I agree... that was why I was asking. If they aren't included in the statistic that would be highly likely to make it skewed, I think.

This is from my NPC perspective:

I think it has to do with how sororities are portrayed to the general population. How do they see us? Think of every sorority stereotype. Rich, exclusive, obsessed with looks, only in college to find a husband, parties, objectifying ourselves, etc. We are part of "the establishment" to the general population. I think conservatives tend to be more attracted to (or at least more okay with) this image than liberals.

However, if sororities were perceived as organizations to develop female leaders, organizations that are based on non-political values like friendship, loyalty, service, scholarship, etc. our chapters would be composed of a more representative microcosm of the particular campus.

i havent made up my mind on the topic, but pretty much any statistical data on greeks is going to include (or exclude) the groups necessary to prove a point. then again, that's statistical research for you.

while i could turn a blind eye to such findings as it excludes anyone outside NPC/IFC/NIC, it makes sense. i would imagine any GLO outside such councils (though its obvi that NPHC has made its mark, enough that we SHOULD be included) would be excluded because they themselves WERE the excluded, and therefore being non-conservative. and if NPHC/NALFO were excluded in said study because were arent "traditional" enough to be considered, then religious/LGBT-based orgs SURELY wouldnt. i suppose we're to believe that if youre not part of the mainstream orgs (whether by choice or circumstance) , then you're probably not "conservative."

hmm,im gonna haveto comeback to this... dont know if im making much sense.:confused:

But then not really, because imo we have done a good job in changing our old protocols to today's way of dress, and have broadened them to basically just saying wear your symbols with respect.

As for behaviors, I don't think a prohibition against public drunkeness, or not running to the store with rollers in your hair while wearing letters would be considered conservative--just common sense. And what internal dress codes we still use or more ritualistic rather that a matter of liberalism or conservatism. Because there is a special meaning behind them--know only to us.

And again I will point to our social action thrust and the issues we endorse are not socially conservative by anyone's definition. For example No Child Left Behind. We are still a sorority where the majority of our members are in the field of education. And as an organization, we challenged the Act, because of what it would mean in communities of color.

Another example, when I was on the national board we invited Clarence Thomas to speak with us before his confirmation. (He had been a law student of one of our past national presidents.) We challenged him on his views and although we cannot endorse candidates, he knew that the message would go out that we did not support the issues he championed. (And neither did his old law professor who was the first Black woman appointed to the US Civil Rights Commission.)

This is not to say that we don't have conservative members in our sorority who are also given the opportunity to express their views, but when it comes right down to our resolutions the over whelming majority vote on the ones that are socially liberal.

So again, I think it boils down to one's definition of liberalism and conservatism. But to me Delta is a liberal and very tolerant organization.

Violetpretty- But stereotypes such as partying, drinking too much, not being financially responsible, and being wild in more than one aspect are applied, then this would probably lean more towards liberals. As I said before, my relatives are very conservative and very opposed to GLOs. Some due to this perceived behavior, some because they think "it's buying your friends", some because of actual bad experiences with them in practice.

I guess for me this about sums it up. I think most NPHC organizations, and I single them out because they are the ones that I am most familiar with, are quite progressive on social issues, while at the same time having members that socially conservative in their own lives (which I think is what the OP refers to--the body of members). It certainly isn't a black or white issue.

There are two types of conservatives that we are talking about: people who follow their own moral code, and people who vote for Republicans.

I identify as politically liberal. I generally agree with Democrats. However, I didn't drink at all until I turned 21 and am not a huge partier. I also refuse to have sex with someone with whom I am in love and with whom I am in a committed relationship. Mind you, this code that I established for myself has nothing to do with religion. Some people think that's conservative.

I can think of plenty of "conservatives" that have loose morals. I can also think of plenty of "conservatives" that have strict morals. Likewise, I can think of liberals with a strict moral code, and liberals with a loose moral code. When I said GLOs tend to attract "conservatives", I was talking about people who vote for Republicans, moral code optional.

The way you worded this implies that the only areas that are (C)conservative in the Midwest are the poor/uneducated ones.

The Midwest is in many ways as conservative as the South, however the large urban areas like Chicago and St. Louis are much more liberal. Illinois is only a "blue state" because of Chicago, and Missouri can go back and forth depending on the issues. However, Central and Southern Illinois are not uneducated and poor. If anything the education is, on a whole, better than that of poor inner city schools.

Not to say that there aren't bad schools and uneducated people around here, but rural doesn't equal poor and uneducated, it just means you combine school districts and drive a bit further. Ohio hardly counts as the midwest in the first place, so don't speak like you know it if you're going to get it wrong.

Cincinnati yes, Cleveland, not so much.

I think that's exactly right.
________
Buy vapor genie

Interesting, because after being born and raised in the Lou, I wouldn't call it midwest (we considered ourselves borderline south,) a large urban city, nor liberal (racism is and has always benn rampant.) It always seems to be two steps behing the rest of the country.

As for Southern Illinois, when I attended SIUC in the 60s-70s, Carbondale had some of the poorest areas I had ever seen--including all the homes in the "regular" neighborhoods still having out-houses. Having been there recently, the non-poor consists of the faculty and admin of SIUC, but the town itself is still behind the times. The same with Central IL, because of the U of I. In other words those areas only have a modicum of progressiveness because of the universities that exist there. The locals/natives are a totally different story.

Oh and folx I know in OH--mainly Cleveland do consider themselves to be midwest--as does Delta, which has them in our Midwest region. BTW, MO is not in our midwest region--IL yes, but not MO. The MS River is the divider.

And again, based on the demographic studies of Delta, I do know that the vast majority of our members are liberal in their own lives. So I am beginning to wonder it you are equating conservatism to elitism or classism.

I wouldn't say that NPC/IFC GLO members are super-conservative. Many immigrant cultures are super-conservative, and the parents would freak out if they find out that their children (especially their daughters) went Greek. To these parents, school is meant for studying, not having fun. Also, the partying repuation that GLOs have (whether it be true or untrue at the campus the kids attend) may be against their values at home.

In any case, all NPC groups were founded at a time when women only made up a small percentage of college students, so just BY being college students, these girls' parents were no way extreme conservatives during their time.

No, I think that we generally are saying the same thing. Of course, it goes back to your statement about the definitions of liberalism and conservatism (and, actually, I don't know if a straight juxtaposition of those two ideas is as useful as it could be) and I think that things have changed pretty significantly with regards to definitions of conservatism even within the last ten years.

It was the Republican party who pushed the Suffragette agenda...Harding was a huge supporter of Sufferage!

Most California greeks I know....like most California college students are woefully liberal. The greeks however seem to be more moderate Democrat than their non-greek liberal to commie student counterparts. So it's all relative but I think in general you're right.

Conservative people tend to be attracted to organizations which have limitations and conformity (the Military, GLOs, Country Clubs, etc), and no I don't think there is ANYTHING wrong with that.

Also I think being in a GLO(especially as an exec) teaches you about human nature, why it's a bad idea to let random dudes into events, and how to run finances. I think all three things tend to make people a little less naive and trusting about the goodness of human nature....and thus more conservative.

I think Liberals tend to see human nature as generally good and after having a few computers, DVD players, and stereos stolen at parties and see sleazy stranger guys try to date rape girls at your house that whole fluffy world view begins to change....and you become more cautious.

oh noez! not Harding!!! :(

You are aware that at one point in this country, the republicans and democrats were the polar opposites of what they are today.

Only went to school in STL but yeah, it is a weird mix of southern with Midwestern, however it votes blue which is apparently what we're talking about. Southern Illinois has some really poor areas, however Central IL is not at all the same. Champaign-Urbana is a college city, but the rest of Central IL are primarily industrial. I've never seen an outhouse in Decatur or Springfield and the small towns around there generally have good school districts even though they're not pulling in the same tax revenues as the cities.

Yes there's poverty everywhere, but being conservative in the Midwest doesn't mean you're poor or uneducated which seemed to be what the previous poster was saying. Most of Illinois is conservative and most of it is not poor nor poorly educated.

Damn, I lost my whole first response to this. Anyway, I agree with the general proposition that conservative individuals may be initially more comfortable with the idea of an institution like Greek Life. However, I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea that liberalism somehow equates to irresponsibility and naivete. If anything, in looking at the current administration's fiscal policy, the opposite seems to be true (ex: hemmoragic spending in the face of an enormous deficit). If somehow having a chapter composed of liberals meant huge RM issues and lack of financial stability because of their naivete and unwillingness to impose rules (which is what I took away from the above post), every chapter in every blue state (except for those chapters entirely composed of Republicans) would be in ruin. And, despite what rumblings I've heard from time to time on here about Greek life in the West and North, they are not.

Kyle, please correct me if I've misinterpreted you.

So, does all of this make NIC and PHC members Republicans?

I have run the gamut over the years from semi liberal, to moderare to conservative.

Maybe some feel GLOs are conservitive because we are more regimented within our organizations.

That's ok. Yesterday somebody on MySpace assumed that I was a liberal and disliked George W. and Laura Bush simply because I had an advanced degree. That I would find it "disgusting" that Mrs. Bush used to be a librarian because I was "probably a liberal given your education level".

Whatever. I'm a moderated who usually votes Republican, voted for Bush twice, and admires George W. and Laura very much. I may be opposed to extending the war, but that's not the point.

I cannot believe that someone would automatically assume that I was liberal AND disliked the Bushes simply because I have an advanced degree. Not only that, he was pointing out that I would be disgusted at Laura Bush being a librarian- as in the First Lady, which would have little if anything to do with political persuasion.

I do know someone who fits the sorority girl stereotype in nearly every way- but turns out that she is very opposed to them. She is quite liberal and has given me a hard time about my ideals. Conversely, I fit very few stereotypes, and look how pro-GLO I am.

Yes, and my liberal parents were Republican, because it was the party of Lincoln. My reference had more to do with the liberal thinking (not party affiliation) of my Founders. And my guess is that many of their families were Republicans and liberal, too.

I totally agree.

word. only recently did i realize that.

:gasp: no! not love... and committment! :runs for the hills: :)

i love the period at the end of that. no question mark, but like, "umm, yeah im jus saying."

anyway carry on.

LOL.

IFC/NPC sororities tend to skew conservative -- I can't see how this is up for debate. (I don't know enough about the NPHC to comment, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was true for them also, given the argument below.) The sororities and fraternities on my campus were probably split right down the middle, but this is on a notoriously liberal campus where, on the whole, probably 80+ percent leaned left. That said, I think that Greek life tends to attract moderates more than anything. The extreme conservatives I know are just as turned off by stereotypes of Greek life they associate with liberalism (hardcore drinking and partying, promiscuity, relaxed moral standards) as the extreme liberals are with the aspects they associate with conservatism (sexism/racism, conformity, groupthink).

I do think that the adherence to tradition is the major point here. On campuses with less traditional Greek systems, I've found that you're more likely to have liberal members. On campuses with traditional Greek systems, less so. On campuses with sororities and fraternities with decades, maybe 100+ of history, tradition is a big thing. Greeks as a whole tend to be a pretty nostalgic bunch, and "it's the way we've always done things" tends to be a fairly popular defense for a whole range of decisions. Some of these choices are not particularly political -- whether or not to haze, recruitment methods, which songs to sing at rush. Others -- like the decision to allow Jews/Catholics/people of color into our organizations, gender roles, behavior standards, whether gay members will be embraced, tolerated but ignored, or not allowed at all -- clearly are, and we have always lagged behind the college population as a whole on these viewpoints because of a dogmatic adherence to tradition. Unfortunately, as the gap between the GDI population's views and the Greek population's views widened in the late 1960s/1970s, GDI tolerance for the Greek organizations decreased. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really recall there being a big focus on the political leanings of GDIs versus independents prior to, oh, 1960? The question of whether or not to go Greek mostly hinged on finances and individual preference prior to that, yes?)

Since then we've been stuck with the rep of being conservative and conformist, which turns a lot of socially liberal potential members away right off the bat. I went to a high school where nobody -- I literally mean no one -- planned on rushing when they went to college, including those that you'd most expect would go Greek. Obviously a few of us ended up doing so, but I think it's no surprise that most of us who rushed either went to schools where a large majority of the students were Greek and rush was in the second semester (they had time to be talked into it, meet Greek friends and see that the stereotypes were not true) or rushed at schools where the Greek systems were less traditional. The town that I grew up in is very socially liberal, and growing up, we had no Greek role models. It was just understood that going Greek was something that conservatives did -- people who were not us, people who valued wealth, tradition -- spoiled brats with daddy's credit cards. If you're not exposed to any other ideas than that growing up, it's rare that you'll give Greek life a second thought when you actually get to college. Which ensures that even in organizations where liberal members would be valued or at least tolerated ;), most liberal college students don't even get to the opening round of the rush process in the first place.

Well by 1912 the Republicans turned pro-business and kicked out the progressives...the modern Republican party took hold around the time of Taft....

I'd rather not get into a political history debate here though...

You only halfway misinterpret me. Obviously liberals are not totally irresponsible with money otherwise they'd all be bankrupt...they're only irresponsible with taxpayer money which they see as fun money. Blue State Chapters don't foreclose all the time because their Execs, while possibly Democrats, aren't spending house cash on expensive communal programs without consequences. Of course I never claimed that liberals are totally irresponsible with finances...I merely said it's one of the things that may attract more conservative people. When it's HIS money and he is held accountable for the spending in the SHORT TERM (spend today = no rent money tomorrow type deals) the Liberal is responsible with money on the whole. Although I do think Liberals in general are a bit naive about human nature. I think the average Liberal puts too much trust in the goodness of man and attempts to write off evil as some kind of social illness that has a societal cause.


And you're right the Republicans did an awful job with money management since 2001....instead of doing what they did from 1995 to 2000 they just catered to Bush's every whim. That's one of about three major reasons they aren't in charge anymore. HOWEVER, in general conservatives are most stingey when it comes to spending the communal treasury.

So I'm not saying Liberals are flakey with money....unless it's the public treasury on a grand state/federal scale that they won't have to take the fall for if the poop hits the fan. If the Treasurer or President of a chapter is a Democrat he'll still be responsible because if the finances get funny HE'LL take the immediate blame.

How do you know my family?

For the anti-sorority liberal girl, only the first one applies. She IS very much a follower. She and her clique all have major groupthink and cannot stand it when an outsider takes the spotlight away from them. She does not like it when she's not the center of attention.

I very much dislike groupthink and conformity myself, and I'm a moderate.