F*cked
My Way
To The Top
Kristie Marano
11609532
MSc Sociology; Gender, Sexuality and Society Track
Marie-Louise Janssen & Margriet van Heesch
Ju ly 2 01 8 A ms te rd am , T he N et he rla nd s
An Analysis of Sex Capital in
Greek Life at a Southeastern
University in the United States
Table of Contents
Table of Contents Acknowledgment
Chapter 1: Welcome to Greek Life
1.0 What do you Think This Was? 1.1 Welcome to Greek Life
1.2 Answering the Questions 1.3 Descriing the Networks
Chapter 2: Theoretical Inspiration
Chapter 3: Culture and Whiteness
3.1 A Difficult Memory 3.2 Space and Enviroment 3.3 ‘Make America Great Again’
3.4 The Ultimate Divide: Race and Class in Sorority House’s
3.5 Disparities Between NPC and NPHC: White Bodies and Capital 3.6 The Tailgate
3.7 The Tailgate and Gender
3.8 The ‘Dad Bod’ and Erotic Capital
Chapter 4: Gender
4.0 Volleyball at the Pool 4.1 Making Men: Hazing
4.2 “Fuck her pussy, and be a Man about it!”: Performing Masculinity and Sexual Assault 4.3 Making Women for Men
4.4 Women Controlling Women: Space and Divide 4.5 ‘I’m a Fucking Feminist’: Power and Gender
Chapter 5: Participation
5.0 The Hazzard Girls
5.1 Participation and Gender as a Social Structure 5.2 Forced participation for a ‘Good Cause’
5.3 Doing Gender in Competitions 5.4 Status Through Participation 5.5 Talk Derby to Me
5.6 Blood, Bodies, Blowjobs: Using bodies and Participation 5.7 Talk Derby to Me: Dance, Appearance, Rebelling
Chapter 6: Status and Sex Capital
6.0 Intro
6.1 ‘You have to pledge this house!’: Tradition and Exclusivity 6.2 Mating and Dating in Status
6.3 Status and Winning Events 6.4 Shacking for Status, Intro
6.5 CEO’s and Boardroom Hoe’s; Swapping for Status 6.6 Shacking for an Invite: Spring Formals and Date Parties 6.7 Old South and Shacking
Chapter 7: Analysis and Conclusion
Bilbiography Appendix 2 3 4 4 5 8 10 13 21 21 22 23 24 26 28 30 30 34 34 34 37 40 45 48 53 53 54 56 59 60 64 66 68 72 72 72 77 78 80 83 85 86 91 94 96
Acknowledgment
“i want to apologize to all the women i have called beautiful before i’ve called them intelligent or brave
i am sorry i made it sound as though
something as simple as what you’re born with is all you have to be proud of
when you have broken mountains with your wit from now on i will say things like
you are resilient, or you are extraordinary not because i don’t think you’re beautiful but because i need you to know
you are more than that”[1] -Rupi Kaur
To the women who shared their traumas, their successes, their triumphs, their rises and falls within the system; to the women who encouraged me, who challenged me, who loved me, who hurt with me, who supported me. To the women who question, to the women who rebel, to the women who collectively fight. To the women who allowed me to know them, and in turn, allowed me to know myself, To this fight with you, forever.
To my mother, to my father, to my brother; There is a story for everyone; but each story begins with who we had before we began writing. You are my story, you are my world. To the scars we share, to the laughs we share, to the darkness we share, to the light we share. To molding me, to reflecting with me, to unconditionally loving me and believing in me that I could write this, To you, forever.
To Leo, to Marco, to Javier, to Emma, to my tribe in Amsterdam; to struggling together, to feeling together, to laughing together, to procrastinating together, to being together, to living in the library together, to being resilient together, To you, forever.
To my advisors; Marie-Louise and Margriet, to believing in me, to guiding me, to being patient with me, to inspiring me, To you, forever.
To this opportunity to share their story, to share my story, to just share a fucking story. To the reader, To you, forever. 1 https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/1137550-i- want-to-apologize-to-all-the-women-i-have
I stood in the Marriot hotel room in New Orleans, Louisiana spring of 2014. I had been told that I had ‘made it’ from my sorority sisters since I had been asked to a ‘top-tier fraternity’ formal at a southeastern state university in the states. Around me in the room were 3 white men, 2 white women, all 19 years old. The men had on high-end brand suits accompanied with Rolex watches and Italian-designed dress shoes. Myself, and the other two women were in tight black dresses with black heels and had spent the week getting spray tans, our nails done, brazillian waxes, and most importantly, making the cooler*1. On the table was cocaine, Xanax, and bottles of Jack Daniels, Crown Whiskey, and Bud Light. One of the girls pulled me aside and said, “He told me because he asked me here that I had to make the cooler, buy the alcohol, but most importantly let him fuck me…I don’t really want to, but he’s top tier and I know what it means to be with him”. Prior to this conversation, I had an argument with my date in our personal hotel suite he paid for after naively believing I was asked because of status terms; I was vice president of a sorority comprised of 490 women, he was the vice president of his fraternity comprised of 300 men. Twenty minutes before we headed to the ‘party room’, he said in a southern accent to me, “I spent almost a grand on this weekend and you want to bitch about not wanting to fuck? What did you think this weekend was?”
1 Cooler is an expected obligation for fraternity man’s date to sand down a cooler and paint it with their dates favorite drinks, sports, mascot, and fill it with alcohol.
What Did You
Think This Was?
1.0
Chapter 1: Welcome to
Greek Life
Welcome to
Greek life:
Abstract
It was in this moment that I realized how individuals, primarily sorority women, were using their bodies as means to gain access to other forms of capital—social, economic, and political. The normalized situation of power and status linked to certain men (and their networks) encouraged
individual women to transform and mobilize their own position using their bodies in the context of the social network of Greek life, a unique dynamic of social networks of sororities and fraternities within American universities. I termed the use of one’s body (sexual acts) or the proposition of one’s body (illusion of sex) to gain other forms of capital as ‘Sex Capital’. This theory is built upon Bourdieu’s Forms of Capital and Hakim’s extension of Bourdieu in her piece Erotic Capital. These works are the main influence of my theory, as well as feminist theory and past research on Greek life networks at American universities. The social network of Greek life at this particular public southeastern university campus dominates the literal social and university institutional norms currently and historically. Words like ‘tradition’ and ‘status’ are at the core of social discourse; there is a heavy emphasis of gender roles, heteronormativity, classism, and racism that have been carried on for the ‘sake of tradition’. I would argue that the power and status of Greek life is so deeply institutionalized that this social network is what perpetuates and maintains the status quo of these norms, and what ultimately encourages women to have to enact their Sex capital within this space. It is my aim to show how the systematic network of Greek life at American universities reflects the institution of power in American political, social, and economic entities. I will demonstrate this through sorority women’s stories as well as account for my own experience within the system2. 2 Author’s note: I am choosing to write my thesis in the most basic language possible. I feel a moral obligation to make this piece accessible and understandable to any individual with or without a sociology academic background. I feel this is crucial to mobilizing individuals to stand up to this system and allow others to access this theory, data,
and world
The relevance of exploring the topic Sex capital is significant because it is occurring within everyday youth interactions. It can offer dialogue to current institutional forms of gender relations, sexism, classism, and racism in American society. The application of this theory to a PWI (predominantly white institution) within the Bible Belt of the U.S. can explain broader historical and cultural power and status relations not just within this one region of the states, but as well as broader American society. The application of the theory of Sex capital to this group of individuals can expose more institutional ways a social network such as a fraternity or sorority shape. It can maintain current power and status barriers (class, race, gender) in the U.S. Social systems like fraternities and sororities are institutions within the university institution. I propose these structural constraints of both institutions are the main precursor to how a woman enacts her Sex capital, as well as insight into current gender and race relations on this campus. Further, Greek life is a reflective model on how university social networks often inherently segregate based off class and race, maintain gendered differences, and demonize women’s autonomy. The concept of using one’s body to access
other forms of capital is part of a larger, capitalistic social structure narrative within contemporary American society.
Therefore, my main question is: How are sorority women using their bodies primarily through sex and participation in Greek life culture to gain other forms of capital? Be that social, economic, and political capital in a space such as Greek life (fraternities and sororities) at a southeastern university PWI (predominantly white institution) in the U.S.? To first examine the power relations within this space, we must first examine the knowable reality. When I refer to sororities and fraternities, I am speaking of woborn-women only organizations, and men-born-men only organizations. This separation of gender as a binary is the current dynamic of Greek life space.
Further, the entire construction of a fraternity (making a ‘man’) or a sorority (making women for men) is where the power and subordination originates between these two.
Subsequently, I will ask myself: How does the broad collective ideology of the Greek system (tradition, secrecy, hierarchy, exclusion) maintain the current power and status relations between gender relations? And who benefits in perpetuating these traditions? And what happens if/when women rebel the system?
My third sub question is: What is the significance of whiteness and institutional racism in the space of Greek life and its collective ideology? This is developed from Judith Butler’s Undoing Gender(1990). Who has the privilege to be recognized in this space? As Butler notes, “only experience of recognition and that is only through the experience of recognition that any of us become constituted as socially viable beings”(Butler, 2004 2). Who, under the perpetuation of segregated spaces and classism can be recognized in the space of Greek life?; Does this mirror current race relations in broader American society?
It is my aim to demonstrate the systematic network of Greek life as a reflection of broader American stratification. The power and status dynamics within Greek life offer insight to how current powers came to be. Greek life is a stepping stone to networking and power advantages within political, economic, and social sphere. It can demonstrate the stratification of race and gender socially by maintaining or raising their status and networking opportunities;
economically by using their status/affiliation for occupational networks and contacts; politically by using their status/ affiliation to win university elections, have the backing of the Greek community. Sorority women maintain this system to be able to access their own power, and to dramatically shift the system, a collective rebellion needs to occur.
Over the course of 3 weeks, I conducted in-depth interviews and participant observation as fieldwork in April 2018. I began with snowball sampling from my own personal network and made a WordPress site in order to attract more participants. I had more success with snowball sampling, but the WordPress site helped get my name out which helped me gain access to attend more events and parties for participant observation. I was able to get 20 in-depth interviews that ranged from 35 minutes to 3 hours.
Because I was focusing on the NPC sorority women, each participant identified as white and heterosexual, although some participants did give accounts of personal lesbian experiences and/or their friends sexual experiences. This demonstrates a very white and heteronormative culture being examined.
I asked a variety of questions including how and why participants chose to get involved in Greek life, their personal experience with participation, with men, and with the structure of Greek life. My participants varied from age, status affiliation, and experience. A detailed list of interview questions can be found in the appendix. Below is the breakdown of my participants.
Year Total # Affiliated with
their sorority Dropped sorority (disaffiliated) From Southern States From North-East States Coast StatesFrom West
Junior 2 2 0 1 1 Senior 6 4 2 5 1 0 Graduated 12 9 3 6 4 2
Answering the
Questions
1.2
I graduated from this university a year ago, so a wide range of my snowball sample were graduated women and junior or senior year women. I was unable to get an interview from freshman and sophomore aged women3.There were 2 interviews who I reference thoroughly throughout this thesis because I think they represent they represent the dialogue and evidence I aimed to have. One is the former sorority chapter advisor and current fraternity chapter advisor as well as a Professor of Psychology(Miranda*). The other is a senior participant from Arkansas and gender studies minor and president of the feminist club on campus(Haley*). Both provided the sociological insight to their experiences and each had a gender studies background. 4
I decided to show the partial ethnography by
opening each chapter with an observation or memory that I recalled from my fieldwork or moments from my time at undergraduate student. I felt this would help the reader visualize the space and concept that will be explored.5
3 Based off my experience and my participants’ experience, freshman and sophomore year tends to be the ‘honeymoon’ phase of Greek life. I could not attract younger women to participate mostly due to the fact that their age influenced their view (lack of awareness) on the Greek system as a whole.
4 I have changed both their names, but because I reference them so many times I do not want to reintroduce them every time I use their perspective.
5 In addition, I added photos to be able to display the world in which I am describing, I strived my best to use my own photos before seeking Google.
I tried to use complete anonymity and not use names and withhold sorority/fraternity affiliation.6People I encountered had no problem with knowing I was a researcher and most did not filter their actions or words.
The total number of students part of a fraternity or sorority (NPC/IFC/NPHC) at this university is around 7,500 out of 23,780 undergraduates. To understand the space of Greek life at a southeastern university located in the Bible Belt of the U.S., we must first recognize the historical consequences and whiteness that have maintained today. I would like to be completely transparent in the process of representation. There are two different Greek life networks at this university, National Panhellenic Council/Interfraternity Council(NPC/IFC) and National Pan-Hellenic Council(NPHC). Both fall under the broad Greek life culture but are separate in entirety for the most part; in terms of representation, racial/ ethnic backgrounds, dues, houses on campus (only NPC/ IFC), and culture. The stratification of space and race in this system will be further examined in the Culture chapter.
The networks I will be examining are National Panhellenic Council (NPC) and Interfraternity Council(IFC) whom are overwhelmingly white and middle to upper-class students; as well as have mansion houses on campus. I was very active in a sorority under this network (NPC) for 3 out of 4 years of my undergraduate degree. This contrasts to the National Pan-Hellenic Council, membership is comprised of mainly middle class African American and students of
6 However, I did ask how participants viewed the status association of their sorority (Top tier, middle tier, bottom tier). Greek life is notoriously known for party culture with heavy emphasis on drinking and drug use. I strived to keep anonymity while keeping notes and observing individuals while also being in the spaces (parties and bars). At times where I was drunk or high, I took as many descriptive notes on my phone and audio recorded myself leaving.
Describing the
color. This differentiation of social networks matters in terms of this thesis research and context of the research space.
It is essential to recognize the dynamic of race and space at this university to comprehend the institutional as well as societal stratification between groups; and connect it to broader American culture. Due to the very dense institutional racism within this space, I did not feel that my limited time of data collection would do justice to NPHC sorority women and their experiences. I would like to develop a concrete comparison and research of both NPC and NPHC sororities in future research. For this thesis, I will primarily focus on NPC sorority women’s experience and aim to show the parallels of racism and classism through NPC membership lens.
Below is a diagram that displays the hierarchy of the power/influence of each social tier at the university studied. I created this based off the average political, social, and economic representation among the student body:
The process to become an NPC and IFC member is often superficial, where sororities often recruit women with grades, involvement, legacy, and economic capital. IFC fraternities look for men with similar social networks, economic capital, and legacy. NPC sororities chapter sizes range from 300-490 women in each sorority. IFC fraternities and chapter sizes range from 175-250 men in each fraternity.7
7 Please reference the appendix for an in-depth description of tier system(stereotypesas well as pictures of NPC/IFC/NPHC
The theory of Sex Capital is influenced by Bourdieu’s Form of Capital and Hakim’s Erotic Capital and has been applied to Greek life experience at a southeastern university in the U.S. The following pieces have influenced this theory and inspired me to add insider research to this network.
Bourdieu’s Forms of Capital, offers the inspiration and roadmap to writing this thesis. Bourdieu states:
“[Capital] is what makes the games of society— not the least, the economic game—something other than simple games of chance offering at every moment the possibility of a miracle”(Bourdieu 1986: 46).
Bourdieu focuses on three main forms of capital; economic, cultural, and social. It is within the ‘possibility of a miracle’ that we can begin to examine the ways in which individuals can use one form of capital and transubstantiate into another form of capital. Bourdieu mentions disinterested economic theory which is defined as, “those forms of
exchange which ensure the transubstantiation whereby the most material types of capital—those which are economic in the restricted sense—can present themselves in
immaterial form of cultural capital or social capital and vice versa”(Bourdieu 1986: 46). It is within the context of economic disinterest that I want to examine the form of Sex capital as a way individuals transubstantiate their bodies engaging sex/ illusion of sex (shacker shirts) as a conversion to another form of capital among fraternity and sorority members.
A second primary theory guiding this proposal outline is Catherine Hakim’s Erotic Capital. Hakim states that there are 6 or 7 forms of Erotic capital and, “is just as important as economic, cultural, and social capital for understanding social and economic processes, social interaction, and social mobility”(Hakim, 2010: 499). Hakim describes Erotic capital as having multi-faceted factors; beauty, sexual attractiveness, social, liveliness, style, sexuality, and fertility. Hakim defines the combination of these factors as:
Inspiration for
Research
2.0
Chapter 2: Inspiration
for Research
“Erotic capital is thus a combination of aesthetic, visual, physical, social, and sexual attractiveness to other members of your society and especially to members of the opposite sex, in all social contexts”(Hakim 2010, 501).
Beauty is not necessarily a requirement for a sorority woman to enact their Sex capital. Sex capital does not look to categorize or minimize individuals based off a vanity, but rather looks to examine how individuals are using their bodies and positionality (status associated with sorority) as a means to gain other forms of capital. It is something that any individual is capable of enacting and does not require a superficial attempt to each given cultures’ standard of beauty. While those deemed more ‘attractive’ in the eyes of fraternity boys may have more opportunities to enable Sex capital, it is most definitely not a necessary component. This thesis will show other indicators that enable a woman to use her Sex Capital more so than beauty, such as status affiliation and network.
The main feminist theorist influencing this research is Judith Butler and her concepts of heteronormativity and gender as a performance. Both concepts heavily exist within the social institution of Greek life regarding the norms attached to men in fraternities and women in sororities. I reference Butler’s Undoing Gender(2004) and Sex and Gender in Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex(1986):
“sex is understood to be the invariant, anatomically distinct, and factic aspects of the female body, whereas gender is the cultural meaning and form that the body acquires, the variable modes of that body’s acculturation”(Butler, 1986:35).
Women are not allowed to rush fraternities and men are not allowed to rush sororities, both organizations
exist to mutually segregate gender and there is a heavy emphasis are on heteronormative mating. Sororities are often described as women being made for [fraternity] men, a social status network of women who must follow certain rules/guidelines, gender norms, participate in fraternity events, and attend social functions with only fraternity men. Greek life is the ultimate heteronormative dating and mating pool at universities. Within the Greek life system, there are certain notions men and women are expected to perform to be part of the collective cultural community. This will be discussed further in the Gender chapter.
Feminist, sociologist, and gender theorist, Barbara Risman’s shows gender construction within the American sorority system. In both her pieces, Gender as a Social Structure and College Women and Sororities, Risman demonstrates the way in which gender is institutionally embedded in the individual sorority woman and the collective and that gender ought to be conceptualized as a social structure (Risman 2004: 430).
In Gender as a Social Structure, Risman references Lorber(1994) in stating, “the continuing purpose of gender as a modern social institution is to construct women as a group to be subordinate to men as a group”(Risman 2004, 431). Further, Risman references an extension of Judith Lorber’s theory of gender as an institution which parallels the ways in which sorority as an institution operates in constructing gender in the broader university institution.8
8 “1. Characteristic of groups; 2. Persists over time and space; 3. Includes distinct social practices; 4. Constrains and facilitates behavior and action; 5. Includes expectations, rules/norms; 6. Is constitutes and reconstituted by embodied agents; 7. Is internalized as identities and selves; 8. Includes a legitimating ideology; 9. Is contradictory, ride with conflict; 10. Changes continuously; 11. Is organized and permeated with power”(Risman 431, 2004).
These indicators explain how gender is part of the Greek life institution and offers insight to the willingness of women to participate in Greek life. It is an explanation for the subordination of women in this broader institution. Risman offers insight to this paradox of women participating in this system by stating: “As long as women and men see themselves as different kinds of people, then women will be unlikely to compare their life options to those of men. Therein lies the power of gender”(Risman 2004, 432). The purposeful differences between fraternities and sororities in terms of participation, status, class, and race intersect with gender identity too.
Risman examines gender institutions to explain the process of rebelling within the system. She states, “gendered institutions depend on our willingness to do gender, and when we rebel, we can sometimes change the institutions themselves”(Risman 2004: 434). This
references my second sub question in how sorority women rebel from their traditional and expected gender position in the Greek life. But, using gender as a social structure to examine this world may offer specific insight to the institution of Greek life as a whole. Sorority women at this university trade subordination with fraternity men for other forms of capital and sometimes ‘MRS’ degrees.
In addition, Barbara Risman’s College Women and Sororities provides insight to the individual woman within the structural functions of Greek life community. She writes, “Just as academic institutions involve anticipatory socialization for adult work roles, so too, voluntary organizations—the Greek system—functions as anticipatory socialization for adult social roles”(Risman 1982: 233). The learned socialization processes and rituals within sororities and fraternities pave a platform for how women and men ought to act in social settings. Sororities and fraternities are also used
as wider status affiliation and networking opportunities within their time at university, as well as post-graduate.
Risman accounts the ways sorority women earn and maintain their status within the tier system. She argues, “Girls are learning that their success depends not upon personal achievement in school or sports, but upon their relationship to boys”(Risman 1982: 240). This notion of sorority women’s status and value- still tied to fraternity men in 2018 will be further explored throughout this thesis. Risman wrote this piece in 1982 and her findings eerily parallel mine in 2018 in terms of sorority women’s priorities, goals, and gendered position within the Greek community.
Sociologists Mindy Stombler and Patricia Yancey Martin write on the formal and informal ways the structure of Greek life has on perpetuating and maintaining gender roles and heteronormativity in their piece, Bringing Women In, Keeping Women Down. Stombler et al write on the ways in which the structural influence of Greek life. They state, “…as well as high status that accompanies attaining a boyfriend, [it] is an integral part of their self-worth. In this way, the high-pressure heterosexual peer group, central to women’s students everyday lives, transmits and produces traditional patriarchal gender relations”(Stombler et al, 1994, 152). In addition, Stombler and Martin illustrate why women participate in ‘Little Sister’ programs . They write, “When women joined little sister groups to gain men’s company and approbation, they acted within the constraints of an unequal power structure and a culture of romance that encouraged them to define their identity and self-worth through their relations to men”(Stombler et al, 1994, 159). Sorority women’s collective status and reputation is created off fraternity
men’s interpretation, competitions, and opinion of them. ‘Little Sister’s’ are known as ‘Sweethearts’ at the university I conducted my research at. In this thesis, identity and self-worth in relation to men will be explored by describing how
and why sorority women participate in competitions and spring formals to maintain their status with the ‘top tier’ fraternity men, thus enabling their use of Sex Capital.
To reinforce gender as a social structure, ‘Little Sister’s’ (Sweethearts) are used to demonstrate the power dynamic between fraternity men and sorority women. Sweethearts are chosen based off their “physical beauty and sociability; woman’s face, figure, and hairstyle”(Stombler et al, 1994 156). This criteria is linked to Hakim’s theory of Erotic Capital described at the beginning of this chapter. One fraternity’s book of accomplishments displayed their Little Sister page and stated, ‘Little Sister-Chosen on the Basis of Beauty, Charm, and Loyalty. Their motto: To Serve the Brothers”(Stombler et al, 1994 157). Fraternity men choose sorority women to be associated with them formally (during recruitment and philanthropic events) and informally (during parties and at bars) to give off an image of status to potential new fraternity members. Women trade their subordination to men completely aware they are a currency(looks and network) to recruit fraternity men to attain the status of being associated with a ‘top tier’ fraternity.
Their sorority also gains this status because she is a member of a particular house. The unequal power and status structure of Greek life encourages women to use their bodies (sexually, as well as physically being in the space) to navigate these structures. Sweethearts use their position and Sex capital to connect with “high-status men and to many other women, thus these groups helped women find friends and companions and linked them to other people on campus”(Stombler et al, 1994 160). Little Sisters (Sweethearts) exist within the oppressive and sexist structure that allows them to access social and economic capital in particular.
women navigate patriarchal waters through what states is a ‘strategy’ in The Fraternal Sisterhood: Sororities as Gender Strategy. Handler writes, “My use of the term strategy is similar to Hoschchild’s in that I understand joining a sorority to be a particular act that women use to navigate college campuses, particularly the ‘male dominated culture of
romance’”(Handler, 1995:237). The spring formal observation at the beginning of this thesis can be explained through Handler’s research on how sororities collectively influence decisions individual sorority women would not otherwise make. Social status and affiliation is the driving force for the women enacting their Sex capital, where top tier fraternity men are the gatekeepers to other forms of capital. It is within this dynamic that women engage and participate with men to maintain the collective reputation of her sorority, as well as her individual position as a woman in Greek life institution. This concept will be reinforced in the participation chapter; where sorority women I interviewed worked the ‘double shift’ of labor for the top tier fraternities philanthropy competitions; sorority women would paint signs, raise money, donate blood, and choreograph dance and cheer routines.
Further, sociologist’s Jenny Stuber, Joshua Klugman, and Caitlin Daniel’s piece, Gender, Social Class, and
Exclusion, examine the way social class status aids in exclusion within the Greek system. They found through narratives of both male and female students that, “Guys are not as focused on that (class status), Guys build more upon the people they knew, you know, whether it’s the sports teams they play on or the town they are from”(Stuber et al, 2011: 440). While this statement is tying masculinity/ membership to athleticism, it also examines the indicators of membership between sororities and fraternities. While there is some exclusion from fraternities, men in general, do not have to focus solely on network opportunities with women because they often are the ones to encompass economic, political, and social capital. This piece offers sorority
organizations as, “Consistent with their characterizations of females as being overly concerned with status and social class, students described sorority rush as highly exclusive”(Stuber et al, 2011:240). I would like to use this specific quote as an analytical framework to my thesis in that sororities are more exclusive because they are a social network that, once part of, individual women have access to enable their Sex capital and attain other forms of capital.
The culture of the university (norms, values, space and place) shape and maintain the power structures of Greek life. These theorists offer insight to understanding and questioning the system.
“To understand the world, you must first understand a place like Mississippi”
-William Faulkner
A middle-top tier fraternity guy, ‘P’1 texts, “Wanna do blow?” We have a history of sitting in his fraternity house doing lines of cocaine and writing our term papers together, occasionally sneaking off to have sex.
P picks us up in his lifted Ford F150. He has on a backwards black flat billed hat and a gold chain cross hanging from his neck. In the passenger seat is the head baseball coach of the university’s son wearing Kurt Cobain white sunglasses on inside the truck while its midnight and has on a green t-shirt. He is known to deal a lot of coke because he is ‘untouchable’ within the politics and system of the university and town. Myself and two other white girls pile into the backseat of the truck. He has custom detail lights inside his truck underneath the seats and they change colors with the beat of the music.
We get to his townhouse and there is an ounce of coke2 on the counter along with Sourheads3and an ounce of weed. I see camel cigarettes on the table alongside cigarillo rolling papers and lighters. On P’s iPad are 8 fat lines of coke, one for all of us. The talk is about music mostly, as we know each other broadly through attending the same music festivals.
We head to the kitchen counter to weigh the blow to 1 Name changed, P is known within the
Greek community to always have cocaine and Xanax(anti-anxiety pills that when mixed with alcohol usually cause individuals to ‘black out’ and not remember night). He is addicted to cocaine.
2 According to DEA, average ounce of coke is $1,300 3 Xanax pills bigger than the 2
euro coin, anti anxiety meds
A Difficult
Memory
3.1
make a sale to fraternity men coming to pick up their drugs for the night; after making a pickup from a cocaine dealer who is black and lives in a trailer home nearby. P rolls up a 100 dollar bill a personalized coke dollar to pick up coke. I lean down to snort a line, as I pull my head up, one of the boys reaches above the refrigerator and pulls a black handgun down. Me and the other two girls look at each other wide eyed and say “put it away!”. They laugh it off and reply back, “It’s not loaded and we each have a gun”. I look around and see another one underneath the table. Two black handguns sit on the kitchen counter. The brother of P looks at me playing with the gun and asks if I was a Bernie supporter and if I hang with “the niggers in Amsterdam”. I tense up. As I am looking at him and to the other two girls, I see a hunting knife on the counter. I feel unsafe, ignore him, and I don’t say anything about his racist slur. I feel ashamed. I internally fight with myself about how I replied: ‘no, they have guns and knives, now is not the time to combat their racism’ then I shift to, ‘if I am going to die for what’s right, so be it’.
The other white boys are screaming in southern accents how they “have to work like niggers” and are coked out talking very loudly and pacing around the house. One asks me where I am from and I say, ‘San Diego’. He says he went to San Francisco and didn’t like it because of “Them gays everywhere”. P says he is starting at his dads company, but has to start at the bottom “where all the niggers are”. I shift my legs as he says this sitting next to me pouring out another 8 lines of coke. I get up and begin to leave. ‘Awh liberal Kristie uncomfortable?’ P says to me as I begin to walk away. The other boys laugh.
This chapter will look to address both my second and third subsequent questions of cultural/traditions as well as whiteness in the institution. For a more detailed description of cultural capital in the space of the university town, as well as symbol significance of the
Space and
university, please see the beginning of the appendix.4 Statistically speaking, those in political and economic power are affiliated to a Greek life network. To grasp the depths of power within the political, economic, and social world of the U.S. According to The Atlantic, “Fraternity men make up 85 percent of U.S. Supreme Court justices since 1910, 63 percent of all U.S. presidential cabinet members since 1900, and, historically, 76 percent of U.S. Senators and House of Representatives, 85 percent of Fortune 500 executives, and 71 percent of the men in “Who’s Who in America”(The Atlantic, 2014). There is an overwhelmingly majority of those in political, economic, and social power who were members of the Greek community. Those in political power shape discourse on race, class, and gender. Greek life sustains political power and ideology by the networks and status that come with affiliation.5 Values and ideology shape discourse that affect stratified systems like Greek life. President Trump’s rhetoric ‘Grab her by the pussy’ and complete disregard for non-white lives empowers detrimental ideology.
4 The excerpt at the beginning of this chapter was an extremely confronting experience for me; I felt it was crucial to highlight the space, ideology, and power dynamic happening in this university town and subsequently, the Greek life community. The rhetoric of current U.S. politicians matters in terms of who and what values are being empowered.
5 A list of notable alumni from this university with political positions; most affiliated with a fraternity or sorority: https://www.olemissalumni.com/notablealumnilawandpolitics/
Ivanka Trump hires recent sorority
graduate from this university as assistant; https:// eu.clarionledger.com/story/business/2017/03/30/ ivanka-trump-hires-ole-miss-graduate/99824826/
‘Make America
Great Again’
3.3
To run a mansion-size sorority or fraternity house, there is an 8-10 member staff who cook all three meals in a commercial grade kitchen and clean the house. The staff of Greek houses are overwhelmingly African American women. Some are third generation workers (meaning their parents worked during Civil Rights Movement in 1960’s and grandparents worked before/during the Jim Crow Era6). The history and consequences of Jim Crow still haunts most sorority and fraternity houses. My own sorority house was built in 1941 but renovated in later years. The house still holds a ‘separate’ lounge area for the staff located on the first floor near the dining hall, which also includes a separate bathroom. Although the sorority speaks of this separation as ‘the staff having their own space away from us’, it is a reminder of the legal segregation design of Jim Crow Era in the south between African American staff and white sorority women. Staff typically sit outside the back of the sorority houses on their lunch or cigarette breaks, not in the front. This is an issue of space and visibility; rich white women sit on the front porches of sorority houses aloof to the harsh reality of those who maintain their house and lifestyle whom sit on the backside of the house. [Lack] of visibility of black bodies and lives matters in how the system perpetuates institutional racism and classism.
The dynamic of race in sorority space is blatant: white, rich, sorority women have lower income African American staff cooking 3 meals a day and maintaining the sorority
6 “The segregation and disenfranchisement laws known as “Jim Crow” represented a formal, codified system of racial apartheid that dominated the American South for three quarters of a century beginning in the 1890s. The laws affected almost every aspect of daily life, mandating segregation of schools, parks, libraries, drinking fountains, restrooms, buses, trains, and restaurants. “Whites Only” and “Colored” signs were constant reminders of the enforced racial order”(PBS)
The Ultimate
Divide: Race
and Class in
Sorority Houses
house. Some staff members arrive around 5 AM every day to begin meal preparation for breakfast. While this race dynamic is more unique to southern states in the U.S., it is not unique in terms of people of color performing intensive labor tasks for white elite. I wanted to include the personal narratives of the staff at my sorority, but some cautioned to speak about their experience because they are not contract workers; regardless of how long they have been working for the sorority, or how many preceding family members worked there before them.
There needs to be exposure of this structural unequal livelihood existing and exposure to perpetuation of oppression of black bodies. This is a significant criticism on class and space; white sorority women are paying on average $2,500 a year in dues, the staff who work 50-60 hours a week are not tenured or paid a living wage. Because sororities and fraternities are independently run within the university institutional system, they do not need to comply with university income standards.
Bourdieu stated, “Social class is embodied in every social actor which means that social actors engage in class processes wherever they are”(Bourdieu 1977; 1984). Sorority women, (including my own participation) engage in the stratification of class between the staff and sorority members by not rejecting and rebelling the current payment system. Lack of income and other job opportunities has caused generations of families to be sorority house staff workers; they make just enough to get by, but not enough to invest in other income opportunities. This dynamic is what shapes the Missing Class7 in American society.
7 “The Missing Class gives voice to the 54 million Americans, including 21 percent of the nation’s children, who are sandwiched between poor and middle class. While government programs help the needy and politicians woo the more fortunate, the “Missing Class” is largely invisible and ignored” (Newman and Chen 2008) My Own Archives
This also shapes broader American capitalistic structure which enables these multi-million dollar social societies (sororities and fraternities) to exploit its workers so they can easily maintain their power and class position.
The shared collectivity between NPC/IFC creates the bonding community of social and cultural norms that further divide groups into tier systems and network systems. I want to give acknowledgement to NPHC’s experience, but recognize that 2 pages in a thesis is not enough to show the disparities and experience for NPHC members. Miranda*8 describes:
“You can’t talk about gender without talking about race and you can’t talk about race without talking about class. I think it’s a way as campuses become more diverse, socioeconomically and racially, I think in some ways [NPC/ IFC Greek life] represents traditionally white spaces.”
Awareness of the intersections between class, race, and gender is pertinent to understand how and why the system of Greek life is existing. This points to who has the ability to access the cultural capital privileges that come with affiliation to the network. NPC and IFC have actual mansions on campus, an outward symbol of money and visibility.
NPC/IFC and NPHC exist separately for a combination of the above reasons. Historically, this university did not allow African Americans to attend the university until
8 Name changed for anonymity. She is a former sorority chapter advisor and a current fraternity chapter advisor as well as Professor of Psychology. She currently teaches ‘Gender in Greek life’ and has insider experiences that offers rich sociological insight to this thesis.
Disparities
Between NPC
and NPHC: White
Bodies and Capital
1962.9 NPC/IFC are 99% white members, who have had a century to raise finances to build and maintain their sorority and fraternity houses; an average cost of millions of U.S. dollars10; the first fraternity house was built in 1850 (New York Times). The economic stratification between NPC/IFC organizations and NPHC matters in how power is maintained as well as challenged at the university level; white sorority and fraternity members having this space allows for them to further perpetuate their power of classism and visibility through a shared symbols of space.
Bourdieu challenges the influence of educational institutions and the reproduction of social hierarchy
systems: “Definitions of functions of education ignores the contribution which the educational systems makes to the reproduction of social structure by sanction the hereditary transmission of cultural capital”(Bourdieu, 1985:48). One participant, a recent graduate from Wisconsin whom disaffiliated with her ‘middle tier’ sorority describes the culture of whiteness within the recruitment process:
“There are almost no black women [in NPC
sororities] for a reason. Because there are alum and women currently in the sorority who make it not happen and I am ashamed and embarrassed to be associated with that.”
This demonstrates the depth of institutional racism within the Greek life, and the construction of social hierarchy structure. Bourdieu’s description of cultural capital offers insight to how white women are overwhelmingly excluding
9 African Americans were barred from joining the NPC/IFC networks upon enrolling at the university (The ‘separate but equal’ period).
10 A southern sorority built in 2016 costing $13 million USD: http://www.wideopencountry.com/the-inside-of-this-13m-ole-miss-sorority-house-is-insanely-extravagent/
African American women “…the share in profits which scarce cultural capital secures in class divided societies is based on the fact that all agents do not have the economic and cultural means for prolonging”(Bourdieu 1985 29). Greek life capitalizes on, and reinforces the stratification between race, class, and accessibility. African American women often do not exist within the same social, cultural, and class networks with white women prior to attending university (which is structured in primary and secondary school). Racist ideology and values persist because the system is structurally designed to do so. A graduate participant from Wisconsin reflects on her relationship with a black football player:
“I dated a black football player. For the first year of knowing him I didn’t want to tell anyone, I only told my closest friends about our relationship. Girls in my sorority definitely didn’t even know that we knew each other. We didn’t go public in any way because I did feel embarrassed primarily because I was worried about what people would say about him being black. Because there’s an automatic stigma when you look at the fact that there are no black women in NPC sororities. And there’s no black men in the fraternities my sorority hung out with… Looking back, who fucking cares if I was getting dick down by a black guy?”
This excerpt shows how exclusive institutional systems like NPC/IFC Greek life perpetuate racist ideology and maintain the status quo of mating and dating as a white network; through the barring of black bodies and interracial interaction.
Whiteness and visibility is seen within the university’s athletic programs; the university is a Division 1 institution11. The two main athletic programs are American football and
11 D1 means the best athletic programs/ teams on U.S. college campuses. There are 3 Divisions of athletics at American university’s: D1, D2, D3.
basketball, where the university handles multi-million dollar budgets and revenue12 to support and broadcast these sport networks. Whiteness is most prevalent in these spaces: Saturday’s are football gamedays where the university
student body and local community come together to tailgate and pregame before the football game. A sea of white people join collectively together to watch majority black students play football. Inevitably using black bodies for the profit in athletic ticket sales; and yet, there is little welcome space for black students to participate in the culture of the tailgate.
The tailgate is a place for students and fans to celebrate their university and get excited for the football game. Tailgate spots are reserved the night before the game, but there is an unspoken rule of allowing people to keep their tailgate spots that they have had for decades. This perpetuates who can be in this space based off ‘tradition’. Whiteness exists until the football players (mostly African American students) walk through the crowd before heading into the stadium. This is crucial to note because white students and the local community watch the work and dedication of football players and yet they do not provide visibility and space for African American students.
These pictures show the sea of whiteness until the football players walk through to the stadium. These images are from Google and the above photo was the only picture I could find with African Americans in this space. The lack of visibility of non-white students and community population shows the severe stratification of bodies; boldly, the white population uses the black population as entertainment but are not coexisting with them.
12 $117 million USD in 2017: https://www. oxfordeagle.com/2018/01/29/ole-miss-athletics-generate-117-8-million-2017-football-nets-27-3-million-profit/
Students get ready for football players to come through the tailgate to cheer them on before game, (https://news. olemiss.edu/new-tailgating-rules-aim-enhance-experience-fans/)
Football players walking through the tailgate to the football stadium ; (https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/01/
sports/ncaafootball/tailgating- goes-above-and-beyond-at-the-university-of-mississippi.html)
This space is unique to American college football because female students are expected to wear dresses, and male students wear suits. The gender preference of attire further perpetuates gender roles and expectations of masculinity and femininity. As you can see from my own personal tailgate experience during my 4 years, there are only white bodies and women in dresses in pictures with me:
My own experience as well as my participants experience described the heightened double standard that exists between how men and women are expected to look. There is a term called ‘dad bod’ in which fraternity men have the pass to ‘let themselves go’ and not care about their appearance. Whereas sorority women are often attending workout classes at least once a day, fake tanning, getting their nails done, and watching what they eat. The ‘dad bod’ is culturally significant to this space and region of the U.S. because it applies beauty standards and expectations to women; while allowing higher tier fraternity men to have a pass on keeping up with their appearance. This differs from fraternity men at West Coast and East Coast male university students where attractive appearance and body matter. Fraternity men’s status association at university matters more than his gender display. Miranda*,
The Tailgate
and Gender
The ‘Dad Bod’
and Erotic Capital
3.7
3.8
the former sorority chapter advisor and now fraternity chapter advisor describes the dad bod phenomenon:
“I think the women on this campus are some of the most beautiful women I have ever seen. And I have taught at many schools…I have no idea what it is. And the men on this campus are some of the laziest in appearance that I have ever seen. It’s just interesting the care they take in their appearance is just non-existent. If I see an attractive woman in my class, it is not uncommon for her to be Greek. If I see an attractive man in my class, 50/50 shot if he’s Greek. It’s almost like being Greek gives the men a pass. Because they can trade on their looks for their social association with their fraternity. They have status so they don’t have to try.”
Miranda parallels the status association of certain ‘top’ tier fraternities and ability to not take care of themselves in exchange for their status of association with them (and their fraternity). Sorority women often strive to maintain the standards that the fraternity men have of them so that they can be asked to date parties and formal functions, in order to either maintain ‘top tier’ status, or gain it; incorporating Erotic capital with Sex capital offers insight to the ‘dad bod’ phenomenon. This can be further connected to Sociologist Katherine Hakim’s Erotic Capital theory; “Erotic capital is not only a major asset in the mating and marriage markets, but can also be important in labour markets, the media, political advertising, sports, and everyday social interaction. Women generally have more erotic capital than men because they work harder at it”(Hakim, 2010 499). Women who encompass both Erotic capital and high to middle-high status affiliation in Greek life, are the main power influencers within the system and use both these Erotic capital and status affiliation to enact their Sex capital. Miranda further explains how this can be happening:
“If we think of traditional heterosexual
relations what she [sorority woman] brings is attractiveness and fertility and he [fraternity man] brings status. He doesn’t need to be attractive, that’s not part of this exchange.”
The heteronormative mating and dating network of the Greek life system is further explained through Hakim’s theory; “…Men exchange economic assets for women’s beauty in relation to marriage and mating markets”(Hakim 2011, 503). Hakim’s Erotic capital claims her theory applies to both men and women but then goes on to state, “women have more erotic capital than men in most societies
because they work harder at personal presentation and the performance of gender and sexuality”(Hakim 2011, 504). Sorority women are aware of the double standard but often do not rebel seriously from it. An honor’s college senior whom disaffiliated from her sorority and is from the Mississippi Gulf coast further describes this phenomenon:
“[This university] is notorious for beautiful girls just dating these [fraternity] slobs. Girls aren’t even 10s here, they are like 12s. They’re ridiculously in shape and spend $100’s on clothing and products and keeping up appearances, and the guys buy a 30 pack of natty(beer) and get really drunk and smoke a bunch of weed and play video games and get fat and somehow that’s good enough for all these beautiful women”
Hakim’s theory further explains this particular
participant’s perspective: “Erotic capital is thus a combination of aesthetic, visual, physical, social, and sexual attractiveness to other members of your society, and especially to
members of the opposite sex, in all social contexts”(Hakim 2010, 501). Hakim’s Erotic capital also implies that because women have a greater ability to enact Erotic capital, they are more capable to transubstantiate their beauty into negotiations with men. This is similar to an extension I am
trying to create with women using their bodies and the illusion of sex or performance of sex to negotiate power imbalances and economic stratification with fraternity men.
Race, space, and culture dynamics shape the discourse and ideology communities encompass. These discourses are made by political and social officials whom often are or were affiliated with Greek life. Stratification between white and black bodies within Greek life and on the university campus (tailgate) matters in who is visible and how power looks like. Blatant division between white and black bodies (Greek house staff) demonstrate how institutional networks maintain racist and classist ideology. Gendered double standards of appearance (tailgate dress and dad bod) matter in what associations are used in exchange for status identity or affiliation.
I had decided to take a break from my interviews and head back to the all-student apartment complex I lived in my sophomore year as an undergraduate student. It was a particularly hot Saturday afternoon, with no sport games happening, meaning everybody would be going to the pool to drink beer and cool off. I arrived with a fraternity friend of mine with a 6 pack of beer. All around me were white sophomore and junior year students drinking beer, smoking Juuls1, and talking with one another. I noticed two black students in the pool talking with one another amid upwards of 60 white students. Next to the pool is a sand beach volleyball court. My friend asks me if I want to play. I have always been athletic and competitive and agree to be on a team. When I stood in the sand court about to serve, I realized I was the only woman playing. Across the net from me was a team of 6 white fraternity boys with southern preppy swimsuit bottoms and chewing tobacco in their mouths. Behind them were three white fraternity guys near a bush and drunkenly throw a cigarette into the bush, setting it on fire. As we were about to play, one of the other team members shouted, ‘Oh, so we’re gonna let girls play this game?!’
‘Making Men’ and ‘Making Women for Men’ are two divisions I will use to explain the gendered and heteronormative reality in Greek life. I aim to answer my second sub question on how the collective ideology maintains power and status between gender relations as well as what and how women are rebelling. Judith Butler’s, Sex and Gender in Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex further explains this gender construction, “To be a gender whether a man, woman, or otherwise, is to be engaged in an ongoing cultural interpretation of bodies”(Butler, 1986: 36). Hazing is a cultural process within the system of Greek life that makes masculinity. Miranda distinguished
1 Vape pens that are sold at gas stations that have become increasingly popular at this university and in Greek community.
Volleyball at
the Pool
Making Men:
Hazing
4.0
4.1
Chapter 4: Gender
between ‘Making Men’ and ‘Making Women for Men’: “I think the things that trouble me about sororities are different than the things that trouble me about fraternities. They are both tied to gender. What I find egregious
about sororities, and again, I have been complicit in it… It’s not about looking out for equality and making the best women, it’s about making women for men. My problem with fraternities, which is completely different, although related to gender, it’s about making men.”
Sociologist Kathryn Farr describes heteronormative structure of Making Men in her piece, Dominance
Bonding through the Good Old Boys Sociability Group,
“Within the confines of the male peer group, young boys develop a repertoire of behaviors and attitudes which define masculinity and affirm its superiority”(Farr 1988, 259).
How the system of Greek life ‘Makes Men’ matters in terms to understanding how and why women are participating in this system, and how and why women are accepting their gender roles (for the most part). Kathryn Farr describes the makeup of these men as, “white, upper class men in their productive adult years with established informal networks through which instrumental factors are exchanged and barriers to inclusion are erected”(Farr 1988, 264). Exclusivity is an indicator of a ‘man’ by ‘making it’ through the Greek life system. Men are first made when they accept a bid to their fraternity and accept the hazing traditions of the fraternity. Hazing is the intentional verbal and physical abuse of pledges through forced drinking and drug consumption inflicted by the upperclassman active fraternity members. Hazing is a toxic masculinity indicator that caused 1 fraternity alone to have 10 members die since 2005 (Chicago Tribune). Further, how Greek life determines the ways women become women, and men become men,
can be further explained through Butler, “To conceive of gender as passively determined, constructed by a personified system of patriarchy or phallogocentric language which precedes and determines the subject itself”(Butler, 1986, 36). Masculinity is derived from the opposite of femininity; the ways in which both men and women perform their gender is derived from opposing one another in the extreme form. Miranda 2mentions her viewpoint on hazing:
“Hazing is about man-making. They have to prove that they are a man. Masculinity is fragile. It has to be built and conveyed, because the opposite is feminine so we have to take away the feminine and make them men. That’s where the hazing comes in. We have to tear them down and build them back up as men…It’s basically like they weren’t a man before? I think that’s why the hazing that happens in sororities looks very different. You don’t see a lot of paddling, you don’t see a lot of forced drinking and servitude in quite the same way.”
The system of hazing perpetuates because it is a symbol in the system that an active fraternity man is part of the system and ‘made it through’ the process of being a man in Greek life. To make it through the hazing portion (usually 4 months) shows dominance and masculine strength to enduring the system, which is another reason it is so valued and respected by the fraternity system.3Fraternities sell hazing to pledges as ways of ‘bonding with your brothers’ and ‘becoming one’ together through trivial hazing practices (cleaning the
2 Miranda* and Haley* name
change, will primarily be referenced in this chapter due to their gender studies background and own personal experience in Greek life.
3 To note: the highest status fraternities (Top Tier) are the ones rumored to have the harshest hazing rituals for freshman pledges to become an official member.
fraternity house and driving active members to the bars) and harsher hazing practices (being paddled on their butt or forced to consume large quantities of drug and alcohol).
The roles the sorority women give off(dancing, performing, driving small cars, underrepresented in leadership) are counter to the roles fraternity men give off (sports, leadership roles, hunting, driving trucks). Fraternity men want other men to not only prove their dominance, but to also assert it.
Men who fail to live up to the norms of hazing and female sexual conquests face social exile and shaming. Butler explains, “The social constraint upon gender compliance and deviation are so great that most people feel deeply wounded if they are told they are not really manly or womanly, that they have failed to execute their manhood or womanhood properly”(Butler, 1986, 41).
Some men in a ‘top tier’ fraternity joked to me that they ‘were asked to make a girl fall in love with them as part of hazing, and then break up with her’. This not only encourages unhealthy and unstable behavior, but reproduces a heteronormative standard of finding and sleeping with a woman. Performing heteronormativity is an indicator to ‘Making Men’ and masculinity. Therefore, they are encouraged to pursue as many female sorority women as possible, the end goal, is shacking(sex). Some participants mentioned that the significance of sexual assault in Greek life is attributed by the ‘Making Men’ system. Miranda states:
“I think the sexual assault and rape that happens in fraternities is related to the man-making. Men are supposed to be sexual distant, but virial. As many women you can conquest as possible. So they take them in and tell them they have to prove ‘you are a man’.”
“Fuck Her
Pussy, and be
a Man About It!”:
Performing
Masculinity and
Sexual Assault
4.2
Navigating these performances proves to be
problematic for the community. If men are the status bearers and hold power/dominance, then they also shape the way in which other fraternity men, as well as sorority women experience their sexuality. This can also be seen in the case of fraternity spring formals, where fraternity men are expected to bring an attractive (sorority white woman) as well as shack with her. Myself, as well as every participant who attended a fraternity spring formal spoke about the intense pressure they felt to sleep with their date if they were asked. This underlying pressure for fraternity men to achieve a sexual conquest to prove their masculinity blurs the lines between consent to sexual experience and sexual assault. One participant, Haley recalls her experience at a fraternity spring formal in the shower:
“I got in the shower, because you know we had to get ready for the evening, and he was like, ‘how about I come shower with you’ and I was like, ‘oh I’m about to be out, you can take a shower next, I’ll be out in a minute’. Next thing I know, he’s getting in the shower with me and touching me…But he had that expectation because it has been talked about as an expectation. And so, kind of not taking no for an answer…he came anyways. I faced the shower the whole time and I didn’t want it the whole time.”
Haley disclosed she never had shared this incident and was fairly distraught speaking about this experience. What was more problematic was that she mentioned that most of her sorority sisters have had this same experience, a blurred pathway of consent that is not talked about by sorority women to their sorority. Women are aware of the blurred lines of consent at fraternity spring formals and the pressure men receive from their fraternity to shack with their date; and yet rarely are women addressing this phenomenon.
‘being a man’ in this space, while the women feel pressure to uphold the expectation of ‘being a woman’ and sleep with their date. Both parties are playing into the pressured gendered expectations of them to carry on the traditions of the system. Miranda shared her experience of giving a talk on sexuality and sexual consent to the sorority she advised, but then had mother’s report her for encouraging ‘deviant behavior’. Since this incident, there have been no conversations from sorority chapters on sexual consent before spring fraternity formals. She describes:
“And if you know things about your body, then you know when someone touches it in an inappropriate way to you, you can say ‘get your hands off my body’. But you have to know enough about yourself to understand that. You also have to believe that you will be believed and supported, and that your sexual autonomy, my mind and myself is just as valuable as his. And I don’t think they believe that. I think sororities in the south are for men. White southern women, we don’t want to empower them. We don’t want to tell them how their bodies work.”
The lack of discussion about bodies and sex is definitely an influencer to allowing fraternity men to control sexual spaces and experiences. Knowledge about bodies, pleasure, and limits, are absolutely essential in navigating consent. This advisor displays how women within the system are overwhelmingly not wanting to empower other women and educate on bodies. This university is also in a state of ‘abstinence only sex education’: consequentially, also the 4th highest teen pregnancy state, and 2nd state with the highest STI’s (CDC 2013).
Fraternity men also have this expectation because they spend a lot of money to go to a spring formal, and usually pay the room and drugs/alcohol for the weekend. Participants mentioned that their dates usually ‘played this
up’ to their dates as another way to get women to sleep with them. For a fraternity man to ‘be a man’ in the context of spring fraternity formals, they prove they have economic value to spend (up to $1000) as well as the ability to sexually conquest their date. A junior participant in a ‘middle tier’ sorority from California described her experience:
“I have been to spring formals where I have slept with my date, and others where I haven’t. And the one where I had not sleep with my date he was so mad at me that he did not speak to me the rest of the weekend or sit next to me on the bus ride back. It was a huge ordeal.”
These social constraints of gendered norms negatively affect both men and women to ‘prove’ their gender identity through their sorority or fraternity network. Women who rebel and do not sleep with their date are often the minority, and face confusion from their sorority sisters. Men who fail to sexually conquest their formal dates fail as a man and face backlash from their fraternity brothers. In light of Trump as president, men in particular are not only pressured, but encouraged to ‘grab them by the pussy’; current U.S. political officials encouraging this rhetoric are extremely harmful to severe gendered systems like Greek life.
Institution of marriage and emphasis on heterosexual mating acts as the precursor for sorority women
perpetuating gender roles. Sociologists Mindy Stombler and Patricia Yancey Martin explain this structure in their piece, Bringing Women In, Keeping Women Down: “The high pressure heterosexual peer group, central to women students’ everyday lives, transmits and produces traditional patriarchal gender relations”(Stombler, Martin, 1994, 152). In a system where majority of men still strive to be dominant and the ‘bread winners’, women often are forced into submissive roles as a means to navigate their partnership (marriage) in order to more easily advance their occupation
