Phi Sigma Sigma discontinues legacy policy.

[APhi2KD]

Okay...

Legacy--It's tough for alumnae to lose the status that is *sometimes and not uniformly* afforded to their legacies. Legacy status has been decreasing over the years anyway. It also can be devastating to the alumna when their legacy gets cut.

Appearance- Yes, many chapters are too focused on looks. However, if PNMs could ask one question going into recruitment, my guess would be over 90% would ask, "what do I wear?"

A new business suit for an interview is a good analogy, but this is a SERIES of interviews requiring different classes of attire, from very casual to formal/cocktail. AND "interview" clothing for women can also bring a variety of results. For men, "Dockers, collar and khakis, business suit, suit and tie, etc." are much more definitive.

MANY girls opt to get new clothing for each event, but many of them have most of the requirements already in their closet. Just as they could do their own nails or put their belongings in a large ziplock or market bag, many OPT for manicures and Kate Spade/Tori Burch bags and sandals.

Dues- It would be wonderful to make dues more affordable for all and yes, having to pay dues does create exclusivity. But that is a larger barrier/step and one that would take more time.

Recommendations- I have mixed emotions. First choice would always be someone that knows the PNM personally. Not always possible, which brings us to the way many are done now. This is because "they are required". Yes, some sororities require them prior to granting a bid, but the larger issue of needing a rec for each house on SEC campuses, etc., has created an environment of meaningless recs that actives do not even read. It checks a block.

If we want to truly encourage inclusion, recs either need to be done away with OR accepted from non-alumnae, if necessary. In many cases a good letter of recommendation from a teacher would mean much more than the ones that are submitted today. But that would mean a return to actually READING the recommendations and that makes me cringe for the recruitment committees at large greek schools. Having to read, absorb, and prioritize them would be an enormous undertaking. Perhaps NPC alumnae groups should venture into less exclusive high schools to recruit and meet girls and set them up with recs.

These are all tough issues, but I am hearing a lot of what sounds like a blanket resistance to change. And if you want to maintain exclusivity in terms of QUALITY, some barriers need to go because race is NOT an accurate predictor of quality -- as some current NPC members are showing us daily.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by APhi2KD

Perhaps NPC alumnae groups should venture into less exclusive high schools to recruit and meet girls and set them up with recs.

Is there any intimidation or resistance felt by students from less exclusive highschools when they are asked to meet with women from NPC Alumnae Groups? How often does this type of potential PNM end up an initiated NPC member?

[shadokat]

OK, so do you think PNMs are so focused on what to wear because chapters are too focused on looks or vice versa? Do you honestly believe that a woman at say Georgia could roll into recruitment with a large ziplock or market bag and not be immediately eliminated from consideration? I personally witnessed a woman get laughed at and ridiculed because she had a fake Kate Spade bag in the early 2000s, and the "fake label" was becoming unstuck due to the extreme heat of the Georgia weather.

As an Alpha Phi, you've likely experienced some backlash with the Alpha Phi membership selection "scandal." What's Alpha Phi's stance on all this?

The whole point of this is that meaningful change is about more than eliminating a legacy policy. And if NPC groups are going to hang their hat on inclusion by eliminating legacy policies, then all of our groups need changes in leadership quickly.

I personally have a little resistance to change, but I understand that change is necessary to evolve. Legacy policy elimination is change for PR/image sake, and it's baffling why it's being celebrated. Again, my opinion alone. Not the opinion of my chapter or my organization that I know of.

Originally Posted by APhi2KD

Okay...


Appearance- Yes, many chapters are too focused on looks. However, if PNMs could ask one question going into recruitment, my guess would be over 90% would ask, "what do I wear?"

MANY girls opt to get new clothing for each event, but many of them have most of the requirements already in their closet. Just as they could do their own nails or put their belongings in a large ziplock or market bag, many OPT for manicures and Kate Spade/Tori Burch bags and sandals.

Dues- It would be wonderful to make dues more affordable for all and yes, having to pay dues does create exclusivity. But that is a larger barrier/step and one that would take more time.

Recommendations- I have mixed emotions. First choice would always be someone that knows the PNM personally. Not always possible, which brings us to the way many are done now. This is because "they are required". Yes, some sororities require them prior to granting a bid, but the larger issue of needing a rec for each house on SEC campuses, etc., has created an environment of meaningless recs that actives do not even read. It checks a block.

If we want to truly encourage inclusion, recs either need to be done away with OR accepted from non-alumnae, if necessary. In many cases a good letter of recommendation from a teacher would mean much more than the ones that are submitted today. But that would mean a return to actually READING the recommendations and that makes me cringe for the recruitment committees at large greek schools. Having to read, absorb, and prioritize them would be an enormous undertaking. Perhaps NPC alumnae groups should venture into less exclusive high schools to recruit and meet girls and set them up with recs.

These are all tough issues, but I am hearing a lot of what sounds like a blanket resistance to change. And if you want to maintain exclusivity in terms of QUALITY, some barriers need to go because race is NOT an accurate predictor of quality -- as some current NPC members are showing us daily.

[Sororitysock]

Originally Posted by shadokat

OK, so do you think PNMs are so focused on what to wear because chapters are too focused on looks or vice versa? Do you honestly believe that a woman at say Georgia could roll into recruitment with a large ziplock or market bag and not be immediately eliminated from consideration? I personally witnessed a woman get laughed at and ridiculed because she had a fake Kate Spade bag in the early 2000s, and the "fake label" was becoming unstuck due to the extreme heat of the Georgia weather.

As an Alpha Phi, you've likely experienced some backlash with the Alpha Phi membership selection "scandal." What's Alpha Phi's stance on all this?

The whole point of this is that meaningful change is about more than eliminating a legacy policy. And if NPC groups are going to hang their hat on inclusion by eliminating legacy policies, then all of our groups need changes in leadership quickly.

I personally have a little resistance to change, but I understand that change is necessary to evolve. Legacy policy elimination is change for PR/image sake, and it's baffling why it's being celebrated. Again, my opinion alone. Not the opinion of my chapter or my organization that I know of.

I just had a conversation with some Panhellenic sisters about the changes and how they're being celebrated. We wondered if everyone would have been so positive if it were Alpha Phi leading the charge. Would the perspective be different? Would we look at them as only changing their Legacy Policy so they could avoid being forced to bring legacies who don't meet their "standards" into the first invitational round instead of inviting only women who meet those "standards." We came to the conclusion that there would be a lot more pitchforks and torches if that were the case.

[GreekOne]

If NPC is truly interested in making meaningful change (and not just seeming relevant due to the optics of the moment) there should be some research done. How many minority women register for formal recruitment? How many first gen students register? How many from these groups receive bids? Maybe they have that data and it is just not universally accessible. I have never been privy.

Campuses that have upperclass quotas have established those to give these otherwise overlooked pnms an equal opportunity of receiving a bid.

If the data shows an interest by POC and first gen students (who have presumably been overlooked in favor of legacies) then the elimination of these policies may be warranted. Perhaps then we need to establish a separate quota for these overlooked pnms?

I suspect the data may show that lack of diversity has much less to do with legacy policies and rec letters. It likely has much more to do with the financial burden. And, if the numbers point there, as many others have said, what are our organizations willing to give up to make membership more affordable?

Do we restructure recruitment to 4 rounds in the Panhel provided tshirt? Do we let our housing decor become dated? Do we eliminate in person training for our members to cut travel costs? Eliminate national office staff and traveling consultants? Do we redirect money raised for our philanthropies to more needs based scholarships for pnms?

I have no doubt the groups dropping their legacy policies are well- intentioned. I just don't think it is going to bring about the change that most hope it will.

If NPC has captured the statistics on diversity now, I would love to see a comparative study in 10 years. Without far more than a change to legacy policy, I suspect this data will remain unchanged.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by GreekOne

Campuses that have upperclass quotas have established those to give these otherwise overlooked pnms an equal opportunity of receiving a bid.

If the data shows an interest by POC and first gen students (who have presumably been overlooked in favor of legacies) then the elimination of these policies may be warranted. Perhaps then we need to establish a separate quota for these overlooked pnms?

I'm sorry, no. A separate quota for every chapter on a campus to follow during rush, for "a particular type of POC/first gen overlooked PMN", isn't necessary.

But I'd like to know whether Bama ever truly used or still uses a separate POC quota [in relation to past 15-20 years of Bama sorority recruitment issues].

What comes next, a separate quota for PNMs with cranberryblue hair?

And finally, not every campus considers upperclassmen as 'overlooked' in their purpose for calling it UC quota.

[carnation]

Ohhh no, we do not want to go back to quotas for various groups. That turned into a swamp back in the day. And I can see where it would lead to, like girls lying about being first generation college students so they could slide into that quota group.

[navane]

Originally Posted by GreekOne

If NPC is truly interested in making meaningful change (and not just seeming relevant due to the optics of the moment) there should be some research done. How many minority women register for formal recruitment? How many first gen students register? How many from these groups receive bids? Maybe they have that data and it is just not universally accessible. I have never been privy.

Campuses that have upperclass quotas have established those to give these otherwise overlooked pnms an equal opportunity of receiving a bid.

If the data shows an interest by POC and first gen students (who have presumably been overlooked in favor of legacies) then the elimination of these policies may be warranted. Perhaps then we need to establish a separate quota for these overlooked pnms?

I suspect the data may show that lack of diversity has much less to do with legacy policies and rec letters. It likely has much more to do with the financial burden. And, if the numbers point there, as many others have said, what are our organizations willing to give up to make membership more affordable?

Do we restructure recruitment to 4 rounds in the Panhel provided tshirt? Do we let our housing decor become dated? Do we eliminate in person training for our members to cut travel costs? Eliminate national office staff and traveling consultants? Do we redirect money raised for our philanthropies to more needs based scholarships for pnms?

I have no doubt the groups dropping their legacy policies are well- intentioned. I just don't think it is going to bring about the change that most hope it will.

If NPC has captured the statistics on diversity now, I would love to see a comparative study in 10 years. Without far more than a change to legacy policy, I suspect this data will remain unchanged.

I like where you're going in terms of looking at the data to truly see if we can suss out the trends, identify potential obstacles to membership, and identify possible solutions.

I agree with the others that separate quotas are not the answer; but, that one suggestion doesn't dismiss your whole post. You brought up a lot of valid ideas and considerations.

One issue I do see is.....human factors. If we were to all "agree" that financial means was a problem and we all "agree" to cut down on costs, I firmly believe that there will still be chapters which won't truly hold themselves to that. They will still post photos of members on trips to Greece, members on yachts, and members with expensive handbags to the chapter Insta and whatnot. They will still find some way to spend $$$ during recruitment. It's human nature to want to be better than everyone else. No one wants to be the financially sensible chapter that gets left behind because we all know they will be left in the dust by the big spending chapters doing big, flashy things. It seems that some chapters these days are selling an image more than sisterhood Those professional-grade recruitment videos cost money and the money has to come from somewhere. Once one chapter ups their game and raises the bar on their videos, house, formal dances, etc, then there goes the neighborhood!

So, as you were suggesting, how do we make sorority membership more financially accessible? Food for thought.....

[carnation]

Here's what I would not want to see. Have any of you ever been the parent of a child who had several field trips and you were thinking they were pretty pricey? And then you found out that some parents were required to pay a lot so that other kids could go on the trip?

Sounds very sweet but some of us who were paying are very middle class, with several children, and paying for other kids to go is not in the budget. I know of several parents who just refused to let their kids go on field trips if they were the trips where some people were paying for the whole class. Nobody knows what anyone's financial status is!

What I'm saying is that I would hate it if some people had to pay elevated dues so that others could join. If you want Greek life that much, you can always work to pay your dues. (I had 3 jobs at one time.)

[DGTess]

I see elitism in the idea that diversity stems from not being able to afford a sorority That implies women of color, first-generation college students, and immigrants who don't know sororities are all economically disadvantaged.

Consider the small-town (probably northern) freshman. It's entirely possible she doesn't consider greek life at all. Or all she sees is the movie stereotypes where all the fashion plates laugh at the real women How do we get these women interested in joining?

How do we get the first-generation American interested in joining?

How do we get women of color interested? I know in my school in the dark ages, black women who rushed/pledged were treated horribly by the black groups, some of whom were D9 but most of whom were not; I don't know if that dynamic still plays.

I believe the legacy policies, the rec requirements, and our utter failure to reach out to those who are not like us - before they come to school - are serious failings. Sure, MS, AL, TX alumnae groups reach out - to those who already know about sororities - by "we'll hold a seminar and if you're interested you'll come", not by approaching those who don't. What happens in other areas? How do we reach out to others? And if we don't, how can we say we're really interested in them?

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by DGTess

I see elitism in the idea that diversity stems from not being able to afford a sorority That implies women of color, first-generation college students, and immigrants who don't know sororities are all economically disadvantaged.

I don't think anyone is saying that diversity stems from the lack of affordability, or that they are ALL economically disadvantaged; it is a piece of the puzzle, and one of many considerations we need to include as we figure out how to be more diverse.

[carnation]

Several high schools where I've taught have had Panhellenic meetings in which sororities were explained to college-bound seniors and all kinds of great advice was given to them. We talked to women of every race but the black students almost all wanted NPHC. It was understandable but it's frustrating when people are going on about how we MUST be diverse and you know you've tried for years to attract a more diverse crowd of PNMs.