Junior don writes letter about fraternities, gender and equality on campus

Bethany is right to ask that members of KA begin to express why we feel our organization is worth maintaining. So here goes. This is a long one….. Brevity is not my strong suit apparently.
The point about creating a safe space for men to express their feelings was pretty solidly scoffed at during the conversation at council (with on or two much appreciated exceptions). In general this was taken to mean that a space was being preserved for men to say things that would otherwise be criticized by women, that we would be free to express our misogyny in comfort and safety without fear of accountability. This is simply not what I experience, nor do I think that anyone that knows our members personally would have reason to suspect us of such a thing.
The Masculine trope of the strong silent type, of a masculinity that admits no vulnerability and bluntly barrels through life with unflinching self confidence can be as harmful to men as it can ultimately be to women. I was raised by a stay at home father who provided all the emotional accessibility that any child could want from their parents, but this is not the stereotype of what a man should be and this is not the sort of role model that many men have.
The safe space that I am proud to be a part of is one that allows for the sort of conversations about love, about fear, and about personal responsibility that have helped me to develop a strong enough sense of self that I can turn my back on stereotypes and exemplify the strength of character that is necessary for a man and a father in our time. A more versatile and humble sense of masculinity.
Safety is a word that is being thrown around quite a bit in this discussion. At council I tried my best to convey (what might not have come across in the transcripts) that the sort of fear being spread around campus about the threat we pose is hyperbolic. I was advised not to come to council because council was afraid the KA would come to intimidate members. Where such a notion would come from is beyond me, but it is a testament to what I think is a misguided perception of us as people. While I appreciate Bethany’s point that this is about structures not people, I feel like more care needs to be taken in the responsible expression of these concerns. It is not fair on the one hand to pick and choose all the evils of fraternities (and there are many) as they exist around the world, make reference to KA in the same breath, and then refuse to talk about us as people, in reality, claiming this isn’t about people. I think it is irresponsible because it is this sort of conflation that is helping to whip up a sense of fear that is simply unjustified.
Please don’t talk about “one of the sources of inequality at King’s that I believe is under-acknowledged and under-discussed on our campus: specifically the presence and activities of fraternities around the university (here I am thinking of Kappa Alpha)”, and then say
“most fraternities promote a vision of elitist hypermasculinity that has to be constantly proven through rituals that reinforce the exclusion of others, usually women, queer and trans people, and people of colour”. And when we respond defensively, please don’t say that you are talking about structures and therefore it’s okay. Talk about structures of racism, sexism, and homophobia, or talk about us. But DO NOT associate us with them. Do not suggest that these are inherent values of any fraternity as if we must exemplify such things, as if we are all racists, sexists, or homophobes whether we like it or not. We are people.
I am James Shields and I approve this message…

First, I would like to commend Bethany, Michal, Meghan, Katie and Charlotte for seeking to eliminate exclusionary and potentially discriminatory behaviours on campus, defend women, queer and trans people who may feel particularly targeted by male-only groups and promote student safety. However, this particular attempt to address these issues is misguided and unfortunately under-researched.
To my knowledge, Kappa Alpha is the only male fraternity based at King’s that recruits only King’s men. There are four other male fraternities, one female fraternity and two sororities based at Dalhousie that recruit members primarily from Dalhousie, King’s, SMU and the Mount. The male fraternities are Phi Delta Theta, Sigma Chi, Phi Kappa Pi and Zeta Psi. The female fraternity is Alpha Gamma Delta and the two sororities are Omega Pi and Iota Beta Chi. All of the Dalhousie-based organizations belong to Greek Council, a ratified Dalhousie society that exists to promote communication between the groups and to facilitate communal enterprise. I encourage you to visit the websites and Facebook pages of each organization to learn more about their particular values and ideals, and to contact a member of Greek Council to learn more about their initiatives.
To simplify things slightly, this letter argues essentially that harmful patriarchial norms, sexism and elitism are reinforced by fraternities whose “hypermasculinity” disadvantages women and decreases their safety. Moreover, the authors argue that the benefits of belonging to a sorority are not even comparable to the privileges awarded to members of fraternities. I would like to address each of these issues in turn (apologies in advance: like James, brevity is not my strong suit).
Fraternities and sororities are exclusionary based on gender. The authors are right to draw our attention to this point and to discuss whether harmful gender norms are subtly or overtly reinforced by these exclusionary practices. However, to my mind, such a discussion would also necessarily involve any organization that unites members based on something shared between them, be it gender, religion, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, and even likes or dislikes. There are experiences, advice, discussions, questions and answers that are more meaningful when shared with people who have something in common with you than with those who do not. Sharing “coming out” stories with other LGBT members can give one a sense of solidarity and inclusion, for example; Bible study with other members of the Christian faith can reinforce one’s own beliefs; comparing experiences with the “glass ceiling” and discussing strategies for overcoming it as a woman in the corporate world can be more pertinent when talking with other women, rather than men. I do not support discrimination or exclusion, but I do understand that sometimes sub-communities give people the support they need in
order to contribute to the larger one they live and work within.
Perhaps I misunderstood the “elitist hypermasculinity” argument, but the authors seem to have conflated masculinity with gender. They write that they are skeptical that Kappa Alpha (and presumably other fraternities) will be able to eliminate “rituals associated with aggressive masculinity”, homophobia and sexism since they are gender-segregated (frankly, I don’t really see how being gender-segregated affects one’s capacity for meaningful change, but I digress). Further, they write that “you can’t maintain segregation without policing the masculinity of some participants.” As I’ve already mentioned, fraternities are exclusionary based on gender. However, one is allowed admittance into a fraternity whether one is hypermasculine, moderately masculine, a little bit masculine or not at all masculine. Certainly, some fraternities attract one “type” more than others, but there are enough differences between and even among the ones I know that the statement “Most fraternities promote a vision of elitist hypermasculinity” is not only a gross overgeneralization, but perpetuates a pernicious stereotype many fraternities work hard to overcome. Yes, the typical “frat boy” still exists, but he is no longer the rule.
Finally, there is the question of benefits. In this regard, the authors’ statements are patently false. Sororities offer a number of benefits to members that rival those offered to men in fraternities. These benefits may be tangible, such as scholarships, employment or travel opportunities, or less tangible, such as preparation for life after graduation, study skills, or community partnerships. Alpha Gamma Delta, the organization to which I belong, runs monthly philanthropy initiatives, hosts weekly study sessions, sponsors frequent events where students and alumnae get together to discuss a range of topics, encourages communication and involvement with members at other universities/colleges, offers opportunities for leadership experience, participates in Dalhousie intramurals, and the list goes on. On a personal note, Alpha Gamma Delta also was a “safe space” for me when I needed it most, and when the King’s community couldn’t provide what I needed alone.
As I said, I commend the authors of this letter for taking the time to voice their concerns to the King’s community and for promoting equality on campus and in our society. However, I do not think that exclusive sub-communities undermine the effectiveness of the larger or are harmfully inequitable. What is needed is more communication between all members of the community in order to eliminate the misrepresentation, misinformation and misunderstandings that perpetuate negative stereotypes and prevent all students from feeling safe and comfortable at King’s.

Frats operate ideally at a 5:5 ratio. This video will let you know!