I just don't see how we can have any kind of
|>conversation aboy frats, constructive or otherwise, withouyt those
|>words coming up over and over.
Jason, the generalizations you use are closed-minded and narrow. You look
only for the bad in people, and fail to notice the good. Have you ever
tried to get to *know* anybody in a Fraternity? Or are you at college only
to get a degree and not broaden your outlook on life in general? The best
thing I have found in college is the wide variety of people I meet every day.
|> Loser: Alcoholics are at a serious disadvantage in all endevors,
|>including academic ones. I would love to see the average GPA of
|>fraternity members and the rate at which they drop out of UCLA and
|>also the rate at which accusations of cheating are brought against
|>them. Non-academically I would say that they are losers also because
|>they do such stupid things: wouldn't you call that poor boy who lost
|>his fingertip trying to steal a statue in a frat prank a loser?
Using your line of reasoning, I would call the poor boy (independent) who drank
too much at a party in his dorm room and had to go to the hospital to get his
stomach pumped a loser as well. I also would have to call all of the freshmen
who cannot handle the rigors of college losers. But, they aren't. I suspect
that you would be surprised at the graduation rate for Fraternity members at
UCLA. If it follows the national trend, it will be higher than that of the
non-fraternity members at your school.
Alcoholism is not just a problem in Fraternities. It is a widespread problem
at most campuses in the US, including independents.
|> Sleazy: frats a dirty, dark, smelly, and sleazy. I have never been
|>in a frat, but I have lived on the west side of campus for a few years
|>and the stench is widespread. Also the IFC's powerbrokering in campus
|>elections in past years can only be described as sleazy. Frats are a
|>minority on campus but they have a solid block of votes which makes
|>student government biased in their favor. That is the only reason I
|>can think of that would explain why it took a whole year to get the
|>IFC desponsored after the first song book incident.
Ah, so you look at any Fraternity house and you automatically assume that it is
a smelly, dirty, dark and sleazy place. And you have never set foot inside.
I applaud your use of assumptions and stereotypes yet again. After all, how
can one truly take a stand on an issue without being fully informed? Very
easily, I see.
In many student governments, the most active people are members of Fraternities
and Sororities. They vote because they *care* about the campus and are much
more involved with campus affairs than the average student. Many members of
Fraternities and Sororities get *leadership* training through the everyday
business of the organization. If you don't like the fact that Fraternity
members are on student government, then organize a campus group to increase
general student participation in the elections. But, if you sit and don't do
something you consider positive, you have no one to blame about the results of
the elections except yourself.
|> Hypocritical: The adjective I think works best. The idea of a
|>_student_ living, and in your case defending, a lifestyle of excessive
|>drinking, partying, jockism, and in general anti-intelectualism is so
|>hypocritical. The only thing that I can think of that is further off
|>the deep end is the editorial written by the head of the sorroritys
|>who said that she was a feminist and that she "felt under attack from
|>all sides." Well, I guess that is what happens when support womens
|>rights and roles in society, but at the same time you organize women
|>to "get drunk and rage."
I don't defend the lifestyle you describe. I do defend my lifestyle. Anti-
intellectualism is exactly the tone you set in your posting. Hypocrisy is the
idea of a _student_ blindly assuming, having no firsthand information and not
examining all aspects of a group he/she attacks.
|>>And before you start, any Greek will tell you that there is *much*
|>>more to fraternity and sorority life than drinking. If you think that
|>>is the main or only aspect of Greek life, you are wrong.
|> No I am right. It happens every thursday, every friday, and every
|>saturday at one house or another. Not once in my memory have I been
|>able to walk from school to my apartment without passing by some
|>party: and drinking is ALWAYS in evidence at greek parties.
Gee, it happens on my street all the time. About 3 houses down. And guess
what, it isn't a fraternity house. But college students live there.
|>>In an e-mail message Fong writes:
|>>You seem to be forgetting the fact that there is no way that UCLA, as
|>>a public institution, can get rid of fraternities...Concentrate on
|>>treating the causes of the problem (alcoholism, poor sexual attitudes,
|>>etc...) rather than tossing blame around and hoping it will go away.
Correct. UCLA, as a public institution, cannot abolish Fraternities just like
it cannot abolish professional societies, ethnic organizations, sports clubs,
and other student organizations. Freedom of association is an amazing thing...
|> I give in: you guys are welcome to do yourselves in as much as you
|>like as private citizens. Although I think that I would be helping
|>some people out if I can do anything to reduce the number of greeks.
Well, I guess that's why Fraternity members tend to do very well for themselves
in the workplace.
|>Blame is my method, and I _do_ think that it will work in this case.
|>You seem to think that frat boys are basically a nice bunch of guys
|>who are being singled out because they are examples of the problems of
|>society.
Closed-minded finger pointing and gross generalizations are your methods. You
talk a lot of junk, but you exhibit the same anti-intellectual attitude you
attribute to Fraternities.
|>You seem to think that the most responsable think for the
|>campus to do is to help educate the frat boys about what rape and
|>alcohol are and why they might be bad.
The most responsible thing for the campus to do is to educate its students about
the dangers of alcohol abuse and what rape *is*. This means the entire student
body, not just a small minority.
|>I think that frat boys are like
|>first time offenders sent to the state pen. where they are exposed to
|>an entrenched group of hard core criminals who teach them the ropes of
|>hard core crime.
Now I'm a hardened criminal in the state pen? Try again, Jason. I am a college
student, just like you. And like you, I see problems. However, I do things to
get to solutions for the problems, I don't sit on my butt and whine about them.
|>I think that the older frat members teach pledges to
|>"party-hardy" which includes how to hold their liquior, how to "handle
|>bitches" and to never rat on you "fellow brothers." Its a factory for
|>sex offenders, alcoholics, and sleazy, hypocritical losers.
|>-jason
Hmm. I guess that's why my Fraternity expelled a member for behavior which was
inappropriate and detrimental.
Citecheck Hell
>Besides, you have absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to tell someone that
>they shouldn't drink unless they're causing a problem. If you dislike
>walking by parties on your way to your apartment, well, DEAL WITH IT!
>People have a RIGHT to socialize and a RIGHT (yes, it's a RIGHT, see
>the 22nd? ammendment) to drink.
I suggest you actually read the constitution before you suggest that
drunken frat brawls are explicitly protected. A repeal of prohibition
hardly vests nineteen-year-olds with the right to booze.
Citecheck Hell
>Alcoholism is not just a problem in Fraternities. It is a widespread problem
>at most campuses in the US, including independents.
Of course, it's a *bigger* problem in fraternities, but it's nice of you
to obscure the issue.
>Correct. UCLA, as a public institution, cannot abolish Fraternities just like
>it cannot abolish professional societies, ethnic organizations, sports clubs,
>and other student organizations. Freedom of association is an amazing thing...
It's not clear that that's true. The only Supreme Court decision on
the matter allowed the University of Mississippi to refuse to admit
fraternity members.
And it's very clear that a private university has the right to abolish
fraternities, as the recent case of Phelps v Colby College demonstrates.
Liam O Forbes
> In many student governments, the most active people are members of
Fraternities
> and Sororities. They vote because they *care* about the campus and are
much
> more involved with campus affairs than the average student. Many
members of
> Fraternities and Sororities get *leadership* training through the
everyday
> business of the organization. If you don't like the fact that
Fraternity
> members are on student government, then organize a campus group to
increase
> general student participation in the elections. But, if you sit and
don't do
> something you consider positive, you have no one to blame about the
results of
> the elections except yourself.
One of the first experiences I had with fraternities involved in
student governement was at a private school. The fraternities were not
recognized by the administration so they couldn't conduct their business
on campus. It came up somehow in front of the student senate because a
member of the senate was a fraternity member and was being looked at for
negligence in his carrying out of the duties involved as a senator (this
is not to say that his frat status was part of the negligence.) When the
question came up for either debate or vote, I can't remember which,
exactly at that time about 30 of his fellow fraternity brothers entered
the room wearing those sweatshirts with their letters and stood directly
behind the seated senate members. They would fiddle with the notes the
senators wear making and stand about a foot away from their backs.
Needless to say the senate took an immediate recess and tabled the
discussion until the next meeting I think. The senator who may have
gotten impeached resigned that week or something happened that the
question did not come up the next week.
In this isolated incident I would say that the fraternites (who
had national standing) acted very irresponsibly and further bore out the
administrations wisdom in not allowing them to be an official part of the
campus. -Liam
(I have plenty of these stories, and I was only at the school for a year)
Tom Guptill
Oh, no. Thank God for threaded newsreaders.
--
|Tom Guptill | tgpt...@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (internet) |
|CPU Box 277445 U of R | " " @db1.cc.rochester.edu (alt internet) |
|Rochester, NY 14627 | " " @uordbv (bitnet) |
|(716) 274-0156 | (if mail to uhura fails, try db1 or uordbv) |
Tom
>In article <8eujkuS00...@andrew.cmu.edu> Erik Warren Selberg <es...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>Besides, you have absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to tell someone that
>>they shouldn't drink unless they're causing a problem. If you dislike
>>walking by parties on your way to your apartment, well, DEAL WITH IT!
>>People have a RIGHT to socialize and a RIGHT (yes, it's a RIGHT, see
>>the 22nd? ammendment) to drink.
>
>I suggest you actually read the constitution before you suggest that
>drunken frat brawls are explicitly protected. A repeal of prohibition
>hardly vests nineteen-year-olds with the right to booze.
>--
>ted frank | th...@ellis.uchicago.edu
I would suggest anyone that has a problem with fraternities or fraternity life
like that little boy from UCLA that is so disgusted by them, just avoid frats
all together. He obviously wants no part of them, and the frat I'm associated
with would want no part of him, nor would any other that I know of, so what's
the problem. We can just pretend the other is not there. "Can we all just
get along?"
The fact that I'm not Korean, doesn't mean that I hate the Korean
Business Students' Association here at my school. I just go on with my life
like the KBA doesn't affect it. That is what young college freshman trying
to fit in and not doing a good job at it should do. You were probably a smart
guy in high school and figured that things would be different in college and
you would fit in. Well you don't. Socially or otherwise, but why take it out
on the fraternity system? Because we do? Just relax and get in some extra
time on that terminal on Friday night. Just think about how far ahead in class
you'll be on Monday.
Tom
--
"Chicks dig me because I rarely wear underwear"
Bill Murray
Nigel Allen
>public, chartered by the State of California, and as such can not deny a student
>the freedom of association. A private school, such as Brandeis, can do whatever
>they wish...
>
>
>other campus organization. Private institutions have much more leeway when it
>comes to disallowing student organizations to form or operate.
>
private institution but which gets most of its money from government
grants and government-regulated tuition fees, has for many years had
nothing official to do with fraternities. The frats are not allowed to use
"University of Toronto" in their names, and are not allowed to represent
themselves as part of the university.
Any student group that does not overtly discriminate and that can put
together a constitution can normally register with the university's
student affairs office as a "recognized campus group" and can then call
themselves the "University of Toronto Outing Club" or whatever.
So while a university may not be able to shut down a particular fraternity
chapter, it *can* deny it recognition.
Nigel Allen
(not speaking on behalf of any postsecondary institution)
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Clayton Cramer
> In article <8eujkuS00...@andrew.cmu.edu> Erik Warren Selberg <es...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> >Besides, you have absolutely NO RIGHT whatsoever to tell someone that
> >they shouldn't drink unless they're causing a problem. If you dislike
> >walking by parties on your way to your apartment, well, DEAL WITH IT!
> >People have a RIGHT to socialize and a RIGHT (yes, it's a RIGHT, see
> >the 22nd? ammendment) to drink.
>
> I suggest you actually read the constitution before you suggest that
> drunken frat brawls are explicitly protected. A repeal of prohibition
> hardly vests nineteen-year-olds with the right to booze.
> --
> ted frank | th...@ellis.uchicago.edu
Especially since many of the Prohibition-era laws remain with us.
Keep in mind that many state courts had found for the police power
of STATES to regulate, or even prohibit alcohol, before the Prohibition
Amendment was passed. The Eighteenth Amendment was only an
extension of this authority to the federal government.
I found it very interesting, while researching my book on the
history of judicial interpretation of the right to keep and bear
arms, that precedents recognizing the validity of state laws
prohibiting alcohol and drug sales or possession are intimately
tied up with the gun control precedents, and that the alcohol
control precedents go back well into the 19th century.
Of course, the difference is that the courts never had to deal
with a constitutionally protected right to drink and carry
alcohol.
--
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer My opinions, all mine!
October is National Quality Month. That's why we wait until the first
Tuesday in November for national elections.
Erik Warren Selberg
th...@ellis.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
> In article <8eujkuS00...@andrew.cmu.edu> Erik Warren Selberg <es2q+@andr\
> ew.cmu.edu> writes:
> >People have a RIGHT to socialize and a RIGHT (yes, it's a RIGHT, see
> >the 22nd? ammendment) to drink.
>
> I suggest you actually read the constitution before you suggest that
> drunken frat brawls are explicitly protected. A repeal of prohibition
> hardly vests nineteen-year-olds with the right to booze.
I didn't say drunken fraternity brawls are protected. Matter of fact,
I'll be the first to call the police to stop a drunken brawl of any
sorts. However, the right to drink adn thus the right to get smashed
are protected, so long as you do not infringe on anyone else's rights.
Citecheck Hell
>I didn't say drunken fraternity brawls are protected. Matter of fact,
>I'll be the first to call the police to stop a drunken brawl of any
>sorts. However, the right to drink adn thus the right to get smashed
>are protected, so long as you do not infringe on anyone else's rights.
I'll be more specific then. The right to drink is not constitutionally
protected. You'll note that it is indeed illegal for the vast majority
of undergraduates in the United States to imbibe alcohol, and many states
and localities have further restrictions than those recommended by the
federal government.