100 Years Later " The College Fraternity"

The College Fraternity –100 Years Later

Take a moment, if you will, and think of the negative connotations associated with the average college Fraternity, or better yet think about why someone may not want their son to join a fraternity. What comes to mind? Hazing, alcohol abuse, failing grades, elitism, to name a few. Now, we all know, in large these negative connotations are not reflective of the entire fraternity experience but why is it that we cannot escape them? Rarely a year goes by that we do not see a headline involving men in Greek letters not living up to our values. We can get in front of the media as much as we want but no fundraiser, community service event, or reunion is going to gain as much attention when college aged men are exposed to risk due to their choice to join a fraternity.

Unfortunately, this is nothing new.

In researching for this piece, a proposed standing feature looking back at 100 years of recorded history in The Laurel, I hoped to find an amusing anecdote we could relate lightheartedly to today’s time. In the winter 1923 issue of the Laurel, a 123-page behemoth might I add, you will find a rather comprehensive list of the on-goings of our then 17-year old organization. This was before we had 150 chartered groups, prior to 100,000 members. The elders of the organization were 40. Still, in the twilight of the organization’s youth, a piece is published in this issue entitled: The College Fraternity by Miami brother Roger Smith, Miami 1908. Smith was notably the First National Secretary of Phi Kappa Tau, then Phrenocon.

In the piece, Brother Smith outlines succinctly the multiple valid arguments made against the concept of fraternity at the time. Losing focus on scholarship, lowering morals and spirituality, elitism, or “snobbery” as Smith put it, “Then there is the ever-present criticism of snobbery. It is common for someone to say ‘Harry and I used to be good friends until he joined a fraternity and now he rarely speaks to me... The fraternity man, of course will have the majority of his close friends in his organization, but he makes a mistake when he limits them to it.’

When referring to the lewd behavior of Fraternities, Smith had this to say, “There is no defense for some of the things done by some fraternities. Perhaps there were wild, exceedingly wild parties, gross immorality, drunkenness and any of the other sins of men. Reports of such things immediately stir up opposition and bring severest criticism.”

In summation, Smith was not a fan of the reputation that the concept of Fraternity had earned itself by 1923. I find it interesting that reading his words 100 years later, while some of his language may be antiquated, a lot of the arguments against fraternity are still present today. It appears it will be an uphill battle to have these negative images of fraternity become a thing of the past. Phi Kappa Tau must find a way to differentiate itself as the exception to these negative behaviors, and band together with other organizations to change the narrative. Brother Smith, myself, and likely anyone reading this probably doesn’t have the easy solution to reshaping misconceptions about fraternity. Perhaps the solution is in action, and not just talk.

“I have given only a few of the most common criticisms of fraternities, all of them at times founded in fact.” Smith wrote, “The wise organization will see that these and all others do not apply to it, and will exclude them by regulations or traditions.”

If only it were that easy, Brother Smith, but then again – maybe it is.