Another view of sorority membership, 2016
 

Today's New York Times contains an article titled "When a Feminist Pledges a Sorority".

While I have my opinions on the article, I will refrain from extensive analysis and commenting so that others can form their own opinions. I believe that our four founders were "feminists", intent on achieving political, social, and economic equality with men, to the best of their ability, given the constraints of the time in which they lived. In addition, I think Bound by a Mighty Vow discusses the shift that occurred early on in women's Greek letter organizations from an emphasis on academics to a more "social" type of organization.

Let the pendulum swing, as it will.

I am a feminist, and I never found that to be at odds with my sorority membership.

I like that the article makes a point that I often do - many sororities (like mine) began as a way for women to gather in solidarity because they were in such a minority at their school.

Interesting read. Although I suspect that the "sorority experience" at Columbia is likely way different than Alabama...

Thank you for posting this!
 

I'm pleased that, for the most part, this article portrays a positive message. On the other hand, as a leader in a woman's sorority who has been involved as such for over 30 years, I have never, ever told a member, "You have to wear makeup or look a certain way" nor have I ever heard anyone from "NATIONALS" say such a thing. Again, I'll give this article a passing grade.

I liked this article and enjoyed reading it. Our executive director actually posted it. I just wish that it didn't continue to further stereotypes (emphasis on appearance, false statistics like x number of presidents were in fraternities, etc.) The author also lost points by quoting Alexandra Robbins.

Ugh.

I guess I missed the part where criticizing other women for their choices, making fun of things that mean something to people or using a 20 year old comedy/satire book as a scholarly source (Alex Robbins I'm looking at you) were key parts of being a "feminist. "

I also find it beyond ridiculous to present the Ivy League as the only place where "non stereotypical" sorority chapters exist. As if anywhere else, the students aren't smart enough for that to happen.

Same shit, different day. Kind of depressing that the "paper of record" would fall for this tripe.

I totally agree. I can't speak for anyone else's sorority experience, but I went to a big, non-Ivy, which happens to be a pretty good school, thank you, and I don't think we were a bunch of "stereotypical" sorority women. I also wonder what people think when they learn that women like Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Condoleeza Rice were in sororities. Do they think women like that would be in organizations that would tell them to wear makeup or look a certain way?

I also think it's ironic that the chapter they focused on was recently in trouble for what many people might call "stereotypical" Greek behavior (but they don't mention that at all).

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4847827.html

It's a typical NYTimes "Sunday Styles" front page story. Not much there there. The comments section is more entertaining that the actual article.

Nice catch -- deliciously ironic.