Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:03:06 -0800
From: Doug.Case@sdsu.edu (Doug Case)
Subject: Lesbigay Greeks Research Summary

Reprinted with permission from"Perspectives" Vol. XXIII, No. 3, April/May
1996 (a publication of the Association of Fraternity Advisors, Inc.)

A Glimpse of the Invisible Membership
A National Survey of Lesbigay Greek Members

by Douglas N. Case

        Over the course of the past few years, there has been substantial
public attention to the issue of lesbians, bisexuals, and gay men (which
for simplicity I refer to as "lesbigays") serving in the military.  A great
deal of research on the topic has been undertaken, resulting in several
published works, including Randy Shilts' best selling book Conduct
Unbecoming.  In many ways, the social dynamics of lesbigays in college
fraternities and sororities parallels that of lesbigays in the armed
forces.  In both cases, there are cohesive single-gender units of young
adults in which the existence of homosexuality or bisexuality is perceived
as threatening.  Unlike the flurry of information chronicling the
experiences of lesbigay members of the military, however, there has been
virtually no published research on the experiences lesbigay members of
fraternities and sororities.
        A few years ago, I began an informal research project to attempt to
shed some light on this unexplored area.  Like many gay fraternity men, as
an undergraduate I led a very "closeted" life, and it wasn't until after I
had been graduated that I met other gay men with Greek affiliation.  With
some colleagues, I devised a survey to distribute to gay fraternity
undergraduate members and alumni so I could compare their experiences --
and perhaps even better understand myself.
        Initially the surveys were distributed, with the assistance of some
friends and associates, by word of mouth.  From the initial responses, a
32-question survey instrument was refined -- and at the request of several
individuals, expanded to include both men and women with Greek affiliation
who currently consider themselves gay, lesbian, or bisexual.
        Methods for distributing the survey included publishing
announcements in various gay and lesbian publications, posting
announcements to newsgroups and electronic mail discussion lists on the
Internet, and referrals from other respondents. A little over 500 responses
were eventually received with a good cross section of ages (ranging from 19
to 59 years old, with a mean age of 31) and regions of the country.  Since
the respondents were self-selected (in that they learned of the survey and
took the initiative to respond), the results may not be completely
representative of a true random sample of all lesbigay fraternity and
sorority members (if it were possible to devise such).
        Approximately 90% of the responses received were from men.  There
are several reasons for the low proportion of women respondents:  (1) The
survey was expanded to include women after about 100 responses from men had
already been received.  (2)  Although studies to determine the number of
gays and lesbians in the general population have yielded varying results
(ranging from 1% to 15%, depending upon research methodology and the
definition of what constitutes a homosexual), the studies have fairly
consistently found that gay men outnumber lesbians by a factor ranging up
to 2-to-1.  (3)  The survey was more prominently publicized in some
publications oriented more toward gay men.  (4)  As indicated below, women
respondents tended to develop their homosexual or bisexual identity later
than men.  (5)  It is also possible that gay/bisexual male students find
the lifestyle of the Greek collegiate community more appealing than do
lesbian/bisexual women.
        The percentage of Greek students who are lesbigay is difficult to
accurately determine.  Many students are still in the process of developing
their sexual identity while in college.  For example, of the survey
respondents, over a third of the men and 80% of the women self-identified
as heterosexual at the time they were initiated, but by graduation only 20%
of the men and a little over 40% of the women identified themselves as
heterosexual.  Many identified themselves as bisexual for a period of time
before accepting a self-identity as gay or lesbian.  In terms of sexual
experience, 45% of the men had their first post-pubescent homosexual
experience prior to college, 39% during college, and 15% after college.
For women, the corresponding figures are 12% prior to college, 52% during
college, and 37% after college.
        Of the male survey respondents, the average total number of fellow
chapter members who the respondent currently knew with certainty (rather
than mere speculation) to be gay or bisexual was 3.5 (a total of 4.5 if the
respondent himself is included).  Often, the respondents did not discover
or confirm a fellow member's homosexual or bisexual orientation until after
they both had been graduated.  With an mean reported chapter size of 52, it
is probable that the average respondent matriculated with 75 - 90 different
brothers over the course of his undergraduate career.  Thus, a total of
approximately 5 - 6% of the chapter membership was known by the respondents
to be gay/bisexual.  The women reported knowing with certainty that an
average of 2.9 fellow members were lesbian/bisexual, with an average
chapter size of 81, meaning that a total of approximately 3 - 4% of the
chapter membership was known to be lesbian or bisexual.  The actual
percentages of lesbigay members would, of course, be higher, to include
those others not known with certainty by the respondents to be lesbigay.
        The data collected suggests that lesbigay students join
fraternities and sororities for reasons similar to those one would expect
from a sample of heterosexual students. The top three reasons listed were
(1) friendship and camaraderie, (2) social activities, and (3) a support
group and sense of belonging.  Likewise, the benefits of Greek membership
reported by the lesbigay students were similar to those that would likely
be reported by other students -- the top three being (1) social and
interpersonal skills, (2) long-term friendships, and (3) leadership skills.
Sexual attraction or the opportunity to meet potential same-gender sexual
partners was not a significant reason for joining a fraternity or sorority;
only 3% marked "to meet members of the same sex" as one of their top three
reasons for joining.  A little more than a third, however, reported having
at least one sexual encounter with a member of their chapter while in
college.
        One area where lesbigay fraternity/sorority members appear to
differ from their heterosexual peers is in chapter leadership.  Over 80% of
the men and over 60% of the women had held at least one of the following
executive committee positions in their chapter:  president, vice president,
secretary, treasurer, new member educator, rush chair and social chair.
Over 20% of the men had served as president of their chapter, although only
6% of the women had served as president.  This tendency toward
"overachievement" may reflect a desire for validation and acceptance by the
group.  Another explanation may be that lesbigay members channel their
energies into organizational leadership that others apply toward developing
heterosexual relationships.
        Over 70% of the respondents, indicated that they had encountered
homophobic or heterosexist attitudes within their chapter, usually in the
form of derogatory jokes or comments.  Homophobia was also frequently
evidenced in membership selection.  If a rushee was rumored or perceived to
be gay or lesbian, the chapter was likely to summarily vote against
offering the rushee a bid to join.   Likewise if a pledge was discovered or
believed to be gay or lesbian, the chapter was inclined to dismiss the
pledge.  More often than not, the initiated lesbigay member(s) would voice
no opposition to the discrimination, fearing that to do so might cause
other members to question their motivation.  One man even wrote, "A rushee
was blackballed because of suspected homosexuality.  I was one of the three
who blackballed him.  Five years later I met this individual again at a
bar, and we have been lovers for eight years now (and going strong)!"
        While chapters seemed generally unwilling to pledge or initiate a
student thought to be lesbian or gay, greater tolerance was demonstrated if
the homosexual orientation of an initiate became known.  About 40% of the
respondents "came out" (i.e., revealed their sexual orientation) to at
least one other member of their chapter while they were in college.  Here
there is a sharp generational difference.  For example, of those who were
graduated before 1980, only 12% "came out" to anyone in their chapter.
There are also some regional differences reflected in the responses.  Those
from the southern region of the country were more reticent to "come out"
and reported a higher incidence of negative responses than the other
regions.
        The responses of fellow members to the revelation that a member was
lesbian, gay or bisexual varied widely, from immediate expulsion and
physical threats at the one extreme to complete acceptance at the other.
In most cases, however, the majority of the chapter had at least a somewhat
supportive response, with only a few members responding with rejection.  In
those instances in which the lesbigay member had control over the
circumstances, by voluntarily determining the time, manner and recipients
of the disclosure, the response was much more likely to be supportive than
in those instances in which the member's sexual orientation was discovered
by others.
        There is a noteworthy dichotomy between chapters' responses to
prospective members or pre-initiates who are perceived to be lesbigay and
their response to the revelation that an initiated member is lesbigay.
With few exceptions, chapters are very reluctant to offer a invitation of
membership to a rushee perceived to be lesbigay.  On the other hand, while
some initiated lesbigay members faced expulsion or ostracism after their
sexual orientation became known, more frequently lesbigay members who "came
out" did not face the rejection they had feared.  This is comparable to the
experiences of lesbigays who have "come out" to their families.  Far more
often than not, siblings strive to be understanding and supportive when
they learn that a brother or sister is lesbian or gay, even when the
sibling harbors homophobic attitudes and beliefs. It is not unusual for it
to take a period of time for siblings to process this cognitive dissonance,
but in the long run brotherhood and sisterhood tend to prevail over fear
and prejudice.
        Slowly, but surely the things are changing for the better in terms
of tolerance and acceptance of lesbigays within the Greek community.  One
chapter president who was recently graduated from a large midwestern
university, organized a "coming out" party for himself during his final
term, to which the entire chapter was invited and most attended. Another
chapter president who also recently graduated from a large midwestern
university, reported that he was reelected as president for a second year
shortly after "coming out" to the chapter.
        Another respondent who was one of two openly gay members of his
chapter, submitted a provocative essay detailing some of the dilemmas with
which his chapter has had to confront.  These included whether or not the
gay members should be permitted to invite male dates to the fraternity's
date dances and whether the chapter should make a conscious effort to
conceal from others (such as rushees, alumni and parents) the fact that the
chapter had openly gay members.
        Factors that respondents frequently indicated as detracting from
their Greek experience were that social activities were geared for
heterosexual couples, that they felt intimidated by homophobic attitudes
and remarks, and that they felt it was difficult to get close to other
members because they felt a need to hide a significant part of their lives.
Nonetheless, about 85% reported that overall they were either very
satisfied or somewhat satisfied with their Greek experience.
        Although the statistical results of the survey are interesting, the
most meaningful information can be found in the narratives that many
included to elaborate on their responses.  Let me share excerpts from two
that I believe speak volumes about the gay Greek experience.  The first is
from a 1963 graduate of Brown University, who served as president of his
chapter:

        "In considering the questions asked, it occurs to me how very
dramatically the world has changed in the 30+ years which separate me from
my undergraduate experience.
        "In my opinion, the fraternity system in the late '50's and early
'60's merely reflected the predominant social values of the times, it did
not create them.  Homophobia was just another of the postwar social norms .
. . My sexual repression was firmly in place way before I hit the ivy
covered walls, and in a sense fraternity membership, not to mention
achieving fraternity leadership, was elemental to the expression of this
repression.  It represented simply another layer of the cloak which was
designed to hide my true identity.
        "It took tremendous courage to be openly gay in this era.  There
was little public tolerance for deviant behavior, and certainly in
university courses such as Sociology 201 (Nuts and Sluts), my recollection
is that homosexuality ran a distant third behind alcoholism and nymphomania
in emphasis and treatment.
        "The environment didn't do a whole lot for the self-esteem of your
average emerging homosexual, and generations of psychotherapists have grown
rich treating the multiple personality disorders which resulted. But
fraternity membership was, on balance, a constructive force in my
development.  Being a member gave me a social identity.  It provided a
"community" in which to develop leadership and interpersonal skills  . . .
        "No, I haven't found it appropriate to publish a newsletter
announcing my true sexual orientation to these friends from the past, and
as a divorced father of two (pretty neat) kids, I guess the supposition is
that I'm straight -- to the degree that anyone thinks about such things.
        "I'm out to my kids, I'm out to my (current) friends, and even out
to a few of the people I went to high school with . . . It has been an
interesting journey of self-discovery and self-acceptance, and an
incredibly enriching one as well.  My fraternity experience was simply a
stop along the way."

        The second excerpt, is from the survey of a fraternity member was
graduated thirty years later, in 1993, from the University of Wyoming.  He
"came out" to the chapter during rush and thus never had to hide his sexual
orientation from his brothers:

        "I have really enjoyed my experiences in my fraternity.  I have
managed to change quite a few of my brother's ideas about gays.  David
[name changed], who was our vice president when I was initiated and is now
our president, is a redneck from Nebraska. We have spent a lot of time
together this semester.  David and I drove to our regional convention this
past spring and really got to know each other better.  David recently
admitted that he had quite a few reservations about my joining the
fraternity.  He said he used to think of gays as being "sub-human."  In
high school, David and his friends actually went into Omaha one weekend to
"beat up fags."  They didn't find any gays to beat up, but he acknowledges
that he was excited about the prospect.  Now when I see David on campus, he
comes up and gives me a hug (a fairly butch hug, but a hug nonetheless).
We've discussed our romantic and sexual problems.  We occasionally work out
together and we take a shower at the gym afterwards.
        "This semester, Robert [name changed], the homophobe [mentioned
previously in his survey] rushed a friend who he knows from the College
Republicans group. This friend also writes a column for the campus paper.
In this column he has attacked gays three times in the past year.  As the
rush chairman, I have the ultimate say in whether or not we extend a bid to
prospective members.  I could have kept this guy from joining our
fraternity.  I expressed my concerns about him to a couple of men in the
fraternity.  As a result, the president, treasurer, and sergeant-at-arms
visited the individual to explain that his homophobic beliefs could not
enter into the fraternity.  They explained to him that his ideas were his
own, but that they had no business in the fraternity.  This individual was
initiated over a month ago, and I haven't had a single problem with him.
He actually goes out his way to come over and say hello when we see each
other on campus."

        These two responses reflect our changing times.  Lesbigay students
have always been in fraternities and sororities, although their identity
has almost always been hidden.  "Don't ask, don't tell," the newly
prescribed modus operandi of the military has long been the norm in the
Greek community when it comes to homosexuality and bisexuality.  In today's
world, though, more lesbigay students on campus, including those in
fraternities and sororities, feel compelled to no longer hide their true
identities.
        By acknowledging the existence of these hidden members and
attempting to understand their experiences, Greek affairs professionals
will be better equipped to assist fraternities and sororities in dealing
with the challenges created when a traditionally heterosexist institution
comes face-to-face with its non-heterosexual members.


Doug Case is the Coordinator of Residential Fraternity and Sorority Life at
San Diego State University and served as President of Association of
Fraternity Advisors in 1991.  He is a member of Kappa Sigma and serves on
the International Fraternity's Scholarship Commission.  Doug is active in
several gay and lesbian organizations and is an honorary member of Delta
Lambda Phi, a national fraternity for gay, bisexual and progressive men.

For more information about his research, contact him at Housing and
Residential Life Office, San Diego State University, 5500 Campanile Drive,
Mail Code 1802, San Diego, CA  92182-1802; (619) 594-2939; e-mail:
Doug.Case@sdsu.edu