Perception of sororities nationally

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

My point was that when reading these rush stories about how some women (and in some cases, their mothers) are dead set on getting into a particular sorority on a particular campus, it varies so much from campus to campus as to which sorority is "the one" that the women are gunning for. Reading those sorority descriptions from that Texas magazine was just really fascinating for a Yankee with no southern sorority experience.

So, to go back to my original point... The way we think about things is greatly influenced by our collegiate experience, our alumna experience and our geography.

The whole trouble with tiers is that often people take them to reflect on an organization as a whole- and react accordingly.

Any given chapter's reptuation will, I believe, be far more reflective of that specific campus and active members than of the GLO nationally.

The tiers discussion comes up most with large southern public universities for two reasons,

1. At those schools you have a high concentration of people who come from that state, and so it is natural that the regional social "pecking order" will flow into the university's social life.

2. In the South moreso than in other regions- being Greek has, for many people, very important social meaning. In practice, people who let it have a major impact on who they interact with for life have a problem- but the fact remains it is important that you "were there."

I have attended many weddings where ladies were introduced to me with, "This is _____, she was a __fill in the GLO__ at ___ fill in the school." This comes first- even before you find out in conversation that the lady in question is a highly successful neurosurgeon (yes I am laughing thinking about a specific introduction a few years ago as I write this.)

The point is, that affiliation says a great deal about a person right away. It does not tell you if they are a good person. It does not tell you if they are successful in life. It does not tell you that they are better than anyone else. But it does give you quite a bit of background in one simple sentence.

Naturally this is a strange concept to most people. I think country clubs are foreign concepts too for most people- or at least when discussing the many people who join country clubs and don't ever play golf.

Being a part of any GLO a person likes is a valuable experience. And this is why the tiers discussion gets so problematic on a site like GC. Tiers do matter, but only in the very specific context of the college in question- and even then so much depends on whether a person just naturally ended up in a top tier chapter and made a great life experience of it, or clings to it as a crutch for low self esteem or a lack of success for the rest of their lives.

Now than I am nearly 10 years out of school I have seen many high school and college classmates who were "top tier" fall flat on their faces in the real world. And many who were not so sociable in college have done well.

Sure, most people who went to 1st or 2nd tier GLOs have been successful because they were born to successful parents and were raised to be productive citizens. And this is reflected in chapter stats. Non-Greeks at UT do not like the Greeks, but the GPAs of the top tier chapters- fraternity and sorority- are incredibly high. These are talented and motivated people.

But that said, top tier is not a predictor of anything- nor does it confer some magical social status. A person's success and social status comes from far earlier influences (i.e. their ancestry) and- more importantly- what they do with their own lives after college.

In short- I am agreeing with you and taking 2 pages to do it in detail

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by EE-BO

The whole trouble with tiers is that often people take them to reflect on an organization as a whole- and react accordingly.

Any given chapter's reptuation will, I believe, be far more reflective of that specific campus and active members than of the GLO nationally.

But that said, top tier is not a predictor of anything- nor does it confer some magical social status. A person's success and social status comes from far earlier influences (i.e. their ancestry) and- more importantly- what they do with their own lives after college.

In short- I am agreeing with you and taking 2 pages to do it in detail

Thank you!

There were three very clear (and at times somewhat hostile) tiers at my school - to the point where women from different tiers would cross the road so they didn't have to pass by each other. But it is interesting because even though my own chapter would have been considered bottom tier, we had many wonderful women in our chapter who were not in any way hindered by being in a "lesser" chapter. In fact, I think it was a distinct advantage in some ways.

My second year in the house we had the Greek Pledge of the Year.
My third year in the house we had the Panhel President and a sister on Homecoming Court.
My fourth year in the house we had a finalist for Greek Woman of the Year and one of the University Outstanding Seniors.
We had Greek Week Co-Chairs I believe every year I was there and usually more than one each year.

Bottom tier does not mean inferior members. It just often means women who found what they were looking for somewhere else.

So if someone wants to look down on me because I was a low tier sorority member, that's their prerogative. However, I was the woman who was the finalist for Greek Woman of the Year and one of the University Outstanding Seniors. And I honestly don't think I would have personally won those honors if I had been in a top tier house. I had far more opportunities in a bottom tier chapter that was perfectly suited for me.

All that being said... and I realize I'm going way out on a limb here... If someone offered a million dollars to guess the top 6 groups on a campus, how many people would randomly pick 6 of the 26 groups? No one would. Every one of us would draw on our experiences and knowledge of the groups, the region the school was in, the strength of different groups by state and/or region, etc. to try to guess it accurately. Those who have a lot more knowledge about all 26 of the groups would have a distinct advantage in trying to guess as opposed to those of us who may only be marginally familiar with 8 or 15 or 20 of them or only have limited regional experience. I don't think that having ideas about different groups and their perceived strength both locally and nationally makes someone un-Panhellenic.

Now running for cover...