Conflict of interest: The author is a member of ATO of Massachusetts at Tufts University.
This semester, rush numbers surged among the various Greek-letter organizations on the Tufts campus. Local sororities experienced the biggest swing. Serena Song, a Member Application Process (MAP) Chair of the Ivy, confirmed that the local chapters saw an increase of more than 100 potential new members from around 160 last fall. She told The Tribune that “Every senior that I talked to noticed the increase in interest. It was very apparent.” Jamal Mustafa, this fall’s Rush Chair at Theta Chi, spoke of a major increase between the fall semester of 2024 and the spring semester of 2025. Otherwise, they’ve “sustained really high numbers…with a modest jump this fall.” An anonymous member of Delta Tau Delta (DTD) corroborated the stark increase between this year and last.
One might jump to attribute this increase in demand to the general growth in the Tufts student body. From the class of 2026 to 2027, the population grew around 4%. This marginal increase may be a helpful statistic to understand the more moderate increases in some of the organizations we spoke with, but others far outpace this rate of growth. Indeed, the explosion of interest in local sororities mentioned above amounts to a growth of nearly 60%, suggesting other factors at play. Director of Orientation and Student Experience Mary Kate Kelley affirms half of the picture, stating that interest in Greek life grew, but that this was largely constrained to sororities.
Coupled with this uptick in demand, however, is a decrease in supply. Of the five official fraternities listed on the Tufts’ Fraternity and Sorority Life website, four — ATO of Massachusetts (ATO), Delta Upsilon (DU), Theta Chi, and Zeta Beta Tau (ZBT) — have been censured by the school. President of Theta Chi Trevor Wallace cited “the abrupt closure of our basement, that ha[s] limited our ability to host events in controlled, supervised spaces.”
Due to less frat activity on campus, sophomore Sophia Hubbard described “spend[ing] more time at the sailing house.” Describing the larger social scene, she added, “my friends are sad about that,” in reference to the censure of DU. Christopher Hovet, a Tufts freshman, puts it simply: “When I hear people talking about parties, they are usually at sports houses.” He added that “I hear about frat events, but they seem to be few and far between in comparison.”
Wallace elucidated these concerns. “When we don’t have the agency to operate safely within the social spheres that we dominate, we lose our ability to safely maintain ‘fun’ experiences for the broader campus community, which encourages students to pursue uncontrolled, unsafe alternatives off campus,” he explained.
With the knowledge that drinking and parties are likely to occur regardless of the presence of fraternities on a college campus, their existence and compliance with safety protocols thus allows for the centralization and regulation of what may otherwise be the same practices dispersed off campus and unmonitored. This is the state of parties in private houses, often ones known for housing specific sport teams or clubs.
Some fraternity leaders expressed disagreement with the recent crackdown on four out of five of the active fraternities on campus. “I think they don’t see the valuable outlet that fraternities represent on campus,” remarked the president of one of the above-mentioned organizations, who wishes to remain anonymous. They noted that restrictions imposed by the school appeared to be borne out of a perception that fraternities are a “liability,” where safety concerns and insurance implications are paramount and the implications of night life a comparatively unimportant collateral.
These liability concerns are well-documented in the university space. A 2015 report by the University Risk Management and Insurance Association (URMIA) found that in a survey of their members –– professionals across the higher education landscape –– “two-thirds of the respondents judge fraternity risk to be among the institutions’ significant or top liability risks.”
Yet concurrent with his risk-related rise in discipline is an ongoing effort to safely manage risk and safety. Concerted efforts have been made to ensure the safety of all attendees at parties, including collaboration with Tufts Green Dot and the guarantee of sober monitors at each event.
To some, the recent punishment of the majority of fraternities on campus, may make it seem like the school envisions a Tufts future devoid of Greek life. But the picture is less than black and white. When presented with the issue, ATO member Aydin Smolover-Bord said: “Abolition of Greek life doesn’t seem like the goal just because of the bureaucratic slowness of it all.” From the perspective of Smolover-Bord, institutional crackdown on fraternities is not borne out of a concerted desire for their eradication, but out of simple awareness of insurance liabilities.
So if insurance risk is the primary driver behind the current restriction of fraternities as claimed, why do notable outliers remain? DTD has avoided penalties as of late — a stark contrast to most other fraternities on campus. One major difference between DTD and its counterparts on campus is that it is both nationally affiliated and owns its own house, thus avoiding a greater degree of scrutiny on the basis of liability. Liability insurance is top of mind for many national organizations, with groups like the North American Interfraternity Conference (NIC) offering “general liability insurance” and “protection for directors and officers” to its constituent members. And tellingly, DTD is the only campus fraternity that is a member of this organization, aside from ZBT.
This differs substantially from the situations of DU and Theta Chi. “The school can close the basements of fraternities whose houses they own,”reported the Greek interlocutor, “and they do so without pause.”
But in her comment, Mary Kate Kelley provided a different glimpse. She stated that the institution supports “all [Greek-letter] groups and treats them all fairly and equitably.” Further, it has a “positive view of all [Greek-letter] organizations and believes they are an important part of the Tufts community,” from “the community they create, the philanthropy and community service they are a part of” to the “leadership opportunities they provide.” Evidently, the school professes to see the merit in all such organizations on campus, without priority given to any in particular.
In terms of the alleged differential treatment that has fostered theories to the contrary, she stated that all fraternity and sorority organizations “are expected to follow [Community Standards] policies, and if it is determined they have not, Community Standards holds them accountable. Our hope is that once they have satisfied Community Standards’ requirements, these groups continue to flourish.” Under this lens, there is merely compliance with the community standards — composed of such guidelines as the Academic Integrity Policy and the Alcohol and Drug Policy—and noncompliance.
Wallace, though, argued that the communication around these standards has been inconsistent, affecting the ability of his organization to achieve their mission: “The lack of clear communication around these changes has made it challenging to preserve the inclusive and well-managed social environment that Greek life contributes to the Tufts community.”
Evidently, there is a gulf in understanding between the current institutional policy and the perception of the Greek organizations themselves. In response to this challenge in communication, the heads of Greek life organizations have advocated a plan for transparent dialogue with the school and a vision for the future that more systematically incorporates Greek life as a social cornerstone of campus.
Such was a theme of the recent meeting between the Tufts Community Union (TCU) Senate and the executives of Greek life organizations on campus. According to the presidents of the Ivy, this brought some of the organization’s frustrations surrounding misunderstandings to the fore. “The administration doesn’t seem to understand what we as Greek organizations do on campus or just the general infrastructure. For example, the senate wasn’t aware that we offer financial aid of up to 100% in scholarships, about the history of our disaffiliation.”
When asked about their plan to close this gap in understanding, they responded with “next steps” being to “establish better communication with the school and learn how we can better serve both our community and organization.” Preeminent among those next steps is a direct dialogue with President Kumar, which they hope will provide a clearer vantage on their organization’s future.
As the Greek institutions continue to gain popularity, the limbo state they inhabit becomes less and less sustainable, and threatens to divert those seeking access to parties or community to less regulated and less safe outlets. The main conflict in this case was borne of incongruity of perspective, leading to sentiments that don’t accurately reflect each party’s intentions. This conflict, and its ongoing resolution, provide a lesson on the need for transparency through open discourse.
Song echoed this, confirming that “it’s great that so many people are interested, but having to adjust and reimagine what we do to accommodate more people can be difficult.” Whether or not the future of Tufts’ social life reads in Greek letters may depend on the presence and nature of dialogue expressed over the next few weeks.
Photo by Sascha Dembling