I went to Rauner today with my WGSS
10 class and we got the opportunity to look at some interesting material
pertaining to sexism, feminism, and gender as it relates to Dartmouth’s
history. I read an edition of the publication no longer in circulation, Spare
Rib. The edition had a specific focus on the Greek system and rush as it
relates to women, a topic that I have been grappling and arguing about for the
past week. Arguing quite fervently. The two articles related to rush in the
volume offered two different criticisms of sororities. The first argued that
the Greek system is a terribly degrading process, which has the unfortunate
consequence of exploiting the self-consciousness that people bear. In the
articles it states that, “Too many of us willingly accept and participate in a
system that judges and them either accepts or rejects a woman on the basis of a
five minute conversation. We insist that this should not be taken personally,
yet how else can a woman take it? Isn’t she the person we just rejected on the
very basis of who she is?” (Spare Rib, Spring 1993). The second argues that
sororities are inherently undermining the greater feminist coalition of women
on this campus in that it partitions us into insular cliques that berate,
undermine, and antagonize the others. While this publication was published over
20 years ago, it is haunting in how easily you could deceive yourself into
thinking it was published yesterday.
While sororities like my own have
diverged from this toxic path towards more inclusive and meaningful ways of
recruiting new members, the mainstream Greek culture still smarts of the same
problems. We have somehow deceived ourselves into thinking that the same
problems of exclusivity and sexism have been resolved. The Greek council touts
its victory in making the Greek system inclusive in that anyone can rush and has the chance to
participate. But it covers over the fact that rush is not even a real
possibility for everyone, whether that be for financial restraints or mental
health issues. The Greek system is inclusive in title only. There is a
significant difference between diversity and inclusion: one is a numbers game
and the other is about actually changing the dynamics of socialization. There
is no substantive inclusion. The fact that someone can be denied a bid for
being their most genuine self when someone else who lies about engaging in
activism to seem more feminist to cater to a house does. The fact that Greek
houses still treat their minority members as a tally to prove to other houses
and the campus that they are “not racist”. The fact that a house was told
explicitly from their national to “accept less Asian women” because they are
“not pretty enough” and took that to heart in their next formal recruitment
cycle. The fact that sorority girls buy into the whole “white dress” tradition
that obviously mean to demonstrate the importance of a woman’s purity. The fact
that houses like AKA and APhiO are completely disconnected from the Greek
system to the point where many people don’t even know they exist. The fact that
members who need financial aid to be a part of a house are forced to perform
more duties and act as a “house-keeper”. The fact that guys send each other
blitzes detailing when they have events with a sorority as a reminder for their
members to expect and prepare for coitus. The fact that meetings are fraught
with outright racist jokes that members feel safe enough to yell in the privacy
of their own houses because no one will snitch if they’re part of the club. How are we so delusional as to think that
the Greek system is not toxic?
I know that I still bear the shame
and the guilt of the Greek system because when it comes down to it, I’m still
in a Greek house. While I may not be the chief authority or have the most right
to speak so critically of the Greek system for that reason, I believe that
people still have the right and the obligation to speak out about a system that
they are in if something is egregiously wrong with it. I can be an American and
still critique America so that it can do and be better. The other publications
that we read were harshly satirical and were such a breath of fresh air because
they didn’t hold anything back. As jarring and shocking as these pieces were
then, they’re still as striking now compared to the tempered, measured ways
that we write today to cover our asses. So that we don’t make enemies. So that
we don’t stir the pot too much. So that we don’t get backlash. Academia might
be partially to blame. Writing esoterically and “appropriately” is the only way
that anyone will actually listen to your argument and what you’re trying to
say. God forbid someone say “fuck your white tears” because we are too quick to
get personally offended then we are to check our privilege. So I urge that we bring
back biting poetry about demon vaginas to criticize our current repression of
female sexuality. Bring back the spreads with women’s advertisements revised
with shocking catchphrases to criticize beauty standards. Bring back the satirical
articles about “10 things you can do with a severed penis”. Be bold.
