Dartmouth College "Editorial"

[LXAAlum]

HANOVER, N.H. -- Late Wednesday night, I was talking with a friend in her room; she and three friends had just been through the rush process together. At its end, her three companions -- two of whom are her roommates -- were all granted a bid to their first-choice sorority. She was not given a bid to that sorority, or to any other.

Suddenly we heard paper rustling and low, excited voices in the hall. The noise settled just outside the room. "Oh God," my friend said, "They're here to decorate the door."

I stepped out into the hall and found myself confronted with three white women crammed into tiny clothing and plastered with makeup. They stared at me, in my jeans and flannel shirt, as though I had just materialized from another planet, or, perhaps, Brandeis.

"Hi. May I ask what you're doing?" The women replied they were decorating the door with their sorority letters, to proclaim that the room was home to two members of the elect. "I see. Were you aware that your sorority rejected my friend, who also lives here?" They were. But it's a tradition, one explained. "Ah. Well, listen: my friend is having a rough time right now, partly because your group rejected her. So until your 'sisterhood' is predicated on something other than exclusion, we don't want any part of it."

I closed the door. There was a muffled conference outside.

"Hey girl, it's me. Can I come in?" one of the women called. As she entered the room, my friend began apologizing profusely.

"I'm sorry for being such a bitch. I'm so sorry. I'm not myself. I was sexually assaulted two weeks ago, and my COS hearing is tomorrow."

"Oh, I'm sorry. Listen, we didn't reject you. It's the system, and yeah, it's screwed up. There are lists for making selections and it's really complicated and we don't really have much to do with it. I'm sorry you didn't get in. Don't worry, we can come back in a few days. And we won't tell your friends that we were here."

Not especially supportive. Not especially courageous. Not especially sisterly.

More like cowardly, obscuring any personal responsibility behind the incorporeal machinations of "The System."

You know this system: it's the same system that, apparently devoid of human involvement, deleted the name of at least one woman who rushed this term, ensuring that no house would accept her. It's the same system that allowed a sorority member to shamelessly ask another friend of mine, "We need a black girl in our sorority. Will you join?" It's the same system that commands that pledges constantly drag around a bunch of crap -- hair bands, Ramen noodles -- and entitles their older "sisters" to accost them and demand these items; if they are missing, their younger siblings must humiliate themselves in public. And it's the same system that teaches that none of this may be questioned.

I've got news for you, sorority women: your system stinks. It reeks of cattiness and jealousy and exclusion, and it is downright putrid. And guess what: if you're in it, then like it or not, you're responsible for it.

The system stinks of something else, too: privilege. According to the Student Life Initiative report (Jan. 2000), while 67 percent of Dartmouth's female student population is white, 81 percent of its sorority members are. This figure becomes even more dramatic when one realizes that it includes the members of our two historically black sororities. The same report also notes that only 45 percent of sorority members receive financial aid, compared to 61 percent of non-affiliated students.

But paramount among all the privileges within the greek system -- and the most antithetical to Dartmouth's stated mission of fostering a diverse, egalitarian and fully co-educational community -- is the privilege to exclude.

Professor Susan Ackerman called it out at a faculty meeting last spring:

"'You're just not right,' 'You'd be happier elsewhere,' 'You don't fit' ... we know this language. It is a language that has long served as a code for discriminating against blacks, Latinos and Latinas, Asians, Native Americans, Jews, gay men and lesbians and women. Like all codes, the language is covert -- so covert, indeed, that I suspect most fraternities and sororities would recoil at the idea that their organizations use this language in discriminatory ways. But I challenge these groups to examine their exclusionary principles carefully, and I remind them, and you, of the SLI data, that these organizations are significantly whiter than the rest of the Dartmouth campus."

To those of you now thinking how much your sorority has empowered you, I say, "Wonderful." But was it necessary for your empowerment that other women be excluded? Can you justify the scorning and marginalizing of your fellow women that occurs in the creation of your "sisterhood?"

Rejecting women who don't quite fit the mold is no way to uplift the status of women in general. Instead, it keeps us all down. It is, in fact, the mark of truly internalized oppression: our oppressors need no longer concern themselves with perpetuating our subjugation, because we women will take care of it ourselves.
This was posted in Dartmouth's paper yesterday....to me, it's very disengenuous....just thought I'd post it here to get everyone else's thoughts.....

[lovelyivy84]

I had some good friends at Dartmouth and I visited there a number of times.

That is one of the most racially divided campuses I have ever seen. Integration in sororities should be the LEAST of their problems. None of the black women I met were the slightest bit interested in anything outside of AKA or DST.

[AXO Alum]

Sounds like more than one person got a rejection notice!! (oops - couldn't resist!)

As usual, we are being punished because we don't want every Sally-Sleep-With-Me or Tequila-Sheila out there. Maybe if this so-called enlightened person would go to our national websites, and READ the criteria for membership, then she would understand, that *wow* we really don't check bank statements, and designer jeans at the door.

Sounds to me like she's also confusing racial issues with issues of sisterhood selection. Stupid! And for her to say that these women were crammed into tiny clothing and plastered with make-up....sorry, but isn't that making a judgement of another person in the same regard??

Hypocrisy -- maybe the author needs to look that one up!

[LeslieAGD]

Originally posted by AXO Alum
As usual, we are being punished because we don't want every Sally-Sleep-With-Me or Tequila-Sheila out there.

And for her to say that these women were crammed into tiny clothing and plastered with make-up....sorry, but isn't that making a judgement of another person in the same regard??

Hypocrisy -- maybe the author needs to look that one up!

Ok, I am laughing my ass off at that first comment!

But seriously, if everyone could be in a sorority or fraternity, it wouldn't be an organization, it would just be the norm. There could have been any reason for the one roommate not getting a bid, and it's unfair for the author of that garbage to make assumptions. Does the system stink sometimes? Yes, but so do other organizations. Why don't they go pick on varsity athletes, or the band, or the dance team for once? These groups are much more exclusionary than the Greek system and the hazing that goes on is much worse also.

[HeidiHo]

What a bit@h! Of course by telling sorority women how horrid they are she is being open minded and nonjudgemental.
Jeeze-louise.
Heidi

[Steeltrap]

Originally posted by lovelyivy84
I had some good friends at Dartmouth and I visited there a number of times.

That is one of the most racially divided campuses I have ever seen. Integration in sororities should be the LEAST of their problems. None of the black women I met were the slightest bit interested in anything outside of AKA or DST.

My soror makes an excellent point.
Greek organizations, ultimately, are voluntary activities and fall, somewhere in the larger scheme of things, somewhat short of being able to secure a quality education, being able to compete for jobs and being able to live where you can afford to live.

[KillarneyRose]

Originally posted by LXAAlum
The system stinks of something else, too: privilege.

Dartmouth is a highly selective college. I don't know the exact numbers, but I would be willing to be that accepts less than 20% of applicants. To me, that really undercuts the writer's assertion that sorority members belong to a rarified, privileged class. Every student at Dartmouth is, in my opinion, privileged.

[AXO Alum]

LXA - is there an address (email or otherwise) that we can respond to? I really am jumping at the chance to point out how judgemental the reject....dang - I really meant to say author is being while pointing her finger in the face of greeks.

Lovelyivy84 is right on target - if this campus is racially divided, then greeks should be the least of the worries.

Ignorance -- too many people with this genetic flaw are breeding!

[ZZ-kai-]

I highly encourage everyone to read the Rick Reilly article in the 1/30/02 issue of Sports Illustrated. For those of you not familiar with him or S.I., it is the last page of the magazine.

Kill Whitey - Chris Farley

[RxyChrldr]

My dad was Lamda Chi Alpha at Dartmouth..so he forwarded me this same article..it reminded me of one written in our school paper, The Daily, called "Inside rush: the real story of going Greek" which was absolutely horrible. I tried to find the link, but the paper's archives aren't all on the website it seems. There is, however, one of my sorority sister's letter to the editor about it available..

http://www.thedaily.washington.edu/a...Date=10/8/2001


Anyway, people frustrate me when they try to "expose" the recruitment process like they know what they're talking about..sheesh.

[Steeltrap]

Originally posted by ZZ-kai-
I highly encourage everyone to read the Rick Reilly article in the 1/30/02 issue of Sports Illustrated. For those of you not familiar with him or S.I., it is the last page of the magazine.

Kill Whitey - Chris Farley

I just read this and am not offended (even though I'm not a white guy). Reilly's work is familiar to me -- he appears regularly on the Jim Rome show and he wrote a wonderful column a couple of years ago praising "Sugar" Shaquille O'Neal.

[LXAAlum]

You can go to the link where I found the article, and there is a response link on that page.

By the way, the uwiretoday is an interesting clearing house for news, editorials, and columns (where I found this) for all aspects of college life...

http://www.uwiretoday.com/columns013002008.html

Originally posted by AXO Alum
LXA - is there an address (email or otherwise) that we can respond to? I really am jumping at the chance to point out how judgemental the reject....dang - I really meant to say author is being while pointing her finger in the face of greeks.

Lovelyivy84 is right on target - if this campus is racially divided, then greeks should be the least of the worries.

Ignorance -- too many people with this genetic flaw are breeding!

[lifesaver]

I really dig how the author is using the sexual assualt thing for sensationalism in the editorial. Has nothing to do withthe story and is extraneous. Like how in journalism you arent suppose dto identify someones race unless it pertains to the story. Same thing here.

I wonder how many of the allegations of hazing, "hair bands, ramen noodles" the author has actually seen? Probably more of a "Well a friend of a friend told me" thing.

I agree with Krose - everyone at Dartmoth is exclusive- because of the 20% acceptance policy. As for the racil gap quoted in the ststisitcs given, a 14% discrepancy doesnt seem that big. I would be much more shocked and outraged had it been 70 or 80% difference. "and I remind them, and you, of the SLI data, that these organizations are significantly whiter than the rest of the Dartmouth campus." I simply disagree withthe author that 14% is significant. Come on, 14% of a hundred dollars, is $14 bucks and that wont even get you a CD. If youre gonna use stats, make sure they reflect your argument. <lifesaver announces to author, "um, you have a call on line one, its your academic advisor telling you to enroll in MAT 3233, Scope and Methods in Statistical Analysis.">


blah, blah, blah, same leftist crap we always get just repackaged. BTW, ya got some granola on your flannel shirt.

[LXAAlum]

Life - well said brother! The sexual assault is nothing more than a red herring...I was wondering who else caught that. Brilliant.

ZAX

[amycat412]

Its just occurring to me that Rush is, in many ways, good preparation for the process of job interviews.

Think about it-- most of us have had a job that we really wanted, that we were really close to getting--

Take me--

A number of years ago I interviewed with a behemoth and legendary digital effects company. This would have been a recruitment coordinator position and I would have been in large part responsible for hiring the digital artists used when they did the effects for an Oscar winning movie.

The office was on the beach. The setting was uber cool. I wanted that job so bad I could taste it.

The interview process was grueling. I was interviewed by SEVEN different people. They narrowed it down to me and someone else and called us back in to meet with some head honcho woman.

I'd sailed thru my previous seven interviews and could pretty much smell the ink on my business cards.

I met with Ms. X. Her first question ; So are the connections you made at USC worth the money your parents paid for you to go there?

WTF? I replied that I went to USC for an education, not for connections. I said that while my parents did pay for a portion of my education, I also received financial aid that I was responsible for paying back. I replied that the amount of debt I carried as a result was somewhat staggering, but I wouldn't trade my experience at USC, wouldn't trade the education I got there, for anything. And those loans? Well they were just teaching me financial responsibility, which was something I needed to learn as well.

She made some comment about spoiled children and ended the interview?

I found out later that this woman and most of the people in the department had attended a local public university that had a, well, pathetic academic reputation. They also had major chips on their shoulders and couldn't see past their perception of a USC grad to see all I was capable of.

How is that any more or less fair than a sorority not picking you because they don't think you'd fit in personality wise?

THis is the RIGHT we have in our society--to choose the MOST QUALIFIED. The most qualified person for a job--based on flexible and subjective criteria-- the most qualified member of a sorority or fraternity based on flexible, subjective and ever changing criteria.

If GLO's were required to take every Trash talking Tina and druggie Darla out there-- how would this in any way prepare us for the rejection we are bound to face in our post-collegiate careers?

Sure, not all Rushees are cut completely, or don't get the house of their chocie-- but most rushees face decisions and choices in the proccess as do the members--they've collectively got to decide what's best for the overall good of their chapter.

Just like a company will have to do when interviewing you for a position. And just because its the real world, doesn't mean their reasons for wanting or not wanting you are any more fair than Rush was.