College women are embracing — and rethinking — the Greek life experience. And not just on the campuses you’d expect: in the Ivy League.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/fashion/sorority-ivy-league-feminists.html
Not surprising in the least. I know several young women who are ardent Bernie supporters, about as liberal progressive as one can be, activist in many causes, etc who are very active in Greek orgs even as alums. (One, in fact, wrote her master’s thesis for the U of Chicago on the bonds formed in her DG experience as an undergrad).
Sororities were founded by women who were trailblazers, who were fighting for women’s education and other issues. The rabble-rousers of their day. My house was established by a well known suffragette who has a statue in the US Capitol honoring her achievements. They stood for many of the same qualities that women’s colleges did - empowering women to take their place in the world.
For whatever reason, the meme of bubble-headed bleach blondes has dominated the discourse, especially on CC.
Agreed Pizzagirl. Sororities were founded on inherently feminist ideals by women who were pursuing higher education at a time when it wasn’t necessarily common or encouraged. Much of my sorority’s programming, both at the chapter and national level, is strongly rooted in feminist principles.
Drive down frat row at any big university on a Saturday night and you’ll see the stereotype on ample, dominant display.
Not all universities are big. Not all have frat rows that you drive down. At my school, you walked. :-). Or you didn’t. It was not a requirement that you go to frat parties.
D1 was in a sorority and also in the alternative-grading, cooperative-living “school within a school” at her college. I consider her to be a feminist.
And not all sorority women visit fraternity row. I know a good number of my sorority sisters who never (or very rarely) went to frat parties and still had active, enjoyable social and academic lives. I also knew a lot of sisters who went to fraternity parties and still had active, enjoyable social and academic lives outside of that. Going to fraternity parties, although not something I personally enjoyed (I think I went to 1 or 2 before deciding that it just wasn’t my thing), is not necessarily incompatible with being a feminist.
I was a feminist in 1976 (still am) when I pledged!
Not sure being an ardent Bernie Sanders supporter necessarily means one is “about as liberal progressive as one can be”.
While Bernie Sanders’ is considered radically liberal progressive nowadays, that’s actually more of an indication of how much US society has shifted radically rightward since the heyday of the New Deal in the '30s*, the degree of political right-leanings of the alternative candidates currently in the running, and the fact his Democratic opponent has issues trying to convince many center-left and liberal progressives that she’s not “Republican-lite”. Especially those in the millennial generation and some cohorts among Gen X.
Ironically, many actual radical lefty FB friends who were older Oberlin classmates are reserved in their support for Sanders because they feel he doesn’t go far enough on the issues they support and have some issues with some political stances(I.e. gun control):
http://www.courant.com/politics/elections/hc-bernie-sanders-guns-newtown-20160407-story.html
- Much of his political platform is similar to FDR's New Deal policies which weren't considered very radical by most Americans of his era. He was elected to office for 4 terms.
True. However, feminism…especially the first wave had a mixed record when it came to being liberal progressive even for their contemporary era:
The inescapable fact remains that black men had the vote long before black–and white–women.
Black men could and did own other people long before the Married Women’s Property Act.
The women’s suffrage movement was not perfect, especially viewed from the perspective of theorists a hundred or more years later, but do not try to diminish what they were fighting for, that they were willing to actually give their lives for it, or what they accomplished. THAT is what is deeply offensive!
Oh, and regarding the article, a lot of what they say in terms of networking and support and so on is what is found in women’s colleges.
I’m not sure one can say black people, especially in some regions of the US meaningfully had the vote when massive efforts by the local/regional White elite establishment did their utmost to restrict or even effectively ban it. Some of the measures range from the arbitrarily enforced poll tax or literacy tests* to the outright use of armed vigilante groups such as the KKK which were considered so serious President Grant’s administration had to use Federal troops stationed during reconstruction to attempt to put them down. Unfortunately, that became moot once reconstruction ended which left the local White elite establishment free to use all means at their disposal to effectively ban Black and other minorities from voting.;
And this continued openly well into the 1960’s and is reoccurring again with the troubling voter suppression efforts many of the same areas with past history of active suppression of Black and other non-White voting rights.
http://billmoyers.com/story/on-super-tuesday-hundreds-of-thousands-may-be-barred-from-voting/
I’m a bit perplexed by the sheer obliviousness to the actual history and documented experiences in the above-quoted statement. Especially considering some of the very same issues are still happening to some degree in the very present.
Ironically, it also underscores the article’s point that feminist movements, especially the first wave had a mixed record when it comes to being progressive even for its time.
- Determination of whether one was "literate" and reading material used was often deliberately chosen to ensure even the most educated Black citizens** of the era wouldn't pass whereas White citizens were given easier tests or exempted from the literacy test altogether.
** They could make it so a Black citizen with an elite U graduate degree would fail.
They had the vote, legally, even if they were blocked by racists in the South.
Voter suppression is not the topic the OP wished to talk about when she posted her piece. Let’s try again.
Many of the national sororities were founded by women who were the activists/agitators/leaders of their day - women who were agitating for other women to have a full role in society, in education, in social causes, and (in the case of my house) working towards the vote for women.
This is simply not arguable.
“The women’s suffrage movement was not perfect, especially viewed from the perspective of theorists a hundred or more years later, but do not try to diminish what they were fighting for, that they were willing to actually give their lives for it, or what they accomplished. THAT is what is deeply offensive!”
Darn right.
Anyway focusing on suffrage misses the point. That is an EXAMPLE of the types of social movements that a lot of these sorority-founders were involved in.
Many special interest groups form to provide support within a bigger group. Bar associations will have the Women’s Bar associal, the Hispanic bar association, the real estate bar. The groups share interests and support, information, and like to socialize. Sororities were formed at colleges which were at the time male dominated. Black sororities and fraternities also formed.
I sent this article to my daughter. This is what she wrote back: “And I’m proud to say I’m a feminist and in a sorority. And most of my sisters would say the same thing. They are really such kind and genuine women and I’m so glad (greek letters for her sorority—edited) brought us all together.” That doesn’t mean the bubble-headed blonde stereotype doesn’t exist. But it is far from universal.
(And, by the way, she is one of those liberal activist Bernie supporters. 
)
You implied past feminists
as progressives.
My point in my first post here was to point out that feminism in the US/UK had a very mixed record on that.
Especially considering the historical fact that while Black advocates for abolition and racial equality like Frederick Douglass were also prominent supporters of early feminist movements, it’s a sad fact that within a matter of decades this was not only forgotten, but many feminists effectively threw Black and other racial minorities “under the bus” as shown here:
Others like Rebecca Ann Latimer Felton who was the first female senator were staunch racists to begin with as shown by the fact she publicly advocated for more lynchings and the denials of rights to Black and other minorities. Granted, it probably wouldn’t be considered too surprising considering she also happens to be one of the last senators who was a slaveowner. Incidentally, her frequent staunch calling for lynchings and denial of rights to Blacks and minorities were such that they were considered regressive and reprehensible by many even in her time.
In short, the early US mainstream feminist movement had a very mixed record of being “progressives”. Especially considering some critical actions and arguments used to advance women’s rights were actually quite regressive as they effectively threw their Black and other minority allies…including women “under the bus” in the process and substantially undermined their fight for equality until the '60s…and that fight is still ongoing to this day as issues as the voter suppression, one issue among many illustrates
bump
@cobrat you’re exactly right. Sanders isn’t exactly what I’d call moderate, but he is definitely not radically left. If one thinks that, they should take a trip to the USSR or China in the 1930s.