Should you join a "lower tier" sorority?

[littleowl33]

Originally Posted by Shellfish

They probably have been described as most popular, even if the word tier wasn't used.

This doesn't crop up for guys, though, does it? When I think of my own alma mater, the composition of fraternities seemed to be based more on common denominators such as being on the same teams or just being a bunch of similar guys who liked hanging out with each other, not what other people thought of them.

Maybe it's just my campus, but the fraternities here bash each other waaaay more than the sororities do. They're really competitive about creating "tiers" and hating on certain groups. There are basically a few "top tier" groups that throw the biggest parties, a bunch of "middle tier" groups that are pretty diverse and tend to attract guys based on who actually gets along best, and a few "bottom tier" groups that tend to be new, small and/or not have a specific sports team associated with them. We have a fraternity colonizing right now and the other fraternity guys are just vicious in degrading them... it's very catty and low, in my opinion. I think they're just worried they'll steal pledges from them and they think bashing them is the best way to maintain their position.

[ellebud]

The question as to whether anyone will rank a "less" desirable (whatever that ultimately means) above a top tier house: My daughter did all the way through. She had solid reasons for choosing what she did. At her university all the chapters are good, no kidding. Two are smaller. But my daughter felt that one "top" house had a vibe that she wasn't going to join. I am being VERY vague on purpose.

Yes, she was "lucky" that she wasn't cut from her choices and she ultimately made the decision. But if she had received her number 2 house she still would have been thrilled...and walked by the houses that she felt didn't match who she is as a person.

[Shellfish]

Whenever I read the posts from PNMs who say they're disappointed by their list of invites or their bid, I wish they would take some advice from Mike Damone of Fast Times at Ridgemont High: "Act like whevever you are, that's the place to be." But by act I don't mean pretend but behave: feel confident that where you are (anywhere in life) is probably pretty darn good. If you like butterscotch ripple when most people around you like chocolate, well, feel like butterscotch ripple IS actually the cool ice cream.

[Elephant Walk]

I'll go ahead and say this (not knowing what people have said):

It depends on your motives for joining a sorority. Is your motive primarily to have sisterhood or to be a part of the social elite and throw rad parties? Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the social elite who throw rad parties don't have sisterhood. But if your primary goal is to have sisterhood I would say that joining a "lower tier" sorority is okay.

[Bella796]

I COB'd so I got to know girls in different organizations and chose the one where I felt more at "home." However if I was going through recruitment with my 18 year old attitude, I often wonder if I would have chosen another house. I think it depends on the person and what they want (and their maturity level).

[APhiAnna]

One of my absolute favorite quotes I read on this board deals with this...I want to say it was 33girl but if not then I am sorry that I forgot who said it. It went: "Guys think they make the fraternity and girls think the sorority makes them."

Tiers for guys are just as established as tiers for girls on a year to year basis. But I feel like guys are infinitely more likely to join a lower tier house where they click with the guys and then work their butts off to turn it around. Whereas girls, even the ones who work hard for their sororities, don't really see it that way. At my alma mater, the fraternity tiers completely re-shifted in the 4 years I was there, while the sorority tiers didn't even budge. I think if girls took the "guy" mentality more often during rush, you would see more dynamic changes in sorority reputations.

I do not agree whatsoever with the statement that said that top tier chapters are less close, disorganized, etc. There are clicks and internal problems in EVERY sorority chapter over 7-8 members. There are "top tier" chapters with great sisterhoods and "bottom tier" chapters with terrible sisterhoods, so be careful making blanket statements. That is just as un-Panhellenic as making fun of "lower tier" houses.

And lastly, at my campus in the last few years there HAVE been many girls who have been in the position deciding between a top tier and a "lower tier". With top tier sororities required to make huge cuts early on, and enough legacies, recs and "high-school friends" who are going to make that first cut, cuts can be severe. We were always competitive in recruitment, and we had many girls who preffed our biggest competitors, but also many women that were cut by the other really competitive chapters. And I remember seeing our competitor's pledge classes and recognizing half the names, and for the other half I'd be like "Who is this girl? I don't even remember her coming through!" I even know of one girl that ended up at the "best" sorority, and she had been cut by every other sorority within the first few days except for the "worst"...and she was not a legacy and had no connections that I know of. I think the new release figures are making this phenomenon much more common than it used to be.

ETA: I am familiar enough with a couple west coast schools that had rush threads posted on this board, and PMed them (haha, I know everybody hates when people mention PMs) asking for the codes. The PNMs at these schools tended to have surprisingly varied rushes...being dropped from lower tier houses on the first day only to end up in "top tier" houses, preffing drastically different sororities, etc. So this is definitely a common thing at Pac 10 schools, but I can't say anything about other regions. I think it could probably ring true for SEC as well, but I am not that familiar with those campuses.

[AnchorAlumna]

I dunno.

At my SEC school, it's like the "tiers" are set in concrete reinforced by rebar and encased in steel. The top, middle, and lower tiers, with just a tiny bit of shifting within tiers, are the same now as they were in 1971.

It doesn't seem to matter what women do or achieve, they don't change.

And Panhellenic has traditionally been all about enforcing that. Informally, of course.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I dunno.

At my SEC school, it's like the "tiers" are set in concrete reinforced by rebar and encased in steel. The top, middle, and lower tiers, with just a tiny bit of shifting within tiers, are the same now as they were in 1971.

It doesn't seem to matter what women do or achieve, they don't change.

And Panhellenic has traditionally been all about enforcing that. Informally, of course.

I thought this too about my SEC campus, but I'm realizing it might not be the case. One group that was bottom tier when I was in school is solidly middle now, I think. And there's been some shifting in terms of the popularity of some of the middle and upper tier groups.

I think a lot of it has to do with changes at UGA. I think high achieving suburban Atlanta public school kids are playing a much bigger role in the system than they used to, and they elevated some groups that were middle when I was there and some of the really southern traditional groups suffered a little. I'm not sure the mobility would have occurred without this big shift because of the HOPE grant. But I think a lot of the SEC schools are experiencing similar changes, if on a smaller scale. If you're pulling more out of state kids, they aren't going to have 20+ years of a group's bad hometown rep to deal with, IMO.

I think it's still hard to take a lower tier group and somehow turn things around in one four year window.

And anyway, even if your low tier is forever, it's probably still worth being a member.

On a different note: even if girls are preffing a low and a high group, I think the number who don't list the high group first are a small percentage. The decision might be, do I list and accept a low tier bid if I get it instead. But I don't think girls are saying with any frequency, "I'm turning down #1 for #15.

[KSUViolet06]

I find that in some smaller Greek systems, the tier structure is much more fluid and a pledge class or 2 can really change things for a chapter.

I'm finishing up my grad degree at my undergrad alma mater so I have been here for awhile and I have seen one class change the reputation of a chapter dramatically (or better or worse).

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

...anyway, even if your low tier is forever, it's probably still worth being a member...

Oh, I certainly agree with you. One thing I've learned as an alumna is that among alumnae, tiers don't matter. The important thing is that you're a member of a GLO, and share similar experiences.

Now, some here say that your choice of group determines who'll you'll associate with and how you'll be perceived. Granted, I can see this among certain folks in certain communities (think bluebloods of Birmingham, Mobile, Atlanta etc.) But not in my little city.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

Oh, I certainly agree with you. One thing I've learned as an alumna is that among alumnae, tiers don't matter. The important thing is that you're a member of a GLO, and share similar experiences.

Now, some here say that your choice of group determines who'll you'll associate with and how you'll be perceived. Granted, I can see this among certain folks in certain communities (think bluebloods of Birmingham, Mobile, Atlanta etc.) But not in my little city.

I agree with the second paragraph too, but I also wonder as the chapters get bigger and bigger if it even matters in the places where I thought it used to. It's also been pointed out that if the factors are in place for you to get offered a bid to a chapter that we think of as "blueblood", you probably don't need to even rush to keep associating with them.

I think this old row-y kind of mindset remains more prevalent in fraternities since they don't have quota. A kid grows up in that blueblood world, goes to a certain set of private schools, goes off to a big public university but joins a really elite/elitist group, goes back to reclaim social position in hometown. If you take a pledge class of 60-80 every year and their are multiple blueblood groups, how elite can you really claim to me?

[baci]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I dunno.

At my SEC school, it's like the "tiers" are set in concrete reinforced by rebar and encased in steel. The top, middle, and lower tiers, with just a tiny bit of shifting within tiers, are the same now as they were in 1971.

It doesn't seem to matter what women do or achieve, they don't change.

And Panhellenic has traditionally been all about enforcing that. Informally, of course.

I do agree with this post from my experience at an SEC school. The tiers are set and there has been minimal movement for generations.

IMO, it feels like a carryover of high school - who is most beautiful, best figure, most popular, dresses best, what area they are from, and possibly what parents do for a living come into play. It doesn't matter what you do or achieve in many cases. The young girls that fit closely to the above filter into the top groups and then it falls from there.

What I have noticed over the years though is how nasty girls have gotten. Many young girls that are presently in a sorority will try by various means to start rumors and tear apart another group. The internet is a perfect place to do so. It may be a top tier trying to trash another top group or a mid tier trying to move up and attempt to knock another group down. I am shocked at what some of these girls will do with their time.

I met a wonderful woman who told me her best years with XYZ have been those out of her four years in college. She said it fulfilled her life like she can't explain. That really touched a spot in my heart. I understand why the tiers are there to a point (whether I agree or not), but it is sad and ridiculous. There is so much more to each of the organizations. You just can't always explain that to an 18-21 year old woman with her own mind.

[dgdramadawg]

I am probably repeating stuff because I haven't read the whole thread.

I think that one of my girls who rushed this year (I didn't post her story because the end was sad) best explained the reason not to pledge a "low tier" group that was struggling with numbers: "I appreciate what they're trying to do; I just don't want to be a part of it."

A lot of PNMs don't want to be in the smallest/least popular group because they don't want to have to deal with all of the work that would go into making a chapter grow. It takes a special kind of girl to join a group that's not as popular when she KNOWS that the group isn't as popular, and an even more special kind of girl to join a group that is struggling with numbers on top of a "low tier" rep.

When I look back at my school and the way it was when I went through recruitment, I remember 3 groups that people referred to as "low tier." Of the three, one chapter has closed due to low numbers and the other two have gained in numbers and in reputation to the point where the difference in chapter size between them and others is negligible. However, even with those gains in reputation, those two chapters still have to deal with being called "low tier" every recruitment (despite members every bit as pretty, smart, involved, etc. as those in "higher tier" houses).

I saw at the top of the thread people mentioning whether PNMs would ever choose a "low tier" house over a higher house, but sometimes a PNM doesn't feel comfortable in that high tier house. Back in my thread (http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...ad.php?t=87526) I said this about a "popular" house: Their house is big and pretty, but the conversation was more and more awkward today. I just don't know that I am a fit here. The girls are nice and I could see myself being friends with a few of them, but I just don't feel like I fit in with the majority of the girls. I think I would have to change myself to be happy in this house and I don't think it is worth it just to be in a "popular" sorority. The girls on my hall and in my rho chi group insist that this is the "best" house I have left, but the more I see of it, the more I think it is just not for me.

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by AnchorAlumna

I dunno.

At my SEC school, it's like the "tiers" are set in concrete reinforced by rebar and encased in steel. The top, middle, and lower tiers, with just a tiny bit of shifting within tiers, are the same now as they were in 1971.

It doesn't seem to matter what women do or achieve, they don't change.

And Panhellenic has traditionally been all about enforcing that. Informally, of course.

Do you know whether the members of your 1971 top tier groups made the most of their lives by becoming involved sorority alums? Did women in those top tier groups have better marriages, better children, and lead better lives than women from your lowest tier groups? And whether they did or did not, so what?

No NPC sorority has folded since 1971 (the year Iota Alpha Pi dissolved). That indicates every NPC group holds a strength of purpose and industry despite when some may rate them as a lower tier!

ALL current NPC groups have thrived for between 102-168 years. Each group contributes mightily to our NPC organization for the betterment of educated women, notwithstanding each group maintaining distinct and individual reasons for living within/learning about/giving to the world.

One reason women join a sorority is that united with others you can offer the world more. There are women of the 1971 sorority class from within every tier group who will tell you they have experienced self-defined good lives, and the world is no worse for their having lived.

[AnchorAlumna]

Originally Posted by Cheerio

Do you know whether the members of your 1971 top tier groups made the most of their lives by becoming involved sorority alums? Did women in those top tier groups have better marriages, better children, and lead better lives than women from your lowest tier groups? And whether they did or did not, so what?

No NPC sorority has folded since 1971 (the year Iota Alpha Pi dissolved). That indicates every NPC group holds a strength of purpose and industry despite when some may rate them as a lower tier!

ALL current NPC groups have thrived for between 102-168 years. Each group contributes mightily to our NPC organization for the betterment of educated women, notwithstanding each group maintaining distinct and individual reasons for living within/learning about/giving to the world.

One reason women join a sorority is that united with others you can offer the world more. There are women of the 1971 sorority class from within every tier group who will tell you they have experienced self-defined good lives, and the world is no worse for their having lived.

To be clear, nobody is thinking of certain sororities nationally being higher tiers than the others. Every sorority has "top" chapters and struggling chapters.
This is a by-campus thing.
Certainly PNMs don't give a rip about which sororities are strongest nationally. They just care about their own campus.

Women in the so-called top tier groups have, AFAIK, had the same types of lives as the rest of us - some successful, some not.

Have the snooty sorority girls "made the most of their lives by becoming involved sorority alums"? (Oh, do you have to be an involved sorority alumna to make the most of your life?) Same answer - some have, some haven't.

I HAVE found out - and did so pretty soon after graduating - that tiers don't matter so much among alumnae. Just the experience...which is pretty much the same no matter what tier your chapter was considered.