Every so often, a student paper is seized by the philanthropic impulse to present a pro and con opinion on greek life. Today's turn is taken by the University of Maryland Diamondback, which informs us that this is a standard praxis: "every other week, The Diamondback will publish a pair of opposing positions on a contentious issue from student groups and local leaders."
On the "pro" side for greek life is Matry Bock, president of the Interfraternity Council. He proffers a five-paragraph essay (what should be one paragraph on philanthropy is broken into two) that would make any high school English teacher proud: every paragraph is neatly capped by a topic statement, after which evidence is marshalled in short, declarative sentences to reinforce that point. The last sentence of the first paragraph states the article's thesis, and the first sentence of the last paragraph encapsulates the article's argument. It is therefore easy to crib Mr Bock's points straight from each topic sentence: (a) greeks raise more money for charity and do more community service than the average student; (b) "fraternities and sororities also make academics a top priority"; and (c) greeks are actively combatting negative stereotypes and practices, e.g., hazing, eating disorders, drinking and sexual assault. Yay greeks!
On the "con" side comes Stefanie Williams, who seems to confine her comments to sororities. And her comments are actually quite thoughtful, outlining why she ultimately dropped out of her pledging process and regularly averring that sororities can be fun, prosperous, healthy institutions. Certainly she rakes over some pointedly harsh moments of hazing involving raw onions and midnight roll calls, but she isn't piling on body blows gratuitously. Her point is personal—that sororities aren't for everyone—not prescriptive:
Am I telling all my readers not to rush, not to join a sorority? Of course not. Some girls love it. Some girls make the best friends they'll ever have in their houses. Houses do a lot of philanthropy work, and I'm sure a lot of girls have the time of their lives.
Your correspondent comes away from this point-counterpoint sympathetic to the "con" side, not because Ms William's points were more accurate but because they are presented with much greater earnestness. Since her point is nuanced, allowing for differences of opinion and only explaining her own decision-making, it's easy to take her side. And her final admonition is one anyone can adopt: "above all, stand up for yourself."
As promised in the past for such colloquies, the title link goes to the better argument.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment