[FuzzieAlum]

We don't have 100 years of tradition behind our current rush system. I wish I knew more exactly historically, but things weren't always done the way they are now.

The thing is, rush varies sooooo much from school to school and region to region. A&A's description of rush, while accurate at some schools, isn't anything like it was and still is at my school. Recs? Never saw one. Beauty queens? I knew one during college, and she didn't rush. Cheerleaders? There were a few. Legacies? Almost none. Grades? Yeah, we looked for good grades, but girls got in without stellar ones.

There are schools where formal rush is the only way to get in, and schools where you can join any chapter without going through it. There are schools where even the weakest chapter is filled with beauty queens, and schools where appearance isn't that important. Could I, as a first-generation Greek, with no recs, no cheerleading, flag teaming, class officing, pageanting, nowhere near my hometown with no one from my high school, have gotten into ANY house in a big Southern rush? No way! And maybe I and they would both be missing out, but hey, if it works for them ... the chapters are big and strong, so maybe I shouldn't criticize.

I don't think ANYONE, except maybe a few advisors with too strong a desire for parity, is suggesting GLOs lower their standards. I do think that maybe judging a gal based on a few hours at most of stilted rush parties can't tell you whether she's really a good person or not - but making an impression quickly is important, because she'll have to turn it around and do it again the next year for the next bunch of rushees. I think a more thoughtful rush would produce *better* quality sisters. I think you shouldn't invite a girl to pref unless you'd be willing to bid her, so why are girls going to multiple pref parties, not SIPing, and not getting bids? That's what I think people are perceiving as unfair.

But despite all that, the problem isn't the system, I don't think, as much as I may not like the system as it is now. The system can work, as some schools show. The problem is that the NPC rush rules are not universally and equally applied. Raise your hand if you've seen any of the following at a school you know:

1) Sororities releasing too few girls
2) No use of quota plus
3) Problems with a bid-match system (technical ones)
4) Slip-ups that end up with a girl not being invited to the right parties
5) Rho Chis that don't care if their girls drop
6) Need for expansion but no GLO has the money necessary to come in
7) Dirty rushing totally being ignored
8) Ceiling not being adjusted for the number of rushees (aka numbers are going up or down and rushees are crying or the houses are all begging for members)
9) Girls being forced to accept bids they don't want
10) SIPing being encouraged/allowed (even if you like it, it is against NPC policy)

If none of these are going on at your school, congratulations. I bet you have a strong system, most houses are at or near ceiling, and the majority of qualified rushees (not just the "best," but no 1.5 GPA drug dealers) are getting spots. But if not ... and I'm going to bet this is most schools ... something needs to be done. Maybe not as drastic as my earlier suggestion. Maybe just a "cleanup" of the process. At my school there was rampant distrust of the Greek life advisor, and he was notoriously secretive about the bid-matching process. I would dearly love for Panhellenic to come in and take a look at things for us.

If, after the system is working properly, qualified girls and strong chapters are still unhappy with the process, it would be time to change it. I do think that GLOs all over the country should have high membership standards, but I don't necessarily think that works for one sort of campus will work for another. Some locales don't have a strong Greek tradition and girls have to be coaxed. Others have to turn away legacies. If you want both systems to be strong, it would make sense to approach them differently.