Letter to the Editor
April 16, 2021
Slander (verb): to make false and damaging statements about someone. For something to be “slanderous” and therefore considered defamation in a court of law, the statement must meet the following criteria according to Cornell University Legal Information Institute: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.
The opinions and experiences of others that contradict our own are not slanderous. People sharing their personal victimizations during their time in Greek Life and the decades-old characterizations of particular chapters remind us that violence, both physical and mental, is ever-present. Believing that Greek leadership will “learn from the mistakes of their elders” by continuing to attend performative trainings is not only naïve but it is dangerous. We should not place the burden of education and growth on the shoulders of victims, no matter how heavy our own egos are to carry.
“We should not place the burden of education and growth on the shoulders of victims, no matter how heavy our own egos are to carry.”
If certain fraternities and sororities on IWU’s campus are hazing-free, why aren’t they spending time and energy helping the other chapters accomplish this standard? This standard being the floor, by the way, rather than the ceiling. Instead of attempting to distance themselves from comments on Facebook through ingenuine sympathy, I would recommend that representatives from these chapters step into leadership roles on campus to actively and transparently dismantle hazing from the inside.
Speaking of Facebook, I would like to acknowledge the purpose of the Alumni page that is dedicated to preserving liberal arts curricula at IWU. The liberal arts education requires us to examine our positionality in the world and to simultaneously remove ourselves for an objective observation, as well as insert ourselves for a holistic understanding. To me, the purpose of the page is to build a community based on the authentic and honest experiences of alumni who value this practice of examination.
When we examine the realities of Greek Life across the nation, both from objective and subjective points of view, several themes come forward: values-based community, philanthropy, life-long relationships and unfortunately, several forms of violence. Additionally, when we examine IWU’s history of holding those in power accountable for their actions, we are certainly left disappointed.
I am not a journalist, nor am I loyal to Illinois Wesleyan the way that it stands today. I am, however, a student affairs educator dedicated to justice for students who have been harmed by members of our campuses, and who experience further harm at the hands of apologetic yet ineffective administrators. As alumni, we should be encouraging one another to do the right thing and speak our truths to power, even if it brings those in power down in the process.
Thank you for this opportunity.
In solidarity with victims of hazing,
Jordan Prats (she/her)
IWU Class of ‘17
Ally Daskalopoulos • Apr 19, 2021 at 5:32 pm
Let’s just go off the slander definition that was provided in this letter to the editor, considering that the definition of slander is essentially the same in the state of Illinois. However, to be clear the law can differ state to state.
1. False statement purporting to be fact: stating that Alpha Gamma Delta had a hazing incident and accusing others of defending it is a false statement that one is purporting to be true… we can check off number one.
2. Publication or communication of that statement to a third party: publishing this comment on Facebook or any other social media platform constitutes publication/communication of the statement…check.
3. Fault amounting to negligence: suggesting that my organization hazed is suggesting negligence… Let’s use Cornell’s Legal Institute’s definitions again… (negligence: failure to behave with the level of ordinary prudence would have exercised under the same circumstances. The behavior usually consists of actions, but can also consist of omissions when there is some duty to act.) Yes, hazing is negligent, but again accusing AGD of negligence contributes to the definition of slander…check. let’s continue.
4. Damages, or some harm caused to the person or entity who is the subject to the statement. Referring back to the language used in the original defamatory statement of Alpha Gamma Delta had a hazing incident and others defended it… there is damage in that statement that amounts to slander. If this is unclear, just ask the current leadership of the sorority who were victims of this statement. This statement caused damage to their reputation and the organization, dragging them into the hazing incident of another Greek organization that has no affiliation to AGD whatsoever…
This my friends, is the definition of slander and how it fits in my argument. I suppose I should have provided this definition in my original letter, but once again I naively assume the intelligence of my audience. My mistake. Let me clarify another point that was made. Nobody is suggesting that the experiences and opinions of others are slanderous. Not at all. But providing statements like AGD had a hazing incident and others defended it, is not an opinion or an experience. This is a claim, a false one. Furthermore, stating that others defended it is hearsay and also not an opinion or experience, it’s a rumor. Again, nobody’s experience or opinion is being attacked here. I’m simply refuting a false statement.
Additionally, my words of “learning from the mistakes of their elders” is a more sophisticated way of saying that we do not act as previous stereotypes of Greek life have made us out to be. If our elders did haze (I’m not saying they did or did not) then we were not present to stop that. We learn from the past. This is a simple concept not meant to be interpreted as anything else other than that. As many know, the mere definitions of hazing have evolved over the years as well. Are we going to accuse others of hazing because of past behaviors that could nowadays be construed as “hazing”? How is that fair to anyone who is an active member today? Is it fair to force them to carry the burdens of their distant brothers and sisters?
And to ask why we aren’t spending time to help other chapters against hazing is also a misinterpretation. First of all, sororities and fraternities while both Greek, have different standards, constitutions, practices and protocols. To get involved and insert our own egos into each and every one of them is not only impossible, but a recipe for disaster. This is where fraternities and sororities rely on universities to be the neutral guides. Fraternity and Sorority Life offices exist on campus for a reason. When universities maintain an order of no hazing policies, that is when an equilibrium can be reached among Greek life. It is not the job of each chapter to keep one fraternity in check.
While violence may come to mind for some, I assure you that is not the norm. Like every organization or setting anywhere, injustice can occur. And when it does, it is up to individual chapters to denounce that behavior and stand up for themselves, rather than bringing others down in the process.
The only reason I spoke out on this subject was because current leadership was suffering. These women felt confident enough confiding in me that they were being accused of something that was untrue. This is an injustice in and of itself. As an alumna who is loyal to Illinois Wesleyan for making me the person I am today, I want to commend the women of Alpha Gamma Delta for being brave and honoring our purpose.
I will end my rebuttal now since anything longer would require a separate letter and/or Ted Talk. I did not submit another letter because I believe that to be excessive, combative and unnecessary. The Argus should continue to publish news and updates and doesn’t need to hear the arguments of alumni.
Thank you.