If this were the case, a resume that included only service activities, where do you draw the line? For example, if a girl was a cheerleader all through high school and the squad did service activities together... does she include just the service and leave off the sport?

What about girls who were active and kept good grades, but don't have any experience with volunteering and service... would this be a disadvantage to them?

See, this is exactly what I think is wrong with sororities today. First of all, I wouldn't give a rat's ass if people think there's a pledge class full of "skanks" because WTF does that mean anyway (I'm not about judging on stuff like that)? Also, if someone approached me and said that the girls in XYZ were a bunch of "cokehead sluts" I'd be more likely to think she was an obnoxious gossip than I'd be to pay any attention to that sort of thing. Don't we tell rushees to ignore the "tent talk" and think for themselves?

So we all agree that rush is hectic and there's not time to get to know the girls as well as we should be getting to know them. Then why not make rush longer? Make the parties a couple hours instead of 20 minutes or whatever they are, and spread rush over a few weeks. Wouldn't that work?

ETA: I don't really think we'd make that change even if it's feasible because honestly, I think most of us like it the way it is even if it's shallow.

I suppose I've been looking at the Recruitment threads in a different way. If I knew a friend traveling to say, Ireland, I would tell her the must-sees, and about Shannon's duty-free airport. If she were going to Russia, I would suggest taking a cruise instead of staying at a hotel, and to take warm clothing. If she were going to Hawaii, I would tell her to ask OTW for the best suggestions.

In other words, different schools have different rush systems, and the PNM should be guided to the one best for her school. Wearing Lily Pulitzer at say, Susqehanna University, doesn't carry the weight that it would at LSU. Having a few dozen recs means little to some schools, and everything to others. Being a legacy in some schools means a mother, grandmother, or sister from that chapter, while at others, having a cousin at Obscure University is considered somewhat of a legacy.

I'd like to think that the threads that have been posted haven't been a "our rush is better than your rush", so much as "this is what to expect at your school". And if it isn't, maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing to keep in mind.

GLad that we understand each other. Maybe cause we both had similar experiences in high school that college was all about being who we are and not what others think we are.

I do think that the research is kinda of weird and if i had gone through a rush and did not know that was done i would be super creaped out. Even if it was only good stuff that was told i would still wonder who talked to whom about me and what wrong info was given.

I do agree that each rush is different, but i would ask: How many people go through rush as LSU or Georgia and know that research has been done on them.

Also, ( I know this is long, sorry) there is a difference between someone actually being a scancy hoe and someone making up stories about them that do not go away. As an example, these 2 girls told the principle of my high school when i was in 9th grade that i stole money from a friend of theirs. well i did not and there was no proff. I had to be questioned by the police and everything. Well as with any small school everyone know about it and for years I was refered to as the girl who stole money from this other girl. Well would i want to go away to college and have a sorority hear this story, that again is IN NO WAY TRUE, and cut me because they heard that i stole and felt that my reputation was in question? No. I know this is a small example, but i have had many people make up stories about me, and like 95% of the stories were not close to the truth. I went to college to get away from that. I would never want to go through rush and have these stories catch up with me.

So we are all to be held to the mistakes we made in the past? Perhaps that Susie had been abused as a child and these actions were sympotms of a larger issue, if she is a nice girl, shouldn't she be given a chance at friendship.

Sororities were, in my estimation, not created by women who demanded 18 years of previous perfection for entrance. NPC founders were women who were ahead of their time in college. They wanted equal rights to men. They wanted to stand on their own two feet, make a difference, have respect and do some good in the process. If this is where we came from, how have we come to the point where who I lost my viriginity to in HS matters? What some 80 yr old woman who taught me piano thinks? This is a SORORITY, not the CIA. Sororities are supposed to be fun, not the KGB. Reality?

At big rush schools, being a "nice girl" is nowhere near enough to secure a bid. And pledging a sorority at those schools is not just a chance at friendship. If you've got XXXX number of girls going through, and your chapter can only take XX pledges in quota, those XX pledges, for a highly competitive chapter, are going to be the best, and the quality of "best" is judged by all of the shallow and not-so-shallow characteristics mentioned in this thread. The ones who maybe weren't Ms. Popular in high school... well, that's a good enough reason to cut her on the first night when your chapter met all the girls for 15 minutes and your release figures are telling you that you've got to get rid of quite a few.

It's not fair, but it's reality THERE.

I totally forgot about this thread until today . . . haha. Anyway, addressing some points:

1) Yes, the rest of life is shallow, thus it's a given that rush will be to an extent as well. However, rush is not equally shallow across the board. Rush at a small northern liberal arts college, then rush again at Ole Miss. Chances are the degree of shallowness increases quite a bit at the latter. That's not to say that rush at at a small northern liberal arts school will not be shallow -- girls may be judged on their looks, previous reputations, degree of shyness, and what is said in a short 20-minute conversation with three sisters. However, I can guarantee you that the degree of shallowness is not nearly as high as it is in, say, many SEC-type schools.

So what does that mean? If it was just rush itself that was a shallow process, it would be equally shallow across the board. There are reasons why it is "shallower" in certain geographic areas, at certain types of schools, etc. Let's not kid ourselves. You can't sweep that under the rug.

2) I did not simply write off rush at large Southern schools as shallow and commend all northern sororities for being down-to-earth. For example, I've heard horror stories about rush at Miami University that would rival any I've heard about Bama. And as we all know, Miami, Indiana, Illinois and Penn State have some of the largest rushes and largest Greek systems in the country -- larger than many SEC schools, and in some cases just as competitive. Then why do we not hear so many horror stories about these schools on the boards?

My guess is that students that attend these schools (and alums who did attend) are not so proud of the shallowness as many from SEC-style schools tend to be. (I hate to keep picking on SEC schools because I know there are plenty of you who attended them who don't fall into the category of people I'm discussing, and there are plenty of people who attended non-SEC schools, who do -- so bear with me here.) The people I know from Indiana or Miami who have told me stories about the cut-throat nature of their rush are usually a little embarassed about how shallow it can sometimes be. I don't get the same impression from GCers who talk about UGA, Ole Miss, Bama, etc.

As I've said, there is often a sick sense of pride when discussing some (usually Southern) systems that you don't see nearly as much when discussing other systems that are equally competitive and possibly equally shallow. I'm not attacking the shallowness so much as I'm attacking the pride. Make sense?

3) I attended a large northern school with a moderately competitive rush -- although not on par with the schools listed in #2. I would be lying if I said rush wasn't shallow. Looks mattered, of course. This is a given at any school, and at more points in life than just sorority rush. And of course we didn't always get to know the girls as well as I would have liked.

HOWEVER -- for the most part, clothes, money, who you were in high school, "Who is your daddy and what does he do?", etc. were never an issue. My school is proof that matchy-matchy clothes and elaborate rush skits and girls who walk around carrying Coach bags does not necessarily equal a particularly cut-throat recruitment. I'm not saying that we "did it right," because there were certainly times when I was ashamed of the shallow nature of our rush, and I think there is certainly room for improvement. However, I don't see anyone from my Greek system talking about how proud we are that our rush is so cut-throat and if you weren't cute you didn't get a bid, either.

4) Whoever mentioned that the shallowness goes both ways is correct. However, we ALL look down upon the girls who "only want to be in the top three sororities" and their ilk. How many times has a girl come to this board and said something along those lines and everybody jumps on her? "Give everyone a chance, don't listen to what you've heard, don't judge on stuff like skits and clothes because it's not that important -- sisterhood is what's important!" Yet for some reason it's fine for us to cut a girl because she has a less than stellar rep, or she wasn't "cool" in high school? Why is one acceptable but not the other? One can't be bad and the other okay. We need to reconcile this somehow.

5) Side note: Do people really list stuff like "Member, Homecoming Court" on their rush applications? I was on the Valentine's Day dance court but would have NEVER thought to list that on my rush app? Maybe I should have; maybe I would have gotten invited back everywhere. :p

6) PhoenixAzul, I think that your post was great and insightful and all of those other good things. One of the things I'm getting at here is the "sorority as an opportunity to show off" idea as compared to the "sorority as an opportunity to mold women and make them better people" idea. We say we don't want our members to just be the type of women who will only join so they can brag about being a member of a sorority or use their membership to make themselves look good -- so why do we look for women to join whose accomplishments (be they looks, talent, popularity, brains or otherwise) we are mostly using to make the sorority look good? If what is important is the sisterhood, what should be most important during rush is to look for girls who will be good sisters. That's not to say that brains and talent -- and to an extent, popularity and looks -- are never important, but too often with the way rush is currently run, they're used as bragging points. "Our new member class has the highest GPA." "Well, the Sig Eps said that we have the cutest pledge class this year." "But all of our new members were cheerleaders and dancers in high school so we'll definitely win Greek Sing this year!" If we are going to be about the sisterhood, then in some ways we need to bring back rush to being about the sisterhood.

SO LONG HERE. Sorry, guys. And thank you for playing nice! ;)

Haha... I feel like everyone took my homecoming court think out of context. (Or maybe it's just coincidental that a couple people started talking about it after I mentioned it!) I didn't mean ANYTHING about anybody actually putting that on their applications/resume... the point I was getting to was that the things (for example, Homecoming court... or service, grades, sports... whatever!) that made a girl stand out in high school are not going to make her stand out when going through rush, because it tends to be all amazing girls who all did a million things in high school. Therefore, in a "cut-throat" rush, a PNM often has to find other ways to make herself stand out... not just rely on her resume. Whether that's looks, nice clothes, personality... who knows.

Just clarifying!! :D I like this thread!

Just keep in mind, some of those who brag (or talk about) their greek system being so competitive and shallow may not be the ones in the "competitive" sororities. Just a thought.

For example...

I went to Atlanta for SEPC a couple of years ago. One of my friends was in another sorority, and had gone on the trip as well. While we were in Lacoste with a couple of our other friends, both of us flipped over a price tag of this REALLY cute skirt. Of course, being Lacoste, it was about $150. She said something to the extent of it all being too expensive, and she convinced me to go to another store with her where they were having a really good sale. About a week later, I saw her driving (her) Lexus SUV.

Moral of the story... people who spend their money on things to look like they have money, probably have very little. People who say they're in a very competitive greek life system, probably are not in the sorority that is cutting for looks.

Just a theory. I could be wrong. (And no, this was not directed at anyone in particular. I haven't noticed who's been talking about their competitive systems, honestly.)

Kind of off topic... but is there any number or percentage that would suggest a rush is "competitive"? (I don't know if that makes sense!) For example, at my school, about 85% of women who go through recruitment receive a bid. I would definitely not consider that "competitive". Does anyone know what that percentage is like at other schools?

I thought quota was set so that the max number of women who were at last round received bid? However, my school set quota at how many women registered, which i thought only benefited the larger houses since if say 50% women droped out then quota was still set as if they were still there.

Good question as to what defines competative.

Ah, but first you have to get to the final round. From what I've seen, in a lot of the more competitive systems, sometimes PNMs are cut very heavily, and are either released from all chapters prior to pref, or drop out once they are released from their favorites.

1. Part of the fascination with SEC and SEC - style rush is, I think, a fascination with the unusual. The huge number of women going through, the number and size of the chapters, and the size of new member classes is not at all typical. Some GCers recall the data that the NPC presented a year or so ago when introducing the new options for recruitment; it went something like this:


"Campuses are different:

63% have four NPC groups or less

28% have 5 - 9 NPC groups

9% have 10 - 21 NPC groups

Quotas vary:

17% have Quotas less than 10

24% have Quotas of 10 - 19

18% have Quotas of 20 - 29

19% have Quotas over 30

22% have unknown Quotas

Sixty percent of campuses have Greek communities considered small or very small, with no more than four NPC groups. . . ."

So some of the "pride" may come from being part of, or knowledgeable about, recruitments that are highly unusual.

2. About "competitive": I'm not always sure what is being talked about when "competitive" creeps into the conversation. Often, though, I get the feeling that what's meant is a combination of "it's really hard to get into a top-tier sorority" and "lots of women going through recruitment are fixated on just a few chapters." (The Big Six, Top Three, Big Four, or whatever it is on a given campus.) Could it be that the culture of SEC and SEC-type schools is just more attuned to social distinctions, and maybe more willing to talk about them -- at least in contrast to some other kinds of schools?

Which brings up a question: if you ignore the 'top" houses, just as a thought experiment, how "competitive" is recruitment at some of the SEC or SEC-type schools? If women who are cut early from, say, ABC, DE, FGH, and IJK stay in recruitment, is it pretty likely that almost all of them can find a sorority that likes them and where they can feel comfortable and have a good experience?

Just keep in mind that it's not unusual to those of us who DID go to SEC schools and were a part of those greek systems. To us, it's craziness that some of you are part of 50-member sororities (or 20, or 10). How do you survive? How do you pay for everything? And your dues are WHAT... Less than $1,000?? Now THAT is unusual!

And yes, I do understand that South Carolina is not on the top of the "competitive" list. My point is more that it's just a way of life for us (or them, since I'm now alum).

Ah, but what rushee does? The girls they're talking to are "on the inside" so they're more in the know about what's going on, right? Even if it is gossip, rushees take close to everything you tell them as truth. Girls will drop ABC because they're told they have to stand on their head and sing the alphabet backwards during pledging if that's what someone in XYZ told them because "her best friend is an ABC." You can tell girls till you're blue in the face to ignore "tent talk" and rumors but they won't. That's why you don't want people to think you have a pledge class full of skanks--PNM's don't want people to think that they're skanks too because of their affiliation. They may even go so far as to believe that once pledged, they have to sleep with a whole fraternity if someone tells them that's a requirement for joining your sorority.

I was just thinking about this. I guess therefor that the term competative means to get into the "right" house.

I do understand that greek life is different other places and i have heard that what house you are in determines a lot about being in leadership positions/homecomming queen ect. But if a person just wanted to join a sorority for friendship and did not care about homecomming or other things and just really wanted a place to find friendship then how hard would it be to find a house. To say, if i went through rush at a SEC school and kept my options open and did not care about getting the house with the homecomming queen or the house that parties with the "good" frat on campus would i get a bid if i made it through preffs (say i got invits and attended all the preff parties that i could, what then would be the chances of me getting a bid.

It seems to me its about keeping options open and if i am going through rush to find friendship and not just be in the right house then it would be my choices that would make rush competative. Or am i missing something. I just am thinking that you could consider my school competative if you only wanted a few of the 16 houses. At my school almost everyone got bids. However, pproblems occured when PNM's only wanted ABC or DEF then they have to comptet for one of 60 spots open instead of say the other 420 spots that are open.

First: "would I get a bid if I made it through preffs" ? -- It depends. For instance, a few months ago there was a thread with several posts about LSU (Louisiana State University). There, evidently, according to the posts, it IS possible to make it through preference and still not get a bid. At other schools, even in the SEC, someone who makes it through preference will get a bid, though not necessarily to her #1 choice.

Second, "problems . . . when . . . they have to compete for one of 60 spots open instead of say the other 420 spots . . . ." Exactly! Some great young women can make it much more difficult for themselves if they limit their options that way. But it's their choice -- we just hope it's an informed one.

They, the PNMs, are the ones that are making the process competative and its not just the process itself. My point is, what defines competative can be different within the same rush just depending on how the PNM's are reacting to what invites that they get.

If you don't have a house like San Simeon it cuts down on costs considerably. It also cuts down on the need to have over the amount of sisters needed to fill the house.

Plus if you only have 50/20/10 people organizing them is far less of a feat than getting 200 people in one place. :)

If they're that clueless and judgmental, I'd be happy to not have them as my sisters.

It's entirely possible that I expect WAY TOO MUCH from a group of 18 year olds, but I do.

I feel like we are kinda comparing apples to oranges. I went to a school where joining a sorority gave you NO additional social standing, in fact, if anything, it knocked you down a few tiers. (Though everyone would attend our parties :rolleyes:) At the 'southern' schools, there seems to be a social tier benefit to joining, it is more like a business move than necessarily a social move.

We took women who were called skanks, but so did all the other groups. We took women who graduated virgins, so did all the other groups. I went to a school with one NPC and two locals, no defined quota, no rush rules except deffered till spring. In all honestly, if we wanted to defy national and serve alcohol to our rushees and have boys over we probably would have been able to get away with it. Water teas are another planet.

I still think our founders never envisioned SEC style rush, however, we are a long way from grabbing freshman and running them from the train/bus to the house to be pinned. :)

My favorite is the rumor that I heard when I was going through that "XYZ" circles body parts that the girls need to correct. A year later, my little sis asked me if "AB" sorority circled body parts that the girls need to correct. So, within a year, the sorority that supposedly did this had changed.

Trust me, very few PNM's actually ignore the rumors going around about sororities. I know I didn't. This reminds me of the other thread, "Stupid reasons why you cut a sorority."

the north vs. south thing: it just makes for a lot of controversy. if the northern sororities were as accepting as it is professed they are, then the northern chapters would be the largest in the respective sororities.

That's the same as saying "If Harvard was that good of a school, everyone there would have a 4.0."

Care to explain that logic further? I'd like to see how northern schools' lack of acceptance make them smaller than southern chapters. Please, show me this lack of acceptance and some proof of this statement

This is not true. Nearly all recruitment systems operate on a quota system, whether a huge Southern school or a small Northern school. The number of PNMs interested in going through rush largely determines how many new members each sorority is permitted to take, not how accepting the chapters are. IN GENERAL, there is more interest in joining a sorority at a large, Southern school because
a. they are more likely to have grown up with knowledge of the Greek system (with sorority alumnae in their families, friends who join at other schools, etc.)
b. the thriving, huge Greek system already in place at the college attracts more applicants.

With your skewed logic (chapter size would be positively correlated with acceptance and non-shallow membership selection), would that not also mean that the large Southern schools should be highly accepting? And that is the whole point of this thread... that they are NOT.

If I may paraphrase a few of our fine Southern gentlewomen. :)

It is just precious how so many lovely folk - from north of the Mason-Dixon line, from non-Southern schools of higher learning, and even some of our own kin - just get their little ole nickers in a twist over Southern recruitment. Why I do declare that it is just too cute for words. ;)

I thought we established that it wasn't just north/south, but that it is the most obvious divide to refer to and the SEC schools are just one example of the rush type we are talking about. No one has condemed the 'south' on how they do rush.

Ditto to what she said. I feel like in a lot of the Southern schools there is more of a need for girls to join sororities for the social aspect of it. That need doesn't always exist in Northern schools. The one Northern school that I can think of it existing at is Cornell, and Cornell has high chapter numbers, with chapter numbers being over a hundred and taking NM classes of 40-50.

Why TSteven! You almost made me spill my mint julep, you precious thing. :D

ok ok...
 

We are getting to crazy with this Rush 'fighting' between North & South, really who cares. It is hard to follow on here because all of us have different CAMPUSES and different OPINIONS. What works for one college, does not work for others. Some have houses, some don't. I know you guys are trying to prove a point, but what I'm saying is, it is basically pointless b/c all of us have DIFFERENT FORMAL RECRUITMENTS!!!

you are all correct. the statement i made was absurd....it was meant to be. i tire of people who are self-appointed southern recruitment experts expounding on the unfairness, shallowness and down right bitchiness of southern recruitment, when you have nothing to base your knowledge on, other than hearsay. i cannot recall one thread where we southerners lambasted the way northern schools conduct their recruitment. if you want to conduct your recruitment in the winter, in the snow and your pnms can just casually drop in to meet the sisters,unscheduled, fine say we! most of us southernbelles love southern style recruitment. its competitive, its glitzy, its entertaining and its fun. we wouldn't have it any other way.

Interesting discussion. One that could go on for years.

Has anyone considered the caliber/type of girls going to these different schools? I considered going to U of Arkansas while in high school. Definitely an SEC school, definitely a large recruitment, definitely before school starts...it definitely fits into the stereotype of "Southern Recruitment." We even have pricey boutiques in the Little Rock area that advertise their "Rush Clothes" and have fashion shows on what to wear and what not to wear at the major schools' recruitment in Arkansas (and they include Lily and all those other designers I can't name).

At U of A, you either are attached to a group/organization (whether it be band, Greek, athletic, even the dorm you live in, or something else) or you pretty much "don't exist". It's such a large campus that most students are encouraged to join something in order to give them a "home base" or an anchor. Otherwise you can feel very lost.

Anyway, I visted U of A THREE times before I finally decided that I just didn't fit in. I wasn't comfortable on campus...no one talked to me when I was walking around. I didn't feel comfortable there, it wasn't for me, and I didn't go. Had I gone to U of A, I would not have considered recruitment. I wasn't that "type"...it didn't appeal to me. The smaller school I went to did appeal to me...the recruitment style fit better as well (didn't like all of it, but most of it worked...)

In any case, I think that you could add to the argument that the TYPE of women choosing to attend the SEC schools drive the type of recruitment that happens. After all, there's probably not many people who attend SEC schools (at least) that have absolutely no interest in being associated with that school's football/basketball team. If you hate the Razorback athletic programs you probably won't go to U of A...because once you say you're a U of A grad, you're automatically a Razorback whether you like it or not.

PsychTau

Carnation, I'm going to run with this for a minute....

It's true that in a lot of the larger recruitments (also the larger national sororities at smaller schools), the PNMs backgrounds are checked out as much as possible before recruitment. However, do we actually let them KNOW this? Probably not...it is probably done behind the scenes, on the down low, etc. And most PNMs who aren't recruitment savvy (or who don't have connected Greek family members) will not have this info. Therefore, they aren't as prepared for recruitment as others, and once they see how it all works, can very well perceive it as shallow (based on the fact that all the "research" appears to be a behind the back, "gossip about my reputation" kind of thing, especially if they feel they didn't get into a top house by their definition). You get several PNMs who were heavily cut or go bidless, and that increase the chatter out there that recruitment is shallow. So in a sense we've created our own problem.

I wonder what would happen if we made the process more public (not the voting part...everyone knows that there's some sort of voting/ranking process going on that's unique to each org.)? What if we talked about the fact that if you give us a reference we're going to call them and ask some questions about how well you'd live up to our values...how well you'd contribute to the org...what makes you stand out? What if we asked them to answer the questions: "What do you want to get out of sorority life at this school? What do you plan to contribute to sorority life at this school? What do you plan to contribute after you graduate? What previous (HS or otherwise) activity was your favorite one to participate in, and why?" on their recruitment application? Aren't those the types of questions that we try to get the answer to through rush conversations anyway? Ask 'em up front!! That approach would be no different than a job interview.

I don't think there's a way to take the "shallowness" completely out of recruitment. After all, appearance and first impressions do factor in to a majority of decisions on different levels. However, I think that it would be great if we were more up front about how the process works.

PsychTau

My point of view is that recruitment is an interview. Southern competitive recruitment is scruitizined because there are many more women than there are available spots. So with the supply of PNM's exceeding the number of available new member spots, doesn't it make the most sense to first consider those with the most outstanding attributes and letters of recommendation?

I know that if it were an employment situation and I was hiring a large class of analysts, I'd want the ones who looked best on paper to come in and interview, and then I'd select the ones I got along best with and could see working well together the rest of the team.

How is recruitment any different from that?

Of course any interview process is going to appear shallow-- you are at the mercy of the interviewer's bias! If you don't meet the basic requirements and you don't get along well with the interviewer, why would you be hired or in this case, invited to membership in an organization?

Yay! Yay!! Yay!!!

I agree. I know that when we were discussing Ole Miss and why a new sorority wouldn't succeed there, everyone mentioned tradition. Ergo if you are not big on that sort of steeped in decades tradition, you probably won't be at Ole Miss to begin with.

If you played "Freaky Friday" with the student bodies of say LSU and Harvard - the rushes would probably change as well!

Here's a perspective from both the north AND the south! :)

I'm from the north (NY area), but went to a school in the south (University of Florida.) Here's a whole different spin on rush at a SEC school:

Being from the north, I knew literally NOTHING about sororities and fraternities. I knew zero about the so-called prestige and reputations of this house vs. that, I knew nothing about recs, I didn't even know what the heck rush was!

I had a ton of friends in the dorm, and didn't pay much attention to the Greek system. But in my junior year- a friend of mine decided she wanted to go through rush and asked me to go with her. I wasn't really interested, but I finally gave in and said.. "OK, why not?"

I was totally not interested in joining a sorority, I had no recs, I didn't even dress like the southern girls (being a yankee-- we wear a lot of black, not sundresses!) I was so clueless about the greek system, at one lull in the conversation while I was being rushed, I asked a sister what one of the symbols on their shield meant! I couldn't understand why her face went alabaster!

At the parties, I was myself. I put on no airs, and I tried to impress noone. I was there just keeping my buddy company. But I found the parties a lot of fun, and enjoyed meeting new people.

To my surprise, I was invited back by quite a few houses. Here I was, this yankee from the NY area who wasn't a campus queen, but a tom-boy judo athlete skateboarder. Yet, I was totally accepted for being me.

After round one, to my surprise, I found myself VERY impressed with what I saw. I thought the Greek women were super. The more questions I asked them about Greek life, the more interested I became. I was especially impressed with the ZTA house at UF. And sure enough, I got a bid from ZTA!

So... I guess, sometimes ignorance IS bliss! I was totally unprepared for rush, yet look how it turned out! My experience at UF in Zeta was absolutely amazing. Who would of thunk? :)

I hope that this will put to rest some of the myths related to SEC sororities and rush. No, you don't have to have recs... you don't even have to have a french manicure (you should see my nails from playing judo!!)

And, playing off what someone else said, "Yes, southern rush is glitzy, be we "northerners" wouldn't have it any way!"

We are hiring at my work and my boss told me that when someone is turning in an application we, the current employees, are suppose to "evaluate" the applicants on how we feel about the applicant. I asked my boss on what qualifications are we suppose to judge these people on and he said, just your initial feeling about the person. he then went on to say that a lot of these people applying for the job will have similar qualities and to narrow down the job pool he will start interviewing with the people that we (as current employees) feel good about.

I think that rush is similar. I really don't know about southern rush, but evern over here on the west coast we still have to make quick judgements and i feel that the interview/application is a good example.

Bumping to the top so newcomers can read.

Recruitment at these big SEC schools is definitly driven by the culture of the south. I almost attended LSU since I got a scholarship there but ended up (thank GOD!) following my sister to tiny NLU in north Louisiana where Rush (it was rush when I went through!) was much less cut throat. Recs and pictures were all I thought about for a little while. I had friends from high school that didn't make it to the first round of parties because they had no recs (apparently this has changed.) The problem is that the big groups (don't want to name too many names, but Chi O has always been extremely strong and desired at LSU) are drilled into PNMs heads as the only groups worth joining. So...if you have 1000 girls who all want to be a Chi-O and 300 are Chi-O legacies, it's going to be cut-throat. Luckily, plenty wonderful women figure out that the rest of the chapters are really great as well and have no problem finding a home. Until Mamas stop telling their daughters that they HAVE to be an XYZ, you will not change the way recruitment happens in these competitive areas.