Guess what, soze. Even with the 130 or so girls in our sorority, there were still those I hung out with and those I didn’t, and I wasn’t entitled to “butt in” on gatherings that didn’t include me just because we were all in the same house. We were all expected to be polite to one another, of course, but there are still subgroups of friendships wherever you go in life.
At these great, inclusive schools, is everyone really entitled to join every group? I understand that everyone is able to try out for the groups, but do the groups have to accept everyone? If everyone wanted to be a cheerleader, are they going to have 450 of them? An unlimited number of flute players in the band? No cuts for the club soccer team? Even for groups that welcome everyone, they still have limits. Not all 1400 members of the student body can be on the school newspaper or take a turn as student body president.
It is often discussed on CC that ‘joining’ the Honors college is a good way to turn a big college into a smaller one. Well, you can’t just sign up for the Honors college, you have to be selected. Only one of two students with similar qualifications might be selected. At the colleges with the house system, a student might not get into the house he wants.
Everyone is welcome to try out for the sorority or fraternity she/he wants to join. Not everyone will be accepted. I don’t see a difference in limiting the size of the Greek group or limiting the size of the newspaper staff or the cheer leading squad or the intramural teams.
Some have. Most haven’t. I think all the “shoulds” that people are using are assuming that anything less than full inclusion is by definition bad. I don’t necessarily agree. Neither do most of the colleges in the U.S. And, I would assume neither do the students who chose to go to a school that allows for any kind of affinity-based social groups (fraternities and sororities are only example).
For everyone on this thread who keeps saying that others "don’t get it " “your off base” or things are “irrelevant”, they " get it " they just don’t agree with it and won’t ever agree with a differing viewpoint based on the last 25 posts. And that’s OK because everyone is entitled to their opinion. One is neither more “relevant” or “right” than the next.
One needs to deal in reality, carolinamom. And if one contends that if you are not “chosen” to be in a house (or choose not to rush), you can’t have friendships with anyone in that house, one is not dealing in reality. Likewise, if one contends that being Greek means you cannot initiate, maintain or build friendships outside one’s house, one is not dealing in reality.
My point being @Pizzagirl that you cannot force someone to live in reality if they choose not to and are not breaking any laws or hurting anyone else. They will believe what they choose to believe no matter how much you attempt to influence their reality.
That would be a great point if anyone had indicated they disagreed with that in this thread. You keep repeating it but no one is refuting it.
I’ve been doing some self-reflection to try to understand why I am taking the stance I have on this (and other) threads about the legitimacy of the Greek system (or other social-affinity groups) on campus. I was in a sorority 30+ years ago when I was in college, but it was a neutral—at best—experience. I walked away from it feeling ambivalent about my two years as a “sorority girl.” And when my daughter decided to go through rush in January, I had mixed feelings, as did she.
The OP’s son seems to have both suffered but also grown beyond his negative experience. I guess I want other kids (and families) contemplating rush to be prepared for the possibility of disappointment but also not be afraid to take the plunge into pledging if they think that’s something that they might want.
This is why I’ve decided this is a debate-worthy topic on college website:
-
I really do feel that the Greek experience and the way the system impacts on students and the university is different from the prevailing stereotype. Moreover, it differs from school-to-school and house-to-house. If my daughter had made her decisions purely based on those inaccurate assumptions about what the Greek system is, she would have missed out on an opportunity that I feel will add to her college experience.
-
Honestly, I think my daughter benefited from being part of a “selective” admission process. She faced her fears, dealt with rejection, and was happy with her performance and her decisions at the end of rush. She wasn’t crushed. She gained confidence and also empathy. But she also went into the process with the kind of mindset that would lead to success—she wasn’t over-invested in the process or any one house, she was open-minded, and she was adamant about being true to herself.
-
I also think the way that students involved in Greek life are portrayed is often unfair. And now that group includes my own daughter and many of her friends. Rejection and prejudgment goes both ways. The media is quick to jump on misconduct among college kids in general and members of GLOs in particular. But for every bro singing disgustingly racist songs on a bus or covering up sexual misconduct there are many, many more good guys working for campus causes and simply doing what they’re supposed to be doing—getting a good education. My daughter is the same nerdy, nurturing, shy, studious, and, above all, kind and well-meaning kid she has always been. When she is on the other side of the recruitment process, I’m confident that she will try her best to meet each and every PNM with an open mind and an open heart. I don’t like the idea that people will assume that she is a social-climbing party girl or pretentious mean girl based on her involvement in one of her many ECs.
-
(Personal and selfish reason:) I’ll admit that I love a good debate. Especially when the only other alternative is cleaning the house or doing my taxes, which is what faced me this afternoon.
As long as the “lower-tier” sororities have to take every single girl that nobody else wants, then they have very little chance to improve.
One of the things fraternities and sororities want to do is attract members of the opposite sex. People don’t care how many members there are in a chapter, they care how attractive, smart, and put together they are. Far better not to make quota if it means having a chapter filled with exactly the type of girls that you want to have.
How common are “strong hierarchy” fraternity and sorority systems compared to “weak or no hierarchy” fraternity and sorority systems?
Yes they do. For example, at my alma mater (Brandeis) every organization that operates on campus is required to have open membership to anybody who wants to join. The only exception are those organizations that require special skills or talent (singing groups, sports teams, etc.).
Sounds very school specific. It’s hard to make blanket statements on policy based on what happens at several schools. It’s great that those schools exist for students who are looking for that environment, but it’s certainly the exception not the norm.
““weak or no hierarchy” fraternity and sorority systems?”
Maybe these exist at schools with a small handful of chapters. There are schools where the pecking order is set in stone and really important, and schools where the pecking order is more fluid and of lower importance, but pecking orders seem to be universal or close to it.
I don’t know much about Brandeis or other schools of it’s ilk but I have a hard time believing that student government (for example) allows in as many people who want to participate without some form of selection process. If the homecoming committee only needs 30 people and 50 want to join, do they have to take all of them? I know they sure didn’t at any school I’m familiar with (including high schools). I don’t agree with the notion that everyone who attends a particular school should automatically be able to force themselves into every club or committee anyway. It seems to be poor preparation for life in the world outside the college bubble.
I’m very glad the OP’s son has recovered from his disappointment and is moving forward in a positive way.
“have a hard time believing that student government (for example) allows in as many people who want to participate without some form of selection process.”
That’s how it worked for me at Bryn Mawr (small lefty women’s school with no Greek system). Student government leadership positions were elected, but anyone who wanted to participate in the meetings could. Ditto the debate team; you just showed up if you wanted to join (I did). In other words, you might not be a starter, but anyone who wants to come to practice and be on the team can do it. Some of the artistic groups had auditions while others took all comers. In fact, that was true even at Harvard. Everyone who wants to be in a choir at Harvard is guaranteed a spot; some ensembles are selective and some take everyone who shows up.
"As long as the “lower-tier” sororities have to take every single girl that nobody else wants, then they have very little chance to improve.
One of the things fraternities and sororities want to do is attract members of the opposite sex. People don’t care how many members there are in a chapter, they care how attractive, smart, and put together they are. Far better not to make quota if it means having a chapter filled with exactly the type of girls that you want to have."
Ew, so better a bunch of girls are disappointed entirely?
“How common are “strong hierarchy” fraternity and sorority systems compared to “weak or no hierarchy” fraternity and sorority systems?”
It would be difficult for us to answer, when at most we have opinions/experience at a handful of schools. Unless you’re someone like Hanna, who has broad experiences. And whether it’s “strong” or “weak” hierarchy is pretty subjective. Obviously at any school there will be some who think that there is a strong hierarchy and care about “rankings” and those who couldn’t care less and just have fun with their friends.
I suppose the marker could be -ask the non-Greeks who are considered the top houses and see if there is uniformity in response - but why on god’s green earth should they know or care about it? Hierarchy is only important to the types of people who care about hierarchy in the first place.
On some campuses where pan-hellenic Greek organizations dominate the campus culture and social life, information on what are top houses tends to be publicized in such a ubiquitous manner that it’s hard to miss or ignore even if one’s not a member. .
This was the case at the Big 10 colleges in which my older cousins not only attended, but were also members and chapter officers of their respective fraternity/sorority chapters. It was one critical factor why I didn’t bother to apply to those colleges.
Michigan, Illinois, Iowa, Purdue, Indiana? Seems like the other traditional Big 10 schools have under 10% fraternity and sorority participation (although fraternity and sorority participation is nowhere close to a majority at the others).
It would be impossible for a ‘lower tiered’ house to move up if it doesn’t take new members at full quota. Why? The first evaluation point is whether the house took quota. Another criteria is if those invited and accepting bids were on the first bid sheet (the quota). None of that really matters to anyone, including the girls. Everyone is really happy if all the houses on campus take quota and every PNM finds a house.
I don’t think it really matters much. It’s like being the #1 Pizza Place in town. According to what survey? House A claims to be the best, #1, top of the mountain, but so does House B. It is like Yale arguing its incoming class is the best because it didn’t take anyone off the waitlist and more of its students were also accepted to Princeton and Harvard but chose Yale. Then Harvard argues that its class is so superior the incoming class didn’t even apply to Yale. As long as everyone has a college, does it matter?
PanHell tries to keep the houses about the same size. There might be fluctuations but they even out over a 10 year span or so. Fraternities tend to vary more in size, and some like smaller houses and others like the big party machines.