Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site mit-vax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!mit-vax!csdf
From: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Newsgroups: net.college
Subject: Re: A \"frat-boy\" takes exception...
Message-ID: <1208@mit-vax.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 26-Nov-85 04:08:45 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-vax.1208
Posted: Tue Nov 26 04:08:45 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 27-Nov-85 06:22:17 EST
Reply-To: csdf@mit-vax.UUCP (Charles Forsythe)
Organization: MIT, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 33
Summary: 

>Mr. Gerber, if fraternities are more conformist that some dorms, perhaps
>that happens because people *choose* to join a fraternity and the fraternity
>*chooses* to offer a student a place in their house; this choosing process 
>tends, without effort to the contrary, to breed homogeneity, or else a few
>small cliques. 

I don't buy that for a picosecond. Not even a femto-second. Fraternities
have, and always will, choose those they feel will "fit in". Only in a
sitf-com or a movie would a frat rush director say,"Gee, we have too many
athletic, social and good-looking brothers, let's pledge some pimply,
wierd nerds!"

>Outside, the fraternity is a unit; inside, the fraternity is
>individuals, each exercising his own tastes.

Nobody said that a frat WASN'T a group of individuals, but instead, Mr.
Gerber and I claimed that fraternities have sort of a "Gaussian" social
make-up and many MIT frats, such as "Number 6" have a particularly small
"standard deviation".

>My fraternity was large and *diverse* enough that there was always
>someone driving where I wanted to go, or a large enough crowd to go out with.

Not all of the fraternities are as large as ZBT.

I think your point that "not all frat guys are beer-swilling jocks" is a
very important one, but let's face it, non-conformity on an individual
basis is not a major component of the fraternity ideal.


-- 
-Charles