[Alpha Sig Scott]

Originally posted by Firehouse
Dear Dznat187:
Part of the answer lies in the fact that men are very competitive by nature. Men and women do not think at all alike when it comes to rush. Women's rush is highly controlled and structured. Men's rush has few rules and success often depends on hustle. Fraternities can pledge as many or as few men as they want, and the chapters can grow as large as they want. It's a free enterprise system in which any individual fraternity is free to win, or to fail.
In that atmosphere of free competition and free enterprise, it's infuriating to have an administrator make an arbitrary decision which, one suspects, is based on a their desire to preen for the camera and use fraternities as scapegoats.
Set aside the probability that the university's decision is illegal. Apparently, their decision applies to no other student organizations. Freshmen can still play varsity sports, can still join the various religious and political organizations, and yes, even social organizations. They're told they can participate in anything as freshmen, they just can't join an IFC fraternity.
Why don't the sororities just be like the men? Why can't a sorority be as large and as dominating as they want? Why can't they pledge as many girls as they want? The answer is: because they don't want to be in that environment. Men instinctively establish heirachy, within each group, and among the fraternities themselves. Women instinctively establish cooperation in order to maintain stability and security.
So..."why not just have deferred rush?" Because if I was at Colorado I'd want my fraternity to dominate, and that means I'd want to pledge as many top men as I could as quickly as possible.
The very fact that I want to do that is reason enough.

Firehouse,

A very articulate and well put together post