Gender equality is an issue plaguing our leaders. While no one should be denied his or her rights based on color or gender, society constantly wrestles with issues that are not so clear-cut.

The idea that women can do anything men can do is correct, and only the most blatant sexist would disagree.

But, other considerations can come before equality.

When considering the issue of women’s integration into the ranks of front-line soldiers, our leaders had to decide what would appease both sides of the issue.

While military experts feared women would undermine morale, many civilians felt gender equality was more important.

The deal struck provides for women to serve in air combat, though ground forces remain strictly off-limits.

I have no problem with women serving in the armed forces.

Women deserve an equal right to die on foreign battlefields.

Why should they be spared the horrors of war?

Some complained that allowing women to fight was a break with tradition.

At the Citadel, a woman petitioned for the privilege of attending the male military academy.

The courts sided with her and even though she subsequently withdrew from the school, the message was clear: gender equality was on the warpath and the notion of tradition was bunk.

Thus it should come as no surprise that Dartmouth College announced their plan to do away with the current greek system and institute co-ed fraternities and sororities in the fall.

I actually had to laugh when the president of Dartmouth was quoted as saying that the greek system “doesn’t contribute significantly to each student’s intellectual and personal growth and well-being.”

Whether you believe this statement or not, the fact that the president of the college would say something like that indicates either a great amount of courage or a public speaking ability on par with Dan Quayle’s.

While it was reported that our greek leaders reacted to the Dartmouth decision with concern, I feel that their fears are unwarranted.

It is undeniably accurate to say that co-ed fraternities and sororities will constitute a major shake-up for the greek system.

It is logical to assume that fraternities and sororities will no longer exist, as there shall be little distinction between them. Instead, some type of omnibus house will take their place.

Yet I don’t see this as that destabilizing.

Tradition will undoubtedly be broken by the discontinuation of the current greek system. Even though I am forced to admit that many greek houses do have a long and storied history, I believe institutions should be founded on ideals more important than tradition.

To conclude that something should remain a certain way just because it has been that way for a long time is somewhat closed-minded and does not do the issue justice.

Tradition is not really a belief, but a pattern of action built on an accepted ideal.

Just because you change the underlying premise does not mean what you have done is wrong; you could just be laying the groundwork for a new tradition.

Some fear that the dismantling of the current greek system will reduce the positives that the greek system accentuates.

However, I doubt that their philanthropy projects will suffer or their academic performance will decline.

The institution of co-ed housing may encourage more positive relations between the sexes.

Instead of focusing on the negative aspects of the Dartmouth decision, an effort should be made to explore the positive impact of the new system.

Offhand, I can see the decision to go with co-ed housing as a boon to the greek system.

With a number of houses going dry, there has been some concern that enrollment numbers may drop.

The introduction of co-ed houses can only increase the appeal of greek social life, helping to draw in new members.

Though some parents may be wary of the new houses that place the sexes in such close proximity, the trend in the residence halls is for co-ed floors.

Most students prefer them, and I am at a loss to explain why segregated housing should exist.

I am sure someone will raise the issue of increased promiscuity, but I doubt those rates will change dramatically from what they already are.

So our choice is to cling to tradition or embrace an uncertain future.

I cannot help but remember the words of FDR, who said we had nothing to fear but fear itself. How true.

---

Aaron Woell is a junior in political science from Bolingbrook, Ill.