Indiana University 2014 Recruitment

[Mom64]

Wasn't AXO one of the sororities that changed their live-out policy? Would have thought it would have led to more bids.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by IndianaSigKap

DBB's chapter at IU did take fewer members than they did last year. She did say to call it out, so there it is. 50 last year (45 in the bid day photo this year).

AXO did not take any additional members either. They took 50 this year and 50 last year. It is up to them to whom they offer bids, but they did not offer more.

ZTA did take quite a few more than last year. A few of us IU people are working on gathering information, we have two thirds of the chapters so far.

I'm happy to email my HQ people (not that my opinion matters to anyone), but has anyone seen a number from a source other than counting heads? Is that a reliable estimate?

ETA: Never mind. The google says 47.

[silver_blue]

Originally Posted by Mom64

Wasn't AXO one of the sororities that changed their live-out policy? Would have thought it would have led to more bids.

Allowing seniors to live out isn't the same as forcing them to live out, I think that's part of the problem, too.

[BAMA2]

When my daughter pledged KKG at Alabama in the Fall of 2008 she had 85 in her pledge class. They were told that 60 of the 85 were legacies. That year they had 200 Kappa legacies going through rush.

[stbemtpynest]

I was the one who mentioned that an active at AXO told my daughter they were allowing seniors to live out. This was during 21 party. It was just one person telling one person. It could have been misinterpreted. Or as silver_blue said, maybe that didn't impact their quota (however it is determined...).

[silver_blue]

Originally Posted by stbemtpynest

I was the one who mentioned that an active at AXO told my daughter they were allowing seniors to live out. This was during 21 party. It was just one person telling one person. It could have been misinterpreted. Or as silver_blue said, maybe that didn't impact their quota (however it is determined...).

It depends when they changed the policy, too. If they just changed it last semester, then it was probably too late for the current juniors to find houses/apartments for their senior year (they go FAST). Plus, even though AXO and others are allowing senior live outs, members of chapters like that might not want to be in the first senior live out class. Maybe it'll have more of an impact next year.

[Mom64]

Originally Posted by silver_blue

It depends when they changed the policy, too. If they just changed it last semester, then it was probably too late for the current juniors to find houses/apartments for their senior year (they go FAST). Plus, even though AXO and others are allowing senior live outs, members of chapters like that might not want to be in the first senior live out class. Maybe it'll have more of an impact next year.

It can't be finding houses/apartments that's the issue. Trust me, my daughter and her other friends with no bids are looking at quite a few in the next few days. I believe it is probably more of a transition thing and the impact will be felt in future years. At least it is a step in the right direction and hopefully more chapters will follow suit.

[33girl]

The "number shaming" in this thread needs to STOP. Membership selection is still membership selection and sororities still have the prerogative to take quota/bid up to total, take NO women at all, or do something in between. That prerogative doesn't disappear because it's IU. We have no idea why chapters took the size classes they took. So quit.

Also, I don't think comparing this to Alabama is appropriate. The women in Alabama were bucking something that's not just particular to their school.

[silver_blue]

Originally Posted by 33girl

The "number shaming" in this thread needs to STOP. Membership selection is still membership selection and sororities still have the prerogative to take quota/bid up to total, take NO women at all, or do something in between. That prerogative doesn't disappear because it's IU. We have no idea why chapters took the size classes they took. So quit.

Also, I don't think comparing this to Alabama is appropriate. The women in Alabama were bucking something that's not just particular to their school.

We know exactly why they took the numbers they did: because that's the number of beds they'll have in their houses next year. "Number shaming" wouldn't exist if all groups went to a normal quota system. I think ALL of them have to do it to make it work, though.

[Mom64]

Originally Posted by 33girl

The "number shaming" in this thread needs to STOP. Membership selection is still membership selection and sororities still have the prerogative to take quota/bid up to total, take NO women at all, or do something in between. That prerogative doesn't disappear because it's IU. We have no idea why chapters took the size classes they took. So quit.
.

Take NO women at all - please.

Originally Posted by silver_blue

We know exactly why they took the numbers they did: because that's the number of beds they'll have in their houses next year.

Agreed!

[AZTheta]

The problem, as was pointed out much earlier in this thread, is that IU does not have a quota/total system independent of the number of beds in any facility.

That said, I agree with 33 - membership selection IS membership selection and is the exclusive domain of the chapters. I can see the future in my crystal ball and it is saying that, given the choice, they may well cut off their noses to spite their faces. Because, after all _______ (fill in the blanks).

[suzy88]

The "number shaming" in this thread needs to STOP. Membership selection is still membership selection and sororities still have the prerogative to take quota/bid up to total, take NO women at all, or do something in between. That prerogative doesn't disappear because it's IU. We have no idea why chapters took the size classes they took. So quit.

The real "shame" here is that the sororities know that the current system demoralizes young women and destroys their self esteem and they don't care. They prefer exclusivity. They should take a look at their own recruiting material and see that they are values based organizations that are meant to uplift women. They are not fulfilling their own mission. That is the shame. Just because something is "their prerogative" doesn't make it right.

[Mom64]

Originally Posted by suzy88

The real "shame" here is that the sororities know that the current system demoralizes young women and destroys their self esteem and they don't care. They prefer exclusivity. They should take a look at their own recruiting material and see that they are values based organizations that are meant to uplift women. They are not fulfilling their own mission. That is the shame. Just because something is "their prerogative" doesn't make it right.

Thank you. Most of the women entered the process with excitement, high hopes and enthusiasm. Too, too many were turned away.

[33girl]

^^^^you are completely missing my point.

My point is that this or that group is being criticized for taking too few women. With the current system, they're doing what they're supposed to do. I doubt that ZTA just decided this week to allow senior live-outs and compel the chapter to take more members than the norm for the current system. I mean people are acting like these chapters should have woken up today and changed everything because of a thread on Greek Chat. This rush was a mess because of the missed party date and the time to think about changes is when everyone is calmed down from rush, NOT in the middle of it.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by suzy88

The real "shame" here is that the sororities know that the current system demoralizes young women and destroys their self esteem and they don't care. They prefer exclusivity. They should take a look at their own recruiting material and see that they are values based organizations that are meant to uplift women. They are not fulfilling their own mission. That is the shame. Just because something is "their prerogative" doesn't make it right.

I understand that people are upset. I am so sorry that there are women who did not get bids.

However, it is quite the accusation to put on 18-22 year olds to say that they are "destroying and demoralizing young women." We've said in here before that this is likely a university issue, not something that the women themselves can change.

Again, I get that folks are upset. But no collegian goes into recruitment thinking "yes, let's DESTROY some self-esteem!"