Alums and alcohol in chapter houses

[dukedg]

A couple of years ago a few UC Berkeley DG alums wanted to have a reunion at the house over the summer (they wanted to stay at the house a couple of nights, reminisce, etc.). We discussed it with our regional housing team and they were given the all clear as long as they did not bring or consume alcohol at the house. I'm not sure if the event ever happened, because I moved to LA shortly after.

I know in the past (60's or 70's?) the Berkeley chapter used to do a mother-daughter fashion show fundraiser and they would apply for and receive a waiver for alcohol to be served in the house. Of course, back then the drinking age was lower... I'm not sure when that rule changed, but I have never heard of anyone since I have been involved with DG getting a waiver or even applying for one (I pledged in 1997).

As far as I understand it, beyond being the fraternity's or sorority's policy, the ban on alcohol in the house is also part of the insurance agreement!

[James]

There are few absolutes when it comes to social rules.

In this case I would say that its obvious that the people that really pressed this point didn't appreciate Super Alumna on some level or another prior to this infraction . . . because in perspective the problem is not even worth mentioning versus her contributions to the chapter.

To put it another way. If someone saved my life, supported me and constantly looked out for me it wouldn't occur to me to harshly berate them about breaking a relatively small rule after the fact. Which would be the personal equivalent of what SA did for her chapter.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that there is a really petty lack of loyalty and gratitude to the SA that I am surprised the more mature alum and chapter members allow.

[skylark]

I think I take a really different perspective than James. To me it isn't her contributions versus the rule breaking. To me it is saying that these are the rules -- we don't care who you are. And I didn't get the impression from the OP that anything had happened to SA or her daughter because of the event. Just, "don't do this again." Contrast that to having to plead your case to your chapters judicial/membership standards/equivalent committee if you are an active.

One point I'd like to make is that if no one mentioned the fact there was wine there, then there wouldn't have been any kind of reprimand. So, not only did they have the wine but at least one person was dumb (or obstinate) enough to brag about it or at least mention it in passing. When I have a casual glass of wine at a meal, I don't normally mention the wine specifically. That fact alone makes me think that at least someone at that dinner KNEW that they were breaking the rule and didn't care.

I also find the enforcement of the rule fair to the active girls. Many of them are of age and would probably love to have a senior sisterhood dinner and responsibly drink some wine. If the alums were allowed to do it, I would be pretty pissed as an of-age active. Furthermore, regardless of whether I was or wasn't of age, as an active I'd tend to take my HQ's alcohol policy a lot less seriously if the alums didn't even respect it while in the house.

[fantASTic]

Originally Posted by James

There are few absolutes when it comes to social rules.

In this case I would say that its obvious that the people that really pressed this point didn't appreciate Super Alumna on some level or another prior to this infraction . . . because in perspective the problem is not even worth mentioning versus her contributions to the chapter.

To put it another way. If someone saved my life, supported me and constantly looked out for me it wouldn't occur to me to harshly berate them about breaking a relatively small rule after the fact. Which would be the personal equivalent of what SA did for her chapter.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that there is a really petty lack of loyalty and gratitude to the SA that I am surprised the more mature alum and chapter members allow.

True. HOWEVER...

Does the fact that she has donated money and time give her the right to do whatever she wants, even though it is breaking sorority rules? No. Maybe the rule was stupid, maybe they overreacted, but your contribution to the chapter does not give you an 'all clear' when it comes to obeying the rules. If it did, then where is the line drawn?

The rules are the same for everyone. Bottom line, she should have asked, and not made such a big fuss over being informed that she had broken the rules.

I've always thought that rule was a bit dumb anyways, but that's not the point here.