The Five Questions Frezza Should Have Asked
Mr. Frezza,
I read your recent column for Forbes entitled, “Drunk Female Guests Are the Gravest Threat to Fraternities,’’ and accept your trolling request.
I realize many of your statements were not phrased as questions, but they lack useful solutions other than victim shaming and blaming, so I’ll chalk it to an oversight in appropriate punctuation.
Before I wrote this piece, I reached out to you for further comment. You sent the response and asked for it to be printed in its entirety.
First, I would ask that readers read the entire column as written and not just the spin, venom, and ad hominem attacks that it seems to be provoking. I stand by my words. And second, when everyone is done with their sport and the social media flash mobs move on to the next pecking party, that they consider the terrible predicament we have put our colleges and fraternities in – particularly the well behaved ones, as ours is – when we move from a regime of personal responsibility for one’s behavior to institutional liability. I have complete confidence that the men in my fraternity will comport themselves responsibly. I have no such confidence in their guests.
I agree with you, Bill. I think everyone should read your column in its entirety. Unfortunately, Forbes doesn’t seem to agree and confirmed to me that they removed your column, published earlier this week, from their site and that you are no longer a contributor to their program. The Internet saved cache has also gone down, but the fine team at Jezebel preserved your words.
Reading the full column is essential because you do touch on some valuable points:
— The dangers of pre-gaming;
— Advising fraternity brothers to be vigilantly aware of drunken guests and their interactions;
— The vague (and possibly counterintuitive) mention of reducing the drinking age to 18.
I have no personal reason to doubt that the fraternity you represent has done innumerable good for society and promotes the traditions of brotherhood they’ve pledged to uphold. It is unfortunate that fraternities often find themselves at the antagonist-end regarding many of the problems plaguing campus life today. And yes, at times fraternities are blamed unfairly as the result of the society’s tendency to accept stereotypes affixed to a largely faceless group.
Perhaps you meant the column to be some sort of FSA (frat service announcement), designed to encourage fraternity brothers to take responsibility for guests who have downed copious amounts of booze before attending a party by denying them entry and sending them home.
But back to the column – with answers to the questions that you really should have asked. I know you want to know why the current state of campus life remains in a state of disarray, despite your fraternity’s 22-page risk management manual.
You wrote: “In our age of sexual equality, why drunk female students are almost never characterized as irresponsible jerks is a question I leave to the feminists. But it is precisely those irresponsible women that the brothers must be trained to identify and protect against, because all it takes is one to bring an entire fraternity system down.’’
Question that you should have asked: Why aren’t drunk females stereotyped as “irresponsible jerks’’ when something bad goes down?
I’m sure other folks (not just feminists) have plenty of good answers for this, but mine is as follows: drunk female students are characterized as irresponsible jerks. Victim shaming is one of the main reasons why female (and male) sexual assault victims fear coming forward. The categorization of rape victims as “irresponsible jerks’’ happens and is appalling. It’s one of the pillars for greater awareness and education on college campuses today.
You wrote: “A recent incident at MIT’s Lambda Chi Alpha chapter in which a drunk female student apparently danced her way out of a window has, once again, resulted in a clamp-down on all fraternity parties.’’
Question that you should have asked: How did an allegedly drunk female dance “her way out a window?’’
Unfortunately, you dismissed a statement to the Globe (linked to in your article) from an attendee who claims the party in question was “dry.’’ There doesn’t seem to be foundation to your allegation that the female party-goer was drunk.
The same attendee also claims the third-story window did not have a screen. If true, it would be a city housing violation. Apparently these “freak accidents’’ are quite common, so much so that the city put a ban on large gatherings hosted by MIT Greek life last year. Perhaps clumsy accidents or a lack of window screens are the second and third gravest threats to fraternities these days.
You wrote: “But we have very little control over women who walk in the door carrying enough pre-gaming booze in their bellies to render them unconscious before the night is through.’’
Question that you should have asked: How do drunk females gain entry into fraternity parties — where they are then served even more alcohol?
As you note, it remains the brothers’ (or a hired bouncer’s) responsibility to decide who can and cannot enter a party. Enough booze to render someone unconscious can be identified. If the concern is so great, why not institute a breathalyzer test at the door? With that type of initiative, the next time there’s a reported incident, there will be no mistaking where the student got their booze from.
You wrote: “Yes, boozed up males also show up at parties, sometimes mobs of them disturbing the peace on the front steps. But few are allowed in, especially if they are strangers.’’
Question that you should have asked: Can you identify a drunk female as easily as you can identify a drunk male?
I understand it’s an unofficial rule of fraternities to pack their parties with as many female guests as possible – if only to even out the residential ratio. But why is it apparently easier to weed out drunken males at the door than females? Scientific American wrote about a study that concluded we actually have a difficult time recognizing someone who is drunk based on physical appearance alone. I assume this is regardless of gender.
You wrote: “I realize this headline is click-bait, but I believe it to be true.’’
Question that should have been asked: What is the real gravest threat to fraternities today?
That may be in itself the greatest threat. This is the fundamental flaw with your argument, blaming one specific party for the sake of simplifying a large problem and feeding into an opportunity for “click-bait.’’
Taking the same liberties you’ve enjoyed, I challenge you with this: Mis-education is the Gravest Threat to Fraternities. Until students, administration, parents, and the surrounding communities have a proper understanding of preventative steps and actions to keep our kids and institutions safe, students are at risk. That may be the one thing that you and I do agree on.
I reached out to Kyle Veldman, the current president of MIT’s Chi Phi, where Frezza serves as alumni house president, to provide a comment on Frezza’s column. I also reached out to MIT’s media relations department. Neither responded immediately to my request for comment.
The cached version of Frezza’s column is no longer viewable online, therefore I have reposted the original column, in its entirety, below:
Drunk Female Guests Are The Gravest Threat To Fraternities
By Bill Frezza, Contributor
Note: Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
I realize this headline is click-bait, but I believe it to be true. Let me explain.
I am the president of the alumni house corporation of my MIT fraternity. One of my responsibilities is working with our young brothers to identify and manage risks that could lead to a tragic loss of life, the bankruptcy or loss of our chapter house as a result of a legal judgment, or forced dissolution after serving MIT students for over 125 years.
A recent incident at MIT’s Lambda Chi Alpha chapter in which a drunk female student apparently danced her way out of a window has, once again, resulted in a clamp-down on all fraternity parties. Thankfully, she seems to be recovering. And while this may appear to be a freak accident, something like this could happen on any campus, at any dorm or fraternity party, wet or dry. Unless and until we address how student drinking culture has evolved in response to the very regulations designed to control it, incidents like this are not going to go away. As recriminations against fraternities mount and panicked college administrators search for an easy out, one factor doesn’t seem to be getting sufficient analysis: drunk female guests.
Before feminist web vigilantes call for my defenestration, I single out female guests for one simple reason. Fraternity alumni boards, working with chapter officers, employ a variety of policies designed to guide and police member behavior. Our own risk management manual exceeds 22 pages. The number of rules and procedures that have to be followed to run a party nowadays would astound anyone over 40. We take the rules very seriously, so much so that brothers who flout these policies can, and will, be asked to move out. But we have very little control over women who walk in the door carrying enough pre-gaming booze in their bellies to render them unconscious before the night is through.
Yes, boozed up males also show up at parties, sometimes mobs of them disturbing the peace on the front steps. But few are allowed in, especially if they are strangers. Plus, it remains socially acceptable for bouncers to eject drunk and rowdy males because our society rarely casts them as sympathetic victims, as opposed to the irresponsible jerks that they are. In our age of sexual equality, why drunk female students are almost never characterized as irresponsible jerks is a question I leave to the feminists. But it is precisely those irresponsible women that the brothers must be trained to identify and protect against, because all it takes is one to bring an entire fraternity system down.
Pre-gaming is a serious problem, both for the safety of the young people who practice it and the safety of our institutions in a litigious, nanny-state society. As I wrote in my recent column “Ban Kegs From Fraternity Parties? Require Them Instead!,’’ the best way to reduce the incentive to furtively chug half a bottle of vodka before going out for a night of fun is by lowering the drinking age to 18 while encouraging the consumption of beer over distilled spirits. Alas, this is not going to happen any time soon. And so, any time a fraternity hosts an open party, wet or dry, brothers must assume that the house will be filled with ticking time bombs.
Here are the things that worry me most. Any of them could result in organizational extinction, even if the fraternity never served the “victim’’ a single drop of alcohol:
Alcohol poisoning due to overconsumption before, during, or after an event. Death or grievous injury as a result of falling down the stairs or off a balcony. Death or grievous injury as a result of a pedestrian or traffic accident as the young lady weaves her way home. False accusation of rape months after the fact triggered by regrets over a drunken hook-up, or anger over a failed relationship. And false 911 calls accusing our members of gang rape during a party in progress. (Yes, this happened, resulting in seven police cars and thirty officers storming the chapter house.)
Here is what I recommend to my young charges:
Identify drunks at the door. I don’t care how pretty or flirtatious a young lady is; if she’s visibly intoxicated, don’t let her in. Although we were once reprimanded for turning away a drunk female student who ultimately required an ambulance when she passed out on our sidewalk, it would have gone a lot worse for us had she collapsed inside.
In addition to the usual bouncers, assign several brothers to monitor female party guests. If any appear out of control, walk them to the door and put them in a cab heading back to their dorm. You can send me the bill. If they refuse to leave, call for an escort from campus police.
Never, ever take a drunk female guest to your bedroom – even if you have a signed contract indicating sexual consent. Based on new standards being promulgated on campus, all consent is null and void the minute a woman becomes intoxicated – even if she is your fiancée. And while a rape charge under these circumstances is unlikely to hold up in a court of law, it doesn’t take much for a campus kangaroo court to get you expelled, ruining your life while saddling your fraternity with a reputation for harboring rapists.
And please, look out for each other. Do not let a drunk brother take a drunk female to his bedroom. During parties wet or dry, let the water flow – proper hydration and dilution is the best remedy for over consumption. Make sure there are filled water pitchers everywhere. Press them on intoxicated guests even if they resist.
Pre-gaming can be dangerous, but it becomes especially destructive to others in a world that no longer believes in personal responsibility—when a student, male or female, can blame a friend, a host, even a university, for the unfortunate consequences of guzzling half a bottle of booze before joining a party. No nanny administrators or well-meaning risk-managers can fix the situation after an incident has occurred, and besieged fraternity systems are particularly vulnerable. (When has a dorm ever been permanently shut down as a consequence of the residents’ folly?)
Unless and until the drinking age is reduced to 18, students relearn how to pace themselves while drinking, and individuals are held responsible for the consequences of their own behavior, rather than blaming the institutions that house and educate them, the only defense is extreme vigilance.
Bill Frezza is the President of The Beta Foundation, the house corporation for the Chi Phi fraternity at MIT.
To comment, please create a screen name in your profile
To comment, please verify your email address
Conversation
This discussion has ended. Please join elsewhere on Boston.com