Quote:
Originally Posted by PersistentDST
It's deeper than agreements and paperwork. If we can first respect each other equally, then an agreement across councils would be a great idea. I am a realist (and a pessimist at times) and I don't see it happening.
|
This.
Aside from the fact that I don't like the idea of councils dictating who can and can't be members of their member organizations, I think this cross-council kumbaya talk is much ado about nothing.
"Let's all have equal footing when it comes to rush/recruitment/intake" doesn't translate to "We're all equals" when socials are only held among groups that have housing or when "we'll reach out to you again when we need a step team for Greek Week" happens.
Until there's a paradigm shift where groups are actively learning about and engaging with groups other than the ones like theirs, no amount of YAY JOINT RUSH is going to fix things.
Plus, the way we bring in members varies among groups (ie. city-wide, grad chapters, rush before school starts, 365 recruitment, balanced man, etc) -- what kind of agreement would address all of these things? And what about "general interest/social" organizations that aren't members of national councils?