<p><a href=“Why Don’t Colleges Get Rid of Their Bad Fraternities? - The Atlantic”>Why Don’t Colleges Get Rid of Their Bad Fraternities? - The Atlantic;
<p>Long article, but worth the read…for the great writing as much as for the topic. Not just another “Greek is Bad” piece. </p>
<p>Interesting. The insurance aspect of it was certainly an eye opener. </p>
<p>Is it that surprising that fraternities + alcohol = high risk environments?</p>
<p>Some universities, and some fraternity nationals, now require fraternity houses to be dry, presumably because of the liability issues.
<a href=“Ban of Brothers - The New York Times”>Ban of Brothers - The New York Times;
<p>
</p>
<p>Agree. I was also unaware, or at least never took the time to consider the ramifications of the fact, that universities don’t necessarily assume responsibility for the upkeep and maintainance of greek housing. Who is making sure that things are up to code - everything from electrical and plumbing to railings on porches to fire and CO2 alarms? </p>
<p>Summary of a very long article: its about the alcohol. All about the alcohol.</p>
<p>This is really interesting. I think I’m about halfway through, at the point where the author starts talking about how common falls from fraternity houses are.</p>
<p>At my current university there is a fraternity that is recognized by student affairs but who owns their own fraternity house. Their alumni association bought it. Thus, although student affairs typically regulates the behaviors and social events of the other fraternities on campus - and can threaten fraternities with the lost of a fraternity house if they don’t shape up - they can’t regulate this fraternity’s parties because their house is a private residence. The best part is that the fraternity is on the school’s “frat row” because the house used to be owned by the university, so it’s sandwiched between a sorority house and a general residence hall and is generally considered part of the fraternity row on campus. (There’s yet another fraternity that owns their own house and is NOT regulated by student affairs at all - the group lost recognition several years back - so the university has even LESS regulation over what they do.)</p>
<p>I remember one time in broad daylight me and two friends (all three of which were working for student affairs at the time) were crossing the street and we saw several young men and a young woman hanging over the edge of their roof. They were clearly drunk and had bottles and cups in their hands. One of us was on duty at the time, so she called up to our supervisor - sitting on roofs is an offense that can get you kicked out of housing - but as the university doesn’t own the house, it’s a private residence and there was simply nothing we could do about it. I remember being really, really worried that one of them was going to stumble off and fall - that’s how much they were hanging off.</p>
<p>Does anyone else think it’s odd that the two out of the three most in depth stories about the issues surrounding fraternities centered around people not in them?</p>
<p>I do personally think fraternities should all be housed on campus in campus buildings (like Brown). Honestly, I think it’s actually better for the students themselves too.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They can derecognize the fraternity if it violates whatever regulations there are, although from your description of another non-recognized fraternity at the same school, that does not seem to be much of a penalty at all. However, if it is a private school, it probably has more legal leeway in prohibiting students from joining unrecognized fraternities than a public school would have (though many private schools would hesitate to impose such restrictions, if historical fraternity membership were high enough that the backlash among alumni donors who are fraternity members would meaningfully threaten the school’s donation receipts, as noted in the article).</p>