GreekChat.com Forums

GreekChat.com Forums (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)
-   Fraternity Recruitment (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=218)
-   -   Tiers in The SEC (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=94687)

macallan25 03-24-2008 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623224)
You're confusing which posts I'm talking about. But that's okay because the point I'm making is not up for debate. ;)

Oh ok, I understand now. I was kind of confused there for a second.

macallan25 03-24-2008 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nittanyalum (Post 1623240)
I understand abuse is abuse. But I'm talking about even just recreational use here. Macallan seemed to imply that I should get as upset about someone drinking as I would about someone doing cocaine (again, I assume we're talking "recreationally").

ETA: This post was in response to DSTChaos, but I want to note that I also very much agree with EE-BO's last paragraph -- this is what my base concern is.

No no, I wasn't saying you should feel that way.....I was just throwing it out there to see how you would respond.

In some past experiences I have been around some raging, fall down drunks (not that you are one haha) talk about how sad and deplorable it is for people to do hard drugs, smoke a little grass, etc. It always makes me shake my head and laugh.

Yeah though, recreational drinking, I think, is a little different than recreational use of drugs like cocaine. Two different animals, for sure.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nittanyalum (Post 1623240)
I understand abuse is abuse. But I'm talking about even just recreational use here. Macallan seemed to imply that I should get as upset about someone drinking as I would about someone doing cocaine (again, I assume we're talking "recreationally").

[I don't know if we disagree here or are even talking about what my initial post was talking about. But here goes just for clarity. :)]

I don't believe in a recreational use of illegal substances. They are illegal for a reason (whatever the different reasons are, the law has spoken).

You already get the point about alcohol: If recreational alcohol use includes irresponsibility and regular binge drinking, it has similar effects as getting high on drugs. But if the person is over 21, it isn't a legal issue unless there is a law being broken.

But none of these truly compare to the most deadly legal substance: CIGARETTES. BAN THEEEE TO HELL!!!! :eek:

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25 (Post 1623246)
Oh ok, I understand now. I was kind of confused there for a second.

Now, if you believe in ranking drugs and drug users based on prestige or class, my post was also about you. But I didn't gather that from your cost posts.

You should work for the DEA, btw.

Elephant Walk 03-24-2008 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623253)
I don't believe in a recreational use of illegal substances. They are illegal for a reason (whatever the different reasons are, the law has spoken).

Now you're defending racism? Excellent. The law also spoke on Jim Crow and so forth for awhile.

Drugs have become illegal because of racism and prejudice. Opium was associated with the "dangerous" Chinese immigrants. Marijuana with the Mexicans. The first laws against Marijuana in the United States (there were many laws FOR marijuana up to then) was in 1910 in Utah (I believe) in fear of the Mexicans. Cocaine was associated with the black subcultures, more specifically the Jazz scene which caused them to be illegal. Mushrooms, Acid, etc were out of fear for the hippies and the possibility of an oncoming revolution. It's not until much more recently have we began trying to protect people...I think the 1970's was the first time you could make a case perhaps.

Either way, none of this has anything to do with SEC tiers.

Coke is prevalent in my chapter as well as many of the Arkansas houses.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk (Post 1623263)
Now you're defending racism? Excellent. The law also spoke on Jim Crow and so forth for awhile.

analogy --------------------------------------------------------> you

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk (Post 1623263)
Drugs have become illegal because of racism and prejudice. Opium was associated with the "dangerous" Chinese immigrants. Marijuana with the Mexicans. The first laws against Marijuana in the United States (there were many laws FOR marijuana up to then) was in 1910 in Utah (I believe) in fear of the Mexicans. Cocaine was associated with the black subcultures, more specifically the Jazz scene which caused them to be illegal. Mushrooms, Acid, etc were out of fear for the hippies and the possibility of an oncoming revolution. It's not until much more recently have we began trying to protect people...I think the 1970's was the first time you could make a case perhaps

The complete reasons behind the illegality of drugs are and will always be debatable. What will not always be debatable is the fact that there are illegal substances.

Racism and classism are two of the alleged and evidenced reasons why crack cocaine carries a heavier penality than powder cocaine. Other alleged and evidenced reasons include the mixture of different substances in crack cocaine to make for a cheaper and more potent substance to sell to people of lower SES.

However, claims of racism and classism will not get someone arrested on crack cocaine possession off the hook but rather may get a more comparable sentence to someone arrested on powder cocaine (who is more likely to be able to afford a lawyer). So let's go back to the fact that they're illegal as to not unnecessarily complicate the issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk (Post 1623263)
Either way, none of this has anything to do with SEC tiers.

But it must! :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk (Post 1623263)
Coke is prevalent in my chapter as well as many of the Arkansas houses.

Naughty boys. Sore noses make for lame existences.

But as long as you look and dress the part of an upstanding Southern gentleman in a "top tiered fraternity" from a "top tiered school," everything's okay. Going back to the issues of racism and classism.......

UTLonghorn2012 03-24-2008 09:28 PM

Speaking of drugs, has anyone seen "Reefer Madness" from back in the twenties? Hillarious stuff.

But yeah the anti-drug movement in the US got started with the same temperence societies that the anti-alcohol movement did. However, race was a big factor. They did not want "foreign" drugs influencing their children, and they particularly did not want teenage girls to fall under the influence of "foreign" drug lords.

Thanks to having US History class with an ex-hippie, we learned these things in school!

PhiGam 03-24-2008 09:28 PM

I dont do drugs for the simple reason that they are illegal and I don't want to get some shit on my record because of my college days. I have seen a decent amount of marijuana and cocaine use with my own eyes and just chose to never partake in either, I pass no judgement on those who do though. If coke and weed were legal I would probably use them recreationally.

PhiGam 03-24-2008 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UTLonghorn2012 (Post 1623293)
Speaking of drugs, has anyone seen "Reefer Madness" from back in the twenties? Hillarious stuff.

But yeah the anti-drug movement in the US got started with the same temperence societies that the anti-alcohol movement did. However, race was a big factor. They did not want "foreign" drugs influencing their children, and they particularly did not want teenage girls to fall under the influence of "foreign" drug lords.

Thanks to having US History class with an ex-hippie, we learned these things in school!

It makes sense, personally I would prefer to make everything legal so that the government could tax it. To collect any kind of government assistance, however, you would be subject to random drug screening when you went to pick up your check. If somebody is able to use drugs and still be a productive member of society then there really isn't a problem with it.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UTLonghorn2012 (Post 1623293)
Speaking of drugs, has anyone seen "Reefer Madness" from back in the twenties? Hillarious stuff.

But yeah the anti-drug movement in the US got started with the same temperence societies that the anti-alcohol movement did. However, race was a big factor. They did not want "foreign" drugs influencing their children, and they particularly did not want teenage girls to fall under the influence of "foreign" drug lords.

Thanks to having US History class with an ex-hippie, we learned these things in school!

That's not the complete history, though. That was the part of history that an ex-hippie found most compelling from a conflict rather than a consensus perspective.

There's plenty of info about the social and economic reasons behind the illegality of drugs and why alcohol went from being legal to illegal to legal. The -isms (racism, classism, Americentrism, etc.) don't capture it all. Capitalism is a big part of it, as well.

But lo and behold it's still illegal. So the rest is good for theoretical and policy debates with little expectation that there will be policy and legal changes that make drugs legal.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623298)
It makes sense, personally I would prefer to make everything legal so that the government could tax it. To collect any kind of government assistance, however, you would be subject to random drug screening when you went to pick up your check. If somebody is able to use drugs and still be a productive member of society then there really isn't a problem with it.

The government can control the drug trade a lot more than it has.

However, the government arguably makes more money from the illegal drug trade than it would if drugs were legal and taxable. Drug profit is something the government would never admit to but I wish the IRS could REALLY audit the US government (and other countries' governments could be audited). The government has its hand in everything.

If drugs are legal and taxable, and you claim that if someone can be productive they should be able to use drugs, why should people on government assistance not be able to ride the white horse, too? This is where the -isms get stronger if you make those kinds of disclaimers. I'd rather drugs just be illegal PERIOD and for myself and other concerned citizens to spend our time highlighting the hypocrisy of people who pretend that certain illegal drugs and drug users are OKAY. :)

SWTXBelle 03-24-2008 10:01 PM

Read The Devil's Picnic for a fascinating look at cultural (food and drug) taboos and the politics behind them.

gtdxeric 03-24-2008 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623270)
Racism and classism are two of the alleged and evidenced reasons why crack cocaine carries a heavier penality than powder cocaine.

She don't lie, she don't lie, she don't lie.

PhiGam 03-24-2008 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623307)
If drugs are legal and taxable, and you claim that if someone can be productive they should be able to use drugs, why should people on government assistance not be able to ride the white horse, too? This is where the -isms get stronger if you make those kinds of disclaimers. I'd rather drugs just be illegal PERIOD and for myself and other concerned citizens to spend our time highlighting the hypocrisy of people who pretend that certain illegal drugs and drug users are OKAY. :)

As I said before, I feel that if somebody can be a productive member of society and still use drugs then there isn't a problem, at least not one that the government should involve itself in. I have a problem with taxpayers money being used to fund drug use, drugs are a luxury.

macallan25 03-24-2008 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623307)
I'd rather drugs just be illegal PERIOD and for myself and other concerned citizens to spend our time highlighting the hypocrisy of people who pretend that certain illegal drugs and drug users are OKAY. :)

Do you believe that none of them are OK because of the simple fact that they are illegal? or are there some other reasons.

I understand a lot of what you are saying but I've got to say........I'd probably be more concerned with someone that smokes a pack a day over someone that smokes a couple bowls every so often.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 10:09 PM

I love The History Channel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lrd5xtyfjFw

Addresses some of the issues that we have discussed in this thread. Take from this and scholarly sources what you will. It should all be taken together instead of only accepting those things that suit your interests or that you find compelling.

macallan25 03-24-2008 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623322)
As I said before, I feel that if somebody can be a productive member of society and still use drugs then there isn't a problem, at least not one that the government should involve itself in. I have a problem with taxpayers money being used to fund drug use, drugs are a luxury.

Gotta agree here. If someone wants to stick a needle in their arm.......that's their decision. We shouldn't be paying for the Government to babysit them.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25 (Post 1623324)
Do you believe that none of them are OK because of the simple fact that they are illegal? or are there some other reasons.

All that matters for the purpose of this discussion is that they're illegal. :)

The other reasons require detail and The Hills is on. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25 (Post 1623324)
I understand a lot of what you are saying but I've got to say........I'd probably be more concerned with someone that smokes a pack a day over someone that smokes a couple bowls every so often.

I already talked about cigarettes in this thread. That's a health effect that is very concerning.

But I multitask. Cigarettes are bad and illegal drugs are bad, mmmmmkay. :)

macallan25 03-24-2008 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623331)
All that matters for the purpose of this discussion is that they're illegal. :)

The other reasons require detail and The Hills is on. :)



I already talked about cigarettes in this thread. That's a health effect that is very concerning.

But I multitask. Cigarettes are bad and illegal drugs are bad, mmmmmkay. :)

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f3.../Mr_Mackey.jpg

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623322)
As I said before, I feel that if somebody can be a productive member of society and still use drugs then there isn't a problem, at least not one that the government should involve itself in. I have a problem with taxpayers money being used to fund drug use, drugs are a luxury.

Gotcha.

Drugs aren't a personal luxury as far as I'm concerned but I know they are to some people.

But they are only a personal "luxury" as long as they don't result in addiction, family problems and other social ills, health problems, and criminality, right? The problem is that we can't predict when recreation becomes addiction. Drugs should remain illegal because when they become legal, the government can not regulate its use and abuse -- just like how cigarette and alcohol addictions are causing health problems and social ills (to a much lesser extent, criminality) but the government is acting helpless.

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by macallan25 (Post 1623334)

Mr. Mackey is the law!

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 10:22 PM

In the end, the change of thread discussion was interesting. Back to tiered SEC stuff without a ranking of who is the coolest powder nose. :)

gtdxeric 03-24-2008 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623298)
It makes sense, personally I would prefer to make everything legal so that the government could tax it. To collect any kind of government assistance, however, you would be subject to random drug screening when you went to pick up your check. If somebody is able to use drugs and still be a productive member of society then there really isn't a problem with it.

Been reading The Onion?

http://www.theonion.com/content/news...gal_if_user_is

Lucky SC 03-24-2008 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1622977)
So when you said KA, SAE, and EN were top in the south, why didn't Fiji/ Phi Gam get a mention? We're bottom tier at UF and USC. Top at UGA, UTenn, UTexas, Bama, Auburn and middle everywhere else. SAE is bottom tier here and EN is near the bottom of the middle.

where is "here"

and who are you adressing

Lucky SC 03-24-2008 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS (Post 1623341)
In the end, the change of thread discussion was interesting. Back to tiered SEC stuff without a ranking of who is the coolest powder nose. :)

and yea this is getting horribly off topic, i'm responsible for that lol

PhiGam 03-24-2008 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky SC (Post 1623355)
where is "here"

and who are you adressing

FSU, whoever said that KA, SAE, EX, and EN were the top fraternities

PhiGam 03-24-2008 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gtdxeric (Post 1623348)

From the article: "Drugs are addictive, and that's true whether you're a ghetto gang member or a Harvard-educated entertainment lawyer," Hutchinson said. "But the cold, hard truth is, if the ghetto kid gets hooked, he isn't going to clean up in a rehab clinic in Palm Springs and maybe even become president, now, is he?

Is it bad that I ACTUALLY agree with this? Because I do.

nittanyalum 03-24-2008 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky SC (Post 1623355)
where is "here"

and who are you adressing

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623360)
FSU, whoever said that KA, SAE, EX, and EN were the top fraternities

**nittanyalum shuffles into thread scowling and muttering under her breath about women doing all of the heavy lifting, drops quotes from earlier in the thread the men won't bother to go find with a thud**

Quote:

Originally Posted by banditone (Post 1618942)
I did a tally of SEC schools for who was listed in 1st tier the most often. It came out something like this:

(info taken from posts on oldrow)
KA
SAE
EX
EN

It was only the SEC schools tho.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk (Post 1618961)
Agreed. There is alot of difference but it seems that these fraternities come up the most. Along with that Phi Delt chapters come up often, I think.

In my opinion and in no specific order...the top chapters in the South would go something like....

DKE - Alabama
SAE - Alabama
KA - Alabama
Sigma Nu - Ole Miss
Phi Delt - Ole Miss
Fiji - Texas
SAE - Texas

Those chapters are some of the more notable ones

**nittanyalum turns around still scowling and muttering, she straightens some pillows and picks socks up off the floor on her way out of the thread**

DSTCHAOS 03-24-2008 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623363)
Is it bad that I ACTUALLY agree with this? Because I do.

No. I agree, too, and it supports the point that I was making.

Lucky SC 03-25-2008 01:05 AM

honey i'm home...

i said i'm home... DAMNIT where is my meatloaf!?


Quote:

Originally Posted by nittanyalum (Post 1623378)
**nittanyalum shuffles into thread scowling and muttering under her breath about women doing all of the heavy lifting, drops quotes from earlier in the thread the men won't bother to go find with a thud**





**nittanyalum turns around still scowling and muttering, she straightens some pillows and picks socks up off the floor on her way out of the thread**


Lucky SC 03-25-2008 01:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhiGam (Post 1623363)
From the article: "Drugs are addictive, and that's true whether you're a ghetto gang member or a Harvard-educated entertainment lawyer," Hutchinson said. "But the cold, hard truth is, if the ghetto kid gets hooked, he isn't going to clean up in a rehab clinic in Palm Springs and maybe even become president, now, is he?

Is it bad that I ACTUALLY agree with this? Because I do.

where you go to school by the way, i think i might have asked u this already. I feel like u said florida

nittanyalum 03-25-2008 01:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky SC (Post 1623417)
honey i'm home...

i said i'm home... DAMNIT where is my meatloaf!?

Don't honey me! You were supposed to shoot something and bring it home for dinner!

PhiGam 03-25-2008 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky SC (Post 1623418)
where you go to school by the way, i think i might have asked u this already. I feel like u said florida

Florida State... don't ever make that mistake again. :D

33girl 03-25-2008 11:04 AM

wow, didn't mean to make this go onto a huge tangent.

But I agree with EE-BO, coke use has gone WAY up - everywhere, not just in the south. I won't say it wasn't around at all when I was in school, but it's much more prevalent now from what I hear, and what I don't understand is where people at a school where most of the students are on financial aid are getting the money for it.

DSTCHAOS 03-25-2008 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 1623505)
wow, didn't mean to make this go onto a huge tangent.

You didn't. :)

banditone 03-25-2008 02:15 PM

Arkansas: EW, when is row week? Who is KE and EN having?

Elephant Walk 03-25-2008 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banditone (Post 1623643)
Arkansas: EW, when is row week? Who is KE and EN having?

I am currently way, way out of the loop...but..

the list of band goes something like this:

KE: Vanilla Ice and Ying Yang Twins
EN: Eve 6
LCA: Young Joc
Fiji: Crime Mobb
Phi Delt: Lil Flip
EX (I think): Juvenile

and Gorilla Zoe is coming, but I can't remember which house.

Row Week is around April 11th

33girl 03-25-2008 03:40 PM

did I read the above right? Vanilla Ice is going to be performing in a fraternity house?

How can you rail against jorts when Vanilla Ice is in your fraternity house?

DSTCHAOS 03-25-2008 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 1623688)
did I read the above right? Vanilla Ice is going to be performing in a fraternity house?

How can you rail against jorts when Vanilla Ice is in your fraternity house?

Is he performing as Vanilla Ice or Rob Van Winkle. Maybe he's doing his rocker thing.

Rob Van Winkle is handsome when he's not doing the paranoid douchebag thing.

Elephant Walk 03-25-2008 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 1623688)
did I read the above right? Vanilla Ice is going to be performing in a fraternity house?

How can you rail against jorts when Vanilla Ice is in your fraternity house?

...because Vanilla Ice isn't a member of the fraternity?

I'm not sure the decision making that went into this, again I'm way, way out of the loop at the moment. Perhaps people thought it'd be funny. I don't know.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:36 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.