Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteRose1912
I'm not saying it should be an either/or scenario. Yes, we should be more proactive in keeping alumnae engaged. (As an aside, I don't think threatening to revoke their memberships would do that; they're of the mindset that their membership is over when they graduate, so what do they care?) But also we should be welcoming qualified women into our sisterhoods who wish to pledge a commitment to our organizations but are older than teenagers. I imagine they'd be more committed alumnae, although I have nothing to back that hunch up, and alumnae associations or sponsoring chapters could take all the time they need to get to know the PNAM and vet her. It's not like there's a rush period.
The common bond between sisters should be the shared ritual they've all experienced and the values they strive to uphold, not a collegiate experience which is going to vary wildly from sister to sister anyway.
|
I think there's room for both kinds of alumnae. And I think there are places where an alumnae chapter might like to take on NPHC-style recruitment, in places where alumnae involvement is really high and there would be interest from the community at large, or in a smaller community where a collegiate chapter has just colonized (a new chapter in Montana, for instance). But there would have to already be a solid alumnae chapter in place for this to work. God knows I wouldn't want headquarters cramming alumnae recruitment down our throats, but I could see some scenarios where it could be very successful. I don't like the idea that a woman missed out on an opportunity at 18 and she's just outta luck for the rest of her life. But I also don't think we should be out there desperately trying to double our alumnae population either. I'm all about compromise these days, and I think there's plenty of room for it here.
