On Feb. 9, a Daily Illini article described how a handful of fraternity chapters had been revoked of recognition. This article ran the same day as one titled, “Police release second notice in a week for sexual assault at a fraternity.”

Yet, the former Daily Illini article failed to mention any of the sexual assault allegations at fraternities. In addition, it failed to note that eight fraternities on campus are currently under formal sanctions from the University. Three are still on campus, although they have various limitations on their conduct due to the sanctions. In comparison, only one sorority is currently under sanction from the University.

Sexual assault is a problem across many campuses, including this one, regardless of whether one is in a fraternity or sorority. In 2015, the Office of Student Conflict Resolution formed the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct specifically to handle cases on sexual misconduct; it is separate from the Subcommittee on Undergraduate Student Conduct.

That same year, there were fifteen cases of rape reported campus, half of which occurred on campus. In addition, there were twenty-nine cases of sexual misconduct reported to the Subcommittee on Sexual Misconduct at the Office of Student Conflict Resolution. However, the number of actual cases may be higher, as about half of men and women report sexual assault, even less report sexual harassment, according to a University survey.  

Every university struggles with sexual misconduct, and Illinois is no different.  Fortunately, Illinois tends to be about average when it comes to these problems. Surveys of UIUC students indicate that a majority of students feel comfortable reporting cases of sexual assault.

However, there is a large difference between men and women. While 83 percent of men believe that the University takes reports of sexual misconduct seriously, 69 percent of women think the same. Although this difference may not seem like much, it’s over a 10 percent difference. Women on campus are more likely to be victims of sexual misconduct and do not feel as confident that the University will handle it appropriately.

The University has made strides in handling sexual misconduct; for example, the Student Code states that consent is a verbal yes, not the absence of a “no.” Understanding consent is crucial for preventing sexual misconduct.

One key difference that may be linked to both the lack of issues with sororities and the continuing problems with fraternities on campus is that National Panhellenic Conference allows fraternities to host parties with alcohol, while sororities cannot unless partnered with a fraternity.

Alcohol is a known factor that increases the risk of sexual assault. However, this does not mean that it is an excuse. Rather, by only allowing fraternities to throw parties, the National Panhellenic Conference has put sorority members at greater risk to be sexually assaulted. Research shows that men in fraternities are more likely to commit sexual misconduct, and women in sororities are more likely to be assaulted, compared to their peers who do not participate in Greek Life.

Some have argued that universities should consider banning fraternities. However, the current conduct by houses without recognition, including those interviewed for the DI article, seems to indicate that this is a faulty solution. Banning fraternities might, in practice, mean the same as revoking recognition.

This means that houses could still recruit and hold parties; they just aren’t recognized by the University. Banning is, therefore, not a good solution because it makes the behavior of fraternities and sororities unaccountable. Instead, fraternities and sororities need to commit to being part of the solution.

While fraternities and sororities have done good philanthropic work, a legacy of houses ousted for botched parties and sexual misconduct has left their reputation in this community damaged. Some advocates argue for making all fraternities co-ed or enabling sororities to host events with alcohol. However, these solutions are inadequate.

Women are not and should not be forced to be a “civilizing” force for men. This is demeaning to both men and women. Women should not have to police men’s behavior or play the role of a mother. Similarly, enabling sororities to host events with alcohol is not a solution by itself. Binge drinking remains a problem among young adults, particularly those on college campuses. Binge drinking at a sorority can still lead to bad outcomes.

If fraternities want to change their reputation on campus, they need to commit to changing their behavior. Fraternities need to publicly embrace the definition of consent put forward by the University.

They need to commit to making sure that members complete FYCARE and go a step further by having members complete bystander intervention training. Fraternities, sororities and all students need to commit to changing the culture of binge-drinking that is often associated with sexual misconduct.

We can change this University and make it great place for everyone to be, but that is not possible if we ignore the problems that student organizations perpetuate on campus.

Mary Grace B. Hébert is a Ph.D. student in the Department of Communication at UIUC. She is a member of Advocates for Choice.

Elisabeth Larson is a senior in Community Health within the college of Applied Health Sciences at UIUC. She is the President of Advocates for Choice.