Introduction
For numerous college students in the United States, the entirety of their social lives is dependent on Greek life. John Finley Scott, an emeritus professor of sociology at the University of California, Davis, states how sororities can dominate one's social life (523). These organizations take up most of students' time, inside and outside of the classroom, though a majority of this social time is not spent benefiting the students. According to Henry Wechsler, a psychologist and public health researcher at the Harvard School of Public Health, 83% of fraternity or sorority members experience sexual assaults, property damage, and sleep disruption, all due to drinking (Wechsler 204, 208). Drinking is a leisure activity seen in numerous Greek organizations among colleges, often resorting to abuse of alcohol, causing students to act impulsively, therefore harming themselves and others. Likewise, another harmful action seen in Greek organizations is hazing. According to the credited International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 53% of sorority and fraternity members are subjected to hazing. Hazing is an activity involving alcohol consumption, humiliation, and sex acts (Allan and Madden 6). This percent shows that a majority of students are negatively affected through their participation in Greek organizations. This percentage is even higher than stated because this study is limited by not including Blacks, Asians, and Latinos, who are often excluded from Greek organizations. Furthermore, according to a paper produced by Tennessee Tech University, across over 800 college campuses, about 750,000 students participate in Greek life (Easton). This large number expresses the importance of these issues that arose over time in Greek organizations. While some Greek organizations try to preserve their original values, too many have deviated from their original intention, making it difficult for Greek life organizations to return to their original purpose.
Original Intention
According to Edward G. Whipple, an interim vice president for campus life at Lake Forest College, and Eileen G. Sullivan, a Pulitzer Prize winning American journalist, colleges had a formal curriculum that lacked intellectual excitement and social freedom, causing students to form debating societies and literary clubs (8). These associations were seen as ways to escape from strict structures implemented by colleges. Additionally, according to Craig L. Torbenson, a professor of geography in the history department at Wichita State University, these groups did more than provide an escape from schooling; they created a compact brotherhood and sisterhood for friendship (38). In agreement with Torbenson, Scott states that sororities were founded to provide a sense of family and social connection for women in college by providing them a home-like environment (525). Both concur that Greek life was founded on the desire to recreate a family unit, allowing students to enhance their social lives. While benefiting students' social lives was a major impact from these organizations, maintaining a strong education was still important to students. Between 1760 and 1860, literary societies and debating clubs were the most popular organizations, often becoming more important than the college curriculum itself (Torbenson 37). In addition to forming organizations based on educational similarities, groups were also formed based on cultures. For example, according to research by the credited Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, Black women joined sororities to build community, as they served as safe social support spaces for women where their voices were heard (Greyerbiehl and Mitchell 284-288). Students were able to connect with each other based on common interests, allowing for the foundation of all organizations later to come. Furthermore, Greek life sought to expand students’ rights, provide activities for students, and correct perceived wrongdoings from college administrations (Torbenson 38). This activism was counterproductive. It addressed issues in unsuitable ways, resorting students to disruptive behaviors.
Greek Organization Lifestyle
Despite their original intent, colonial colleges were strict and left students with a long list of “dont’s,” preventing freedom to deviate from a routine considered as “‘pay, pray, study, and accept”’ (Torbenson 35). The credited Journal of American Ethnic History adds on by mentioning that Greek organizations served as a form of rebellion against the strict and rigid American college life (Sanua 7). Both sources agree that college life limited students' freedom they craved, causing students to act out. While some activities students participated in were harmless, others expressed that students were not enjoying their time in rigid school structures. Activities included: drinking, smoking, playing cards, singing, and womanizing (Torbenson 38). Activities such as playing cards created community, while others, particularly alcohol, became unruly. Adding on to Torbenson, Whipple and Sullivan state that Greek life still has some of these activities today, such as binge drinking, alcohol abuse, and hazing, which schools are unable to address (11,14). Inability to address these issues, now prevalent pastimes, facilitates their persistent growth. Additionally, students wanted to be involved with their organizations as much as possible. In fact, many procrastinated on their school work in order to be more involved with their sororities. This procrastination was partially to go to social gatherings, but also to maintain the reputation that sororities were organized and involved in community service (Greyerbiehl and Mitchell 289). Despite Greek life being founded upon education and good deeds, students deviated from this system through alcohol and drugs, despite still wanting to uphold a positive reputation to the outside world.
Exclusion
As Greek life evolved over time, values shifted too. Although originally made to foster a positive learning environment, the environment experienced by students was not so glamorous. According to research by the credited Journal of Higher Education and Student Affairs, the Greek system was not created to benefit students of color, often excluding them (Banks and Archibald 28). Susan Mongell, a business and economics professor at California University of Pennsylvania, and Alvin E Roth, a Nobel Prize-winning American economist, add on to Banks and Archibald by stating that sororities had a preferential bidding system where they ranked applicants based on characteristics they desired; this system is still in use today (441). This system is extremely exclusive, as numerous are denied membership based on race, religion, and ethnicity. Furthermore, this exclusion is seen today, especially through sexism and racism, therefore contradicting universities’ original values (Whipple and Sullivan 11). As people formed groups based on common interests, oftentimes unassimilated individuals were excluded, fostering the exclusive involvement seen on numerous campuses today. An example of exclusion from the late 1920s, as antisemitism was on the rise, showed a Christian fraternity that denied membership of those with ⅛ Jewish blood (Sanua 9, 15). Torbenson adds on to Sanua by stating that in the late 1800s and early 1900s, many fraternities only accepted white, male, Protestant students because they thought of them to be like minded (52). The idea of forming homogenous groups excelled in popularity, causing many of the excluded to come together and form their own groups. Fraternities used to admit some women, but would not give them full membership, causing women to create their own organizations; the first of this kind was seen at Wesleyan in 1851 (Torbenson 41). The expansion of Greek life may not have expanded for the right reasons, but today it allows for diverse people to have an easier time finding their place in college.
Conclusion
Looking at the evolution of Greek life reveals that the original intent of these organizations did not turn out to be the reality. Research shows that Greek life intended to enhance students' social lives by giving them an outlet of freedom from an inflexible schooling structure. As this structure was manipulated over time, students abused schools’ values, and this abuse has lingered into the present day. By putting this historical context into a modern perspective, it becomes clear that work needs to be done to ensure students in universities feel safe, happy, and accepted. Recognizing how issues among Greek life persisted over time is crucial for pinpointing solutions that guarantee that current and future college students thrive in environments that foster learning and success.
Works Cited
Allan, Elizabeth J., and Mary Madden. “The Nature and Extent of College Student Hazing.” International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, vol. 24, no. 1, 1 Mar. 2012, pp. 1–8. National Library of Medicine, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22909916/, https://doi.org/10.1515/ijamh.2012.012.
Banks, Shamiece A, and James Archibald. “The State of Fraternity and Sorority Life in Higher Education.” Georgia Journal of College Student Affairs, vol. 36, no. 1, 1 July 2020, pp. 24–32. Journal of Higher Education and Student Affairs, digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=gcpa, https://doi.org/10.20429/gcpa.2020.360103.
Easton, Chelsea. “Greek Life on Campus: A Data-Driven Look at the Impact on College Students.” The Oracle, Tennessee Tech University, 28 Feb. 2025, www.tntechoracle.com/2025/02/28/greek-life-on-campus-a-data-driven-look-at-the-impact-on-college-students/.
Greyerbiehl, Lindsay, and Donald Mitchell. “An Intersectional Social Capital Analysis of the Influence of Historically Black Sororities on African American Women’s College Experiences at a Predominantly White Institution.” Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, vol. 7, no. 4, 2014, pp. 282–294, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037605.
Mongell, Susan, and Alvin E Roth. “Sorority Rush as a Two-Sided Matching Mechanism.” The American Economic Review, vol. 81, no. 3, 3 June 1991, pp. 441–464. EBSCO, research.ebsco.com/c/c5rtnt/viewer/pdf/4cmon6n74j.
Sanua, Marianne R. “Jewish College Fraternities in the United States, 1895-1968: An Overview.” Journal of American Ethnic History, vol. 19, no. 2, Jan. 2000, pp. 3–42. EBSCOhost, research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=edaeae52-bde7-3df8-9010-7d8ccd27aece.
Scott, John Finley. “The American College Sorority: Its Role in Class and Ethnic Endogamy.” American Sociological Review, vol. 30, no. 4, Aug. 1965, pp. 514–527. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/2091341.
Torbenson, Craig L, et al. “The Origin and Evolution of College Fraternities and Sororities.” African American Fraternities and Sororities, 2nd ed., University Press of Kentucky, 2012, pp. 33–62. JSTOR, www.jstor.org.libezproxy2.syr.edu/stable/j.ctt2jcq14.6.
Wechsler, Henry et al. “Trends in College Binge Drinking during a Period of Increased Prevention Efforts: Findings from 4 Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study Surveys: 1993–2001.” Journal of American College Health, vol. 50, no. 5, Mar. 2002, pp. 203–217. PubMed, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11990979/, https://doi.org/10.1080/07448480209595713.
Whipple, Edward G, and Eileen G Sullivan. “Greek Letter Organizations: Communities of Learners?” New Directions for Student Services, vol. 1998, no. 81, 1998, pp. 7–17, https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.8101.
