Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by romwell 2434 days ago
Exactly, and the way the parent didn't seem to fit into the 'culture' was by being older.

"Frathouse culture" is an euphemism for "group of mostly white young male people who exclude people who aren't like them" - because this is what fraternities literally are.

(Recall: by definition, fraternities are young, male, exclusive - and statistically, white).

1 comments

It's not (only) statistically white, it is racism inherent in the language we use. A black fraternity is called a gang instead.
Black fraternities (well, historically black) do exist, both at HBCUs and at other colleges and universities. And one thing that's particularly notable is that historically black fraternities tend to be more public-service oriented than historically white fraternities, which are more purely social clubs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_frate...

I know they exist, and my comment was tongue in cheek, not to be taken literally.

But in every joke there is a core of truth. People use language to disparage minorities or downplay the transgressions of the majority all the time.

E.g. nationalist extremist violent acts are done by "lone wolfs" or "mentally ill" people while the exact same atrocities by other groups are done by "terrorists".

I’ve heard that lone wolf vs terrorist meme so many times, are there actually any studies on this, or even examples?

I’m also not sure if being a “mentally ill” mass murderer is much better than a “terrorist” mass murderer.

If you are not sure, consider the same notions without mass murder attached to them.

They are socially (and legally) in different leagues.

>are there actually any studies on this, or even examples?

Yes, there specifically are[1][2][3][4][...].

I'd suggest [1] as a start, and then Google is your friend.

[1]https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/when-do-peo...

[2]https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-48477-001

[3]https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03050629.2018.15...

[4]https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/06/18/...

The conclusion in 1 seems to be "These findings indicate that stereotypes are not the only force at work when someone is labeled either mentally ill or a terrorist.", which is highlighted in a large font. I thought you were arguing the opposite?

And in 2, the question they examine is "whether people with negative attitudes toward Muslims perceive Muslim mass shooters as less mentally ill than non-Muslim shooters". That seems like a very biased group to ask, to say the least...

Thanks for the links, I’ll have a look.

If you remove the “murder” part from terrorist you basically just have a disgruntled crackpot, but one with political motivations.

I know that I’d rather be a theoretical, non violent terrorist than just mentally ill.

Do some research there are plenty of black fraternities at any major university in the US.