his afternoon I would like to express my support for the motion under consideration on the basis that indeed single-sex exclusionary student social organizations at Dartmouth are fundamentally antithetical to the educational and intellectual mission of this College and opposed to the very principle of community by which we all should abide. I would like to argue that this antagonism is not merely the product of the disrespectful behavior consistently exhibited by individual members of such organizations, but rather the result of the very philosophical and structural principles on which the life of these organizations is based. These are structures and views that foster a particular kind of “student culture” that is in complete contradiction to the values of a true intellectual community.
In the mission statement of the College we read that among the essential elements comprising the character of this institution are or shall be: “A devotion to a vital learning environment rooted in the liberal arts tradition,” and “A commitment to sustaining an academic residential community of learning that nurtures and supports the social, emotional, moral, and physical well-being of its members.”
Crucial to any “vital learning environment”, crucial to any “academic residential community of learning”, crucial in sum to any serious and democratic academic endeavor, is the non-negotiable principle of respect towards each other. But equally important is also our commitment to independent judgement and critical inquiry. This commitment often entails the difficult experience of submitting one’s long-held views to critical scrutiny and open debate and to developing the courage to dissent in public. I believe that —regardless of our fields of study— this is the commitment that guides the work all of us attempt to do in our classrooms: to help our students not to indulge in comfortable self-confirmation of their presuppositions and beliefs, but to stimulate the uncomfortable and not always easy habit of self-reflection and critical doubt.
But while we are involved with this challenging task inside the classroom, what is happening around the campus at large? What is the social environment that ought to enhance the academic mission of the College and support this community of learners? LET ME BE CLEAR: the structures that dominate student social life at Dartmouth have very little to do with the expressed academic mission of this institution, nor with the basic philosophical principles of a liberal arts education. On the contrary, I strongly believe they are in direct opposition to:
1. Our commitment to diversity and inclusion, to bringing together a heterogeneous set of human experiences and characters as a source of cultural and intellectual enrichment. Single-sex Greek organizations enact practices of discrimination and exclusivism (mostly, but not only, through that problematic and elaborate exercise in “profiling” that is called “Rush”).
2. Our commitment to encourage the free and public discussion of ideas as the basis for a true democratic academic culture. Single-sex Greek organizations respond with a culture of secrecy— where aggressive sexist, racist, and homophobic attitudes and beliefs are covered up and remain virtually unquestioned (This was clearly the case of the “Zetemouth Newsletter”).
3. Our pedagogical attempts to equip our students with the tools that will help them to think for themselves and to develop the emotional maturity to stand up for their beliefs. Single-sex Greek organizations foster an erroneous, dangerous, and conformist concept of loyalty. This concept is not based on a thoughtful evaluation of experiences, but rather on the acritical commitment to upholding a priori the integrity of the pack. This misplaced notion of loyalty has repeatedly led to habits of complicity with criminal behavior (ranging from violent fights, to sexual misconduct, to the illegal use of alcohol and drugs, to arson, etc.) on the part of many fraternity brothers who otherwise would have been stigmatized as outcasts or traitors by their organizations. The sense of loyalty demanded from so many of our students in the Greek system requires the concealment of individual critical judgement in order to speak with a single homogeneous voice. This is the voice to which so many of our students have attached their sense of belonging while at Dartmouth, and, unfortunately, of belonging to Dartmouth. Students who have dared to utter a dissident view with regard to this system have been ostracized and even harassed in order to ensure their silence. It takes a lot of courage for students to criticize the Greek system on this campus. Punishment, not debate, has been and still is the order of the day.
From what I have said thus far, it must be clear that we have a rather schizophrenic situation at the College. Student life is mainly articulated along two different and mutually exclusive tracks of socialization that could be metaphorically summarized as the battle between “the classroom” (critical inquiry and creativity) and “the basement” (the selective suspension of critical judgement and the stifling of imagination). Like the institution itself, our students also walk a very fine line. This schizophrenia negatively affects not only the personal and intellectual development of our students (Greeks and non-Greeks alike), but also our own pedagogical work. The classroom is not immune to the pressures of a social environment so hostile to the principles of intellectual life and critical exchange, nor to the discriminatory attitudes it engenders. I believe it would be an illuminating exercise to ask faculty, especially women and faculty of color, what our experiences have been in this regard.
Ever since Dartmouth went co-ed in the early ’70s, the College has been striving to come to terms with the new academic realities created by the presence of women and the increasing presence of people of color in the last predominantly white male bastion of the Ivy League. For almost thirty years, Dartmouth has struggled to articulate its new identity as a serious and diverse institution committed to excellence in both teaching and research and to dispel its unfortunate image as an “animal house” — an image that still haunts this institution with good reason. It is my understanding that this year, while many peer institutions saw an increase in the index of their applications, Dartmouth suffered a 5% decrease. Past reports by Dean Karl Furstenberg have revealed the worrisome fact that many students who are highly intellectually motivated cited the predominance of the Greek system in the social life of this College as a primary factor in their decision not to attend Dartmouth.
Throughout these thirty years Dartmouth has managed to rise to many of the social and intellectual challenges of the times, except to one: the creation of a truly co-educational residential academic community, one not based on discrimination and exclusionary practices and one not so at odds with our educational mission. Single-sex exclusionary organizations are the last stronghold through which that “old” Dartmouth where women and minorities were not welcome still asserts itself. This is why I would like to encourage you all to support the motion we have on the table, as I will certainly do.
