I have heard the question a million times, "What are frats really there for anyway?" In one way or another, it is clear that my generation is still showing difficulty carrying the mantle of a positive fraternity culture, but the question is why? I think there are 3 major factors that are holding back many organizations country-wide, all with their roots in fraternity history and the mindset of current fraternity men. These factors are rushing over recruiting, loss of chapter focus, and fear of vulnerable brotherhood. Even though I am only a 4th year in college, these are the key factors in many of the problems I see in my own organization and just below the surface in other chapters as well.
“Rush over Recruiting”
Well the first questions should naturally be what's the difference and why are we playing semantics. The difference is massive when you think of what context people use these words. Which one sounds more like the fraternity is taking an active role in finding people who live up to its values, its purpose, and their ideals. "What are you guys doing for rush," or "Have you began recruiting new members?" Many fraternities let potential new members come out to them and are validating their membership by asking if they would "have a beer with a guy" or if they think a potential new member is "sick" or "fun" or "cool". Then the whole chapter or a committee votes on who will be the next generation of their house and echo the same sentiments, with a minority questioning the strength of his work ethic, his body of work pre-college, or his intrinsic motivations. Compare that to the men who go out of their way to find extraordinary individuals who excel in academics, who value a strict set of morals, or who genuinely and publicly care for their school or community. That is the difference between rush and recruitment. The question is do you let a group of men come to you and pick the best of the litter or do you find the best of the best at your university who can represent your fraternity's mission and values and seek their membership?
Before I explain why that causes so many problems, it's appropriate to give a brief history on fraternities. Greek life has been on college campuses since before 1830, beginning with Alpha Delta Pi. Most secret fraternities and sororities find their roots in literary societies or college clubs based around scholarship between 1825 and 1920. The biggest shift away from this was when greek organizations began obtaining the coveted "Frat houses" or having a lettered property for the chapter in the late 1800's and the focus shifted away from socialized learning and education to managing a physical house and promoting a social environment away from the rigors of coursework. From the beginning of the 1920's to the end of the 1920's, the amount of fraternity houses nearly tripled. Following that came the need to continuously add new members who had a certain set of qualities, and so rush was created.
Then comes the beginnings of the toxic subculture we have now. World War II saw Greek life boom like never before, let's call it the silver age. Following 1945, fraternities began mirroring the subculture of college-age students and the social trends of their era rather than the traditions of loyalty to one's university and dedication to scholarship, which I am sure sounds familiar. Next comes the golden age of fraternity life, the late 70's to the early 90's. This stands as the period where more men joined fraternities than any other, including the modern era as of 2014. These are the men who are one generation removed from the soldiers who fought in wars and changed the fraternity culture through their shift to social trends. To put that in context, the men who followed after World War II were different than the men before their time but still military men, still upholding many values, but in the end were veterans attending college for the first time, so they wanted to increase the social aspect dramatically. Well here comes the 70's and 80's and I shouldn't have to tell you that people had quite a bit of the social life in those eras. So the sons of the silver age are now in charge during a time of massive social liberalism and they rush more and more men who are like themselves, people who are searching for a social outlet away from academics. In 1978 we get the movie that documented what fraternities had become by two generations of college students since the beginning of the 70's, Animal House.
What follows the golden age is the modern era, the children who grew up hearing stories of how "cool" and "fun" their parents' greek life experience was. The same kids who grew up watching the 1978 culture-changing film "Animal House" and thinking that is how life will be when they get to college. Fast forward to a few weeks ago when I go out to my fraternity's rush event and a student asks me "What kinds of sick parties does your frat throw, I haven't heard too much about Lambda." The correlation is stunning, and at the same time, sickening. So as an organization we are letting that young man rush us, as opposed to putting in the effort to recruit another student on campus who says "I've started a nonprofit to help us reduce grocery store waste and was an eagle scout, I am really here to see how you guys act with each other, I'm looking for a brotherhood and you all seem very close". No that second one was not a real conversation but hell I am willing to bet there is a student with a comparable resume and a similar mindset. How parochial can we be as an organization to think that only people who are "fun" or "cool" can be part of our brotherhood? Well what do you expect? Our parents and grandparents and uncles and cousins and siblings and everyone else has told us that fraternities are here for "fun", and you need to be "cool" to join one.
The difference of recruitment is that it is an ongoing effort to find students who are of extremely high quality with regards to all aspects of a fraternity, from brotherhood promotion, service to one's community, to academics, and to campus leadership. The effort to find men who can replace the best brother in your chapter and exceed their accomplishments may seem sisyphean at first but where does the culture of your house go if that effort is not made is a startling question.
I often hear that people don't like going to rush or they don't know what to talk about when they meet a potential new member. To this end I think there is a way to rush and there is a way to recruit. When you are talking at rush you want to see where they come from, what sports did they play, what's their biggest accomplishment, are they outspoken, and how many events did they come out to. When having a conversation about recruitment I want to see their idea of brotherhood, what are their relationships with their close friends like, where do they see themselves being a leader on campus and outside of the fraternity, and what impact do they want to make on the world. That recruitment conversation ideally doesn't take place during an event but rather long before they ever decide to join a fraternity. Recruitment is seeking, rush is selecting.
When it comes to recruitment, a fraternity man I know recently said a quote that shook me and the way I look at my fraternity's recruitment process.
“I would rather watch my fraternity die than see a single man be initiated who is not worthy”
Why do we not hold our own chapters to this standard? I won't harp on the same point any longer but I implore any fraternity member who reads this to consider ways they can become men who recruit rather than a fraternity that rushes. You may not be an excellent member of your fraternity right at this moment, but the two components of excellence are effort and focus, and you have complete control over both of them as an individual.
“Loss of Chapter Focus”
This point is simple, but I believe that it is profound. What is your chapter here for? Does your chapter have a goal? It can be to create men of strong moral content, to graduate at least 90% of your membership every 4 years, to be men of outstanding academic achievement, pick anything, but pick SOMETHING.
If your chapter president is elected and has no idea what the mission of the fraternity is, how can you expect them to lead you to be a better chapter. Every fraternity brags about their values, ostensibly as a prime example of student leadership and scholarship. But what do we see? We see that the type of student in 2015 who joins a fraternity is the type who could not care less about their university, who loves to binge-drink, who cannot seem to stop sexual assault in their chapter or Greek community, and who can't keep their chapter far above the all-campus GPA. I am not generalizing fraternity men, I am describing the majority.
How many different daises of shame does fraternity life need to be put on before we can collectively say "no more?" I call on every brother who reads this to identify your chapter's mission and if you cannot in one instant, then it is your duty to create one with the help of your brothers. Your mission should be similar to your university's mission, your values should mirror the christian/jewish/academic/catholic/symbolic views of your fraternity, and your conduct should be the prime example of what it means to represent something larger than yourself at ALL times. Ask yourself what mission do you have to remind you that you cannot take your letters off after taking your oath.
“Fear of Vulnerable Brotherhood”
I want you as a reader to do an exercise for me. If you are in a Greek organization think of your 3 best friends in that organization. If you are not then think of your 3 best friends in your life. What moments make that relationship special and valuable to you. I think I can describe some of the after-effects of those moments. I am willing to bet that when they criticize you, you know they only say it because they care so you actually change the behavior instead of arguing (most of the time). You probably feel effortlessly at home when they are around and are happy to hear their opinions. You might even know what they would think when they see a situation and know how things in their past affect their current decisions.
Ok end exercise, what do all these things have in common? At some point with these people you were vulnerable with them. I don't know how it happened but at some point they shared something with you or vice versa which led to a conversation which led to you realizing that you value that person. Everything past that moment was confirmation bias because you were willing to be vulnerable with them or they were willing to be vulnerable with you, regardless of the terrifying aspect that you might not like them or they might not like you. Maybe they opened up to you about an ex, family issues, a death that was painful for them, or even some scarring personal events. Whatever it was, you chose each other and were willing to let them truly know something about you.
Now those relationships are few and they are difficult to foster, you simply cannot be vulnerable with everyone to that degree. Let's call that bond first-degree friendship. The step below that is second-degree friendship. In this degree people can like each other, work together, live with each other and hell they might even date or be in love. But at this degree the theme is commonality itself. You generally share something with people of this degree that you value and they value where first degree friendship is about something unique and secret. The final degree is third-degree friendship, this being people you may or may not like but you know about them or you can at least hold a conversation with them even if that conversation never goes past the surface. Think of that person you see occasionally and you know their name and maybe a few things about them but it never amounts to more than a "Hey what's up, how have you been" with no actual interest in how they have been. Admit it, we all do it. There is nothing wrong with that, it is like I said, you simply cannot be vulnerable with everyone to such a high degree.
Now let's bring this back to the scope of fraternity life. You cannot have an organization of 150 people and tell me that every brother in that organization has first-degree friendship. I would call your bluff if you said any group larger than 10 people could even have this degree of friendship among each other. However, there are elements of that degree that are necessary to take relationships within an organization from friendship to brotherhood.
Brotherhood is second-degree friendship with a willingness to be vulnerable. Therein lies the difference between a fraternity and anything else. We have a special opportunity to have a group that unites us, allowing us to be friends with a common mission and the possibility of being vulnerable with people we share values with. Ask any fraternity member who truly loves their fraternity how they felt when they went to a national convention. There is something just under the surface in every interaction that tells you "I may not know this man, but I know what he stands for, and for that reason I like and respect him."
I will be honest, being vulnerable is not easy. It is not something you can force but it is something you can be willing to accept. The acceptance of vulnerability is what is lacking in many of today's chapters. Talking about something personal in a chapter should be a privilege that extends beyond your one or two best friends or your family within the fraternity. Being vulnerable is a key part to driving excellence because you do not let down people you have been vulnerable with. You cannot let down someone who has seen the real you.
So I challenge any fraternity man to observe his own chapter and see if he honestly feels that way about his organization. In Brotherhood, brothers are their own critics, citing their values and morals in times of peril and confusion, holding each other accountable to something they both believe in because you would rather see your organization die than see your brother fail to uphold your shared values.
“So...what are frats really there for anyway?”
So now we come back to the main question, "what are frats really there for anyway?" Frats are there to imitate the true brotherhoods which are a positive breeding ground for genuine friendship and societal excellence. Frats are the crippled social shell that surrounds the intrinsic mission of fraternities. Frats are for people who come to college to live Animal House and fraternities are for people who seek to represent a set of values and participate in their university and community to the highest possible degree that they can while being an excellent student.
So I ask each fraternity member who reads this, are you in a frat or are you in a fraternity?