GRSJ224/SexualizationofSororityWomen

Enforced Stereotype, Sexualization and the Bad Image of Sorority Women

History

The types of sororities people are familiar with today, originated as literary societies for women attending college in the late 1800s to early 1900s. These groups were accepting and encouraging of women while the institutions they attended were in the beginning stages of allowing women to apply and go to university. These organizations are mostly Christian based, specifically Catholic. The majority of the sororities found today under the Panhellenic Council were founded by the first women to attend American Universities. Through media and a shift in American Greek life, the once respectable role of sorority women has been altered drastically.

Exploitation in the Media

Sororities, or women's fraternities as it was once called, were considered groundbreaking at its time. Women were creating organizations were only other women could hold leadership positions and attend functions. This was a big statement on the campuses where female students were experiencing discrimination. With time and exposure through media, sororities have different reputations now. Greek life on campus is very different based on university, region and number of chapters. However, regardless of these factors, the same themes preside in each narrative. Sorority women are overly sexualized by mass media. In every movie, advertisement and character the women in question is seen as "slutty," "dumb" and partakes in heavy drinking. This stereotype is reinforced by movies such as Legally Blonde, The House Bunny and Neighbours 2: Sorority Rising. Sorority women are depicted as beautiful, overly sexual blonde bimbos. Even in films such as Legally blonde where the main character, Elle, works towards a law degree, she is still shown as a clueless and oblivious. There is also a "makeover" culture within these films. In the House Bunny, for example, the sorority women did not fit the regular stereotype, so they received a makeover to fit them into the norm. New outlets create similar narratives by only reporting the negatives the Greek system provokes. The reports of assault, hazing, excessive drinking and unintelligent comments are easy to spot, while large contributions Panhellenic women make to the nation is never mentioned. The media not only created a character of a sorority girl but a relationship she must fit into. The fraternity man is always present, usually a heavy drinker, womanizer and aggressively stereotypically male. The fraternity brother fits perfectly into the aggressive role of the man. In comparison, his easy, not very intelligent sorority girlfriend is always by his side. When the label of a couple is not relevant, then the pursuit of temporary intimacy is done in an incredibly sexist and anti-pro-consent fashion. The sorority woman is seen as something the brothers can just take. The media amplifies this message with degrading language and narratives that relate to sexual assault scenarios. This behaviour is justified by the "easiness" of the women. The costumes and image created allow views to be accepting of these actions since it looks like "she wanted it."

There is some evidence of sorority women altering their appearance as a result of the group dynamic and societal pressure. Some psychologists have found the college-aged women living inside one sorority house together created a culture of more traditional gender roles. The women's values and plans for their futures were more traditionally female in nature and this seemed to be a result of the Greek system. The dynamic between the fraternities and sororities is of a traditional nature. Men ask women to events, women wear men's fraternity letters to show alliances (these practices are mostly within the American Greek system) and the overall attitude men have towards women in the Greek system is unhealthy, to say the least. Fraternity men also showed more stereotypical "male" characteristics, values and beliefs around gender roles. This topic will be expanded on later, but the attitudes directed towards women do not just steam from systematic sexism. When sororities were first established the female leaders were revolutionary for their time. As Greek life advanced, the power women had gone down. Sorority women under the umbrella of the Panhellenic Council still maintain completely female lead organizations with many notable alumni and great world leaders. However, within the social dynamics of the Greek system, there was much power loss. Fraternities and sororities (or female fraternities as they were once called) started to co-exist in a traditional man/woman relationship. No longer were female fraternities something meant for the leading women in academia. The Greeks started to mirror the dynamics of the outside gender roles, and this tradition has mostly stayed to the present day.

A Culture Created by Mad Men and Reinforced by Fraternity Brothers

Fraternity parties are a common and regular practice at most universities in America, Canada and a few other countries. These parties are extremely high-risk events for potential sexual assault to occur. Not only for sorority women but for GDI's (a term tokened for students not affiliated with Greek life). It appears fraternity parties are another reinforcer of traditional gender roles. Firstly, the segregated environment of fraternity vs. sorority means the traditional role of men looking for sexual relations is initiated by them and only them. Women then are expected to welcome the aggressive approach, being the more passive gender. This example stems from systematic oppression, however, it has been skyrocketed by the media. Looking at advertising there is such an abusive culture around women in media. Media is one of the main ways to continue to flood the public with misinformed stereotypes and offensive material. Society, including fraternity men, continue to see these images, normalizing behaviour. This is not to excuse the expository or rape-culture created within the Greek system but to target the "mad men" in marketing producing this material. These men reinforce stereotypes and create content that works against so much progress that has been made, and fraternity brothers are following their lead. As a result, there are huge populations of men on university campuses who believe sorority women are theirs to "play" with of sorts. The media continues to exploit and push traditional gender roles, while sexual assault numbers rise.

Statistics

When compared with general female undergraduates, sorority women are three times more likely to experience sexual assault (Mohler-Kuo, Dowdall, Koss, & Wechsler, 2004). This study found that 33% of sorority women had been raped and 14% had attempted assaults. In contrast, non-greek women totalled at 8% and 6%. Fraternity houses were the second most likely location for these rapes. The most common locations were in off-campus private housing. Given that off-campus private residences often greatly outnumber fraternity houses, it is expected that fraternity houses would not exceed off-campus private residences in the frequency of rape. Fraternity houses accounted for 32% of the rapes in Minow and Dinolf’s study (Mohler-Kuo, Dowdall, Koss, & Wechsler, 2004). With this data, it is important to note they found fraternity men more likely to be consistent with rape culture attitudes and sorority women were more likely to victim blame. This again shows the power of exploitation of women and reinforced gender roles.

References:

http://www.ubcsororities.com/about-us/

https://www.npcwomen.org

Kalof, L. & Cargill, T. Sex Roles (1991) 25: 417. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00292531

Risman, Barbara J. “College Women and Sororities: The Social Construction and Reaffirmation of Gender Roles.” Urban Life, vol. 11, no. 2, July 1982, pp. 231–252, doi:10.1177/089124168201100205.

Canan, Sasha N., et al. “Sexual Assault Supportive Attitudes: Rape Myth Acceptance and Token Resistance in Greek and Non-Greek College Students From Two University Samples in the United States.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence, vol. 33, no. 22, Nov. 2018, pp. 3502–3530, doi:10.1177/0886260516636064.