I suppose I should apologize first for my use of the colon in my title. I was told that such fallacies are self-important and ostentatious. However, as a graduate in the political sciences, sometimes I cannot help myself.
I was reading an article in the New York Times today about marriage about what makes a good marriage better. The premise was summed up by the author nicely with the argument that:
"I started wondering why I wasn’t applying myself to the project of being a spouse. My marriage was good, utterly central to my existence, yet in no other important aspect of my life was I so laissez-faire. Like most of my peers, I applied myself to school, friendship, work, health and, ad nauseam, raising my children. But in this critical area, marriage, we had all turned away. I wanted to understand why. I wanted not to accept this."
I began thinking, what if we replaced the word marriage with brotherhood or sisterhood?
So often, once a brother (or sister) is initiated it seems to be the end of the line. When asked about what what defines a chapter, the word brotherhood comes up. If we take for granted that Fraternities and Sororities are not just vehicles to buy friends, then there has to be something about "brotherhood" or "sisterhood" that has a deep and meaningful impact in our lives. In many ways though, it is seemingly difficult to clarify through visits to 30+ organizations across the country and that to me is why this New York Times column was so interesting. Why are we content to leave brotherhood as a set of shared experiences embodied by our ritual and NOT challenge ourselves to Be Better Brothers.
I am going to apologize again, as I go forward, my pronouns will be Fraternity and gender specific (based upon my own) but should not constitute an exclusion to women, gender neutral organizations, or non-Greek groups as well. In many ways the arguments I seek to make here should be applied to any "assumed" relationship you or your social circles may have.
The first question I am invariably asked by most inquiring chapter presidents is "how can I fight apathy?" My response is almost always, "what do you like about being a brother of <<insert chapter designation here>> at <<insert school name here>>?" As I mentioned, brotherhood comes up. The "tightness" of a group and how close they are as friends is what distinguishes our chapter from every other Greek lettered fraternity on campus. Now, I'm sure if I asked other consultants and other groups, they would submit to me the same response. As a social Fraternity, I will not dispute that this is generally a fundamental part of our mission, especially at the local, undergraduate level. This response is certainly in line with everything I have been taught by recruitment specialists as well. "People recruit people" they say. Unless you are hazing your members (which is a whole other issue and for a discussion on Hazing please read both Kyle Hickman's blog and TJ Sullivan, of CAMPUS SPEAK, commentary), then there is no reason why you are not at least passing positive acquaintances with your fellow brothers.
But is being a good guy qualify you as a brother? Surely I have friends who are not brothers and I can absolutely promise you that not every brother I have worked with has been a good friend. The answer lies in how you define brotherhood to begin with.
Let's begin with so-called intangibles. Often times we all have difficulty in putting clear adjectives to our defintion of brotherhood. To quote Justice Potter Stewart in Jacobellis v Ohio, "[Obscenity,] I know it when I see it." Insofar as we meet “good guys” and don’t get creeped out by them, then we accept them as plausible candidates. The problem is that then we need to use the new member education process to get to know these men and thus it becomes easier to qualify them as outside of the brotherhood. This presents the basis of the hazing claim that the pledge is not a brother and therefore must "earn" his letters.
Instead, let us challenge that process and say that we won't give a bid to a man who has not already demonstrated SOME aspects of what good brotherhood is all about. Just like the "good" marriage, the "good" pledge maintains strong positives in academics, empathy, ability to socialize and have fun, honest, and loyal.
So, how does one challenge that paradigm and create a better brotherhood? The first aspect is labeling those good traits. Once you know what you're looking for, you don't need to force members through arbitrary activities that promote a false sense of loyalty. You can recruit the men you want, based on a set criteria. Once you have recruited them, you demonstrate those same qualities yourself. You hold you and your brothers to the same standards as those you bring in and set positive goals. You lead by example and you design activities and lessons based upon the principle that you want your new members to BE BETTER than yourself. You don't do the same traditions because you have done them yourself. Instead, you challenge the status quo.
Think about it like this, even when we're content to survive are we really a brotherhood or are we a club?
Ritual does not make brotherhood. Actions forge brotherhood. Knowledge forges brotherhood. Ideals forge brotherhood. Test yourself and your chapter with open an honest dialogue - about drinking, about hazing, about academic and personal excellence. Creating good brotherhood comes from creating excellence. Creating excellence cannot be accomplished through gimmicks.
The question for you is, what kind of brotherhood do you want? And how are you applying yourself to create a better brotherhood for yourself and your chapter?
Married (Happily) With Issues article from the New York Times
