**bangs head on desk**

Where have you ever seen something that says a group is agreeing to a policy where you have to cut legacies? The only thing groups agree to is (by campus) following total and quota rules. If that means some legacies have to be cut, they do, but it's not because there are legacies, it's because there are too effing many of them.

And ask carnation, aopirose or some of the other women experienced in Southern rush - at some schools, at some chapters, that number is NOT hyperbole.

Doesn't your daughter go to UT or another large, very competitive sorority-wise school? I'm not surprised she wasn't interested, as her experience would be absolutely nothing like yours. I'm sure she's smart enough to look at the sizes of the chapters and figure that out.

On our campus, being a legacy just tells us that a pnm's family is accepting of greek life, and therefore would be less likely to drop out after receiving a bid (from parental influence). We do enjoy "stealing" legacies from other chapters :-p

[quote]
Where have you ever seen something that says a group is agreeing to a policy where you have to cut legacies? The only thing groups agree to is (by campus) following total and quota rules. If that means some legacies have to be cut, they do, but it's not because there are legacies, it's because there are too effing many of them.{/quote]

If a sorority (yes, I'm talking big Sorority, not chapter) agrees to total/quota (whatever it is) rules that prohibit bringing back for a second or further round a woman they want to get to know, they're kowtowing to the arbitrary.

Duh. I never said it was because they are legacies. I find it utterly atrocious that you would not invite back the women you might want.

[QUOTE=DGTess;1838494]That's the reality of recruitment. We can only invite back the women we MOST want. Just as PNMs must rank chapters they want MOST. If we're going to have a formal Panhellenic recruitment we have to have a system of limiting the number of invitations so that all chapters participating have a realtively equal opportunity to pledge quota and reach total. We do this in a spirit of mutual cooperation, support and respect. There would be no point in having a formal panhellenic recruitment, quota or total if there were not limits on the numbers each chapter could invite back to each round.

It's great when legacies are pledged and initiated and it all works out happy for everyone....but I think NPC members who don't support their legacies in making their own choices and being happy for them however it turns out do their own legacy a huge disservice. Let her be her own woman and enjoy her own experience!

And now we're back to an earlier point... it's Panhellenic recruitment which, I submit, causes superficial rush, and which causes us to eliminate women too soon.

Apparently we disagree. I despise the Panhellenic system; you seem to believe it's the best thing there is. Adults can disagree.

In your opinion, what might be better? Not being an ass - I'm genuinely curious as to what alternatives might be worthy of consideration.

*migraine looming*

My thoughts of the current legacy system have nothing to do with rebelling against the NPC. I think that most of the Power Ladies of the NPC realize the same thing I'm seeing - too many legacies for the quota.

So far this season, one chapter of ADPi had 70 legacies rushing a chapter. Quota was in the 50's, and while the chapter took quota, only 17 of the legacies were offered a bid. One the other hand, I knew a legacy going through Recruitment at my chapter who was so insufferably rude, I might have hurled if she got a bid, no matter that her mother, two aunts, and 2 cousins were all ADPis!

Maybe there needs to be a Legacy/Super Legacy system? The Legacy is the woman born to a sorority, the Super Legacy is the woman born to a sorority whose mother/grandmother was actively involved (physically or financially) to a chapter or a direct descendent of a Founder - for example.

I think most of those types of comments were directed at DGTess, not you.


Then we would run into the issue of asking "how involved is involved enough to be considered a Super Legacy?"

I can just hear the moms now:

"I was a housemom for 20 years, yet Amy Alpha's mom serves as National Officer for 5 and is a Super Legacy?! *^%^%$5%!!"

I promise I'm not nitpicking, just adding to the discussion. I don't have a better solution, lol.

Honestly though, the issue is to be expected. Sororities have been around for a long time. That alone would guarantee a lot of legacies. Add in the fact that grandchildren and nieces also counts and the number shoots through the roof.

I just wonder how many women at CMU when DGTess was there DIDN'T "connect" with the sorority member writing them letters all summer, didn't bother to look at other groups and missed out on Greek life because Panhel wasn't running rush at least semi-properly.

This is what's happening at my school with the lack of a true formal rush - women are only focusing on one group and if they don't get a bid to that group, becoming anti-Greek - which is why these posts really piss me off. There's a big difference between "I didn't think of being Greek until I found XYZ" and "XYZ didn't give me a bid, so I won't think of being Greek." You can argue a chicken/egg scenario (i.e. Greek life was declining anyway, it has nothing to do with the rush method) but when you look at numbers with a formal rush in place and without it, I'd think you'd want to at least try.

I actually really like the idea of a "Super Legacy," because it indicates that the member has made a commitment to the organization. I'd prefer the "Super Legacy" idea to the idea that the daughter some woman who hasn't done anything for her sorority since college would get the same consideration as the daughter of a committed volunteer.

It wouldn't be THAT much of an issue, since even on a not-so-active alumnae level, most people are familiar with the local and national "Big Squirrels" (to steal a term from AGD) or a sorority's equivalent, that if their names came up in rush-related discussions, it would not be a surprise and that their daughter or sister would be considered a "Super Legacy." I know it's done in college admissions--the children of big donors and high-level alumni volunteers (class presidents, regional club presidents, interviewing chairs) do indeed get a second look.

To play devil's advocate on that...there is also the "gorgeous man and gorgeous woman produce ugly baby" concept. I wouldn't be suprised if there are a few daughters out there of "Super Alums" who deeply resent all the time their mom gave to the sorority and are only grudgingly going through rush to please them, and who are going to be lukewarm at best members.

One the one hand there are alumna who have dedicated years to their sorority in various ways (advising Chapters, House Corp members, I/natl officers, etc.) Without them the organizations would struggle and fail. To do that you know they have made family sacrifices over the years. Sweetie, Dad is taking you to dance class tonight because Mom has to go to Recruitment and won't be home until about 3am. I'm sorry honey, Mom has to miss your soccer game this weekend because of an out of town sorority conference. What a slap in the face to that dedicated alumna Mom when a Chapter releases her daughter!

Yet on the other hand working with the collegians I know how frustrating it can be to get a lot of pressure about legacies who really would not be a good fit. Membership decisions are supposed to be based on what is best for the Chapter, not for a single alumna.

And the simple fact remains that on some campuses there are simply more legacies than Quota allows. Cuts have to be made. It's a no win situation. When you cut legacies you face the wrath of angry alumnae and possibly even your I/natl org. On the flip side imagine the accusations of elitism and discrimination if a sorority were to pledge Quota with only legacies.

This system has pretty much been in effect for selective colleges and universities for some time now and, for the most part, it works pretty well. There will be the occasional angry alumna/alumnus threatening to pull donations but chances are they weren't giving that much in the first place. Those who have worked hardest as a volunteer or donor understand how selective things are and are less likely to cause a fuss. I expect the same thing would happen with the "Super Legacy" system.

People might get ticked off for a day, but they'd get over it.

There's a difference between believing something is "the best thing there is" and believing that it is a workable, albeit flawed, system. I too would like to know what might be better - if you look at how much recruitment has changed over time, I'd say it has been improving. I love the new return system, for example.

It reminds me of grading - I hate the A, B, C, etc., system of grading, but in the absence of anything better, it's all I (as a teacher) have got.

As I was a legacy to another sorority, my mother swears to this day that I acted up at her sorority's chapter to cause me to be dropped by them after round 2. I have told her repeatedly that wasn't the case - it was clearly not a fit.

With the discussion about the idea of "super legacy," if such an animal existed, my daughters would be considered such when/if they go through recruitment in a few years. And while I already can imagine how I will feel/be during that point (a complete wreck during recruitment week!), the journey that they will make must be their own. If they aren't a fit for my organization, that's ok - and that fit can be from either side - theirs, or the chapter's. While I would love to not only call them my daughters but also my sisters, I want them to be happy and to know that they are supported regardless. I do want them to be considered more than the PNM who has no connection with the organization (which is what legacy status offers), and knowing that the chapter will look at them for at least two rounds gives me some comfort.

I think back to how things "used to be," prior to RFM, plus with the changes that my own organization has made to member selection, and I do think the system works way better than it used to. Perfect? no. Perhaps I'm too educated in the system, but at the same time I think "super legacy" status also means that the mother has a clue and recognizes the possibilities better than someone who has not been very involved in 20 years. Would I be hurt if my daughters were released? no. Disappointed? certainly. It would not cause me to stop being involved in my organization, but would certainly cause me to also be involved in theirs, helping at recruitment or whatever they wanted/needed me to do.

In the meantime, though, my daughters know about Greek Life, and have from a young age. They've watched me do sorority work and have conference calls with sisters, and asked why didn't I just meet with them (explaining that these women are all over the country was a fun conversation, btw). They've helped me shop for Convention. They've been to get togethers I've had with sorority sisters. The Purpose is on our refrigerator. They play with Alpha Gam word magnets I got from IHQ. They've looked through our brand new new member book, and my oldest daughter recently decided she needed to learn the Greek alphabet on her own. They have also looked at materials from other organizations that I have reviewed at some point as I try to ascertain trends within the Greek community (one of the reasons I'm on Greek Chat, btw). They have been exposed to other Greek organizations both at the college where I work and at the camp they go to, as a number of the senior counselors are Greek - and I think they are more aware of the fact that some of the counselors are in sororities and tell me about them because they know how involved I am in my own organization. They've watched me write recommendations for young women, and cheer loudly when I find out where they pledge [thus far it has never been for Alpha Gam]. At every turn, I focus on Panhellenic spirit, because in the long run, that's what is important. I know that we're all in the same boat, and offer a lot of the same things.

So, I guess I write all this to say I'm comfortable with the fact that we still talk about legacies and that they exist. Super legacy just doesn't feel as important.

The 2 cents of a "medium/big squirrel."

This subject has really touched my heart this recruitment. My real life little sister was going though recruitment. Having been a panhellenic recruitment chair, I advised her just as I would any other PNM. To keep her options open, to find her perfect fit, that just because I belonged to one GLO didn't mean she had to as well. However, as she went through recruitment she fell in love with the same organization I did. I couldn't blame her, they capture me too. I still encouraged her to keep looking at other places, but her heart was set.

I had helped her secure several recs from well established alums, some who serve as nationals officers. My sister knew how much I care about this organization, and as a current chapter president, she has seen my hardwork and the passion I put into it. To say my heart was broken when she was dropped before preference was an understatement. For something I love and work so hard for, to cut the person who means the most to me in the world is devestaing.

It is easy to say that, you have to look for the right fit, and that every chapter is different. But to watch my little sister cry her eyes out was the most heartbreaking thing in the world. I think we really need to take a look at the legacy women we are turning away. We are losing way too many women that could contribute to our organizations. I know my sister for one would have, without a doubt, been a loyal and comitted member, who continued to give back after graduation.

Being a Legacy is such an important thing, were all our organizations not found on the idea of sisterhood, of tradition, of empowering women? I hope in the future things will change, and young women on various campuses will see the value of legacy members, too many are turned away because of some unwritten bias.

Sorry for being so long, but this has topic has really recently touched my heart.

I really don't think that's it at all. At a lot of campus it's simply a number thing. If quota is 50 and there are 75 legacies to XYZ they can't take all of them. And even then what about new members, who are not legacies.

I have personally been on the daughter's side. My mom missed my birthday party 4 years in a row, couldn't go to my 5th grade and 8th grade graduation because she was at convention. She would leave for a week, and I had to eat the fast food my dad brought home that made me sick. When we only had one computer, I could rarely play games on it because my mom had to answer emails all the time and write up reports. On road trips, she would be on a conference call the entire time, so I had to sit there quietly with out music or talking. At fancy alumnae parties at our house, I had to take coats and serve food.

I had watched both my cousin and sister become initiated into both my mom's and aunt's sorority.

Long story short, when I rushed last year, I was dropped from my mother's sorority the night before pref. And I did not find a home at any of the sororities at my school.

It hurt. I had just wanted to be apart of a sisterhood like I had seen all the women in my family be apart of.

But it was a tricky situation. If the chapter wasn't for me, then I guess it wasn't for me. Should the chapter be forced to take me because I was a "super legacy"? Absolutely not. I don't know how to word this properly, but I still feel almost like my mom and I deserve something from having my mom's sorority affect my childhood so much through all the service she did. It's just a difficult balance between honoring alumnae's service but still allowing the chapter to choose who they want.

I look at it this way. If I ever have a daughter, I want her to find the kind of sisterhood I found in my chapter of ASA. If that's in ASA - fine. If it's in KKG - fine. If it's in the women's rugby team - fine. If it's in a group of women she meets in her dorm - fine.

I wouldn't want any chapter of my sorority to feel forced to take her just because I was a member - mainly because I know that there are chapters of my sorority that wouldn't have taken me, either.

Maybe this means I'm not devoted enough to my sorority on a national level, but if it does, so be it. Maybe it means I still look at this from a collegian's point of view instead of an alum's, but if it does, so be it.

I'm sorry to hear of your experience, but by giving legacies a major advantage over non-legacies we're doing the exact same thing, just to a different subset of people. There are many non-legacies that join a group and give back throughout their whole lives! I mean, a legacy has to get its start somewhere, right? I understand you're upset, but this doesn't make sense. A legacy has just a much of a chance of being a useless sister who doesn't contribute anything as any random person with no connections to the group. Or vice versa.

Perhaps one way, which would be controversial for sure, is to eliminate grandmothers from the legacy standings. As of right now I know for the majority of GLOs, although I can't speak for all, legacies are sisters/daughters/granddaughters. I am not saying that the legacy bond shared between a grandmother and granddaughter isn't special, because it is. But perhaps it would be one way to weed down the pool.

Obviously at a school with less legacies the rec form would still come in and the connection would still be acknowledged, just how sometimes cousins and aunts and great-grandmothers are acknowledged by chapters with less legacies. But at those cut-throat SEC schools it might help the burden. Just a thought.

ETA: In cases where, for example, a grandmother is a high-ranking national officer and had no daughters of her own I am sure exceptions would be made. And I do understand it would hurt for a woman who did not have daughters or whose daughters didn't go greek (or joined another GLO) to be denied that bond with the only female in her family who would be in a position to go to her legacy.

It's so hard because I totally see this too. I advise a great chapter, but I doubt I would've joined this chapter or if they would've wanted me. While our sorority has certain "core values" that we adhere to, let's face it, it comes down to the members at the time at each chapter. These are girls that are 18-22 years old, and we can all remember how we were at that age. It's a hard age for everyone, and I wish I had judged everyone on, say, their grades and ability to pay, but we all know we didn't. If I had a daughter, I would want her to find a great sisterhood somewhere too, but if wasn't a fit with my sorority for whatever reason, then it's unfortunate, but it's not a fit. These things happen. I honestly would be more mad if she didn't get in to my alma mater than if she didn't get into my sorority.

Maybe we should go the route of letting each chapter choose - and spell out openly - who is and who is not a legacy. For example, if XYZ in Wyoming rarely has any legacies come through, they can say legs are daughters, sisters, granddaughters, nieces, whatever. If XYZ at Ole Miss regularly has 3x the number of legacies come through rush that they can take on bid day, then a legacy is a sister or daughter of a member of that chapter. Period.

I know it isn't the fairest thing, but it might help some hurt feelings if people know right away that if little Zsa Zsa goes to a certain school, her chances will be lessened.

(And yes, I know this is kind of an unspoken rule at some places anyway. I'm proposing the bizarre concept of being straight up and honest about it.)

I just don't agree with that. I understand it impacted your childhood but it was your moms choice. If she did everything she did as an Alumna with the ultimate hope of it getting you into the same sorority that's not doing the work for the right reason. Just because you're a "super legacy" doesn't mean a chapter who thinks you would not be a good fit should have to take you.

It's a catch 22 for sororities don't take every legacy and risk alienating super involved alumni, or take nothing but legacies and be accused of elitism and a form of nepotism.

Maybe some sororities wouldn't have a problem with eliminating grandmothers etc, but I guarantee you that Alpha Delta Pi would never do that. In the last couple years, there were legacies who were direct descendents of Founders who were initiated with their anscestors' original Adelphean badge.

I don't think this should be a Panhellenic edict, either. I know that Kappas respect legacies, but trust the chapter to make the final decision; others may do so, too. What I'd like to see is having the NPC ask each of the member organizations to reevaluate their legacy system, and if possible, share it.

I think a direct descendent of a founder would certainly fall under the "special circumstances" mentioned in my original post. Although I feel 33girl had the better idea...let the chapters dictate who is considered a legacy rather than the nationals. I think if a direct descendent of a founder came through our chapter wouldn't even need pressure from nationals to bid them, regardless of legacy policy.

I guess I am in the minority, as I think legacies should get a little extra treatment (i.e. guaranteed parties) to a certain extent before they are cut.

My sorority (not sure if it was our chapter or nationals) was required to invite legacies back to Day 2. If we kept them until Pref, then they were at the top of our list. I worked back office for one rush and I do know that the mother's level of involvement in her local alum chapter or natioanlly had some bearing on whether or not her daughter came back again after Day 2+. (Granddaughters were not considered legacies in my chapter, again I can't remember if this was a national rule or not.) This always seemed to work out well for us, at least from the sorority's side. I also got to hear advisors make numerous courtsey phone calls to the mothers or sisters of legacies who were cut....not fun at all!

I was not a legacy to my house, but I do understand why we gave that little special treatment to daughters and sisters of our sorority sisters. I didn't mind it at all. I just took it as one of the perks of an elitist organization (because that's what a lot consider Greek organizations to be).

I have also heard it said that having a parent or sibling who is Greek, regardless of the affiliation, makes one more desirable, since the parents will know what all is involved with Greek life and there won't be too many surprises, so to speak. I'm not sure if this is the actual case or not, but it does present a good argument.

I've not listed my sorority or school anywhere on this site...not very concerned if this is giving away any secrets.

^^ I don't necessarily think you're in the minority: lots of folks think legacies should be given extra consideration. The problem is, the number of legacies is greater than the number of bids available. With strict quota/ceiling guidelines, the math just makes it impossible for every legacy to be bid to her legacy chapter (assuming both parties want the other).

I have heard similar arguments. And I think those arguments are fair. (There are still arguments to be made, however, that someone whose parents aren't Greek can still prove him/herself an excellent fit for Greek life.)

I would be happy if there ware a general Greek-legacy status on applications. Women going through recruitment would have a place to indicate on her application/registration form whether a family member (sister, mother, father, etc...) was involved in a GLO. There wouldn't be a need to specify the sorority or fraternity. This could cut down the number of PNMs who get cut from XYZ because the XYZs know Patty PNM is an ABC legacy. If Mom (or BioSis, Aunt Jenny, or Grandma) thinks Patty PNM is a super-legacy and should be given extra consideration, then by all means, contact the chapter.

Having said, that, I don't much care for the term "super-legacy". Actually, I don't much care for the concept, either.

ETA: Even though I just put that "general legacy" status out there, I would hate it if the chapters suddenly had to deal with all the heli-moms who undoubtedly believe that their darling is a super-legacy. Probably a bad suggestion looking back, but I'm sure there are some GCers who could tweak it perfectly.

Funny how after Fall Rush occurs that these discussions happen.

The whole idea of legacies is a system-wide GREEK problem, it affects both Male and Female GLOs. It is exasperated on the Female GLOs because of the quota system.

To put it bluntly, if there wasn't a quota system, wouldn't all legacies be offered a bid, provided they were of appropriate moral character? After all, I think that the legacies' mother/sister/aunt/grandmother/(and so forth) would understand if little Suzie was of dubious moral character or legal status that she would NOT be offered a bid. The real problem is that the chapters do a POOR job of talking to the family and keeping them informed, when they OUGHT to be forthright. For example, if little Suzie was told BEFORE she would not be offered a legacy bid, I'm sure little Suzie would move on. But the chapter does not always work like that. In truth, they work in secret and keep it secretive. The chapter and the national HAVE to be in communication with their members on their legacies; it's when they are NOT that problems occur.

IMHO, the quota system is broke because it sets artificial limits on what a strong chapter can do and not do. If a chapter has the means to take 60 more than what quota is, they should be allowed to do so, provided that all the little Suzies want to be in that chapter.

The problem for MALE GLOs is they now are thinking that a quota system is needed as well. As a GLO alumni, I think this is flat out foolish. GLOs offer a continuity that should be nutured. But once again, if the chapter simply communicates with the legacy's family, expectations can be set appropriately.

@itb - no, I don't think all legacies would be offered a bid. Just as each sorority woman is an individual, each rushee is an individual, and some just won't fit. No one should feel obligated to bid or to accept solely due to a rushee's status as a legacy.

Mandatory cuts to an arbitrary number don't help the situation.

Once again I ask - would either of you enjoy being in a chapter with 400 members? Seriously?

Would you enjoy having a choice of only 3-4 groups at a campus of 25,000 because only the "strongest" groups have survived?

Thinking outside the NPC box
 

I'm not sure how to word this, so please be gentle with me. :o

So if I understand what everyone seems to be saying, the issue seems to be that some chapters have more legacies than they can bid. That there can be legacies that are a good fit and are desirable *and* the legacy herself wants to be a member. Yet due to quota etc., she may be released.

If that is the issue, then what about the following.

HQs consider changing their rules regarding Alumnae Initiation (gasp!) so that legacies may "seek" (don't know the correct terminology) membership in their legacy sorority. If ABC currently does not allow AI, they would *now* do so *if* the women was a legacy *and* she was a good fit. A sort of special consideration or exception as the case may be.

To be clear, AI would not be a guarantee at all. And may not be offered or allowed for "just anyone".

The way I envision this is that a chapter will still cut legacies and extend bids to those they want. However, for the legacy that is cut and still wants to an ABC, she would have the ability to seek membership as an alumnae. She would not be guaranteed it, but have the ability to seek it. Thus some NPC HQs would have to change their policy on AI.

Now it is true that the girl may not have benefited by having been an undergraduate member of ABC. But if she was "groomed" to be an ABC, and really wants it, and would be a good fit as an alum, then why allow it? The undergrad chapter is not compromised at all. For what it is worth, something similar seems to work well with NPHC sororities.

Finally, my intent is not to have a "ABC does not offer AI" discussion. But to have HQs think *Outside The Box*. To discuss ways that a legacy - who truly sees herself as an ABC - have a way to be an ABC and be a production member as well. Something along this line might be a partial solution to what will most likely continue to be the *more legacies than bids* issue.

That is so special! How neat for those legacies as well as the members at the initiation.

This is the first time I've heard a story like this. I wonder how often it happens in the various GLOs?

(Sorry for the thread drift. I'm just a history lover so this really caught my attention!)

I did have almost 400 sisters. The year I went through rush, quota was over 85 and that was 10 years ago! I didn't think twice about it at the time, because the majority of houses on my campus (somewhere over 10 chapters) had as many members.

I stated above how we dealt with legacies, and it seemed to work for us. Some legacies just aren't desirable to the chapter and vice versa. Legacies never made up a majority (or even close to it) of our pledge classes, though.

I'm not really sure how new release figures work, but from reading other threads, it appears that girls who rank all chapter throughout rush may be guaranteed a bid. I personally feel that if you attend a full Pref day, then you should get a bid (since chapters shouldn't invite girls to Pref who they don't intend offering bids). However, I don't feel that every single PNM who maximizes her options by ranking all chapters should automatically get Pref invites...I'm not sure this is how it works, but this is what it seems I read.

We had very strong chapters on my campus (top houses) that didn't always take quota & I don't think houses should be required to. But now it seems that if a house doesn't take quota it's that they didn't "get" quota...not that they chose not to take 89 girls.

[Hijack, ignore if you want]

I am not disagreeing here but it is something to think about...while I too think it would lead to diminishing numbers of chapters, it seems to work very well for fraternities. Somehow, like sororities, some are pegged as being the "strongest" fraternities but the overwhelming majority of chapters get similar sized pledge classes every year. It is true that fraternities disappear much quicker than sororities, but they also appear quickly and there are usually more fraternal GLOs than sororities. I understand this to be true even in the most competitive SEC campuses for the fraternities.

Now would this be the same for girls? Maybe not. I do feel that our gender is, on average (there are obviously exceptions), more likely to aim for the "highest status" than the guys are. I feel like even though many of my friends now would say "I loved XYZ from Day #1!", I remember back in the dorms and they had their hearts set on ABC until they got cut after the second round or something like that.

Call me Beatrice Blunt...
 

This would end up being the NPC version of "pledging versus paper." Especially in the areas where certain sororities have too many legacies.

There would also be the problem of people PURPOSELY effing up their rush after they get cut from Pi Sigma Gamma (Prestigious Sorority Group) to AI into that group, getting on the alumnae board of Big Giant Chapter by buying their way in, and seeking vengeance for the chapter that cut them as an undergrad.

I guarantee you that if some of these legacies went to schools where mom, sister, grandma, aunt's chapter was struggling or otherwise not what they were used to, they would stop "truly seeing themselves as an ABC" in record time. Some, not all (so don't jump down my throat).