Tony Meyer 2

Basketball and Barbeque: My Experience in a Fraternity

Every year for Christmas I ask my mom for a brother. My request went through cycles of joking and real desperation. No, my mom is not giving me a brother for Christmas. But, my request, regardless of my motivation behind it, points to a deep longing. It is an unconscious desire I have for brotherhood and homosociality, a relationship that, as one of my fraternity brothers pointed out, “can only exist between a man and another man.”

Sandwiched between two sisters, I never experienced what it is like to wrestle with a brother, or talk about girls with him late at night. I do not intend to whine; life without a brother is bearable for a young boy, and I have never honestly been lonely going through life without a brother, but I do believe there is something in a fraternal bond worth examining.

I developed a tendency to cope with my life without a brother: I adopt brothers of my own. One of my oldest friends is Tom Kohler, a kindergarten classmate of mine who also has no brothers, but three sisters. Tom and I played together after school and swam on the same team for ten years. We grew up together, and I have always thought of him as my brother.

My tendency to adopt brothers has remained a tenant of my personality throughout my whole life. I would have a hard time trying to count all the brothers I adopted at my all-boys Jesuit high school. This trait may seem to be a strange one; however, I know that Tom also thinks of me as a brother. So, the tendency is not uncommon. I have had a hard time, though, pinpointing the exact motivations Tom and I had when we first ‘adopted’ each other.

I do not believe that Tom and I adopted one another as brothers because we needed to escape life with five sisters between us. Nor do I believe that the bonds between Tom and me were formed out of convenience. There must be something inherent in the fraternal relationship itself that is important to the identity and development of a young man. Brothers motivate each other; they keep each other safe; they help determine identity. With few exceptions, no one in my life is more loyal than my brothers.

Although I may seem predetermined to join a fraternity, I came to college with nothing but disdain for fraternities; I’m here to learn, after all. Most people have seen the canonical film Animal House or at least aware of the stereotype and negative associations fraternities bring about. Why would anyone join what is often perceived as a collection of drinking buddies. Furthermore, there are other pressing issues surrounding fraternities, such as discrimination based on race and sexual orientation. Why would any open-minded, liberal-arts-college student wish to associate himself with an system that has continuously barred minorities from joining it?

I do believe fraternities are valuable places for young men to form their identities, however. I know the value of brotherhood from my own experience. I pledged Phi Gamma Delta, or Fiji, because I believe in this value. But, how should one define brotherhood? Furthermore, how is the definition of masculinity related?
In her book Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, Judith Butler attempts to define gender. She argues that it is a performative gesture rather than a set of innate characteristics. This is an important distinction to make and one that applies directly to the Greek system. Masculinity is determined by males through actions. Likewise, brotherhood is defined through gesture and action rather than any predetermined rules. To generalize even further, Fiji is defined through its actions, and more specifically the actions of its members. This theory is important when considering the specific identities of fraternities themselves and how the fraternities influences the identities of its members (and vice versa).
Frank Mort agrees with Butler. He writes in his essay “Boy’s Own? Masculinity, Style, and Popular Culture” that “That what we are as men and women is not natural or God-given, but constructed socially, by practices and institutions that shape our experience.” Fraternities are such an institution that shapes identities. They exist inside the umbrella of masculinity. Rules then exist inside these fraternities to help determine the identity of the fraternity itself and the identity of its members. These rules are often unwritten and unstated. They rely on the collective unconscious of the fraternity members. For instance, in his book Male Myths and Icons, Roger Horrocks discusses how athleticism and the perception of the ideal male body helps in determining masculinity. With the unstated laws of a fraternity in mind, one could argue that fraternities police their members to maintain a certain acceptable appearance in connection with the ideal male form. When a brother breaks these rules, the brothers of a fraternity intervene and bring their brother back to the confines of the rules. For instance, if a brother may have put on weight, one of his brothers may chide him to go to the gym once in a while.

William A. Scott contends in his book Values and Organizations: A Study of Fraternities and Sororities that there is a correlation between the already established values of pledges and the values of the fraternities they join. To carry this assertion further, one could argue that the members of a fraternity do not police each other, but police themselves. No one wants to be the one to break the rules; that only leads to ostracism. In this sense, fraternities can maintain a certain identity without doing much work at all. Maintaining the place of a fraternity will often be an invisible act, and a difficult one to quantify.
Likewise, William A. Bryan asserts that that a pressing issue facing fraternities today is discrimination based on race and sexual preference in his essay “Contemporary Fraternity and Sorority Issues.” This discrimination is a type of policing. He contends that fraternities do not give bids (ask young men to join) who are of a different race or sexual preference than that of the collective fraternity.

If fraternities only exist as a collective of people with the same values, however, then I am without an argument. I believe that fraternities can do more than that: a certain type of fraternity has the ability to make its members step outside of their comfort zones, to evaluate those values. I have been seeing this since I first pledged Fiji. Also, while I do believe that masculinity and brotherhood are performative acts, I do not believe that they create a cultural hegemony for the brothers of a fraternity.

I asked my brothers in Fiji some of the questions that I have been considering thus far. I interviewed one graduate brother, three current brothers, and three pledges. I asked all of them what their motivations for joining Fiji were, what is the ‘Fiji’ identity (if they believed Fiji has an identity), and how they believe that identity is maintained.

I will not mention the different identities of the interviewees, of course. It should be noted though that they have different races, sexual orientations, and socioeconomic backgrounds.

My first concern was what motivated young men to join fraternities: “I came to college not wanting to join a fraternity and opposed to the Greek system in general,” a Fiji brother told me. “Then one of the brothers that I had met outside the context of Fiji introduced me to it, and I started hanging out here. I liked the guys and decided to try it. It changed my perspective on the Greek system.”

“How so?” I asked.

“From what friends of mine have told me, I know that the social life at large schools is centered around Greek life and there is a rift between those who are not Greek and those who are, but I don’t find that at Knox, and my friends at other liberal arts schools tell me it’s the same way there.”

Why would this be? What is different about liberal arts schools? I believe the sense of community here at Knox contributes to the general egalitarian characteristics of the Greek system.

I conducted a few of my interviews in the common room at Fiji, a place where at any given hour of the day, brothers will be interacting with each other. At the time I interviewed this brother, five other Fijis were present, again with all different backgrounds. I asked him what his motivations for joining were. “I had never planned on joining a fraternity, but I really liked the Fiji guys, so I figured I would give it a shot and if I didn’t like it I could always de-pledge. The people were my main motivation.”

“The brotherhood,” one of my pledge brothers chimed in.

I asked the activated brother to define brotherhood. “It’s nice to come back in the house and feel like you are around family. Your fraternity brothers are your best friends, but they’re also your brothers. You can piss them off and know that you will be cool. You can get in a fight and a half hour later it will be resolved.” Although I agree that this statement shows a manifestation of brotherhood, I do not think that it is an all-encompassing definition.

“Is there a certain Fiji identity?” I asked.

“I think it is a strong social identity. Everyone is involved around campus. The brothers are usually laid back and relaxed.”

“Diversity is part of it,” another brother said.

Indeed, as brothers we believe that our fraternity is diverse; however, not a single brother would deny that fraternities often are not diverse institutions.

I asked this brother why he thought there was a lack of diversity in the Greek system. “We have never made a conscious effort to rush minorities,” he said. “We just try to get to know the freshmen. We try to find out which ones will fit in here.” This response presupposes, however, that there is a certain Fiji identity. In that sense it is contradictory.

“Is there a certain identity that makes a Fiji?” I asked the graduate brother.

“No, not anymore,” he said. “At one time maybe. When I was in school every house had stereotypes, but now Fiji has all different sorts.” I see this evidenced in Fiji and in other fraternities at Knox, but I still believe fraternities attempt to maintain (whether consciously or unconsciously) a homogenous identity.

I asked another brother whether he believes there is a Fiji identity. “No, not at all,” he said. “You just have to be a cool guy. Everyone in this room is different from each other. Our identity has to do with drive and ambition and personality above all.”

“That is an identity then,” one of my pledge brothers interjected. The three of us agreed then that there inevitably has to be a Fiji identity, but none of us could quantify it in an articulate manner.

So, the results in the search for a Fiji identity were inconclusive at best. But most brothers agreed that there are certain trait’s a Fiji possesses.
“Fiji decides who receives bids based on judgments of character more than anything else,” one of my pledge brothers told me when we discussed identity. What are the criteria then for judging people’s characters? How is the identity maintained?
“I don’t think there is a way we maintain an identity other than spending time with the brothers,” an active brother told me. He is correct. Spending time with each other alone polices the actions of the members of the fraternity, and identity is thus maintained.

Phi Gamma Delta did not update its international laws to officially eliminate discrimination based on race until the 1980’s. I asked a brother how he felt about this. “I don’t have too much of a problem with that,” he said. “Everyone has their own support groups.”

His comment is poignant: everyone does have their own support groups based on identity. However, Fiji has decentralized identity to classify it based on personality rather than something that can be discriminated against, race or sexual orientation for instance. Therefore, identity is irrelevant. As a result, the search to determine what maintains that identity is open-ended. Identity and the policing of that identity are nothing worth writing about because every support group has an identity. It is the support part that interests me.

The responses Fiji’s gave for their motivations for joining were diverse. One of my pledge brothers said he joined for future opportunities and a chance to make connections for later in life. Another of my pledge brothers said he joined for scholarship opportunities. Brotherhood usually came up in an enigmatic way.

I enjoyed one of my pledge brother’s definition of brotherhood: “It means always having people around in any situation, whether I’m having family trouble and need a car to drive home, or I just want someone to shoot hoops with outside.” It’s true.
When I asked the graduate brother how he defined brotherhood, he said, “For lack of a better word, it is a strong bond between you and the guys you live with formed through experience, hardship, and overcoming adversity.” he stumbled over his words as though this was not what he intended to say. “I guess you can’t really define it; you have to experience it.” There was a hesitation in his mannerisms that made me think that brotherhood is more experiential than intellectual.

I have my own experience of brotherhood manifested. I can only assume that I knew this moment would occur when I decided to pledge Fiji. As I stated, I entered college with a negative perception of fraternities. After talking to several members of the fraternity who held the same perceptions when they entered college though, I was convinced to give it a try. At the very least I could de-pledge, and I liked the other pledges at least.

Many weeks into the pledge process, after one could argue that the pledges had been socialized into Fiji, the house decided to barbeque. It was a brotherhood event. We bought burgers, chips, pop, and plenty of beer. While one of my pledge brothers manned the grill, I switched between seasoning burgers and playing games of three on three basketball. The sun was setting as we shot hoops and ate and laughed about things that I’m sure no one could remember now. The basketball was intense and the burgers were juicy; it was an Eden for college age males.

The intellectual rhetoric that I have tried to quantify brotherhood with cannot possibly encompass that moment. We weren’t just cooking burgers and playing basketball. That moment defined brotherhood in my life. It was a transcendental experience for me, although it may have not been as important to some of my brothers as it was to me. It was the moment when I knew that this group of people would do anything for me. I realized this group of people would support me when I decided to take a year off school. They would joke around with me after a breakup to lift my spirits. They would drive me back home to go to a funeral. It is a moment that I hope I will think back to years later when I want to reminisce of my college days as a Fiji.

I recognize that it is difficult to understand brotherhood if you have not experienced it, but everyone has experienced a bond with another person. The desire for homosociality that I share with countless other fraternity members is only part of a larger desire for sociality. And if fraternities continue down the road of judging by character, then fraternities will have unadulterated brotherhood.
Fraternities in that sense are no different than any other support network. Because people will inevitably form support networks in any situation, most people, I contend, have experienced the same types of feelings that I have experienced in a fraternity.

The women in ENG 206: Introduction to Nonfiction writing have undoubtedly experienced these feelings as well. I do not believe that ‘fraternity’ in the most rudimentary form is something alien to them.