Fraternities Are Misogynistic

Generally speaking, fraternities embody some of the most misogynistic social groups on college campuses. There is an eloquent example of this seen in the letter to the editor in the April 9 issue of The Spectrum titled "Hazing Is Normal in College."

I am slightly baffled why feminism was declared the culprit of the end to masculinity. I am also baffled about what this claim has to do with the hazing of pledges.

The letter's poetic "castration of America" phrase is not applicable in this context because pledges are not made masculine through the pledging process. As regurgitated as this sounds, it is fact that throughout the centuries, females have been placed in submissive roles. When pledges are hazed and humiliated, they too are placed in submissive roles. Aren't fraternity members, in essence, feminizing them instead of making them masculine? There is a power struggle at play here and the credibility of that struggle is at stake when we limit hazing.

The letter asks females "do you really respect a man who you think can't handle adversity?" Hazing is male-to-male role-playing of an abusive relationship. Except when women in domestic abuse situations are blamed for enduring the abuse, fraternity members congratulate each other on their endurance.

Males and females are facing what the letter calls "adversity" in this situation, yet males receive some sort of glory in the form of masculinity. Imagine the way a woman in an abusive relationship feels when she reads the letter that states "there is nothing wrong with a little abuse and humiliation among friends." Females are not considered masculine for enduring "abuse and humiliation among friends." They are seen as pathetic.

The letter also claims "without masculinity there is no femininity, and that is why chivalry is dead." What does that even mean? The claims are vague and unjustified. The obscure claims and poetic language confuse the issues. By limiting hazing as a practice, one loses authority over pledges and becomes threatened by it.

The issue that I believe underlies the letter's distain for the "feminine trend" is simply that the author sees a loss of privilege reflected in the advancement of women and its glaringly similar loss the author faces in regards to his hazing privileges.