Thinking outside the NPC box
 

I'm not sure how to word this, so please be gentle with me. :o

So if I understand what everyone seems to be saying, the issue seems to be that some chapters have more legacies than they can bid. That there can be legacies that are a good fit and are desirable *and* the legacy herself wants to be a member. Yet due to quota etc., she may be released.

If that is the issue, then what about the following.

HQs consider changing their rules regarding Alumnae Initiation (gasp!) so that legacies may "seek" (don't know the correct terminology) membership in their legacy sorority. If ABC currently does not allow AI, they would *now* do so *if* the women was a legacy *and* she was a good fit. A sort of special consideration or exception as the case may be.

To be clear, AI would not be a guarantee at all. And may not be offered or allowed for "just anyone".

The way I envision this is that a chapter will still cut legacies and extend bids to those they want. However, for the legacy that is cut and still wants to an ABC, she would have the ability to seek membership as an alumnae. She would not be guaranteed it, but have the ability to seek it. Thus some NPC HQs would have to change their policy on AI.

Now it is true that the girl may not have benefited by having been an undergraduate member of ABC. But if she was "groomed" to be an ABC, and really wants it, and would be a good fit as an alum, then why allow it? The undergrad chapter is not compromised at all. For what it is worth, something similar seems to work well with NPHC sororities.

Finally, my intent is not to have a "ABC does not offer AI" discussion. But to have HQs think *Outside The Box*. To discuss ways that a legacy - who truly sees herself as an ABC - have a way to be an ABC and be a production member as well. Something along this line might be a partial solution to what will most likely continue to be the *more legacies than bids* issue.

That is so special! How neat for those legacies as well as the members at the initiation.

This is the first time I've heard a story like this. I wonder how often it happens in the various GLOs?

(Sorry for the thread drift. I'm just a history lover so this really caught my attention!)

I did have almost 400 sisters. The year I went through rush, quota was over 85 and that was 10 years ago! I didn't think twice about it at the time, because the majority of houses on my campus (somewhere over 10 chapters) had as many members.

I stated above how we dealt with legacies, and it seemed to work for us. Some legacies just aren't desirable to the chapter and vice versa. Legacies never made up a majority (or even close to it) of our pledge classes, though.

I'm not really sure how new release figures work, but from reading other threads, it appears that girls who rank all chapter throughout rush may be guaranteed a bid. I personally feel that if you attend a full Pref day, then you should get a bid (since chapters shouldn't invite girls to Pref who they don't intend offering bids). However, I don't feel that every single PNM who maximizes her options by ranking all chapters should automatically get Pref invites...I'm not sure this is how it works, but this is what it seems I read.

We had very strong chapters on my campus (top houses) that didn't always take quota & I don't think houses should be required to. But now it seems that if a house doesn't take quota it's that they didn't "get" quota...not that they chose not to take 89 girls.

[Hijack, ignore if you want]

I am not disagreeing here but it is something to think about...while I too think it would lead to diminishing numbers of chapters, it seems to work very well for fraternities. Somehow, like sororities, some are pegged as being the "strongest" fraternities but the overwhelming majority of chapters get similar sized pledge classes every year. It is true that fraternities disappear much quicker than sororities, but they also appear quickly and there are usually more fraternal GLOs than sororities. I understand this to be true even in the most competitive SEC campuses for the fraternities.

Now would this be the same for girls? Maybe not. I do feel that our gender is, on average (there are obviously exceptions), more likely to aim for the "highest status" than the guys are. I feel like even though many of my friends now would say "I loved XYZ from Day #1!", I remember back in the dorms and they had their hearts set on ABC until they got cut after the second round or something like that.

Call me Beatrice Blunt...
 

This would end up being the NPC version of "pledging versus paper." Especially in the areas where certain sororities have too many legacies.

There would also be the problem of people PURPOSELY effing up their rush after they get cut from Pi Sigma Gamma (Prestigious Sorority Group) to AI into that group, getting on the alumnae board of Big Giant Chapter by buying their way in, and seeking vengeance for the chapter that cut them as an undergrad.

I guarantee you that if some of these legacies went to schools where mom, sister, grandma, aunt's chapter was struggling or otherwise not what they were used to, they would stop "truly seeing themselves as an ABC" in record time. Some, not all (so don't jump down my throat).

I know I've said this before, but I believe on the whole the men believe they make the fraternity, and the women believe the sorority makes them. You see it on here...the guys have joined a crap fraternity, and they say "what can I do to fix it?" The girls have joined a crap sorority, and they say "how can I get out of it?" Again, this is a very sweeping generalization.

Actually that is a very simple and intelligent way to put it. I agree with you completely. I think guys tend to join the house where their personality fits the best, regardless of status, and then work their asses off to raise their status but keep the "vibe" the same.

@DGTess: Note that there was a caveat: " if little Suzie was of dubious moral character or legal status that she would NOT be offered a bid". So a bid is not offered blindly.
@33Girl: Quotas are still an atificial limit on size, and as an extension an artificial limit on the size of an eritire house is just as silly. A rushee could decide if they want to be a member of a large house, just as easily as they could decide to be a member of a smaller house. Or they could choose based on belief or fit. But you take away a choice if you impose quotas. If you extrapolate the quota system to other things, does that mean that you should limit the size of members into other college club/organization (like the Glee club or Band or the Accounting Club)? Should it be applied to church sizes? Or political parties? Or to cities or states? Of course not, because it IS artificial. But the SIZE of an organization will work itself out over time. Some people may LIKE large groups, and others may NOT.

The problem with legacies is exasperated by miscommunication of the chapter to the mother/grandmother/aunt. Often a call to them could ease the problem, because information does get shared. And it is important to remember that this applies to ALL GLOs, male or female.

In some cases where XYZ at Ole Miss or Bama has more legacies going through than quota, it is interesting to question whether enough legacies are planning on joining XYZ to actually make a quota...many may decide they would rather join a different chapter making it irrelevant. However, XYZ has no way of knowing which ones are genuinely interested in joining their legacy and which ones are returning as a courtesy to their mother but have no intention in hell of actually joining...I would imagine the sorority would get it wrong on at least several PNMs. That may be where the real trouble comes in.

I agree with you to a point. I personally chose to join a group that was smaller because it was smaller. However, you are talking about a difference of 15 people, not 40-50-60 as can happen at a Ole Miss type school. I also looked at every sorority, even though it was not required when I rushed.

The problem is that as long as national groups keep giving awards that are based on size (meeting total/quota) rather than percentage of members retained, girls are going to believe that bigger is better. And, I think that's just an American viewpoint in general. Bigger just through dint of more members paying dues, has nicer housing and more opportunities (social and educational). Bigger keeps getting bigger, smaller dies out and there IS no choice but bigger. Unfortunately, that just seems to be the way that females think.

So, until we can entirely change that mindset, using quota/total is the lesser of two evils (the other evil being chapters closing).

No flames here, that's exactly what I think about it, too...I just couldn't find a way to word it. Most girls leave open house day set on the prettiest/well dressed/socially connected/popular sororities and keep set on them until they are cut or something happens to make them dislike the house. That's one reason why it's really difficult for struggling houses to dig themselves out of their struggle. All the girls want the more popular houses, and those houses have their choice of girls to choose from.

it is often the same with young women when they decide who to date. most often they try to date the most attractive, popular guy they can-they rarely aspire to date the campus dork. ten years down the road, the most popular guy in college may still be stuck in the "frat boy" mentality, while campus dork has blossomed into a successful, suave individual, but we rarely look that far in the future and we can't change human nature.

My rho gammas actually told us when I went through recruitment to "pick the house with the women who are who you want to be when you grow up".