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.