Three Major Changes to Evolve the Collegiate Fraternity

I enrolled as a freshman in 2007 at Coe College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, where I joined the local chapter of the international all-male fraternity Lambda Chi Alpha. Upon graduation, I was hired by the fraternity headquarters as a staff representative for the general fraternity. I traveled to about 50 colleges and universities over two years to meet with local chapters and school student affairs staff.

In my time as a student and active fraternity member, I experienced many positive moments of personal growth derived from close relationships with other members, mostly due to the nature of the local campus environment and my involvement with the fraternity headquarters. At Coe, fraternity and sorority chapters are assigned housing on designated wings of college-owned residence halls. The small group fluctuated between twenty and thirty members. By many measures, except gender, the diversity of the group was representative of the student population on campus. The chapter did most things by-the-book and members were highly-engaged on campus and with the fraternity headquarters. I attended a general fraternity conference as the president of the local chapter the summer before my senior year, where I was elected by other chapter presidents to serve as a student representative on the board of directors for the entire general fraternity. I was one of four Coe chapter members in a five-year span to serve in a role like this. Out of approximately 180 chapters, any one would be lucky to be represented once in a decade.

Life on the fraternity wing was fun and mostly constructive. There was an alumni advisor present at weekly meetings, but otherwise alumni influence wasn’t much of a consideration. Alcohol was an abundant component of the on-campus party culture and campus policy allowed for alcohol in the residence halls; however, it was strictly prohibited in the fraternity common room. New member events were formal and always alcohol-free. The entire week leading up to initiation was a strict no-alcohol policy for all members. The chapter even voted to ban alcohol above 80-proof from the private member rooms on the wing. Hazing was totally absent. Active members genuinely cared for and sought to teach and befriend new members. Most of my fellow chapter members were very open and helpful, and most experiences were grounded in the values system of the fraternity. Many of the events were designed to encourage everyone, new or senior, to open up and talk about their past or whatever was weighing on them at the moment. The sincere, genuine, and vulnerable nature of the process was unlike anything I expected or had experienced with a group of twenty people up to that point. Then I graduated.

I was 21 years-old and naïve when I accepted the fraternity headquarters job in 2011. I knew about the common “frat” stereotype held by the general public — you know, the epitome of apathy and debauchery coupled with arrogance and elitism — but I had no idea these were celebrated character traits for so many of my fellow members around the country.

I was one of about ten staff members hired by the fraternity headquarters for the position of an Educational Leadership Consultant (ELC). Each ELC had their own region of chapters they were assigned to travel to throughout the academic year. My friends and family outside the fraternity often asked what my job was like. Some would throw in a joke about how it must be fun to travel the country to do keg stands. I would always fight back against those claims and often surprise people when I would discuss the complexities of the job, which included leadership training, coaching about the fraternity programs, and even personal support and mentorship to individual members. Administrative record-keeping was another major function of the job.

One very stressful part of the job was crisis management and harm reduction, the phrase coined by the fraternity to get students to think proactively about their decisions and mitigate risk. ELCs gave mandatory all-member presentations at each visit to educate members on policies. The end goal was always to inspire a sense of accountability for one’s actions, which was also a way of protecting the fraternity headquarters from eventual lawsuits. When the inevitable crisis would occur, ELCs were responsible for communicating with members and campus officials to document whatever happened to create an incident report. It was common for reports to include hazing, excessive use of alcohol and drugs, theft, sexual assault and rape, and even death as a result of a fraternity-related event or on fraternity property.

I held the job for two years. Like most other ELCs, I was totally invested in working to build-up the organization, improve the culture, and help individual members whenever possible. In the first year of the job I traveled to schools throughout Indiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee. In the second year I traveled throughout Alabama, Georgia, and Florida to schools like Troy, the University of Alabama, Georgia Tech, Auburn, the University of Central Florida, Georgia, and so on. During that year of travel is when it really hit me: this isn’t productive.

Never have I tried so hard to help a population of people that so staunchly rejected the idea that I was there to help. Most of these students didn’t care about values or trying to better themselves. It seemed as though most signed up for four (or five) years of debauchery paid for by their parents before they had to figure out what they really wanted to do. The fraternity was the easiest mechanism to hide their inadequacies and blend in as one of the “bros,” while also enabling a very convenient way to roll out of bed and shotgun half-a-dozen beers before the Saturday tailgate.

The oldest and largest historically white collegiate social fraternities are rooted in undeniable racism and misogyny, founded on the basis of discriminatory membership. Most of these organizations are members, or former members, of the North-American Interfraternity Conference (NIC). In the early years for most of these groups, membership was only an option if you were a wealthy white male. Religion, specifically Christianity or Judaism, were also often used as pre-requisites. Today, these groups are open to anyone who identifies as male. The cost involved to join, known as dues, fluctuates highly at the local chapter level. Religion is no longer a requirement, although many of the ceremonies and rituals include oaths to pledge allegiance to religious ideals.

The Coe chapter of Lambda Chi Alpha fought against their own fraternity headquarters to initiate a black student in 1965. I’ve been told that this student was the first black person initiated to any chapter of the fraternity, but I haven’t been able to independently verify that claim. I met an Asian-American alumnus of the Coe chapter who had a similar story.

In the two years I spent traveling throughout the country, I noticed that most chapters had very few members that were ethnic or racial minorities, but it varied widely based on the campus and the chapter. I was assigned to the chapter at the University of Alabama at the same time the student newspaper wrote a report about the intentional segregation of the massive sorority system and the barring of non-white members. The men’s groups were no different. I fit right in at the Alabama chapter as a straight white male just over six feet tall. That was the model, and it wasn’t a secret; it was obvious and it was jarring. These students had no idea the world they would face outside the shallow, one-dimensional bubble of their collegiate fraternity. At least, as far as I could tell, the students at the Alabama chapter had manners and were well-spoken. I was floored to meet members at other chapters that would make racist statements totally casually, or in the form of a joke. It was common to hear President Obama referred to as a monkey, followed by a few chuckles. Other times it was extreme, like a bad joke where the punchline was the “N-word.” I had multiple breakdowns thinking about the reality of a racist system, a system I was a part of. It makes me wonder what it would feel like to be a student — who by all means is totally qualified to be a member: smart, virtuous, interested in being part of a community — but whose black or brown skin disqualifies them from even being in the conversation for a bid.

There were, of course, quite a few exceptions to that homogeneous narrative. I drove an hour east from Tuscaloosa and found the University of Montevallo, which was home to a small but thriving chapter with many members of different ethnic and racial backgrounds. The campus, a public institution, was a vibrant, close-knit community that felt inclusive and welcoming. The chapter reflected those same feelings.

During each visit I learned to recognize and focus my energy toward the students who seemed to have joined for the right reasons. I met many students all over the country that cared deeply about the values of the fraternity, worked to learn from their experiences, and understood the concept of holding oneself accountable for their actions. It was my goal to enable those students to make progress within their chapter.

I remember a conversation the ELC group had as part of our training in the summer of 2011 with one of the fraternity’s great thinkers and spiritual leaders, Rev. S. George “Doc” Dirghalli, who passed away in 2016. He explained his vision of the fraternity, saying, “Lambda Chi Alpha is nothing more than an idea.” An aged but lively man, seated at the head of the overcrowded conference room table, he knocked on the top of his thigh and said, “This, this is furniture. My body is here to carry me through this life. It’s what’s up here,” pointing to his head, “that’s what matters.”

Lambda Chi Alpha, like all fraternities, is an idea. Now is the time to transform the model of the collegiate fraternity, so that any student who aspires to the values of the organization will be compelled to seek membership, regardless of their “furniture.”

I’ve outlined three major changes I see as necessary for fraternities to evolve past the archaic model of today’s status quo to prove their relevance as positive contributors to the student experience in our modern system of higher education. Implementing this vision will not be easy, and I’m sure most current members and even active alumni volunteers would object to most of the specific steps to work toward this vision. One of the open Greek mottos of my own fraternity comes to mind: “khalepà tà kalá,” which loosely translated means “naught without labor,” also interpreted as “that which is beautiful is difficult to attain.”

1: Accept and embrace women as equal.

Accountability is a core tenant of what is most sacred to the fraternity. It is time for men’s fraternities take accountability for their contributing role in the systemic issues caused by excluding women as their equal. The Latin motto adopted from Theta Kappa Nu, “vir quisque vir” is one of the most compelling arguments for this change. Translated, it means “every man, a man.” Each person on this earth has an obligation to recognize the humanity present in the soul of another. It’s what makes us human. For the young men that participate in a fraternity, the current preferred model is a rewarding journey that encourages learning about oneself through shared experiences with others, which sounds wonderful, until you realize that the entire process intentionally omits doing any of that side-by-side with half of the entire human population: women. How will a fraternity man entering the workforce react the first time he faces a strong woman leader in a position of authority? Will he respect and admire her tenacity, or will he assume she is hysterical and bossy? In one recent example from the modern workplace, women at a top national law firm filed suit claiming discrimination based on what they describe as a fraternity culture.

Many of what we describe as today’s “women’s issues” are really issues caused by men. Starting in 2017, the #metoo movement shed light upon all-too-common injustices that men inflict on women, specifically rape, sexual assault, and harassment. As many cultural leaders of our time have pointed out, the issue will persist until men and boys change their behavior. It is vital for men and boys to understand how to interact with women and recognize them as their equal to promote a culture of respect for all.

In the context of a fraternity, a chapter member certainly doesn’t have the option to vote for a woman as chapter president, a thought that would never cross his mind in the current system. One of the few interactions young men have with women is the process of convincing the “hottest” sorority to pair up for a mixer, resulting in an alcohol-fueled party that reinforces rape culture. Alcohol is banned on chapter property for sororities and generally permitted for fraternities, resulting in a power dynamic that places women out of their element in the basement of a fraternity house, where the men are happy to provide the booze.

Insulating young men in a system designed only for them perpetuates gender disparities at the cost of women under the guise of benefits for young men. I’ve heard the argument that fraternities provide young men a safe space to share their thoughts without the fear of being judged or misinterpreted. This logic perpetuates the mentality that it is intolerable for a man to be challenged or debated by a woman, plus it assumes a complete lack of empathy or understanding on the part of the woman. Instead, I envision a fraternity that encourages healthy relationships between men and women by normalizing vulnerability, which naturally includes women challenging men on their viewpoints, and vice-versa. The more accurate way to describe it is to promote the common alignment to the values espoused in the ritual of the fraternity through respectful understanding and holding one-another accountable to those ideals, which takes a great deal of courage on the part of all members.

There are obvious biological differences between men and women, but many other perceived differences are just social constructs shaped by the environment we have created. The single-gender fraternity is a perfect example of a false barrier that assumes perceived differences between men and women. It should be obvious: a person’s gender is not an indicator of their alignment with a set of values, which as is discussed tirelessly in the fraternity world, should be the ultimate qualification for membership.

Men’s fraternities immediately disqualify the majority of college students from membership based on gender. In the fall of 2018, approximately 56% percent of college students were female. Many of those students would certainly find value in the many advantages made possible through the fraternity, including the ritual, educational programming, and close friendships formed through the bond.

Specific steps to address this concern:

• Remove gender as a qualifying factor for membership so that any college student at a host institution who believes in the values of the organization may have an opportunity to seek membership.
• Reinterpret all rituals, ceremonies, and governing policy language to include all members, regardless of their gender.
• Increase the number of women on the professional staff in leadership roles.

2: Recognize that the past has shaped the present state of exclusionary membership.

Historically white North American fraternities have a history of blatant racial and ethnic discrimination, which has undoubtedly had an effect on the inclusion of students of color in current membership. According to a 2019 report Race and Ethnicity in Higher Education by the American Council on Education, “It is well known that the over 50 percent of students from communities of color in public K-12 schools will, in the very near future be the majority of the U.S. adult population…As the U.S. population has grown more racially and ethnically diverse, so too have students across all levels of higher education.” In the 1995–96 academic year, white students made up 69.8% of all undergraduate enrollment, compared to 52% in 2015–16. I am not aware if any fraternities collect and publish membership data on race and ethnicity; my guess is not many do. Now is the time to start. It is safe to assume that a disproportionately greater percentage of active members are white compared to the national average of 52% of all college students.

The reasons to encourage diversity within any organization are worth repeating. As summarized nicely in this article from the Harvard Business Review, diverse teams are smarter because they focus more on facts, they process those facts more carefully, and they are also more innovative.

Specific steps to address this concern:

• Collect data of race and ethnicity for active members.
• Dedicate staff resources to redefine and implement educational programming related to diversity and inclusion, including recruitment training and unconscious bias training, along with a communication plan to highlight stories of non-white students.

3: Shift from a social fraternity to a fraternity that is social through service.

I strongly believe in the importance of the many invaluable interpersonal skills that members have the opportunity to develop through the fraternity experience, including conflict resolution, leadership training, public speaking, and especially the ability to articulate a position based on a set of values. At its best, the social aspect of the fraternity is very rewarding, but at its worst, the social element is used as an excuse for bad behavior. The scenario of a member that joins just for the parties is a well-known thorn in the side of each chapter. Even while self-categorized as social groups, most major fraternities have developed robust offerings of service-oriented and philanthropic programs. These types of activities offer the best of both worlds: development of social skills while reinforcing positive character traits that align with the values of the organization. The shift here is simple: continue to bolster the service and philanthropic activities offered to chapters, while simultaneously tightening up social events that have nothing to do with service, philanthropy, or other forms of personal development through the fraternity education program or ritual. A bold reclassification from “social” to “social through service” may be a necessary component to accomplish this goal.

Specific steps to address this concern:

• Implement a ban of alcohol on chapter property.
• Shift the priority of social activities to “social through service.”
• Strengthen university partnerships to strictly enforce new standards.

The Cycle of Insanity

The support system of a fraternity is commonly referred to as a three-legged stool, all supporting the active member student experience. The three legs include the general fraternity, alumni, and host institutions. Expanding on that metaphor, it is important to think about who is sitting on that stool. It’s the active member, right? Certainly. The better question is, “who is that active member,” or more broadly, “who are we trying to help?” Right now, the person sitting on the stool reminds me of my one-and-a-half year-old toddler that won’t eat what I persistently try to spoon-feed him. Instead, he grabs the spoon and throws it against the wall. While my little boy will eventually grow up and be able to feed himself, the fraternity system has for decades been trying to serve the same recycled population of students that don’t want the best of what a fraternity has to offer. Now is the time for fraternities to take the opportunity to offer their help to the people that actually want — and will actually benefit from — what the fraternity is trying to sell: personal growth through a values-based experience.