I'm really glad y'all didn't get the vapours from what Chris Rock said. I thought it was HILARIOUS. One of my friends texted me to see if I was offended. I didn't even respond because I didn't want to be her black perspective on that joke.

I would actually think it was more classist than racist--I know that I had no problem getting the recs I needed, and my niece certainly didn't (even at an SEC school, y'all!). That's less an individual exception than reflective of the increasing social capital of families of color.

While institutional racism is sometimes inextricably linked with classism, it's rather unfair to intimate that black/Latino automatically means "unable to get recs," because it's just as likely that a working-class white student would face the same difficulties. The institution is just as classist as it is racist.

I've always viewed that (Legacies/Recs) as being classist as well. I'm glad fraternities don't put much emphasis on them as the sororities do, because as the first in my family to go to college and not knowing a single Greek, I probably would have never received a bid.

1) It can. I used DC as an example because it's what I know and because the racial and class dynamics support my argument more. LOL

2) Are you talking about multicultural fraternities or are you talking about predominately black fraternities? Those are two different things. At any rate, we're not really talking about students who make the conscious decision to join those types of organizations, are we? And while black fraternities would have existed regardless, what we're really talking about here is the structure of white fraternities and sororities.


But in the case of a white student from a working class family, they would have still had college-educated teachers at the very least, right? To me, that's more what white privilege is-- that a white child/girl/teen could still have access to certain institutions in spite of their economic standing, rather than people of color gaining access through their economic standing.

I suppose there are always exceptions, like the white family in the predominately black school district.

I'm not sure when recs became formalized/institutionalized...that would be a good question to ask nyapbp. I do believe they perpetuate the status quo. Women don't even know to get them if they're not "hip" to the expectation. However, I think it's like having 2 recs to join a country club, or having members nominate new members for other organizations. "Recs" for any organization are not geared toward helping the "upwardly mobile" or diversifying the membership -- generally, they're geared toward recruiting those who will "fit in" with the existing expectations.

May I ask if there is some of this within NPHC groups? I've had the perception that there are very high standards for membership, legacies are valued, and those who are new to the intake expectations probably aren't going to fare as well...being clueless could ruin someone's chances.

There are some parallels but I don't think they are rooted in class.

For example:

While being a legacy, in some sense, can only help you if all parties are playing by the book, flaunting your legacy status is such a grave faux pas that you could be blackballed.

I think that aside from the cost, the various NPHC selection processes are fairly blind to social status. Service and achievement are transcendent.

And again, for those orgs where a recommendation is necessary, it's more likely that a black student from an underresourced school system had one teacher at some point who was a member of their org of interest. Remember that there are far less NPHC orgs than the others.

I don't think that's true, but even if it is, it doesn't somehow erase the institutional racism.

It's the "knowing the unwritten rules that members know" that I find compelling -- for NPC and NPHC -- it does seem to give an advantage to those with connections or enhanced prior knowledge. I have seen the mentoring teacher/administrator in action amongst two faculty members I know who are members of a particular NPHC sorority -- they are definitely involved in the recruitment process.

The cost of membership is prohibitive to many women, and we really aren't doing anything about that. You have to be able to pay. I have seen this issue come up frequently, but not overt racism (not to say it doesn't happen, just that I haven't witnessed it personally as an issue with active members).

Not that long ago, "getting recs" was not something that a PNM did. The onus was on the sorority to get a rec for her. PNMs weren't expected to do anything except show up for recruitment - all the rec stuff was with the chapter requesting recs from alumnae in the girl's hometown.

But with huge numbers of PNMs going through, there's no way a chapter could request and get recs on every girl going through. That's why the practice has become for the PNM to get her own recs. Chapters still request them from alumnae, though.

I understand what you're saying, but for clarification, are you trying to compare it to structural racism or nah?

I'm veering off on a tangent that has long weighed on my mind, which is that racist and classist structures incorporate processes that are designed to maintain the status quo, and the rec process seems to be one of those processes. It creates an obstacle...one that is easy to overcome if you readily know alumnae members, and one that is difficult (and that you may be unaware of) if you don't.

I'm really curious about how and why the process started...was it just a means to sincerely and formally recommend members and maybe keep that process fair and streamlined, or was there a more insidious purpose behind the process, like keeping out those who "don't belong?"

^^^I think that's a really interesting question. And while I don't KNOW the answer, my guess is the process started just because that's what private clubs do. Junior League to Exchange Club all require recommendations, regardless of how seriously an individual club will take that process.

But considering the NPC sororities don't seem to have fought too hard against the race issue (we did adapt relatively early in the civil rights movement, if not exactly warmly or across the board), I would guess it wasn't with malice, just an unknowing sense of entitlement. Many women throughout the last 50 years (and still) don't get that the process alone of requiring a rushee to get recs can be racist or classist (and yes, I agree that it is more classist than racist).

I would love for this to be the reason that all sororities eliminate the requirement for them. But we know how much my opinion is worth. :)

I don't mind NPC/IFC. I joined a sorority to get my Mrs. Degree. I didn't even bother going to classes or hanging out with the sisters. I just hung out with our "brother" fraternity. Them white boys were loaded! ...well at least their families were.

Did I say it erased the institutional racism? I still find that NPC sorority life is just as classist as it is racist. I did not write that it is not racist at all, did I?

Aside from any racial implications, legacy status and recs have always kind of bothered me. And again, I'll preface this by saying that I come from a small recruitment system.

While both legacy status and recs most likely helped in the past, I think they're becoming less and less important in the grand scheme of things. Not that I'm arguing that getting recs isn't important for a successful recruitment (in some places), but that their overall influence has been lost. The same goes for legacy status, as there are now too many legacies going through recruitment. And I know some sororities require that legacies make it to a certain round in the recruitment process, which can sometimes tie the hands of individual chapters. But I won't delve into specific NPC sorority policies here.

The legacy problem is clear: with the exponential increase in membership year after year, there will only be more and more legacies, the "specialness" goes away, and the numbers become too much to handle.

As for recs: I've asked it here before and I'll ask it again... why can't a recommendation come from a teacher, a coach, a pastor, an employer, a mentor, etc. of a PNM instead of a sorority alumna? Why does it make more sense for a girl to desperately search for a rec from anyone and everyone, just to check off a box that essentially says, "This person barely knows me, but they think I'm great!" than to have a formal recommendation from a person who knows the girl and can truly vouch for her?

I think that sororities miss out on the opportunity to meet some amazing women because of legacies/recs. And no, I'm not saying that chapters are struggling for members and NEED more women to sign up for recruitment. I'm saying that there are probably some fantastic potential members who don't have the same opportunities as others, who start out at the bottom or behind, who don't know anything about recs, who get cut for not being related to a member, or for a number of other reasons that really are a shame.

With MUCH shorter new member periods, I think recommendations are more important than ever. Check out a PNM beforehand, and you can avoid some drama and other unfortunate behavior that results in a hot mess that has to be untangled later and possibly affect the chapter's reputation.

That said, ya'll are giving WAY too much weight to legacy status. Being a legacy is not really that big a deal. In many cases it is a very small percentage of the total number of PNMs. Yes, theoretically, the precentage may increase over time. It's never a guarantee of a bid.

Recommendations - that's one reason many alumnae panhellenics put together teas and info sessions for PNMs and collect info packets. I just wish alum panhellenics and the assistance with recs was more widespread.

We're never going to persuade each other to our own point of view. We're going to have to agree to disagree.