Greek Family,
I was having a conversation with a sistergreek the other day when the topic of greek life came up. She made an interesting comparison between helping people in their quest for greekdom and affirmative action. Her main point was that many greeks are hypocritical in that many of us believe in the institution of affirmative action as a means of getting us to places that our efforts alone would not take us. In her opinion, the hypocrisy lies in that we don’t adopt that same attitude as it pertains to greek life. Many greeks maintain the mantra “I got mine the hard way…you need to get yours the same way” instead of wanting to make things easier for those who come behind us. I know what you are going to say: “They will appreciate my organization better if they have to work for it.” While this may be true, African-American doctors, lawyers, and educators who went through the Aff. Act. System are viewed no less than those who made it the hard way. What do you think? Is her comparison legitimate?
I’m interested in hearing your thoughts. Since this post is so long, I will give my opinion at a later time.
Additionally, while this post is intended for greeks, substantial responses from non-greeks are welcome.
#13—Prima Donna
i don't agree with AA in greek orgs either
I'm just saying you don't have to pledge everyone
everyone doesn't respond to that nor will they accept and appreciate it
there are other ways to get your message out
and please believe that real men are NOT omegas
Many greeks maintain the mantra “I got mine the hard way…you need to get yours the same way” instead of wanting to make things easier for those who come behind us. I know what you are going to say: “They will appreciate my organization better if they have to work for it.” While this may be true, African-American doctors, lawyers, and educators who went through the Aff. Act. System are viewed no less than those who made it the hard way. What do you think? Is her comparison legitimate?
You made a very poignant statement here that I don't think was given enough emphasis... Affirmative action did not make doctors... it gave regular people the TOOLS they needed to pursue a medical career... In the same way, I think that the only adequate comparison in greek life would be giving (or rather making available) information about Sororities and Fraternities for interestees.... I think that for the most part, that burden has been fulfilled with chapter/national websites, interest/information forums, members themselves, and books... Perhaps it is because I don't mind working for what I DESIRE...
Going back to the analogy, the doctors were given admission to a school... their hands were not held during their residency, their rounds, or their competency tests.. They had to WORK, RESEARCH, STUDY,and ENDURE HARDSHIPS to get to where they are... The same applies to Greek Life... By virtue of the nature of humans, we don't necessarily put as much value on things that we (or someone we know) did not work for. Take our wonderful AfricanAmerican race as an example... Do you think that some people would act how they act if THEY had to sit at the back of the bus? or if they were hosed down for being in a WHITE only area? With each generation, comes a grop of people that were DESTINED to be set apart so that they could lead the way for the others... Among them were the riotous slaves in Haiti, the freedom fighters of the 50s and 60s, the diligent entrepeneurs and thinkers of the 20s, and the FOUNDERS of these sororities and fraternities that you hold so dear....
All, to make an affirmative action comparison, you have to evaluate where the affirmative action would be taking place. Would it be in giving information, or in Adding-on to pre-existing lines... I think that people need to STOP complaining and BUCK UP... if they were destined to be greek, then their are some things that they need to endure so that when they cross those burning sands, they will have SOMETHING to give God the glory for...
::Counts change in pocket::
and that's my $0.46 cents...
::comes down from soapbox::
but more than that, I don't believe that a person should be turned away due to personal prejudice.
What other reasoning would we use to turn people away?
I may be confused, but are you implying that if a person is more than qualified to be accepted on the line and you believe they would prolly be a great asset to your frat/soro, but they dont fit a certain look or sumthing of the sort...thats a legitamit reason to not let them in?
but more than that, I don't believe that a person should be turned away due to personal prejudice.
What other reasoning would we use to turn people away?
I may be confused, but are you implying that if a person is more than qualified to be accepted on the line and you believe they would prolly be a great asset to your frat/soro, but they dont fit a certain look or sumthing of the sort...thats a legitamit reason to not let them in?
You're not confused.
But let me turn it around.
Wouldn't that same personal prejudice, or in this case preference, be why we would choose this person over that one?
When you have 250 QUALIFIED applicants, and don't accept them all, what reasoning can you use in order to select or reject other than personal reasons?
but more than that, I don't believe that a person should be turned away due to personal prejudice.
What other reasoning would we use to turn people away?
I may be confused, but are you implying that if a person is more than qualified to be accepted on the line and you believe they would prolly be a great asset to your frat/soro, but they dont fit a certain look or sumthing of the sort...thats a legitamit reason to not let them in?
You're not confused.
But let me turn it around.
Wouldn't that same personal prejudice, or in this case preference, be why we would choose this person over that one?
When you have 250 QUALIFIED applicants, and don't accept them all, what reasoning can you use in order to select or reject other than personal reasons?
ok, now that you have used that type of scenario I do understand what you mean cause all you have left to weed out some of the best of the best is personal prejudices and reasons, because as far as everything else they are basically equal as far as being above and beyond in what u may be looking for...BUT it still seems " wrong " lol...but I can empathize with where you are coming from, cause you are kinda left with no other choice but that when it comes down to the wire...
ok, now that you have used that type of scenario I do understand what you mean cause all you have left to weed out some of the best of the best is personal prejudices and reasons, because as far as everything else they are basically equal as far as being above and beyond in what u may be looking for...BUT it still seems " wrong " lol...but I can empathize with where you are coming from, cause you are kinda left with no other choice but that when it comes down to the wire...
But there is no other way to do it.
Some GLOs operate by invite and don't have to worry about large interest meetings.
But groups that have 300 to 400 people show up for a rush/interest meeting and have 250 folks that meet and/or exceed both the local and national criteria have to do what is in the nest interest of their chapter, not the aspirant.
Decisions have to be made on people we feel that will best serve the chapter in the long run.
Sometimes these decisions are esoteric, other times these decisions are based personal scenarios.
I'd rather not bring a person into my chapter if one of My Bruhs has a real or perceived personal problem with them.
In the long run this can only serve to undermine the morale and unity of the chapter.
I'd rather exclude a member based on the rationale provided by a current member than to let someone in to see how things work themselves out.
That's how folks get crazy hazed up, cuz now this current member has a target and an agenda to try to make this aspirant drop.
Some times these decisions are based on how we've interacted with this person on campus.
Just being a member of various campus organizations doesn't cut it.
Was this person active? Was that person a worker in that organization? Was this person leader in that organization? Would that organization miss that person if they weren't ever a member?
So when you take these questions into account the weight of their involvement takes on another dynamic altogether.
Now just imagine only inviting people to your interest meeting that meet the "paper" requirements and still having 50 plus people there.
Once you get down to the "cream of the crop" of your aspirant pool EVERY decision made about who to select from that point on will be personal.
but more than that, I don't believe that a person should be turned away due to personal prejudice.
What other reasoning would we use to turn people away?
Character, reputation, moral standards etc--these are good reasons in my opinion. Not because she made the cheerleading squad and you didn't, or she's not light enough, or the guy you like is interested in her. These are superficial reasons, and I think that decisions based on these criteria are wrong.
Quote:
Decisions have to be made on people we feel that will best serve the chapter in the long run.
You are 100% correct. Of course, when you have 200 at the interest meeting and 100+ that are qualified, it is going to be difficult to decide from that pool. But when you overlook a qualified candidate and choose someone who is significantly less qualified just because she is your friend or something like that, I don't think it is in the best interest of the chapter or the org at large.
Friends don't necessarily make good sorors. I want someone who is going to work. Sisterhood comes first, of course, but service is a strong second. What is she going to bring to the chapter? Can I trust that my chapter is going to be in good hands after I graduate? I want that assurance, so I want to select someone who will give me that kind of peace.
#13--Prima Donna
ok, now that you have used that type of scenario I do understand what you mean cause all you have left to weed out some of the best of the best is personal prejudices and reasons, because as far as everything else they are basically equal as far as being above and beyond in what u may be looking for...BUT it still seems " wrong " lol...but I can empathize with where you are coming from, cause you are kinda left with no other choice but that when it comes down to the wire...
But there is no other way to do it.
Some GLOs operate by invite and don't have to worry about large interest meetings.
But groups that have 300 to 400 people show up for a rush/interest meeting and have 250 folks that meet and/or exceed both the local and national criteria have to do what is in the nest interest of their chapter, not the aspirant.
Decisions have to be made on people we feel that will best serve the chapter in the long run.
Sometimes these decisions are esoteric, other times these decisions are based personal scenarios.
I'd rather not bring a person into my chapter if one of My Bruhs has a real or perceived personal problem with them.
In the long run this can only serve to undermine the morale and unity of the chapter.
I'd rather exclude a member based on the rationale provided by a current member than to let someone in to see how things work themselves out.
That's how folks get crazy hazed up, cuz now this current member has a target and an agenda to try to make this aspirant drop.
Some times these decisions are based on how we've interacted with this person on campus.
Just being a member of various campus organizations doesn't cut it.
Was this person active? Was that person a worker in that organization? Was this person leader in that organization? Would that organization miss that person if they weren't ever a member?
So when you take these questions into account the weight of their involvement takes on another dynamic altogether.
Now just imagine only inviting people to your interest meeting that meet the "paper" requirements and still having 50 plus people there.
Once you get down to the "cream of the crop" of your aspirant pool EVERY decision made about who to select from that point on will be personal.
