Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

Something I've found interesting while reading through this forum on GC is the hypocrisy inherent in this forum. We are constantly assuring people that sorority rush is not a shallow process, that what you wear or how attractive you are doesn't matter as long as you make an effort to put yourself together, that every girl should give each sorority an equal chance and not listen to rumors, that you don't have to have money or connections to get into a sorority.

Yet there is a sick sense of pride in the amount of cut-throat-ness of rush at certain Southern schools (okay, let's not discriminate -- certain Northern schools too, although not to the same extent). Plenty of y'all seem to take pride in those big SEC schools with the giant, competitive Greek systems -- without acknowledging that the shallowness of the system is what makes rush so competitive. Whenever there is a post about UGA, Ole Miss or Bama, there are flurries of posts about how your Lilys and your Louies do matter, how hot you are does matter, who you knew in high school and who wrote your recs does matter, blah blah blah.

Yet nobody denounces these systems for that, even though we whine constantly about how "Everybody thinks sorority rush is shallow and we're shallow, and we're really not! Money and looks and clothes don't matter!" Like I said, there are many, many GCers who not only don't attack the way rush is conducted in these systems -- they venerate it! It's no wonder that so many people don't believe us when we say sorority rush is not a shallow process. Certainly, at many schools and within many chapters, it's not -- or at least not to the same extent. But to worship big Southern rushes for how "competitive" while ignoring the fact that it is partly (if not primarily) the shallow criteria the PNMs are judged on that makes things so competitive . . . makes us look like shallow hypocrites.

Can we stop talking out of both sides of our mouth and just pick one view or the other?



PS: Play nice in this thread, please.

Hell, yes, rush is shallow! Just like the rest of life, looks do matter, first impressions do matter (a lot of it is first impressions), and a whole lot of other superficial stuff matters more than it probably should just because rush is so short. You have to admit, it's a lot of fun, though.

I'm sure there's a better way to do it...but we just don't.

The reason that recruitment can be shallow is that life as a whole is that way...I've read so many studies that affirm that given 2 equal candidates for the job, the more attractive one (or at least the one who's best put together) will get the job. Studies even show that very young babies will exhibit preferences for photos of attractive adults as opposed to others.

How many times have you seen a Miss America (remember, they're a SCHOLARSHIP pageant, don't call them a beauty pageant :rolleyes:) who's morbidly obese with terminal acne?The truth is that looks play a huge role in life, as unfair as it is.

It's generalizing to say that all big Southern rushes are shallow. That's not why they're competitive. Alums and actives spend months behind the scenes looking up grades, activities, talking to people who have written recs. The sororities want people who'll represent them well in all aspects, not just in *pageants*. This is why a PNM should have a good resume of worthwhile activities--because sororities want workers, not ghost members or letter pimps.

Recruitment in the South is competitive because it's a seller's market. There are a lot of women who want to be Greek, thus we have pledge classes of 50-80 at several universities. I have never heard a Southerner say she was proud to be Greek because recruitment is competitive here. We're proud of our systems because they're strong.

I doubt that people will play nice in this thread. You've pretty much denounced Southern recruitment as being shallow. What do you expect everybody to do, sit back and take it? Until you've been down here and experienced the system, please don't judge what you don't know. I certainly don't flame non-Southern recruitments. Every system uses the best style of recruitment for itself and the system that the Southern universities uses works best for us and our thousands of PNMs.

Shallowness NOT limited to southern schools
 

"Shallowness" (Picking on looks or family background) is soooo not exclusively a southern SEC school/competitive rush" problem.

I bet EVERY system has at least one chapter (if not all!) who have biases towards better looking PNMs. Some people are just a little more honest about it than others.

I went to a nothern school with a fairly small greek system (our first day of rush was always spent convincing people to go greek, much less to join our chapter!) There was a big issue one year when an email intended for chapter members only accidentally was sent to the wrong address (not our chapter, one of the other ones). In the email, the assistant rush chair had gone through freshman photos and picked the "10 best looking freshman women" and identified them to all members so the house could target them during rush. The email was posted to a school-wide bulletin board, and immediately all the other sorority houses feigned being appalled - WE would never do such a thing, such-and-such house is just SOOOO shallow. Yeah right.

If anything, I'd say the SEC schools are LESS shallow because of how much more time they spend researching the activities and background of their members.

I feel like most northern schools go "ohmigod, i need 20 warm bodies to make numbers!"

just my not-the-least-bit-humble opinion..

Re: Shallowness NOT limited to southern schools
 

I sincerely hope you're joking. If we had to lump "most" northern schools together with a quote I think it would be more along the lines of "I wish those southern belles at HQ from the 300 person chapters would STFU about getting quota/total so we didn't have to take warm bodies we don't give a rat's ass about."

Southern chapters may research and know that Zsa Zsa was the 2004 sweet potato queen and all her female relatives since 1900 have been KKGs and she has a 4.0...but that says NOTHING about the kind of person she is inside. For all they know, she'll come through rush and be the dirrrrtiest girl on earth whose parents have been covering for her for 18 years.

anyway...

Heather, I understand what you're talking about and I used to feel the same way. I have come to the conclusion that Different Things Are Just Different. I probably would be aghast at the way some of our chapters go about rushing and choosing women...but they would feel the same way about mine.

Yeah, it's fun to read about the matching outfits and huge parties and budgets. It's fun for me to read about it because I never had to do it. I would last 2.5 seconds in that kind of environment. But again, that's just me.

Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

I don't feel that *looks* ("put together" what have you) are the primary criteria that Southern chapters use when they evaluate a potential new member. Just happens to be a more noticeable attribute.

My guess is that academics, leadership, integrity, friendship, personality etc. are at the forefront.

Yes, rush is competitive at many Southern schools. This is because there are so many excellent women going through rush with with a high GPA, extra curricular activities out the wazoo, community service that would make Mother Teresa blush, stellar recommendations, and legacies to boot. All the while there is a limited number of bids available. As such, *looks* may end up as the "tie breaker". But is not the reason a women is extended a bid. It is the whole "package".

And letting PNMs know "the whole picture" is not talking out of both sides of the mouth. Frankly, it is simply putting forth an accurate assessment of what to expect.

Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

I totally agree with this. I'd go out on a limb and say that hot girls with no other redeeming qualities are not the ones getting bids at competitive schools.

And on a side note- not all Southern schools are even close to this. North Carolina is a HUGE Greek state- the majority of NPC orgs have high #s of chapters in our state. But I'd say we don't have ANY schools who have these competitive recruitments. Granted, we aren't SEC- which has a lot to do with it.

We tend to get into North/South generalizations on GC- it helps everyone out if we keep in mind how diverse we can be even within groupings.

Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

AMEN!!!! AMEN!!!!! AMEN!!!!!

Also keep in mind that at places like Auburn where we have huge chapters, we can ususally find someone who has at least heard of most PNM's before. I'm from west Alabama, and I get asked constantly if I know Susie Q. from XTown or Susie P from ZTown. Sometimes I do, and when I don't know her, I usually know someone who does. Every sister from the Atlanta area knows or knows someone that knows Atlanta-area PNM's. Same way for sisters from Birmingham, Montgomery, and other places--and it's like that for every chapter on campus. Believe me, there's a lot of behind-the-scenes "research" on girls that goes on before the actual week of recruitment. Girls are "known" before they actually come through.

Every organization has chapters that really are shallow and will ask you blatantly how much your parents make and/or judge you on how many designers you have in your closet. There are certainly a couple here; I'd be lying if I said there weren't. There are also plenty of chapters that look at Jane in a Lily Pulitzer dress and just think "Hey, that dress happens to look really cute on her--she really put herself together well," and don't take into account the designer. Like CarolinaCutie said, plenty of "hot" girls with nothing else to back them up (mediocre grades, not many outside activities, very little community service) get cut all the time.

Other factors aside, looks are about the only way you can remember a girl when you're meeting 1000+ of them. Even though sister Katie may only meet 85-100 PNM's during ice water teas, that's still a lot of girls.

I don't think this is inherent only to Southern chapters, but rather to all campuses with a huge Greek Life interest. It just happens that most campuses with that huge of an interest seem to be down here, so we kind of get stuck with that "shallow" label. It would be fabulous if we could really get to know every girl during recruitment, but can you just imagine how long that would take? Personally, I don't like the idea of 8 rounds of IWT so that each girl goes to 2 parties a day and gets to know the chapter better than in 25 minutes. If less girls were going through recruitment, then it wouldn't be so big a deal.

Re: Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

CarolinaCutie what school do/did you go to? Elon's recruitment can be pretty competitive, but it's not extremely cut-throat. I would think that the bigger Greek systems in NC (Duke, Wake, Chapel Hill) would be somewhat competitive, but I could be totally wrong.

My question is this: how did our founders recruit members? What was recruitment like 50, 75, of even 100 years ago? Tri Delta was formed because one of our founders wanted to form a female society that accepted girls as who they are, and not what they were on the outside. Apparently, sororities were taking girls based off looks back in 1888, otherwise our founder wouldn't have mentioned anything about it.

Re: Re: Shallowness NOT limited to southern schools
 

33girl:

Our environments are EXACTLY alike and I AGREE 100% with everything you said. I CRACK UP reading about learning PNM's info over the summer. Heck, our Panhellenic works up to the WEEK before just trying to get PNM's to sign up. There needs to be a "small northern school rush talk" thread for people like us. :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

I go to UNC Greensboro. To my knowledge, Elon is probably one of the most competitive schools in NC since such a high percentage of the student body is Greek. Being Greek is a big deal at your school, whereas it's NOT at a lot of the other schools you named. Big does not always equal competitive- there's a lot of factors that go into all that. For example- Chapel Hill is losing chapters over the years, which means PNMs are the ones in high demand, not sororities.

As for Duke and Wake, it depends on your definition of competitive. I would not group either of these schools on the same playing field, competition-wise, as SEC schools like UGA, Bama, Ole Miss, etc.

I think we are forgetting that this "shallowness" goes both ways. PNMs only get to meet a select few sisters when they go through rush - and we have generally hand picked who they will meet before hand. The only things they have to judge us on are: reputation (whether fair or not), sister's looks (because they do look around the room when we are talking), personality of the few sister's they have met, what the house (suite) looks like and/or if we even have a house(suite).

I don't think you are going to find anyone from a competitive greek system who is going to feign embarassment over the perceived shallowness of it. It's something you can't explain. It's almost like trying to explain to someone anti-greek about the merits of the greek system.

Absolutely. I started a thread here a few years ago--something like "stupid reasons you cut sororities during rush" and people were saying "because I hated their colors" and "they had a dumb mascot" and "I wanted to be in a sorority with 3 (or 2) letters in its name."

Wow, I went to a relatively small state school, with 6 sororities... Gamma Phi, Tri Delta, A X O, A Z D, Sigma Sigma Sigma, and A D Pi. We were VERY competitive. We wanted the best and brightest, and the most well rounded. You needed the whole package, and I think it goes that way for all Southern schools. (We are considered a southern school! :-) )

I think looks play a big part of it, because thats the outter representation of your chapter, and honestly, in a week (and how many parties?!) you don't get the chance to know PNM THAT well, so things like reputations are really on the line. What GLO doesn't want the BEST in their sorority?? That means on all levels-- beauty, brains, athletics, social skills... etc.

There is definitely a certain amount of shallowness in formal recruitment, at least in the early rounds. Chapters have to make first-round cuts based on very little information: GPA, the impressions of a few sisters garnered during a short round 1 party, maybe a rec, and maybe the impressions of a sister or two who knew the PNM before college. As rush continues and the sororities and PNMs are narrowing their options and spending more and more time together, the process becomes less shallow.

It's like the hiring process. Say a company advertises a job opening. Maybe they get 100 resumes. Someone reads through the resumes and keeps maybe 15 of them. The 85 resumes that get discarded are not only the ones that clearly indicate the candidate is unqualified, but also the ones full of misspellings, illegible, on pink scented paper, etc. This is a first-round cut, and some of it is based on presentation. Now, 15 job candidates get first round interviews. During the interviews, some of them show that while they look good on paper, they're not a good fit. Others show up late, or are dressed in a slovenly manner, etc. Others show up on time, are dressed professionally, have done their research on the company, etc. It's this latter group who will be asked back for second-round interviews... the others will be "cut". The company may invest a lot in the second-round interviews, having several employees interview each candidate, taking the candidates to lunch, etc. It's often a full-day process. Only then, after really getting to know each candidate, is a job offer (bid) extended. But that new hire might never have even gotten a callback if his/her resume had had even one typo.

I think Sugar and Spice is pointing out that we are creating a cognitive dissonance for PNMs by saying that RUSH isn't shallow when in fact we all pretty much acknowledge it is.

Even for the guys.

It would be more . . honest . . to tell PNMs that its a shallow and somewhat capricious process.

Especially in schools that have created an artificial shortage of spaces for potential members either through limiting total or limiting the amount of groups.

Any campus that can fill quota for almost all organizations based almost solely on freshmen and transfers going through formal rush has created a limited market that leads to more "shallow" choices.

ETA: I apologize if I am misreading Sugar and Spices original intention.

Brandi brings up an awesome point... it goes both ways. I literally heard girls going through recruitment chatting about how they were going to cut XYZ because they didn't like the way the house smelled. The PNMs can get ridiculous as well.

In my opinion, rush is somewhat of a game. You just have to know how to play. Yes, the house knows who you are, what you did in high school and where you're from when you walk in the door on day one... but it doesn't hurt to try to make yourself stand out. Last year, myself and the other 1100 PNMs were given t-shirts by panhel to wear two of the four days of rush. So how do you separate yourself? I wore a pair of huge chandelier earrings and carried a Gucci... and I went to the maximum number of parties every day and received a bid to my top choice. Yes, it sounds shallow... I'm not denying that. But what makes you stand out in high school? Cheerleading, volunteering, Homecoming court, grades, sports. Recruitment is an environment where EVERY girl stood out in high school... and now you have to find a new way to make yourself stand out. By the way... I would hardly consider my school, Mizzou, a Southern school... rush can be like this anywhere.

By no means are girls selected merely because of those things... and the alums and members that dedicate their summers to learning about the PNMs would be offended if one were to assume that. Yes, you fill out that application... and I'd put money on the fact that houses know much more about you than what you put on it. Being pretty and looking the part alone isn't going to get you in... but when recruitment brings in 1000+ girls, it may help you to be remembered.

I don't think we're being two faced by encouraging PNMs to go through recruitment and acknowledging it can be shallow at the same time. A house would be crazy to extend a bid to a woman with a pretty face and nothing else to offer... and far too much work is put into recruitment to do so.

Recruitment, no matter how scientific the method of membership selection, is subjective at best. It is an interview, and all interviews are subject to the interviewer and the interviewee's inhernet biases.

well said. stlkappa!!

Why thank you!! :D

Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

I think this is kind of interesting and have been wondering about how others reconcile our words veruses our actions.

I think that rush is inherently shallow, but more so when done in a formal rush setting. I really have come to like the way informal works and how it allows for more of an opportunity to get to know women better.

Here's where I'm coming from: In HS I was yearbook editor for three years, student council, student rep to the school board, lettered in athletics, and a slew of other activities. However, I HATED my HS. I would never have been on homecoming court, cheerleading any kind of nonsense that would have forced me to associate any more than necessary with the 'popluar' kids. They hated me, and I avoided them like the plague. I was told on a regular basis that I was ugly and worthless (which I can now say is just bologna). My HS was a small rural experience and I in no way fit in, in fact I managed to get kicked off student coucil by the advisor. Does any of this make me someone who should not be allowed a chance at a sorority? I don't think it does. I went to college and was determined to change. I wanted to start over. I wanted to be less shy (which comes off as stand-offish), I wanted to know everyone and just have fun for once. I went to a school, where no one from my grad class was and did it. I was uber involved, knew everyone and had a fabulous experience. One of the best parts of my experience was AST. I had to learn to work with the 'popular' types and the types like myself, and women who were just a pain in the ass (though I do love them :)).

In my northern estimation, I would never have been given the chance to do this in a formal setting where all my histories were dug up. My sisters got to know me through dinners, parties, classes etc and they 'deemed' me worthy. When I look at the positive aspects of greek life, I think part of that is the ability to create a bond that is about who you truly are. I know you have to choose 80 from 1000, but I want everyone to be given a chance to find a place to flourish. To me, the researched, high intensity rush does not let people change or redefine themselves in the same way a smaller rush situation does. I would love to plan outfits and skits, but even more, I loved that my chapter really empowered me to take some chances I never would have expected or thought possible.

Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

Could you explain what you mean by this? (I'm not trying to attack you, I just don't understand it!) I guess I just don't get how changing and redefining yourself as a person is inhibited by the style of recruitment you participate in... maybe I'm just not getting it...

Re: Re: Re: Discrepancies in the way we view rush
 

Part of what she means is what I said - just because someone was the queen of everything in high school does not mean she is a good person. Some of them are extremely bitchy. Sometimes they were only the queen of everything because there were 2.5 people in their class and everyone else was lazy.

And I think she also meant that if women are getting cut based solely on a resume of what they did in high school - which often is happening in earlier rounds - they don't get the chance to say "hey, just because I was in 300 beauty pageants doesn't mean I want to be in the house with the other pageant winners. My mom made me do that. I would rather be in a chapter where people wear no makeup and sweats 90% of the time." Or vice versa.

Judging people on what they were or who they knew in high school often is not fair at all in college rush. And if you have to rush right after high school you haven't gotten a chance to redefine yourself in the way you want. You probably still believe some of the stereotypes that were hung on you even if they were BS.

(Little E, I don't mean to answer for you, but I absolutely agreed and understood where you were coming from with your post.)

I think this could be argued for hours. Those women who, like me, went through formal recruitment in the fall can just as easily argue that their dedication and resume from high school suggests how dedicated they will be to an organization in college. As previously discussed, many chapters look for a "total package" that calls for a well rounded individual... and one of the ways to determine that is to see what the PNM was previously involved with.

I also think that it is fair to take into consideration who a PNM knew prior to coming to college. Obviously a PNM should not be chosen merely because she was so-and-so's best friend... but if a PNM knows women in the house from high school, they can often give an idea of what the PNM is like outside of a rush setting... which can be very beneficial to the house as well as the PNM.

Finally, many women do not need an opportunity to redefine themselves after high school and are already confident with who they are when they come to college. To deny them the opportunity to participate in rush immediately and get involved with a house as soon as possible would be just as unfair as not allowing women who do need a period of time to adjust to wait to rush until they're more comfortable.

The point is, no recruitment/rush situation is going to make everyone happy.

Congratulations on having fun in high school, that's all I can say. :p

As far as it being "unfair" to make someone wait...you have the rest of your life to be a sister of your sorority. Why push someone to do so before they're ready or penalize them if they decide on their own to wait...which unfortunately is what happens to most women who wait till sophomore year at UT, LSU etc etc etc. They find themselves "handicapped" because they are sophomores, and their choices limited.

Just because some of us did a lot in high school does not mean we all had fun... haha.

Anyways... I do consider it to be unfair to make some women wait until spring (or whenever) to join a sorority. How is it "pushing" someone if they feel they are ready? I'm sure many people would love for schools to have both fall and spring recruitment so everyone could get an opportunity to join an organization when they feel prepared to do so... but at schools that do have both, it always seems like one is always much more successful than the other... which, again, leads me to believe that there will never be a way for everyone to be happy. That's the harsh reality.

I wonder how the whole "handicapped" thing came about in rush. I feel like it wouldn't be used if someone hadn't thought long and hard about it... but it seems so silly at the same time.

I was referring to the people who DON'T feel ready, but know that if they wait until second semester or sophomore year their choices will be greatly diminished.

I don't know, I just wish that instead of nationals giving awards to chapters for making quota or total, they would give them for retention or percentage of sisters participating in activities instead. It would make more sense to focus on the whole sorority experience rather than the results of (what is usually) one week of the year. Like I said in another thread, it doesn't matter how much NPC says that rush is 24/7/365 when their actions don't match it.

I completly agree with what LIttle E has to say.

I think some people have gotten slightly away from what she was saying. I beleive she is talking about not wanting sororities to do research on you and base recruitment desicions based on who other people thought you were in High School. She was talking about (and i agree) that she was someone who people did not know and when she went away to college she wanted the opportunity to have sorority women judge her on who she was and not on who some people might think she is.

I completly agree with this idea. If you were to ask people from my High school about me they would "paint" a very different picture of who i am. I went to school were i went to school cause nobody else i knew was going to be there. I did not want the same "reputation" in college that i have had since the time i was in 4th grade and did something stupid that everyone still remembers to this day. I think that LIttle E is saying that this is what she feels like would happen if women in sororities would do research on her before she even got to campus and started rush.

I am sure that every one of us has had at least one person in our lives who have judged you on something you did that was taken wrong or you did when you were little. Now this same person would probably just say bad things about you, something like, Oh, debbie, she is really stupid. Oh my god she is soo sluttly i heard that she only spends time with guys cause she pays them to hang out with her (of course none of that is true). Anyway, there are people that i went to High school with that would say these things about me cause they said them to my face in high shcool. I really would not want to go to a school were the sororities did research on me and had heard some really bad things about (things that were not even close to being true) and based recruitment choices on what other people say about me.

In many ways, this is why I'm glad we don't do rush with resumes. I think there are a lot of girls who would be "mediocre" to "poor" in other schools that are going through rush...and the sorority is just the outlet they need. It gives them a chance to take on as much responsibility as they want, learn leadership, and express themselves. They just may not be able to act in that capacity in high school or in other campus clubs.

I think in a lot of ways, these girls that some call "mediocre" are EXACTLY THE GIRLS WE SHOULD BE RECRUITING. While it is NICE to have a house of beautiful 4.0 Rhoades Scholars who rescue kittens on the weekends, is it not also the purpose of the sorority to instill the values of scholarship, compassion, learning, etc?

I don't think I came into Tau Delta a polished stone, but I have been shaped, formed, molded into a person that is proud to be a Delta...and I'm proud that my acomplishments only make Her look better....and I don't think I'd be as disciplined as I am now.

Stands up and applauds....:D

Here's what I'm wondering... a lot of schools could not recruit women by getting to know all of them personally, spending time with the PNMs, etc. Even if they wanted to, the large number of women going through recruitment would make it an impossibility. I guess that may be why resumes and recommendations are used... because you somehow have to find out about the PNMs in order to make decisions, and there just isn't enough time in the world (much less rush parties!) to sit face-to-face and get to know the girls. Even if schools were to wait until spring to rush, it's still not realistic to think that they would have the opportunity to get to know everyone.

So I'm interested in knowing what alternatives to resumes and recs could be used in a situation where recruitment is so big. Obviously when resumes are used, it can leave a lot of great girls out in the cold. But how else could it be done efficiently? Perhaps part of the reason recruitment at large schools (I hestitate to say "Southern" schools because I know it's not limited to the South!) is so cut-throat is because no one has been able to find a better way. (I'm not trying to be argumentative here... I'd really like to know what everyone thinks!) One more question... if resumes are not used, does the PNM include her GPA when she signs up for recruitment?

PhoenizAzul... awesome point about how the "mediocre" girls (I don't like that word :( EVERYONE IS AMAZING!) are the ones that should be recruited. Only thing I can think of is that some chapters think it's better to have girls that already possess the vaules and qualities they are looking for rather than try to instill them in the women.

In case you guys haven't noticed, I've been here an awful lot tonight. I have a comp paper and I'm avoiding it. :D

At my school we had an application (which included GPA and resume type info.) and people could submit recs if they wanted, i don't think most people do.

I am only saying that when sororities do research on PNM's and talk to people who "know" her. I would not want to go through this type of system. I am fine with letters of rec and apps cause i did a lot in high school. However, i was not popular by any means and if someone did Research on me i think that they would have an oppionion of me that is not based on reality. I do support applications and recs (even non-greek recs like from former teachers or something) to make some basis, just not talking to people about me and basing cuts based on who "knows" me.

Granted my schools new member classes was around 30 to 40 women and so not the same as places like LSU, but then i do not think that i could go to a school like that.

It's interesting... because I didn't even know I was going through a system where alums and members would be getting to "know" me. I didn't even realize that happened until AFTER I went through recruitment. Now I'm on the other side as a member instead of a PNM... and I see what happens. I'm sure the thought of it sounds really ominous, but then again, you don't always know that it's happening...

Exactly.

Amen, PhoenixAzul.

Am I the only one who finds the concept of people talking to others to get the scoop on rushees kind of creepy? Imagine if you were an 18 year old going away to college and some guy who wanted to date you was doing the same thing. We might call that stalking, LOL.

Sorry I didn't respond sooner. This is were I am coming from. I strongly support GPA, we need academic credibility; I support a resume- though I would prefer it if it had service activities, not popularity contests (ie homecoming). I just don't believe that being homecoming queen says anything about who you are inside. You could be the next Mother Teresa or you could be a complete bitch who just controls people. I'm not trying to discriminate against women who were adored in HS, I just want everyone to have the chance to change, evolve and have a wonderful support system with fabulous sisters.

To be honest, if I had found out my chapter 'researched' me, I would not have joined. That is too big brother(sister?) creepy for me.

alphaalpha- you totally have me right!! :)

one of the advisors that worked with my chapter was from a southern school. it was not an sec school, and from what i have read about this school on gc, it does not seem like a completely cut-throat system. she told us that when she was in high school, her teachers, etc. would say things like, "you don't want to smoke/ drink/ sleep around (insert *bad* thing here) or else you won't get in to a good sorority in college." i am not sure if this is true for many others, but this is what happened to her. i think she was in high school in the early to mid 80s.

now i think that is creepy.

But again, consider:
Many hundreds of girls are going through. You don't necessarily get to know all of them before you have to start cutting. Plus, you get an idea of which girls you may think are best suited for your chapter if you know a little bit about them.

Example:
Susie Q. may have been the biggest hobag in her school. She may very well change over the summer before college, but you don't want people in other chapters that knew her then thinking you have a pledge class full of skanks. Why? Because they will "let it slip" to other PNM's if they know you keep her during the week and definitely the next year.

It's happened here; a girl in XYZ "let it slip" that I definitely didn't want to keep ABC after first round because they were all cokehead sluts (not in that exact phrasing, of course, but definitely let it be known they were "fast" and had a drug problem). It's sort of a watching-your-back kind of thing.