The Future of Frats

“Our way of life is under attack,” the keynote speaker said. The women filling the ballroom, many of them wearing a Greek letter lapel pin or a monogrammed sweater, shouted in agreement. It was the 2015 national convention for my sorority, and college administrators and national pundits alike had been deliberating the elimination of Greek life.

Debates about the future of fraternities and sororities have only gotten more intense since then. One part of this discussion is about campus chapters guilty of hazing, sexual assault or intolerance. Most recently, a video emerged of fraternity members at Syracuse University making hateful vows containing racist slurs. There is no debate about what to do with a group that embraces hate like that: It should be kicked off campus, immediately (the Syracuse fraternity, Theta Tau, was permanently banished this month).

But there is also a wider conversation about why fraternities and sororities continue to exist at all and what role they have at a modern university. Shouldn’t we just ban them all?

I don’t think we have to. I am a firm believer that living in a house with your friends, playing beer-drinking games and dancing to overplayed pop songs are not fundamentally incompatible with inclusion, respect and a just society. And on campuses where Greek life remains, it is increasingly popular, according to the North-American Interfraternity Conference.

But Greek life needs to change. In its current form, it fosters not just fun and friendship but also inequality. At a time when many dorms have gender-mixed floors, and a full generation after most single-sex schools began admitting both sexes, these organizations seem like relics. Fraternities and sororities must make a number of changes to ensure their survival, starting with going coed.

Those who defend Greek life talk about how it fosters a sense of community and belonging at a time when many people are far from home and often unsure of their direction. People meet lifelong friends, and sometimes spouses, through the Greek system, and after college, alumni associations can provide networks in new cities. This may explain why people remain fierce advocates of their “way of life” long after graduation.

Studies have shown that fraternity and sorority members also surpass their non-Greek counterparts on a number of metrics. They are more likely to graduate on time and go on to earn higher salaries (though joining a fraternity does seem to have a slight negative effect on grades). In addition to all that they provide their members, Greek organizations also typically raise money for charity and do volunteer work. What’s not to love?

Well, a lot. Those who support Greek life often have a blind spot. The system strictly enforces gender separation and traditional gender roles. Rules that prevent sorority sisters from hosting parties, drinking alcohol or having members of the opposite sex in their houses result in a disproportionate amount of social capital concentrated in male-dominated spaces. While not all fraternities, and certainly not all fraternity men, abuse this social power, some do. This means that women may be excluded from a major social space on campus if they do not adhere to the expectations of fraternity men. This hasn’t just made it easier to exclude women; it has made it easier to objectify them, too.

I would prefer no Greek life to Greek life that continues to marginalize women and other groups. The purpose of higher education is to prepare the next generation to be engaged and democratic citizens. This is why most universities, even those that are private, receive public funding. And Title IX prohibits schools that get such funding from discriminating on the basis of sex. The organizations on these campuses should be held to the same standard.

Despite the perception that critics of Greek life are attacking a “way of life,” it is quite possible to preserve what is good about the organizations — fun with friends and a community based on common values — while dispelling the bad. Implicit bias training could reduce the discrimination based on race and religion that has for years influenced determinations of which prospective members were the right “fit,” and providing financial aid for the expensive dues could bring in students who would otherwise find membership unaffordable.

And sororities and fraternities should go coed. Greek organizations would not be the first single-sex college group to become coeducational. The eating clubs at Princeton were forced to go coed in the ’90s and more recently, some Harvard final clubs have become open to all genders. This year at Yale, the Whiffenpoofs, an a cappella group, admitted the first female member in its 109-year history.

But this change is not just about keeping up with the times. It is about resolving a division that disservices all students. Involvement in Greek life is about building deep friendships, and there is no reason those friendships should be limited by gender.

Of course, there will be resistance, but this is not just about frats and sororities surviving in an increasingly diverse and open world; it’s about them living up to what they were meant to be in the first place. These communities should be based on common values and passions, not on common privileges of sexual orientation, race, religion or gender. Organizations chartered to uphold values of character, leadership and sincere friendship should not object to such a cause; in fact, they should be at its forefront.