I think that she was alluding to resources available to prevent bad things from happening, and regional reputations regarding risk management issues. None of those are "bullshit", and from my discussions with university administrators, these are very real perceived issues.

I would just like to know what "resources" they mean. Constant scrutiny by national reps? More videos and powerpoint presentations on hazing? Cages to lock them all in? What?

Considering the last 2 sorority hazing/alleged hazing stories we've read about on here concerned very large national groups, I still call BS.

As for regional reps, the whole fricking Northeast has a rep for hazing (undeserved IMO but it's there), so that's kinda like the pot calling the kettle black.

Which resources? How about the ability to deploy resources (staff) to a crisis area and stay there? How about comprehensive leadership training? You may not think that these are important, but administrators do.

As far as regional reputations, in my opinion, the northeast has earned its reputation for hazing, particularly with sororities. This is mostly due to the now defunct ruling by the SUNY system to prohibit national social GLOs. Locals tend to be far worse, with regard to risk management issues, and tend to pull entire greek systems down to the lowest common denominator. There are exceptions, but I know that SUNY administrators regret that old ruling and are fed up with locals. Many of the "smaller sororities" mentioned in this thread are at many of these schools and have not taken a proactive role in reforming these greek systems, as evidenced by not participating in the Genesis Project by several of these groups.

If the only way you can trust your sisters is to keep national staff there with them forever, you might as well close the chapter and say screw it.

Not participating in the Genesis Project? Come ON. That's like saying the groups that don't participate in Kristen's Story are in favor of rape. In case you don't realize, participating in things like that costs MONEEEEEEE. Maybe they feel that using that money on their chapters and their SISTERS is a better idea than putting it into a group whose purpose is still somewhat murky. (Here's the thread from before so you can see if your GLO is one of those that Russell thinks isn't being "proactive." http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...threadid=41027)

and just as a side note, I know a tad-bit more about this campus than you realize, and I'm still calling BS prestige reasons for what Dolphin Chica's group was told.

I never said, or implied that a GLO should keep staff on site "forever." I am saying that a GLO needs to be able to be effective for a period lasting as long as a few months. Also, the GLO has to be willing, and able to effectively clean house, and this requires available and qualified staff members. And in the worst case scenarios, the GLO needs to be able to effectively negotiate a return to campus so that the chapter can be shut down for up to 5 years. GLOs are anything but equal in these areas, and even if someone doesn't agree, the only opinion that really matters, at the end of the day, is with administrators.

As far as joining groups like the Genesis Project, if you don't have the money to do that, then you probably don't have the money to effectively colonize at a Big 10 school. Also, the Genesis Project's creation was motivated directly by the current unified and explicitly stated concerns of American university presidents.

And we know how in touch with reality and Greek-supportive they often are. :rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

It doesn't matter if they have their heads up their asses (which they often do,) because they still hold the keys to our future. If all of the university presidents take a united stand, which they have recently done, we (all greeks) can only ignore them at our own peril.

Ok, maybe I should have quantified this more.

The last time we had a smaller org on campus, they were handed the books, the bylaws, etc and basically told them to go with it. They rarely had a field consultant or anyone from EO come to campus.

When we became Tri Delta, we had a stantionary field consultant with us the semester we were a colony, and a FC last semester. We will also be having a FC more often then other chapters next semester as well. Its not so much of a 'lets check to make sure you're not circling girl's fat' as 'lets check to make sure everything is running according to plan, everything is being done the Tri Delta way, etc.' We had an issue with slating this year, and even though it was 10pm on a Tuesday night, we were still able to get in touch with the right people at Exectutive Office to have our issue sorted out. Tri Delta's National President has been to my campus at least 4 times, and countless other members of either the E-board or EO have come countless other times.

I know ZTA also provided stationary field consultants when that chapter first expanded.

As pointed out earlier, some org's chapters have not seen a field consultant in years. It happend with the last group that went off campus; no one was around to answer their questions, the resources weren't avaiable, and the organization fell apart. Granted, yes it has to do with the girls, but it also had to do with this group of girls was not given the guidence they needed. This is the reason my school's administration was against trying another smaller org.

I'm not saying larger org's do not have their share of problems either. But to use Tri Delta again, a chapter just had their charter pulled because of Risk Management. Our field consultant had to investigate a possible instantance of hazing on another college around mine (and it was a case of study hours as hazing; not a severe we're beating girls up hazing possibility).

I'm stating my college, and probably other colleges, would rather have an org who has the resources to pull a charter before something happens then to have an org who fell apart because of lack of resources to know when there might be a problem.

I don't agree with that - and I can understand why they would be wary of having THAT group come back - but to paint ALL smaller NPC groups with the same brush is incredibly shortsighted. Assuming that they won't provide an equal amount of support for a beginning colony is like the administrators assuming "well let's get XYZ, because XYZ was the biggest chapter at my campus and they were awesome." You never know what you will get until you ask.

It also depends how long ago this colonization happened. Things are MUCH more structured than they used to be and to judge by something that happened 10 or 15 years ago just isn't realistic.

I'm sorry, I feel like I'm yelling at you - and I'm not! :) - but it's stuff like this that makes me want to pull my hair out.

I agree.. it sounds like BS prestige stuff to me as well...
EVERY SINGLE NPC group has a anti hazing policy and insurance to pay if something does go wrong.....

I get what you're saying. I think it's optimistic to say that money does not make a difference when it comes to catching and enforcing risk management policies. That isn't to say that money is the only thing, or that many of the smaller organizations don't have anti-hazing policies and exemplary records of enforcing them. But the availability of field/chapter/travelling consultants is a big issue.

There is one of the smaller NPCs that I always see connected with hazing rumors -- especially in conjunction with their chapters at "bigger name schools." Many of their chapters at bigger schools have either numbers problems or rumors of major risk management issues. I know for a fact that some of these chapters have not seen a consultant in years. And the impression that I get is that is that this sorority feels pressured not to shut down chapters with major numbers or risk management issues at least in part because they want to compete with the bigger sororities and don't think that they'll be able to if they shut their chapter at _____ [insert name of major school here]. I'm not so worried about numbers -- if an HQ wants to keep their chapter open when they have 30 members and the rest of the sororities are at 120 that's their business -- but the avoiding confrontation of risk management issues for prestige's sake, if that's really what's going on, is definitely worrisome.

Of course maybe they are just rumors most of the time, and nothing more. And I definitely don't think that "that NPC is small" is a valid reason for keeping them off campus if the issue is hazing, because certainly the majority of smaller NPC chapters don't have problems with it. But from personal experience I have seen that the only sororities on my campus that have gone unpunished for hazing issues in the past, and because of it, continue to haze are the smaller NPC sororities. So it IS an issue at some schools. I would be surprised if mine was the only one.

Also, I don't remember who brought this up -- but the fact that the last two major sorority hazing cases were larger NPCs doesn't necessarily correlate to who is hazing more. It may just mean that they're getting caught more often.

Not to say that hazing is okay by any means - it's not. However, based on what I've seen, it's not so much that small NPC groups feel like they can't compete if they shut down XX chapter at large school, and more that it's a feeling/knowledge that that if the chapter is clsoed, that chapter is probably going to be gone for good. Why? For all the reasons that have been mentioned in this and the other expansion thread.

Because next time that campus expands, unless an agreement has been worked out prior to that for the group to come back, that campus will most likely NOT select said small NPC group to come back. Even if the next expansion occurs 10... 20... 50 years later. Because that campus will probably want a "big", "prestigous" organization that isn't there. It is a very sad and terrible feeling to close a chapter and know that it will be a cold day before it can ever reopen. One that I'm not sure anyone from a big organization with big chapters all over the place can really understand.

So OF COURSE smaller organizations get a little desperate to keep the big chapters going. Say your group has 5 or 10 chapters sized over 70 people, and the other 2/3 of the NPC has like 30, or 40, or 50 chapters sized over 70 people - wouldn't you want to do everything you could to keep your chapter going? Try to solve internal issues as best you could? Keep things in house as long as possible?? I believe in my heart that Phi Sig, and I would like to think that all "small" groups, would try to do it the right way, and do the best we can to eliminate hazing issues, etc etc., but I'm sure that's not the case 100% of the time. But I can see how there is a tough dynamic at play in those types of situations, when the number of large chapters begins to directly correlate with the percieved health and stability of a group.

Also - I will just say this about rumors, things you've heard, things you may "know" about a certain group - you probably don't know the whole story, unless you were there first hand. For example, I thought I "knew" what happened with our chapter at Penn, from what I read on the boards, what I saw in their newspaper. However, there was more to the story then what people thought they "knew", and after hearing the story firsthand from our National President myself, I have to wonder about which versions of the "truth" people end up believing. It's easy for members of a sorority that is failing to blame it on "Nationals" - "we can't get national support", "our nationals suck", etc etc. Is it neccessarily the truth? Not always. And consultants can be deployed, chapters can be monitored until the cows come home - if the internal workings of the chapter members don't want to get their problems resolved, I promise you no chapter consultant will be able to help. Chapter consultants are not a cure-all, fix-everything remedy. They're great resources, don't get me wrong, but girls WILL get around the rules. For example, one chapter on my campus last year was on social probation (and this was a big NPC group, by the way) - they couldn't have a formal, social events, parties with fraternities, nothing. They had a chapter consultant come in and their advisor demanded to be added to their listserv so that they could monitor what was going on when she wasn't there. So what did they do? They started a whole new "secret" listserv, just for social events, that none of the grown-ups knew about, and continued to have parties and formals without the consultant and the advisor ever knowing it. If there's a will to get around the rules, I promise you people will find a way.

So don't neccessarily be so quick to blame National orgs, because most of what hits the rumor mill is a skewed version of the truth, and no matter what you hear, it's probably not the whole story.

Not trying to be nasty, because you raise excellent points S&S and DolphinChica. I'm just trying to maybe identify some of the roots of the frustrations faced by smaller NPC orgs, and as for the rumor mill - I'm sure that's an issue faced by ALL organizations, NPC, NPHC, NIC, etc etc. I do think its inexcusable that chapters that haze go unpunished and unsupervised.

Pirepresent,


Even those of us in the "big" orgs. have chapters that close. I specifically know the pain of closing a chapter that probably will never be reopened. Just look at the Ole Miss... Let's Discuss thread for my posts on the subject.

Pain and hard times affect even those of us in large GLOs.

Wow, this is an interesting thread. I am reading this and kind of shocked.

Closing a sorority on a national level would be horrible. Take AST, (we are probably on that list to close by 2015) we have 60 some chapters and we have limited finanical resources. However say AST is forced to close all of our chapters at schools that require a national affiliation will have to be disbanded, and even those chapters like mine which could go local, would suffer a serious setback. A lot of our stuff belongs to the nat'l org, would they take that? Most importantly, we are losing a large part of our sisterhood. Suggest to a ChiO or DG or ZTA or DDD (or anyone for that matter) that they could lose their national organization. how are they going to feel? horrible. it is a sad thought, and yes i'm biased, but I think NPC should do something to help smaller sororities. Someone mentioned a NPC with 38 chapters, what happens if they fall below the min chapter req. (or is that only to join not maintain membership?) will they be forced out? then soon disband?

I honestly believe that greeklife is at a low right now. We are facing more PR challenges than ever before and the system is behind. it is moving at a slower pace than the accusations. I honestly believe that as the Millenials and the generations after them go into college we will begin to see a rise in numbers, but why not help the smaller GLOs till then. Yea eventually you can't, but to just say 'oh well' is crap. it is not what i interpert from the spirit of NPC. We should work together not against eachother.

sorry if this is poorly worded, but this thread annoys me. 'yea let them close, they couldn't cut it.'

The post said there will only be 15-20 NPC sororities by 2015. NPC and national are not synonymous.

Even if a sorority elects to leave NPC or falls below the minimum requirements, they can continue to be a national sorority. They don't have to close anything. That is what Kappa Beta Gamma has done - they never died out completely, they are still here. :)

I think that with multicultural groups and social/professional options, women are more open to joining a non-NPC group than they used to be, especially at smaller schools.

Remember the threads about Kappa Sig & Phi Delt leaving the NIC? I wonder what would happen if one of the 26 left the NPC voluntarily, even though they were strong. That would be interesting to see.