From the Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/22/why-frats-can-throw-parties-but-sororities-cant/
A common urban legend contends that the rule was necessitated by old laws that defined dozens of women living and drinking under one roof as a brothel. The real reason is more practical: It’s way, way cheaper to insure dry sororities.
Cindy Stellhorn, a broker at MJ Insurance in Indianapolis (who handles policies for more than a dozen national sororities), said the party rules emerged at a time when society’s attitudes about women were more “provincial.”
As the broader culture changed, economics didn't. Insurance policies cost $25 to $50 a year per sorority member, Stellhorn said, but fraternity brothers, she estimates, pay up to $180 each. “They need more dollars to pay for the usual claims you can expect from young men who are drinking,” she said.
“Many sisters feel that because the fraternity brothers control the parties, the brothers determine sororities' tiers on campus and perpetuate a culture of exclusivity,” she said. “As in, ‘That chapter is hot — they're invited; that chapter's prude, so they can't come in.’ It's completely disempowering that the women are strongly encouraged to interact with the fraternities by attending their parties.”
Others say avoiding fraternity houses altogether might be the safest route. Two separate longitudinal studies have found that fraternity brothers are three times more likely to commit sexual assault than their college peers.
“I’ve been to parties run by girls, and they’re much more protective — they keep an eye on each other,” a George Washington student told the reporter. “At frat parties, it’s more of a hunting ground. Not all guys are like this, of course, but sometimes it feels like the lions standing in the background and looking at the deer. And then they go in for the kill.”
↧