The UVM Sigma Phi Epsilon Survey That Shocked Parents and Students
At the University of Vermont, members of the Sigma Phi Epsilon fraternity circulated an internal survey that included a question so disturbing it quickly drew national attention: a prompt asking brothers to name a woman they would like to rape. The existence of such a question was not only morally repugnant, it also exposed a culture of casual misogyny and trivialization of sexual violence that extends far beyond one form, one email, or one fraternity house.
Parents learned of the survey when one brother’s parents discovered the email and were confronted with the horrific wording. For many families, that moment was a brutal realization that the environment they trusted to help shape their sons into responsible adults was, instead, normalizing the language of sexual assault. The outrage that followed was immediate and intense, and it forced urgent conversations about consent, respect, and institutional accountability at UVM and on campuses across the country.
How a “Joke” Question Reveals a Deeper Cultural Problem
Supporters of the fraternity might be tempted to write off the survey question as an off-color joke or a lapse in judgment. Yet treating rape as a punchline is not harmless humor; it is a direct reflection of the way some students are socialized to think about power, sex, and entitlement. A single question like “Who would you like to rape?” does not emerge in a vacuum. It emerges from a culture that still too often minimizes the experiences of survivors and frames sexual violence as an abstract concept rather than a devastating reality.
Language matters. Research and lived experience both show that when sexual assault is trivialized, the threshold for harmful behavior is lowered. What starts as a “joke” can become an environment where victims are less likely to report, bystanders are less likely to intervene, and perpetrators feel more emboldened. The fraternity’s survey forced many to confront the uncomfortable truth that some campus spaces remain hostile to women and other vulnerable groups.
Impact on Survivors and the Campus Community
For survivors of sexual assault at UVM and beyond, learning that a fraternity posed a question about rape as part of a supposedly lighthearted questionnaire can be retraumatizing. It sends a chilling message: that their pain is a subject of mockery, and that their experiences are not taken seriously by their peers. The emotional damage extends beyond the membership of Sigma Phi Epsilon and beyond those directly targeted.
Students who already navigate campus life with a heightened sense of vulnerability—women, LGBTQ+ students, and students of color—see confirmation that some segments of campus culture condone or at least look away from dangerous attitudes. Trust in peer communities erodes. Confidence in institutional protections comes into question. And parents, who expect universities and affiliated organizations to uphold high standards of conduct, are left wondering what other behaviors are being brushed aside as mere youthful indiscretion.
Fraternity Culture and Accountability
While it would be inaccurate to claim this survey represents every fraternity or every brother, it does highlight ongoing concerns about fraternity culture on many campuses. Traditionally male-dominated, alcohol-heavy, and status-driven environments can foster a warped idea of masculinity where aggression is admired, empathy is dismissed as weakness, and women are objectified.
Institutions like UVM must grapple with a difficult set of questions: How are new members socialized? What jokes are considered acceptable? Who speaks up when a line is crossed? And, crucially, what consequences follow when that line is blown past in such a blatant way? Meaningful accountability means more than a temporary suspension or a strongly worded statement; it demands a sustained re-examination of the values and practices that define fraternity life.
What Parents Are Asking Themselves Now
In the wake of the Sigma Phi Epsilon questionnaire, parents of fraternity members and prospective students have been compelled to re-evaluate their assumptions. Many believed fraternities could offer networking opportunities, a sense of belonging, and leadership development. The survey forced them to ask: At what cost?
Parents are now pressing for transparency and reform. They want to know how organizations vet their traditions, who oversees internal communications, and what safeguards exist to prevent the normalization of abusive language. When a parent discovers their son has been sent an email asking who he would like to rape, the question is no longer whether Greek life is an enriching social outlet; it is whether it is safe, ethical, and aligned with the values they instilled at home.
University of Vermont’s Responsibility and Response
The University of Vermont, like any institution confronted with such a scandal, faces a dual obligation: to respond decisively to the specific incident and to engage in a broader reckoning with campus culture. Administrative actions might include investigations, disciplinary measures, mandatory training, and policy reforms. However, the effectiveness of any response will be judged by whether it produces genuine change rather than short-lived damage control.
Universities must clearly articulate that there is no context in which joking about rape is acceptable. They should provide robust support services for survivors, encourage bystander intervention, and make it easier and safer to report harassment or assault. Beyond policies and procedures, leadership must model the values of respect and empathy they expect from students.
From Outrage to Education: Changing the Conversation
Public outrage is a natural reaction to a fraternity survey that treats rape as a question on a checklist. But outrage alone will not prevent the next offensive email, chant, or so-called tradition. Sustainable change requires education—comprehensive, ongoing, and embedded into the fabric of campus life.
Workshops on consent, healthy relationships, and gender-based violence must be taken seriously, not treated as a box to check. Fraternity and sorority leaders should be trained not only to avoid harm, but to actively cultivate environments where disrespect is challenged and empathy is encouraged. Peers must learn how to call out harmful behavior without fear of social backlash, and campus organizations must celebrate those who choose to stand up rather than stay silent.
Rethinking Masculinity and Brotherhood
One of the most constructive outcomes of confronting incidents like the UVM Sigma Phi Epsilon survey is the opportunity to redefine what brotherhood and masculinity mean. Brotherhood should be about mutual respect, accountability, and support, not complicity in cruelty. A true friend does not encourage another to engage in dehumanizing behavior; he challenges him to do better.
Fraternities that want to survive and thrive in a changing cultural landscape must move away from outdated, harmful notions of manhood. They can instead become spaces where empathy, integrity, and responsibility are valued as highly as social status. That shift requires honest introspection from members and alumni alike, and a willingness to break with traditions that no longer reflect the values they claim to uphold.
Creating Safer Social Spaces On and Off Campus
The implications of this incident extend beyond Greek houses and campus boundaries. College students socialize in apartments, local bars, shared rentals, and hotels when they travel for conferences, formals, or weekend getaways. The attitudes they carry with them shape whether those spaces feel safe or threatening. When groups of students check into a hotel for a fraternity event, for example, the standards they have internalized about consent and respect determine if the night is remembered as a celebration or a story of harm. Building healthier cultures in fraternities and student organizations not only protects classmates at home, it also helps ensure that every environment—campus housing, off-campus apartments, and hotels where students gather—is guided by the same expectation: that every person deserves to feel safe, heard, and fully human.
Moving Forward: What Real Change Looks Like
The Sigma Phi Epsilon questionnaire at the University of Vermont should never have been written, let alone distributed. Yet now that it has forced an uncomfortable truth into the open, the only responsible path is to confront that truth head-on. Real change will not come from a single disciplinary action or a one-time workshop; it will come from a sustained commitment to dismantling the attitudes that allowed such a question to seem acceptable in the first place.
That means elevating the voices of survivors, holding student organizations to higher standards, and expecting more from those who claim to lead. It means rejecting the excuse of "just a joke" and recognizing the real harm caused by words. Above all, it means creating a campus culture where every student understands that dignity and consent are non-negotiable—and where no one ever again has to open an email from their peers and find a question about rape disguised as entertainment.