kappa sigma at fgcu?

[stufield]

I am writing this in response to posts earlier today by "rex in effect", who is a loyal Kappa Sig, and "LaneSig", who is an equally loyal Sigma Chi.

"rex in effect" states, in part, that Kappa Sigma is the 3rd largest fraternity in the nation, and that Kappa Sigma is way ahead of Sigma Chi nationally.

"LaneSig" attempts to distinguish the unrecognized Sigma Chi colony at George Mason University ["GMU"] from the unrecognized Kappa Sigma colony at Florida Gulf Coast University ["FGCU"]

As a Kappa Sigma alumnus of more years than I care to admit, one who has been involved in interfraternal affairs for the past three decades, and one who has a thoroughgoing knowledge of both Kappa Sigma's and Sigma Chi's expansion policies, and where both fraternities have chapters, active and dormant, as well as their general operations in all sorts of areas, I can advise "rex in effect" that although both he and I might not like it, Sigma Chi presently has more active chapters and colonies than Kappa Sigma does, and, frankly, that Sigma Chi has more of them at well-known, quality schools with sound academic reputations. Kappa Sigma is certainly NOT ahead of Sigma Chi in this regard. Kappa Sigma has been expanding vigorously in the past five or six years (as has Delta Chi, Sigma Pi, Pi Kappa Phi, Fiji, and a number of other fraternities), but a number of the chapters it has established in that time are at little-known and lightly-regarded schools. As a Kappa Sig, I don't like this. Nor do many other Kappa Sig alumni. We see it as the "Tekeification" of the Fraternity ... hopefully most of you who are reading this thread will understand that reference. But that is the expansionary road that the powers that be in the Fraternity have chosen to take. And one lane in that road has been to recognize colonies at a number of schools, not just FGCU, which did not at the time enjoy official recognition by the school's administration and/or IFC. In some cases, such recognition did come in due course; in other cases, such lack of formal recognition has continued well past those colonies having received their charters as active chapters. Common sense says that sooner or later such recognition will be forthcoming, if the unrecognized chapter can survive until then without it. But whether or not such chapters can succeed in the long run without such recognition remains to be seen. It is a work in progress at several schools.

I would also state, although again I do not like conceding it, that Sigma Chi actually is far ahead of Kappa Sigma in all sorts of areas nationally: Sigma Chi has a much more balanced distribution of its active chapters across the entire USA and Canada than Kappa Sigma; Sigma Chi has a much lower percentage of dormant/inactive chapters in relation to the total number of charters granted than Kappa Sigma does; Sigma Chi enjoys a significantly higher degree of alumni support, both numerically and financially than Kappa Sigma does; Kappa Sigma's quarterly magazine, The Caduceus, is a rag compared to its Sigma Chi counterpart, The Magazine of Sigma Chi.

Having said that, however, LaneSig's attempted distinction between Sigma Chi's unrecognized colony at GMU and Kappa Sig's at FGCU is an artificial one. While the distinction he makes is valid, the facts of the matter are that both fraternities were not invited by the respective schools to colonize there at that time, but both have colonized there anyway, and both colonies are recognized by their respective fraternities. Furthermore, both fraternities also have colonies at other schools at which those colonies are not officially recognized by those schools' respective administrations and/or IFCs, as do a number of other fraternities (and perhaps sororities as well). Those fraternities all regard such unwillingness to extend recognition as an interference with their groups' rights of free association.

It is well and admirable for members of all fraternities and sororities to be proud of and loyal to their respective organizations. But they should be sure to actually know what they are talking about when they make public statements stating that their fraternity "is better than", "is ahead of", "has more chapters than", "is more progressive or more conservative than", etc. some other fraternity. They will be mistaken more often than not; the more sweeping the generalization, the less likely it is to be correct. Most active chapter members, i.e. most undergraduates, have very little knowledge of their own fraternity at the (inter)national level, let alone about other fraternities (what little they think they know is usually the self-congratulatory, self-promotional, but often not entirely factually correct PR pap that their fraternity feeds them, which virtually all fraternities do); in fact, most undergraduate members have very little knowledge of their own and other fraternities past their own campuses; in fact, it constantly amazes me just how little members of any one fraternity on any given campus know about the other fraternities on their own campuses, let alone about their own fraternity and other fraternities on a larger scale.