Quote:
Originally Posted by clemsongirl
The specific issues I have reading it again:
-the preranking of every PNM based entirely on their perceived attractiveness
-forcing sisters to rank each other based on perceived attractiveness, so that only the "best" sisters talk to the "best" PNMs
-the ranking of PNMs after each round based on how much they "fit" into the chapter, which by necessity means that the pledge classes recruited each year are all going to be homogenous in many meaningful ways
-the national orgs' endorsement of all this through the presence of their consultant, especially when she removed PNMs the chapter would otherwise have wanted to invite back
I imagine every chapter scores women in some way based on their conversations-I know mine did. That isn't controversial to me. What is controversial is the way in which it was done based entirely off of looks and ignored who the chapter members actually wanted to invite back. I know that no matter what a PNM looked like, if we'd wanted her as a member and she was otherwise qualified no one from our national organization would have stopped us from giving her a bid.
|
^^I agree completely. Recruitment, for me, was a time that our chapter really pulled together to accomplish one of our most important challenges of the year. I liked being in rotation groups with women that I might not have known so well and getting to know them better during all those long days. I felt we came out of the process closer than before (maybe a little case of ptsd
). I would have been heartbroken if I had been relegated to a service job or positioned to keep the "undesirable MGs" busy. How hurtful to put those you care about into that position.
Threaded Mode
