Dartmouth sororities announce new policy

Submitted by anthony on Fri, 2011-05-13 06:36

Article here. Notice the incident cited for the implementation of this new policy. The female student initiated the conflict. Absolutely no mention of any accountability on her part. Excerpt:

'The eight presidents of Dartmouth’s Panhellenic sororities unanimously decided that their houses will boycott all social events held in conjunction with a fraternity in which a member has assaulted a female student if internal adjudication is not taken against the individual in a timely manner, Sigma Delta sorority president Danielle Levin ’12 said in an interview with The Dartmouth. The boycott, which will continue until the fraternity in question internally tries the perpetrator of the assault, was enacted following a violent incident at a fraternity’s physical plant on Saturday, according to Levin.
...

The violent argument occurred between a female member of the Class of 2013 and a male member of the Class of 2011 in the fraternity’s basement on Saturday night, Levin said. The female student threw a drink in the face of the male student — who was a member of the fraternity in question — and he threw a glass bottle at her in response. He then pushed her against the wall until other members of the fraternity pulled him away, according to Levin.

Levin said she did not know if the female student, who was also a member of a Greek organization, had been injured. The new initiative will apply to acts of violence against all female students regardless of their membership status in a Greek organization, Levin said.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

There are 2 issues here. First was his level of response-- it was excessive. If she had been a he, it still would have been wrong. A drink in the face warrants the same in reply, not shoving and/or hard objects getting thrown at the other person. So in this regard, the idea that there ought to be some action taken against the bottle-thrower is right.

HOWEVER the other issue is the gender-based nature of the policy. It specifically singles out male (ie, fraternity members) attacks on females, rather than student attacks on students. In that regard what we are seeing is more of the same-old same-old: Nymphotropism, institutionalized.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Fri, 2011-05-13 12:54

I agree, there is no mention of the female student being mentioned about her culpability. Also, as other comments being made from students who appeared to be there, he said some pretty rude comments.

This is no excuse for her response (throwing the beer) and certainly not his response throwing the battle back. Both are at fault and violence should not be the answer in any situation by both parties.

As you will see my comments on here will usually take the opposite approach regarding some of the comments on here. I am also reasonable and agree with most of what you are saying. Violence is violence, though there it is to be measured, i.e. slapping someone and knifing someone is a matter of degree.

So both responses are an uncalled for.

When the sororities call for an end to sexual assault on this issue, though it may be necessary from a standpoint on its own, this is not the reason for it, it does give the indication men are always wrong and the female is not.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by bobwoolsey on Wed, 2011-05-18 18:26