Fraternity and Freedom

I’ve heard it said that when America was formed, it was held as a grand experiment in man’s ability to govern himself.  Models of self-government were mostly theoretical at the time, and so this country became the first to really test that idea.  Although there have been many stumbles along the way, I think the experiment has worked pretty well.

I’ll let the politicians and pundits debate whether or not we’re drifting closer to, or further away, from that ideal.

Nonetheless, if America can be judged as an experiment in self-government, then I believe that the American fraternity or sorority can be judged as the same - albeit on a smaller level.  Our earliest forms were established by men and women without the permission of the colleges they were attending.  Back then, students did not have to submit paperwork to a campus office in order to gain “recognition.”  If they felt something was important enough to establish, then they went forward without apologies.  Now, it’s fair to say that our earliest groups also didn’t want or expect anything from the colleges.  We weren’t looking to compliment the mission of those institutions back then.  We wanted to be left alone.  We wanted to govern ourselves.  That spirit remains, but is being challenged.

I wrote an essay once that argued that fraternities and sororities (and thus their members) have defiance in their DNA.  There is a natural and embedded distrust between the fraternity man and his/her national headquarters and/or campus Greek Life office.  That goes all the way back to our founding.  And it’s proper to be skeptical of the institutions to which we are connected.

I believe that one of the chief reasons for the longevity of the fraternity/sorority movement is the spirit of self-government.  Not only have our organizations been a place for young people to find enduring friendships, service opportunities, academic support, and great memories - they have also been a place for young people to find freedom.  

Freedom and self-governance go together.

The benefits of self-governance can be profound.  Our society needs more individuals who can act upon their convictions, who will question authority when necessary, and who can simply manage their own problems and concerns.  Our world needs the strength that comes from individuals who are unwilling to let others control their destiny.  Self-government creates personal responsibility and nobody I know thinks we have enough of that in our world today.  

And so, we arrive at yet another reason why the fraternity and sorority is an absolutely relevant organization today: we create generations of responsible citizens through the practice of self-governance.  Our society should be cheering our ability to inspire young people to contribute more than they take.

Yet, we are not embracing this.  Because, we are not embracing self-governance.

Is fraternity/sorority self-governance under attack?  Possibly.  Colleges and universities seem to be laying out more and more requirements on student organizations.  Think about the following trends and developments, which many of you will see as progress.  When viewed through a lens of self-governance, and all the benefits of that principle, maybe that assessment should be reconsidered:

• Colleges/Universities choosing to move fraternity and sorority dwellings on-campus, in new facilities that can be managed by the institution.
• More requirements on groups with housing needing to have live-in advisors.
• Headquarters and universities requiring reports on minimum expectations/criteria to be recognized.
• Academic requirements for members to affiliate or organizations to be recognized.
• Service hour requirements from HQ or the university.
• More and more mandates on when a person can join, when they can live in the house, etc.

In an era when the relationship between universities and fraternities is more seamless than ever, it can be justified that colleges and universities have the right to do all of the things mentioned above.  However, for the sake of student learning, efficacy, and empowerment, justifying that they should do these things is not as easy.

Just because fraternities and sororities have allowed entities such as their headquarters and campuses to exert more control over their destiny doesn’t mean it’s the right thing to do.  In my opinion, it certainly cannot be described as progress.

We were meant be organizations that allowed young people a chance to build something together. They were able to learn from experience, achievements, and mistakes. Now, we are trying to build the experience for them and asking them to just ride along. 

For professionals who work in this industry - we were all once collegiate members.  We likely learned tremendous life skills from the autonomy of that experience.  I invite you to wonder (as I have on many occasions) why then we spend so much of our time now thinking about ways to limit that autonomy? How many of us quickly jump to policy when trying to solve an issue?  How many of us have spent a Friday night driving around Greek row looking for rule-breaking behavior? 

Comparisons between a campus chess club and a college fraternity are often made in jest and as a way to show to unique significance of the fraternity/sorority experience.  If we’re not careful, the day when the chess club has more self-governance to speak of than we do, is not too far away.

 

Fraternity Needs Even More Tradition

Tulane Sig Ep's after serenading the university president

I love tradition.  I love the spark it can provide an organization.  In my Kiwanis Club, we have lots of traditions, and I’d be upset to see them go.  We sing at the start of every meeting – terribly – but we sing.  It feels good.  I don’t want my Kiwanis meeting to feel like a business meeting at the office.  I want something that touches my emotions and lifts my heart. 

Fraternities and sororities certainly are guilty of being tradition-bound organizations.  Tradition imprints almost all aspects of our identity, from the Greek names and letters we wear to the creeds we state loudly and proudly.

But there is a compelling reason for us to embrace our nature as tradition-bound organizations.  The origin of the word tradition is from the Latin traditio, which refers to something being transmitted, carried forth, and passed from one person to the next for safekeeping.  Organizations that have a great deal of tradition tend to last, because they inherently care about the safe passage of their organization from one generation to the next.

On occasion, there are calls for fraternities and sororities to change or get rid of some of their traditions.  This isn’t unusual for any institution, and neither is the typical negative response and reaction.  Churches come to mind as another organization that deals constantly with the push and shove of keeping or discarding traditions.

Why do we bristle so much when we our traditions are challenged?  It’s because we believe that losing them would mean losing a part of our identity.  And in some cases, it would.

The origins of the word tradition and standard definitions for it may not be enough for us to work with.  I believe in a five-point test to determine if something is indeed a tradition worth celebrating and keeping:

1. Does it offer unique value to our organization and our members?
2. Is it a longstanding practice that bridges the past with the present?
3. Does it raise spirits and breathe life into our organization?
4. Does it honor our organization, its members, and our legacy?
5. Is it current with societal views on human relationships?

Thus, it is not the new theme party you started last year that you now believe you can’t live without.

It’s not a practice that includes hazing, harmful and destructive behavior, for that saps life from your organization and doesn’t honor your legacy.  Sorry – your alcohol-fueled big brother hunts or your pledge hell week is not a tradition. 

It can include the fact that your fraternity sings or chants (I love fraternities that sing), but not songs that disparage others or would be considered racist or homophobic.   

It can include awards you give each other, even some that are intentionally humorous or sarcastic.  Humor can certainly breathe life into your organization.  But there are ways to be humorous and honorable at the same time.

Sometimes a tradition to someone else can seem puny and dumb, but even those should not be casually dismissed.  My fraternity held a Senior Wills event each year, in which graduating seniors could pass down wisdom or items to younger members.  I saw men brought to tears over receiving an ugly, tattered, sweat-stained hat from an older member – because it was a piece of them. Other traditions can have no other purpose except to be fun or just produce fond memories.  Fine with me – as long as they can meet the test above.

Here is an exercise for you.  Besides Ritual – which is absolutely your most cherished tradition – what other traditions are sacred to your fraternity or sorority?  Use the test above as an evaluation tool.  Are there any that fall away?
 
Even our traditions that seem old-fashioned can be given new and remarkable life.  Consider lavaliering or pinning, which has been challenged as being hetero-centric and old-fashioned.  Forget the fact that it can be beautiful and symbolic.  Consider this story from Denison University in Ohio about a pinning ceremony that spoke volumes about the women involved and all those surrounding them.

As long as traditions meet the standards above, there’s plenty of room for more.  Let’s continue to find ways to take the best of what we are and who we are, and share that with others.  After all, that’s our finest tradition.


 

Fraternal Relevancy that Matters

The word “relevance” seems to be all the rage right now.  I’m reading it and hearing it much more often, and I’ve spoken with many Greek Advisors who incorporate that term frequently into their discussions with undergraduates.  Many Alumni programs seem to grapple with the idea of relevance as well.  I have a few observations on that term and its use towards Greek-letter organizations.

When examining fraternal relevance we need to add the question, “relevant to what?” A thing cannot just be relevant on its own.  It needs to be relevant to something else.   

 

Greek-letter organizations can ask if they are relevant to any of the following:  host colleges/universities, individual members’ lives, and/or the growth of society as a whole.  I think most people are considering colleges/universities when they speak of fraternal relevance.  In other words, when asking about the relevance of college fraternities and sororities, they are questioning whether or not they are still pertinent to the host institution.  That’s fine – but we shouldn’t use that as our only measure.  If we determine that we are no longer relevant to host institutions, then is it over?  No. We may still be VERY relevant to the lives of our individual members who will achieve great things because of their involvement.  Greek-letter organizations may still be VERY relevant to the growth of our society – particularly American society and its need for leaders and organizers.

If tomorrow, all host institutions decided to cut their ties with Greek-letter organizations, would we go the way of the dodo?  I doubt we would.  Instead, we would adapt.  For instance, we might transform into more community-oriented organizations, much like Kiwanis or Freemasons.  We would find a way to carry on.

I’m not making the case that we ignore our relationship with our host institutions.  In all possible ways, we need to nurture that relationship.  We should be actively concerned with how we impact the academic success of our members.  If we house students on a particular campus, we should ensure that we are creating safe and secure living environments.  Overall, we should act as good partners to these institutions, because partners are what we are.

I understand the need to play nice with our “hosts.”  I value the perspectives and call to action brought forth by the Franklin Square group.  But, I fear that in philosophical and tangible ways, we are handing over our right to exist to institutions of higher education – most of which never really wanted us to exist in the first place. 

In other words, the frenzy over trying to regain relevance to colleges and universities has to be tempered with the following question:  were we ever meant to be relevant?  Were we ever really meant to compliment the mission of the campuses where our founders happened to meet up?  I admit that I am not a “Bairds Manual” aficionado that can speak to fraternity history with precision.  However, my understanding of the founding of our movement is that individuals were looking for something that wasn’t provided in their college experience.  They wanted shared values, camaraderie, spirited debate, and fun.  I doubt they took much time wondering how these new organizations fit into the missions of their college or university.  My interpretation of our beginnings is that we were borne out of defiance to the host institutions, not in seamless companionship with them.  So while we should care about that relationship now, should it really define our right to exist?

Focusing on our relevancy to higher education also puts us on the defensive.  We are always stuck responding to someone else’s needs.  This results in a one-way relationship, with colleges and universities holding all the cards.  Simply by asking the question of whether or not we are relevant to our host institutions, we are positing the possibility that we are not.  We are falsely expressing that we might not matter.

We do matter.  We do make a difference - ask almost any person who has had a fraternal experience.  We
have a story to share, and lessons to teach.  Our values are timeless, and every man or woman who passes through our organizations can be better off by having learned them.  If we are to dissolve, it will not be because we stopped being relevant to a university or a college – it will be because we stopped being relevant to those who are yet to join.