Rushing currently, have a few questions

[WLVR]

Hey guys, so I'm rushing this semester and I've been checking out different places. Few questions.

I have an opportunity to become a founding father of a fraternity that's being recolonized on campus. Anyone been in that situation? Is it worth it? Obviously it's going to be hard but should I try to go for it?

Also somewhat unrelated, but how does fraternity "tiers" and "popularity" play into social life? Personally I don't really care or believe in popularity, but does that actually have an effect on the social life you'll have and the people you'll meet? Do people typically care about this?

thanks

[jazing]

1. If a fraternity is being colonized, first make sure they will be recognized by the University. At that point it is up to you to decide if you want to join into a long time tradition of 25+ years depending on your school or start traditions that others will join into. If they won't be recognized, there is no point and it is better to join a fraternity that is recognized already.

2. Tiers and popularity don't play too much into your actual social life. It is up to you to make friends and meet people. A socially awkward guy in a so called "top tier" will have the same difficulty no matter what. A socially successful guy will have a successful social life no matter where they go.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by jazing

2. Tiers and popularity don't play too much into your actual social life. It is up to you to make friends and meet people. A socially awkward guy in a so called "top tier" will have the same difficulty no matter what. A socially successful guy will have a successful social life no matter where they go.

This is what I was trying to find a way to say, but you put it perfectly. Yes, if you are in Top Tier Fraternity you may have tons of mixers with Top Tier Sorority - you may even be paired with TTS girls at date parties or something - but if you're a backwards dork you will very quickly become an object of derision and/or pity among the sororities, who will wonder why TTF ever gave you a bid in the first place.

[Firehouse]

You'll have a different expereince as a Founder than you will as a member of a top tier fraternity. Both experiences are legit and positive; they're just different. As a Founder you're wrapped up in the excitement of expansion and striving together toward the goal of chartering. You have a real influence over the individuals who are selected for membership so you can help form the persoanlity of the fraternity.
On the other hand, as a brother in a top tier house you are surrounded by the movers and shakers of the campus, by men who want and expect to always be part of the championship team. A top tier fraternity at a major university produces the future leaders of the state, and the alumni network is extremely valuable.
In terms of social life, yes it's true that a confident man can enjoy a good social life in spite of being in a lower tier house. But the fact is that top fraternities and top sororities tend to mix together, and it similarly goes down the ladder all the way to the bottom.
I've seen men in a top tier chapter told, "By the time you leave here, you'll never walk into any Board room and be intimidated; you'll never lack confidence in the presence of any beautiful woman."

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

You'll have a different expereince as a Founder than you will as a member of a top tier fraternity. Both experiences are legit and positive; they're just different. As a Founder you're wrapped up in the excitement of expansion and striving together toward the goal of chartering. You have a real influence over the individuals who are selected for membership so you can help form the persoanlity of the fraternity.
On the other hand, as a brother in a top tier house you are surrounded by the movers and shakers of the campus, by men who want and expect to always be part of the championship team. A top tier fraternity at a major university produces the future leaders of the state, and the alumni network is extremely valuable.
In terms of social life, yes it's true that a confident man can enjoy a good social life in spite of being in a lower tier house. But the fact is that top fraternities and top sororities tend to mix together, and it similarly goes down the ladder all the way to the bottom.
I've seen men in a top tier chapter told, "By the time you leave here, you'll never walk into any Board room and be intimidated; you'll never lack confidence in the presence of any beautiful woman."

Correlation is not causation.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

You'll have a different expereince as a Founder than you will as a member of a top tier fraternity. Both experiences are legit and positive; they're just different. As a Founder you're wrapped up in the excitement of expansion and striving together toward the goal of chartering. You have a real influence over the individuals who are selected for membership so you can help form the persoanlity of the fraternity.
On the other hand, as a brother in a top tier house you are surrounded by the movers and shakers of the campus, by men who want and expect to always be part of the championship team. A top tier fraternity at a major university produces the future leaders of the state, and the alumni network is extremely valuable.
In terms of social life, yes it's true that a confident man can enjoy a good social life in spite of being in a lower tier house. But the fact is that top fraternities and top sororities tend to mix together, and it similarly goes down the ladder all the way to the bottom.
I've seen men in a top tier chapter told, "By the time you leave here, you'll never walk into any Board room and be intimidated; you'll never lack confidence in the presence of any beautiful woman."

This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

Success and confidence can be obtained, but it isn't handed to you just because you're a founder of "top-tiered" ABC fraternity. You get out of Greek life what you put in. That goes for any chapter on any campus.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

Does top tier status breed arrogance, as 'DubaiSis' charges? You're dealing with 18-21 year old males, so yes, the confidence and pride displayed by top chapters on every major campus are often viewed as arrogance.

Maybe that's because they're being told things like this:

I've seen men in a top tier chapter told, "By the time you leave here, you'll never walk into any Board room and be intimidated; you'll never lack confidence in the presence of any beautiful woman."

Just because someone says this to you, doesn't mean it's true.

...the top fraternities routinely produce the top performers, the top leaders, and eventually the top contributors to their university. It's hard to think of any famous, accomplished man who was in a college fraternity who was not in a top tier chapter when he was there. Off the top of my head: Sam Walton, George Bush, John Wayne, Warren Buffet, Jon Stewart, David Letterman, T. Boone Pickens, Burt Reynolds, Michael Jordan, Eli Manning, lots of Congressmen on both the left and the right...

It sounds to me like you're saying that only if you're famous can you be considered successful. There are so many people in this world who are successful, and you couldn't possibly know them all. And I guarantee that those that are Greek didn't all come from "leading chapters."

And quite frankly, even if all of these famous people were in "leading fraternity chapters," it doesn't mean that everyone else in those chapters is successful.

I believe that people make their own success, regardless of where they come from.

[Firehouse]

To ASTAlumna06
OK. I say with respect, I think you probably do understand what I'm saying, you just do not care for the narrative.
The truth is that 'programming' is not what differentiates one fraternity chapter from another. The truth is that individual fraternity reputations flow from the composition of their memberships. College men are drawn toward fraternities composed of men like themselves.
Here are two chapters on the same campus: AAA and Tri-Chi. The AAA fraternity is large, well housed with powerful alumni support, strong in athletics and campus leadership. Their members are aggressive, confident, ambitious. They sustain their standing by recruiting men who want the same things
Tri-Chi is very different. They are not a large fraternity and see no reason to grow. The play intramurals for fun not for glory. If a member happens to win some office on campus they are happy for him but they don't particularly attach that achievement to the chapter at large. They tend to be low key, non-competitive, non-aggressive.
Who has the better college Greek experience? Well, that depends on the individual. AAA and XXX both draw specific types of individuals to their chapters, and those guys WANT to be in THOSE chapters. All of the members in both chapters can have rewarding Greek Life expereicnes if they make the effort.
Now...Go back to the original premise. If you desire to be the Governor or a corporate CEO or a pro quarterback or a lion of Wall Street, you are going to be drawn to AAA. If you are just a laid-back type with little compelling ambition to be in the limelight, then XXX my be for you.
The movie 'Animal House' illustrated both types. The author Chris Miller was a member of Alpha Delta Phi at Dartmouth where his chapter was very much like Delta Tau Chi of the movie. I'm guessing that every fraternity in Amercia could cast that wonderful movie with emmebrs from their own individual chapter. But Miller, needing a foil to make the story work, and being from an Animal House chapter himself, made the Omegas to be the guys whose stories ended badly and the Deltas into the later-in-life success stories.
But that's not the way it really works. Sure, Miller is a great success, but in real life it is the Omegas who end up running the show. In the movie, the hero John Belushi ends up as a United States Senator. In the real world, as we know, Belushi dies of a drug overdose.

[MysticCat]

You're trying too hard, Firehouse. Way too hard.

[Firehouse]

OK. Probably. I haven't posted in a long time and I got bored. And chatty.

[DubaiSis]

Sounds to me like TTF breeds arrogance not confidence.

[Firehouse]

I may not have made myself clear. If I understood the original question, the young man was trying to make a decision whether to join a re-founding chapter, or, to join an established chapter. He also asked if the 'tier' ranking of his fraternity influences his social opportunities.
College fraternity chapters are composed of 18-21 year-old young men and their social dynamic is differently informed than that of we alumni.
Is there a difference in the experience he would have as a re-founder vs. the experience he would have as a member of an established chapter? Absolutely.
Are the social opportunities different for the highly rated fraternities vs those rated toward the bottom of the scale? Yes. Again, 'tiers' are based on subjective perceptions and don't necessarily reflect reality. However that's the world of fraternities on a big campus.
Does top tier status breed arrogance, as 'DubaiSis' charges? You're dealing with 18-21 year old males, so yes, the confidence and pride displayed by top chapters on every major campus are often viewed as arrogance. Sometimes that brings them down. But the top fraternities routinely produce the top performers, the top leaders, and eventually the top contributors to their university. It's hard to think of any famous, accomplished man who was in a college fraternity who was not in a top tier chapter when he was there. Off the top of my head: Sam Walton, George Bush, John Wayne, Warren Buffet, Jon Stewart, David Letterman, T. Boone Pickens, Burt Reynolds, Michael Jordan, Eli Manning, lots of Congressmen on both the left and the right...
It's wrong to assume that the experience is different for a player on a losing team vs a player on a national chapionship team. Yes, ATSAlumna06, you're right: you get out of Greek Life what you put into it. But the opportunities vary widely.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

But the top fraternities routinely produce the top performers, the top leaders, and eventually the top contributors to their university.

I see what you're trying to say, but I wonder if this isn't another example of how tier perceptions, which are subjective, can vary from campus to campus and be affected by campus values. I can think of at least one large campus I was pretty familiar where the fraternity that had the "campus leaders" in it was not considered top tier. The fraternities considered top tier tended to be made up of jocks, old money and partiers, not campus leaders.

It's hard to think of any famous, accomplished man who was in a college fraternity who was not in a top tier chapter when he was there. Off the top of my head: Sam Walton, George Bush, John Wayne, Warren Buffet, Jon Stewart, David Letterman, T. Boone Pickens, Burt Reynolds, Michael Jordan, Eli Manning, lots of Congressmen on both the left and the right....

How in the world do you know that the chapters any of these men were in were considered top tier by the students on their campuses?

ETA: By the way, one of the men you listed above was on the campus I was referring to during the time I was referring to. While he was a member of a great chapter of a great fraternity, I don't think anyone on camps would have described it as "top tier."

[Firehouse]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I see what you're trying to say, but I wonder if this isn't another example of how tier perceptions, which are subjective, can vary from campus to campus and be affected by campus values. I can think of at least one large campus I was pretty familiar where the fraternity that had the "campus leaders" in it was not considered top tier. The fraternities considered top tier tended to be made up of jocks, old money and partiers, not campus leaders.


How in the world do you know that the chapters any of these men were in were considered top tier by the students on their campuses?

ETA: By the way, one of the men you listed above was on the campus I was referring to during the time I was referring to. While he was a member of a great chapter of a great fraternity, I don't think anyone on camps would have described it as "top tier."

On the first point, you're exactly right MysticCat. The fraternity with the majority of student government leaders isn't necessarily top tier. I should have phrased it differently. I should have referred to the "leading fraternities" on campus. I prefer term that to 'top tier' a phrase I don't particularly like. Who the 'leading fraternities' are is always a matter of peception.
On the second point, I know because I have studied fraternities for years as a hobby and have made it my business to know. And I agree, let's not say 'top tier'. But I am convinced that the aggressive, accomplished, driven men join the leading fraternities. I didn't take time to craft that list. I threw in Michael Jordan because I like him (he was a member of a historically Black fraternity so it doesn't fit the model - but who wouldn't want Michael Jordan in their chapter?).
Which name were you referring to? I'll take the hit if I'm wrong.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Firehouse

On the first point, you're exactly right MysticCat. The fraternity with the majority of student government leaders isn't necessarily top tier. I should have phrased it differently. I should have referred to the "leading fraternities" on campus. I prefer term that to 'top tier' a phrase I don't particularly like. Who the 'leading fraternities' are is always a matter of peception.

Exactly, which is why I don't know that it's helpful to a discussion like this, whether one is talking about "top tier" or "leading fraternities" -- especially if it means that different people are talking about different things.

l'm not going to say Omega's the best house on campus, but a lot of outstanding guys figure they'll pledge Omega or won't pledge at all.

We do have more than our share of campus leaders -- something that never looks bad on your permanent record.

I didn't take time to craft that list. I threw in Michael Jordan because I like him (he was a member of a historically Black fraternity so it doesn't fit the model - but who wouldn't want Michael Jordan in their chapter?).
Which name were you referring to? I'll take the hit if I'm wrong.

LOL. It was indeed Michael Jordan I was referring to.