Fraternity Gang Rape

Sex, Brotherhood, and Privilege on Campus

Peggy Reeves Sanday

• Publisher: NYU Press
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9780814741207
• Topic: Scienze sociali
• Subtopic: Studi di genere

This widely acclaimed and meticulously documented volume illustrates, in painstaking and disturbing detail, the nature of fraternity gang rape. Drawing on interviews with both victims and fraternity members, Peggy Reeves Sanday reconstructs daily life in the fraternity, highlighting the role played by pornography, male bonding, and degrading, often grotesque, initiation and hazing rituals.

In a substantial new introduction and afterword, Sanday updates the incidences of fraternity gang rape on college campuses today, highlighting such recent cases as that of Duke University and others in the headlines. Sanday also explores the nature of hazing at sororities on campus and how Greek life in general contributes to a culture which promotes the exploitation and sexual degradation of women on campus. More broadly, Sanday examines the nature of campus life today and the possibility of creating a rape-free campus culture.

PART I

THE XYZ EXPRESS

One

Campus Party Culture

For entering students college represents a break from the restrictions of high school and family life. College life provides not only the means to prepare for a profession and develop intellectual skills but also the opportunity for developing independence and forging a self. Among the social traditions of interest to entering students is the sexual culture and the opportunities this culture offers for sexual expression. On many campuses the sexual culture includes the notion that sexual exploitation is part of normal male sexual expression.

In recent years we have learned a great deal about the prevalence of acquaintance rape on college campuses (see Warshaw 1988 for a summary of numerous studies). The most comprehensive study was conducted by Mary Koss and her colleagues in the mid-eighties. This national study of 6,159 students enrolled in thirty-two institutions of higher education in the United States reported that nearly half of the over three thousand women students surveyed had experienced some form of sexual coercion since the age of fourteen (see Koss et al. 1987). These women respondents reported several different types of sexually coercive behaviors. For example,

• 44 percent of them reported that they had “given in to sex play (fondling, kissing, or petting, but not intercourse) when [they] didn’t want to because [they] were overwhelmed by a man’s continual arguments and pressures”;

• 15 percent said they had experienced attempted intercourse by threat of force;

• 12 percent said they had experienced attempted intercourse by the use of alcohol or drugs;

• 25 percent said they had sexual intercourse because they “were overwhelmed by a man’s continual arguments and pressure”;

• 9 percent said they had experienced sexual intercourse because of the threatened or actual use of physical force;

• 6 percent said they had experienced anal or oral intercourse or penetration by objects other than the penis because of the threatened or actual use of physical force.

The problem of date rape and gang rape is not restricted to the college setting. A long-term study of female teen victims of rape found that 97 percent knew their attackers (Ageton 1983). Many teenagers believe that sex means “guys pounce on you, you struggle, then forget the whole thing” (quoted in Warshaw 1988, 119). According to a recent study of adolescents, aged fourteen to eighteen, “more than half the boys and nearly half the girls thought that it was okay for a male to force (that is, rape) a female if he was sexually aroused by her” (Warshaw ibid., 120, referring to study by Goodchilds et al. 1988). Additionally, high school social life, like that in college, is often centered on alcohol or drugs, which further exacerbates a rape-prone environment.

Contrary to high school, the college environment is usually a total world of living and learning. This means that colleges have more control over individual behavior than do high schools. Colleges also have the opportunity to educate students and the right to punish students who engage in rape-prone behavior. Unfortunately, few colleges choose to exercise either the opportunity to educate or the right to punish. In this vacuum we find that self-governing all-male fraternities can control much of the party life on some campuses. Sometimes at these parties a sexual discourse is transmitted and a sexual culture promulgated that makes sexual exploitation a condition of manhood.

At U., as at many other campuses, fraternities are the primary focus of party life because fraternities are more numerous than sororities and there are usually no other places on campus to party. Fraternities enjoy their superior status as places to party and use this fact as an incentive to incoming freshmen to become members. Because of their privileged social position, the sexual ethos publicly displayed during some fraternity parties may play an important role in shaping the sexual expectations of many young men whether or not they join fraternities. This ethos includes denial of any responsibility for sexual abuse that might take place at parties or in the dorms and projection of fault onto the women who come to the parties or participate in dorm activities looking for a good time.

It is important to understand that the privileged position enjoyed by fraternities is in part a legacy of history at U. For many years of U.’s history women were not admitted. Today the conspicuous location of fraternities along the spine of the campus, called the Walk, gives an unbalanced sense of the current representation of women in the student body, which equals that of men. However, equality ends with the numerical composition of the student body. The exclusion of women is evident in the predominantly male composition of the faculty and administration. At the time of the XYZ Express, there were twenty-five residential fraternities and four sororities at U. None of the sororities are located on the Walk. Their absence furthers the impression of U. as a predominantly male campus. Additionally, the prominence of fraternities along the Walk grants the fraternity subculture more visibility than any other subculture of students on campus, with the exception of the student-run newspaper.

The Walk is one of the first landmarks a new student encounters when first visiting or arriving at U. Winding past old, ivy-covered stone halls, the Walk is the main route through campus, connecting the dorms at the edge of campus with classroom and administrative buildings, the main library, the campus bookstore, and fraternities at the center of campus. In order to attend classes or almost any other function, most students make the trek down the Walk daily.

At first sight students are impressed by the contrast between the old, ivy-covered stone halls and the strikingly modern figure of the School of Business, the Center for Performing Arts, and the modern sculptures that dot the few grassy areas surrounding the Walk. Yet more impressive is the sheer amount of space taken up along the sides of the Walk by the various fraternities. Many of these houses resemble beautiful private homes rather than college living quarters; only the glaring Greek letters above the door and the banner painted with a skull and crossbones and the announcement “Party Tonight—10 P.M.!” reveal that these are fraternities. One massive stone house is built to look like a castle, complete with turrets and flying flags. Other houses boast ivy-covered stone walls, stained glass windows, and towers and columns, which stand in marked contrast to the industrial-like appearance of the twenty-five-floor high-rise dorms where most students live on the campus periphery.

When they first get to U., women students have various reactions to the conspicuous location of the fraternities. Some don’t notice it, or if they do, they accept it as part of college. Others complain bitterly, saying it is unfair that only males get to live so close to campus in such nice houses. Some women students avoid what they call the “gawk walk,” saying that they don’t want to experience the “degrading sensation of being gawked at by frat brothers sitting on their front wall or checking out the scene from their rooftop balconies.”

Fraternity brothers respond to complaints regarding their privileged residential status by pointing out that the houses are supported by many rich alumni who donate money to the university and who wield considerable political influence. The buildings are held by long-term leases, which would be difficult to break. According to one brother, the tradition of all-male fraternities on the Walk would be “more difficult to abolish than slavery.”

Another brother admitted that fraternities discriminate against women, saying, “It’s an irrefutable fact, and I agree with anyone who has levied this charge against fraternities.” However, he felt that it was wrong to admit women into membership. In his opinion, any man who says women should be admitted “either knows nothing about fraternities, or has missed one of the best times of a boy’s life, or both.” This brother likened being in a fraternity to being eleven years old again. He felt that the movie Stand By Me, about four eleven-year-old boys, was the best movie of the year, “as close to perfect as any movie can be.” He liked the movie so much because it reminded him of his fraternity life.

Not all fraternity brothers are comfortable about the advantages they have. One house on the Walk is coed. Another house declared that they wanted to go coed, but their national chapter wouldn’t let them. A brother at this house explained that if they went coed, the national chapter would “yank our charter and we’d be dog meat.” At present these are exceptions. Most brothers defend their status as exclusive all-male organizations with the advantages of beautiful houses on the Walk by saying such things as, “We were there first,” “Women have sororities if they want to join a house, so why should we let them into our fraternities?” Whether or not fraternity brothers recognize their advantages over their female counterparts, the fact remains that students walking along the Walk cannot help noticing that in five short blocks there are nine fraternities lining the Walk, with several more standing on side streets within a few hundred feet.

It is not only the actual physical existence of the houses that affects life at U., but, more importantly, the atmosphere they exude. On a warm day one is accosted by the sight of fraternity brothers on the steps and lawns of their houses and by the sounds of men talking loudly, often shouting out commentary at the passersby and blasting loud music through their windows. Whether women see the loud row of fraternities as places for great parties, or, as many do, a gauntlet of prying eyes that they must walk through, all students will sooner or later be affected by an atmosphere that ostensibly displays white, male, middle-class privilege. Women students frequently complain about the situation. On her first visit to campus, one woman’s impressions of the fraternities were very negative:

I first came to [U.] during the spring of my senior year in high school. I came with a friend who was also checking out prospective schools. As we walked down the Walk we passed a frat house where ten or so guys were hanging out front drinking and being loud. They leered at me and my friend as we walked by, and shouted out numbers, rating us and the other women who were passing by. They were being really gross with their comments. It made me think twice about coming to [U.].

Offensive remarks from fraternity brothers can do more than antagonize women students. Sometimes they are frightening. It is common for first-year students to go to fraternity parties because these are the most widely advertised and accessible places to socialize for those who are unfamiliar with the social environment. Freshmen women, ignorant about the fraternity culture, may enter some houses naively, expecting help and goodwill. Instead, they may be assaulted with stares and thumbs-up or thumbs-down gestures, indicating their sexual suitability. One student reported that when she went to a house looking for help with her homework from a fellow classmate, she was greeted by a nearly stampeding group of pledges and brothers, yelling, “Girl in the house! What the fuck!”

Many first year women express ambivalence about fraternities. They are happy to have been accepted at U. and are glad finally to be walking down the Walk as a student. They notice the fraternities and feel suspicious but are torn because they want to have a good time. They express curiosity about what goes on behind the imposing facades. They are particularly curious about the parties. Often they are warned not to go to a brother’s room and not to accept a drink from a stranger because it may be drugged.

Admission to the parties is usually a dollar or two for men, nothing for women. The posters advertising parties announce this with loud lettering, saying “Women Free.” The implication on many posters is that women pay for their booze with sex. On one poster a woman is depicted scantily clad with the frat dog tugging at the bottom of her bikini. Another, particularly offensive poster showed a woman’s pair of legs portrayed as a bowling lane with a frat brother depicted as the ball ready to roll down the lane. When feminists on campus objected to such posters, a rule was established requiring fraternities to get approval for party posters. This rule was later revoked in response to the objection that it infringed on the rights of fraternities to free speech.

Most fraternities have a large living room, which serves as a dance floor when all the furniture is removed. During a party the lights are usually turned out. It is difficult to recognize even close friends. The music is overwhelmingly loud making conversation virtually impossible. In one house the party centers around a “black bag,” a room in which the lights remain off and couples enter to fool around, miming orgiastic sex. Although nobody may actually use the “bag” for sex, its presence and the joking it invites establishes a sexually charged party mood. At another house, the centerpiece for one party was a model of a bride clothed in white and stretched out on the pool table with head back and legs open. The theme for the evening at this party was advertised as “Loss of Innocence.”

A centerpiece of every party is the bar. Before 1988, when a new alcohol policy was introduced by the administration, beer was readily available along with grain-alcohol punch. Everyone was served. It is known that to avoid causing sickness the best ratio for mixing grain alcohol punch is twenty-three to one. Most of the fraternities, however, mix their punch in a ratio between three and seven to one. Heavy drinking and getting drunk are the norm. Drinking serves as a social aid. It helps men to find a willing sexual partner. Many men say that they look for drunken women and encourage women at the parties to drink.

Most women who go to fraternity parties are not seeking sex. They want to “have fun,” see people, and “just hang out.” Many men, however, are looking for sex, and some men claim they join fraternities for the sex and the parties. It is unclear how much sex actually occurs during or after parties; there appears to be much more talking and bragging than actual sexual activity. As testimony to their major goal in giving a party, some fraternities advertise the occasion on other campuses where the women have the reputation of enjoying “one-night stands” with fraternity brothers at U.

During the party the guys “scope” for likely prospects. Blonde, buxom women heavily made up and wearing tight clothes are likely targets. A senior said, “I want a girl who looks friendly and who will come over and talk to me. I like a girl who wears clothes that reveal some of her body, so I can, I don’t know, so I can see what she looks like.”

A senior said, “I look for a girl who is having a good time and who looks at me in a certain way. If I’m just looking to pick someone up, she doesn’t have to be beautiful. I just have to like the way she looks and she has to be open to being picked up. She’s sending off signals that she wants me.”

Neither of these men is interested in establishing a relationship. “The whole idea is that they come cheap,” one of them said. “I don’t ever need to see them again unless I want to.”

Women at nearby colleges have the reputation of being “sleazy” and looking for sex. Sleazy means displaying a suggestive sexual attitude and looking “kind of low class.” A sleazy woman is scantily dressed, wears lots of make-up, and looks like she is “ready for action.” Men label a woman who fits this description “slut,” “cheap,” “hot,” and “fair game.” She appears sexually receptive and hence “wants it,” “is asking for it,” “is setting herself up,” “is looking to get fucked,” and/or “is sending off signals.” About one local college, a favorite expression heard at many fraternities is “Harkem, Parkem, Farkem in the Darkem.”

The procedure for picking up is as follows. A man sees a woman who is described as “fair game.” He determines this by “scoping,” which means “giving her the eye,” “choosing,” or “going on the prowl.”

“I roam around the room sort of looking at the girls who are there,” Mike said. “If I see one I like, I’ll stop and give her the eye and see how she responds. If she smiles or something, I go over and talk to her.”

He then approaches her and has some preliminary contact, which includes talking, dancing, and drinking. The men hope to “score” with her. Other terms for having sex are “having a fling,” “having a one-night stand,” “getting an easy lay,” “getting it,” “fooling around,” “screwing around,” and “getting action.”

“Part of it is just the thrill of getting an easy lay,” Mike said. “A lot of my friends do it just for fun.”

“It’s just screwing around,” another brother said. “The idea is that after you’re out of college, you don’t have much of a chance to do things like this. You know, just hang out in your house and get action on a weekend.”

If a brother “scores,” he goes upstairs to fool around or “get it.” Women students report that in at least two fraternities the brothers leave their blinds open so that others in the house can watch. Sometimes the door to the room is purposely left unlocked so that anyone can walk in. Women in the know at U. say that they would never go upstairs with a brother in these fraternities because they are afraid that others will walk in on them.

At one fraternity house, located on the Walk, the brothers use the terrace that runs around the second-floor of the house for a practice called “beaching.” From the beach, formed by the roof of the larger first story of the house, it is possible to see into the rooms on the second floor. “Beaching a girl” means watching a brother or a male guest have sex from this vantage point. The view into the windows is very clear, but it is not so easy to see the people on the beach. Thus, the girls involved do not know they are being watched. Usually, the male knows that he is being watched; indeed, he may communicate his intention to the brothers and leave the light on to make it easier for brothers to watch from the beach.

In most instances of casual party sex, the girl is expected to leave as quickly as possible. One young woman who was the object of “beaching”—a fact she discovered only when the phone rang and hands reached in from outside of the window to answer it—reported that the man involved never spoke to her again, not even to say hello. Joking about party sex in general, one brother said, “The definition of eternity is the time between the boy coming and the girl leaving.” About “onenighters,” another brother said, “I don’t want to know them, really. I mean, I’ll exchange a few words with them, laugh a little, but it’s all flirting and just joking around. If I want conversation I talk to the girls from [U.].”

Another brother explained that these sexual partners from another college are very willing. “They come to our parties because they want to fool around with frat men, and we’re glad to oblige.” The next day the brothers brag to one another, saying, for example, “She couldn’t talk because she had her mouth full.” In their conversation the brothers degrade both the woman they have slept with and the sex act by using such terms as “gashes,” “hosebags,” “heifers,” “scum,” “scum bags,” “queens,” “swanks,” “scum buckets,” “scum doggies,” “wench,” “life-support systems,” “beasts,” “bitches,” “swatches,” and “cracks.” This kind of conversation and the fact that the girls are out of sight on another campus serves the brothers’ need to “get it” without intimacy and to use the event to bond among themselves. It also means that there are no witnesses to the validity of their claims.

Campus women students do not respect the women who come to parties from other colleges. Their impression of these women is similar to that voiced by the brothers. Karen, a sophomore, said that these women s...