let’s talk about the email

@ItIsReal

First of all, the comment you are replying to is suggesting the email might be fake. You failed to respond to that.

Second, you are making some enormous jumps. Are there fraternity men who are very comfortable and don’t like having that comfort threatened? Yes. Do most fraternity men think “women should just shut up”? No.

Third, it’s hilarious that you’re complaining about a comment that was clearly inflammatory being deleted, while post after post on this site that asks to have an open conversation is removed by people who are afraid of contrary opinions. Stop with the holier-than-thou business.

“@ItIsReal”
^ to hammer the point home, it’s real. I’m trying to point out that the post seems ridiculous, but if you really look at what he wrote it’s inline with predominant lines of thinking in fraternities.

You can call it comfort, but I would the 100+ assault allegations some of these houses (SAE the most prominent among them) violent intimidation. “Shutting someone up“ IS the euphemism. “Comfort” is gaslighting.

Softening the language to something as weak as “comfort” obscures the reality of what’s going on. I am very familiar with the types of things fraternity members say about women on this campus. While still being distasteful and disrespectful, that letter was a higher brow deflection. That was his point, to editorialize his way into legitimacy. It backfired because it lacked substance.

Quoting philosophers obscures the deflection taking place: he wants people to stop posting about the frat’s atrocities on Instagram.

I can’t speak to what does or doesn’t get deleted by who. I know for sure mine was and I was directly responding to that. I agree deleting content is bs.

To be clear, I am holier than someone that values male friendship over women’s safety. It’s a low bar.

So your argument is that "it's real because it is"?

Listen, if it's real (and I totally believe it is) I don't see anyone defending that sort of thinking or behavior. I've seen universal condemnation of it, and any member who was okay with it should face consequences.

Your comment, however, is mainly just using big words that don't mean much. The point of the letter was clearly to defend his organization (probably wrongfully) and to vent about the supposed injustice done to his organization (again, they deserve it).

You went from one very ignorant and hateful email, inspired by fear about his organization being attacked, to the conclusion that somehow TON of frat guys have a massive conspiracy against women's rights.

I have seen 0 greek life members who are against the reform/abolition debate. I have seen time and time again abolitionists who think the existence of a conversation is offensive.

A couple things I don't really understand your usage of:
- "gaslight" - you could argue that what I said was "understatement" or maybe "ignoring the real issue", but gaslighting does not mean anyone arguing with you.
- "lowbrow" and "higher brow" - I'm really confused how you're using these terms tbh
- "euphemism" - I'm not really sure what "shutting someone up" is a euphemism for

1) First off thank you for having a conversation. I can tell you are thinking about this as much as I am.

So your argument is that "it's real because it is"?
-You claimed I failed to address if the email was real or not. I responded by pointing out I made a very clear claim that "it is real," then saying I showed how it fits in with other actions/statements to claim it is not even uncommon thinking, let alone so ridiculous that it's fake.

If you do not believe that's the common line of thinking, I'd encourage you to look at those who are speaking out about the way fraternity members responded to their concerns. Better yet, if you have women friends that would feel comfortable discussing their experiences, have that conversation. I'd recommend letting them speak and just listening, because it is really hard to speak about trauma.

Listen, if it's real (and I totally believe it is) I don't see anyone defending that sort of thinking or behavior. I've seen universal condemnation of it, and any member who was okay with it should face consequences.
-WashU's first climate survey was in 2015. The next was 2019. They are both on WashU's Title IX page. If it assault really is condemned/punished and this was publicly available information in 2015, then the number of assaults in fraternity spaces should have gone down from 2015 to 2019, not up. That's probably oversimplifying math, but let me know if you'd be interested in some of the scary behaviors and defense I've seen. It is really hard to wrap my head around, because I really do love some of my friends in fraternities. It is sometimes impossible to believe they think that way. But unfortunately, a majority of my frat friends (spread out across grades and chapters) do think that way.

Personally I'm not for punishing people that support ignorant beliefs. All for punishing harmful actions. All for critiquing ignorant beliefs and people. Only an insecure person finds genuine critique threatening. (unrelated aside: I don't think either of us are insecure about this, tbh. Maybe the censors will wipe this thread then, haha).