"You can’t ban douchebaggery: Kill the frats, sure, but you can’t stop entitled white bros"

Submitted by Mastodon on Thu, 2015-03-26 07:45

Article here. [Warning: Using Firefox but not IE, a "slide show" opens in the lower part of the page as an overlay that contains NSFW images. Salon has really sunk even for it; some of these images are pornographic. Only reason I don't *not* post it is because when using IE, the "slideshow" does not seem to come up. But regardless of what browser you use, navigate to it while at work at your own risk.]

Excerpt:

'So let’s ban frats, right? Let’s empty their houses and pressure the national organizations to donate the space to be turned into something else. (Repurposed dorms open to all students or maybe, you know, the headquarters for a chapter of Men Can Stop Rape.) Let’s push the thousands of former Greeks to join other public service groups if they really want to help their communities. Let’s open the doors and let sunlight disinfect the whole mess.

Racism and misogyny on campus won’t suddenly disappear if this happens, but shuttering the Greek system could be seen as an institutional commitment to lowering the number of dead drunk kids, women assaulted or otherwise dehumanized and racist parties defended as harmless fun.

This is the side I ultimately come down on, but here’s where I get stuck: You can ban frats, but you can’t ban large groups of entitled white men from living together. You also can’t simply ban toxic masculinity and white supremacy. These are frat problems, of course. But they are also our problems.
...
There’s no denying that frats and sororities are often a particularly grotesque expression of the problems that plague the rest of the country, but they’re not uniquely awful. (There’s plenty of awful to go around, of course.) When you look at the actual issues behind our “frat problem,” you’re left with white supremacy, institutional misogyny and the everyday violence of inequality, for starters. Break it down in those terms, and it’s pretty clear that banning frats would be the easy part.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

That's the inevitable conclusion. Starts with fraternities. Sororities are supporting fraternities because they think this is about eliminating the Greek system on campuses, but it isn't. It's about getting rid of males. The starting strategy is to go for "male strongholds" like fraternities. Once the anti-male-only organization precedent is set, it'll be easy to pick off men who are not organized, one by one, against the feminist agenda. Sorority sisters need fear nothing. They are not the targets. But non-fraternity men do need to fear, for it's the frat guys that are going to be whacked first. Then, fellas, you're next.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Mon, 2015-03-30 06:13

I have to say a few years ago it seemed that the idea that feminists want men driven off of campus altogether was perhaps a bit paranoid or far-fetched, but the evidence is really piling up now.

It seems attacking frats serves their goal very well. Not only do you get to defame a huge chunk of the male component of the student body, you also get to severely limit options for living arrangements for male students. They're hitting more than one bird with this stone.

The good news is that it seems that students are getting tired of the leftist hype, and fighting back. Hence, the exposure of the "Jackie" story for the lie that it is.

Indeed getting rid of frats won't fix the problems on universities, because taking a problem which all of humanity is accountable for and assigning responsibility to one group is a denial of reality. Far be it from leftists to figure that out.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Tue, 2015-03-31 21:09