I went digging and found Facebook posts regarding the legacy policy changes for a handful of organizations. There is certainly a mixed bag of responses for each.

Alpha Sigma Alpha
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...composer=false

Gamma Phi Beta
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...composer=false

Kappa Alpha Theta
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...composer=false

Kappa Kappa Gamma
https://m.facebook.com/kappakappagam...composer=false

Sigma Sigma Sigma
https://m.facebook.com/sigmasigmasig...composer=false

I feel like most of the emotion with the dropping of all legacy preferences is with the loss of legacies who make it to prefs being on the first bid list. Hey, if you don't want her, cut her before prefs. No big deal.

These lame-ass HQs who are dropping all legacy policies are saying, "But we will still celebrate our legacies." How? HOW? Sending them a congratulatory email when they graduate from high school? Letting them wear legacy T-shirts when they're babies? Why can't these HQs answer these questions?

Because the sisters working at HQ probably didn’t write the policies. A consultant (who may or may not have been Greek) did.

The last two didn’t come up. I certainly had some favorites in these, though.

-The Theta who said that GPA shouldn’t be a factor because your parents might be in jail. (I would venture that if your parents are in jail sorority rush is the least of your worries)

-The frequently posting Gamma Phi who apparently has zero understanding of the difference between NPC, local Panhellenic, and individual GLO policies on recommendations, but has no problem weighing forth as though she does.

As far as the ASA thread I plead the 5th ;)

I’ve come to the conclusion that a scuttling of legacy policies would have been received with far less acrimony if it had been explained that after 150 years of sorority membership, there were so many legacies coming through some chapters that the actives had no agency as far as being able to choose women other than legacies. I think everyone would have related to that, sympathized and understood and been supportive of a change. Instead it’s turned into a big virtue signalling moment to the point that some women in those threads actually APOLOGIZED FOR THEIR MEMBERSHIP. It makes it sound like the only thing holding back sororities from being bastions of diversity were these antiquated policies. (Psssst: there’s lots more than that.)

The chapters whose members are diverse in race, sexual orientation, physical appearance and economic status will continue to be so, and those that are homogeneous will continue to be so. The only thing that will change is who will be the new superstar as far as national headquarters and chapter awards are concerned.

33, you have made some fine posts!

Thanks. It’s just the utter hypocrisy that gets me - these populations we are trying so hard to attract were referred to as “undesirable” a couple decades ago.

If these changes actually lead to chapters full of women who love each other and relate to each other regardless of their deepest differences, it may be worth it. However, if it leads to tokenism, I’ll puke.

"I HATE tokenism," said this mother of 5 non-white daughters and also early, often token, female horticulturist.

I enjoyed the question the GPB alum asked:"is the preferential treatment of high GPA PNMs also ending?" A reply was that that was not preferential treatment. Why is it not? And why is a minimum GPA requirement by chapters not anti-inclusive? Why should IHQs expect members to pay dues, because dues would be unreachable for some?

The first time my son's fraternity tells me his dues will be doubled so that they can pledge members who can't pay, he is outta there. We work hard enough to pay his.

I wonder how many women (and men too, because they’re going through this is well) who are just affording college by the skin of their teeth but would be a fantastic addition to a GLO could be pledged, with the money that is being spent on studies, DEI specialists, and consultants. (I used to hope that if you needed someone for a study you found someone in the alumnae membership who was employed in that field and who would maybe adjust their fee because they were a member, but I know better now.)

I think it's great that some people, like the little boy stating that the emperor is naked, realize eliminating legacy policies does nothing to get more diverse PNM populations-and that, greek sisters, is the first step in being more inclusive!

I just got an email from AEPhi's national office. We are NOT ending preferential treatment for legacies. The email does acknowledge that sometimes the number of legacies going through FR is greater than quota, and sometimes legacies will have to be released, but all legacies should be given "every consideration possible".

What triggered the email was a change whereby chapters no longer have to make a courtesy call to a legacy's AEPhi relative to inform her that the legacy was released.

Also, the AEPhi relative must submit a letter of recommendation for the PNM indicating that she's a legacy, to ensure that the chapter is aware of her legacy status. (I guess that if the relative has passed away, another AEPhi in good standing can write the rec.)

And great-granddaughters are now considered legacies. We're one of the younger NPCs, but I guess we've been around long enough that great-granddaughters of AEPhis are now college age.

ZTA just announced that legacies will no longer be given preferential treatment.

I was recently asked to volunteer again, which I declined to do based on the change in our legacy policy. I also let them know that the reason why was declining to do so. I am all for increasing diversity, but I am very (extremely) unhappy that my daughter will no longer be given any special consideration as a legacy. Of course, she’s five years away from college.

I would be happy to mentor PNMs without connections through the recruitment process to help them get in the door. Maybe that’s a better way to diversify membership.

I am thrilled that you spoke up!

Meaning they will not automatically be moved on to the 2nd round. That is a shame for my 2x legacy granddaughters. I'd be upset, but I really don't think sororities as we know them will be around when they enter college (they are three and 1 now).

And good for you amIblue. I am so glad that you explained the reason for declining the invitation. And you are right, alums mentoring PNMs who might not be "in the know" would probably be much more productive than destroying each sorority's alum loyalties.

Alpha Sigma Tau announces updates reflecting our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion

https://alphasigmatau.org/news-event...update/#legacy

Of this 8-point change in policy, the following may be the most interesting or unexpected:

There was no mention of a change in the rec policy.

There doesn't appear to be any pushback regarding these changes on social media thus far.

KΔ has gotten rid of preferential policy for legacies.

I'm hearing more and more about DG legacies being released after first round. Some of their DG legacy-granters are convinced it's *because of* the new legacy policies -- that chapters are taking it to extremes.

I'm not close enough to rush to know whether it's a preconceived notion, a "my little Hannah is perfect", or actually happening.