AOII Eliminates Legacy Policy

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by carnation

Here's what the 'poaching' is about: suddenly NPC and our groups have sent out directives to increase our diversity, even including classes and think groups on it. Some universities have bewailed the NPC/NIC lack of diversity, and unaffiliated people (and neither group has a clue) are forever posting sneeringly about sororities only having skinny white girls. I have seen people try to start discussions about this on FB and get dogpiled.

Sen has made a great post about why so many black women prefer NPHC (and this is pretty much what I've observed in the last 40+ years--PNMs choose the NPHC because the most involved women in their communities did). I would love to see the NPC hierarchy meet with NPHC and have a dialogue about this so they will quit blaming and punishing their groups for lack of diversity. We can try all we want but college students will go for the experience they prefer.

But this is the very point. College students WILL go for the experience they prefer. At least they should, and we should be encouraging that.

And they'd prefer not to get yelled at when mom has a hissy fit because their darling daughter didn't make the same choice they made 30 years prior.

Again, this legacy decision didn't happen overnight. And no, I don't think it's "bad timing." I think a giant movement and the in-our-faces-all-day-every-day thing needed to happen to wake us all up and take action on something (e.g. our legacy policies) that some people have been talking about for at least a decade. Sometimes we all need one giant slap in the face to realize that maybe we're not doing everything perfectly and could use a change.

And let's also not pretend that some members, chapters, and even organizations as a whole haven't openly been racist, or at the very least, non-inclusive. You really think that all of our "picture-perfect" chapters filled with 100+ tall, skinny blondes is treating all potential members as equals? You think they're giving the black girl, or the overweight girl, or the girl with the pink hair the same opportunities as someone who looks exactly like them? Please.

Originally Posted by 33girl

This too.

Heck, women rushing NPC are outright discouraged from the kind of devotion to a possible organization that NPHC women are encouraged to have.

Truth. We push away women who are truly dedicated and we give a pass through rounds to women who may want nothing to do with our organizations.

Look, I don't know what all the answers are, but we really can't continue to do the same thing over and over, year after year, decade after decade, and expect to survive. Change is inevitable. And major events occurring today - BLM, COVID-19 - are going to drastically change how and why women attend college years from now. Are we going to be able as NPC sororities to adapt and be relevant for the 18-year-olds of the future?

[carnation]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

And let's also not pretend that some members, chapters, and even organizations as a whole haven't openly been racist, or at the very least, non-inclusive. You really think that all of our "picture-perfect" chapters filled with 100+ tall, skinny blondes is treating all potential members as equals? You think they're giving the black girl, or the overweight girl, or the girl with the pink hair the same opportunities as someone who looks exactly like them? Please.


Look, I don't know what all the answers are, but we really can't continue to do the same thing over and over, year after year, decade after decade, and expect to survive. Change is inevitable. And major events occurring today - BLM, COVID-19 - are going to drastically change how and why women attend college years from now. Are we going to be able as NPC sororities to adapt and be relevant for the 18-year-olds of the future?

18-year-old have always wanted the same thing--to be accepted. I know that my organization and many others have lots of black, overweight, and pink/blue/whatever color of hair women. I doubt that many chapters sit down and make a plan for excluding these groups. Actives pick who they like.

However, having watched the rush of a purple-haired woman at a college where I taught, I don't blame the sororities for cutting her. She was out to shock the women there and having done so in parties, raged because she was cut across the board. Same for a lot of the women in the "Weird Rush Stories" thread, and this is why I don't believe in being forced to accept everyone.

Some people are talking about change in organizations--acceptance, inclusiveness, and diversity. Fine, but don't go trying to tear up the organization you just pledged. I would never think of pledging AEPhi and then announcing that the Star of David offends me and you just better get all of them out of the house or I'll sue. Yet this has happened with traditionally Christian NPCs--"take the New Testament out of the ritual or I'll raise hell at conventions/print the initiation ceremony online (we saw a few of those here on GC several years back)/act offended at every chapter meeting", etc.

We are all looking for high quality women who will work hard and make us proud of our organizations.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by carnation

18-year-old have always wanted the same thing--to be accepted. I know that my organization and many others have lots of black, overweight, and pink/blue/whatever color of hair women. I doubt that many chapters sit down and make a plan for excluding these groups. Actives pick who they like.

However, having watched the rush of a purple-haired woman at a college where I taught, I don't blame the sororities for cutting her. She was out to shock the women there and having done so in parties, raged because she was cut across the board. Same for a lot of the women in the "Weird Rush Stories" thread, and this is why I don't believe in being forced to accept everyone.

This is extremely antecdotal and is missing the big picture. And who here is arguing that a chapter should be forced to take anyone and everyone?

Some people are talking about change in organizations--acceptance, inclusiveness, and diversity. Fine, but don't go trying to tear up the organization you just pledged. I would never think of pledging AEPhi and then announcing that the Star of David offends me and you just better get all of them out of the house or I'll sue. Yet this has happened with traditionally Christian NPCs--"take the New Testament out of the ritual or I'll raise hell at conventions/print the initiation ceremony online (we saw a few of those here on GC several years back)/act offended at every chapter meeting", etc.

We are all looking for high quality women who will work hard and make us proud of our organizations.

Again, not sure where we're ripping up the very fabric of our organizations and destroying decades of history by eliminating our legacy policies.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

This is extremely antecdotal and is missing the big picture. And who here is arguing that a chapter should take anyone and everyone?Again, not sure where we're ripping up the very fabric of our organizations and destroying decades of history by eliminating our legacy policies.

Haven't you seen articles online for years that scream that sororities are exclusive and must be made to take all interested women? They've been all over the place.

My story about the purple-haired girl is hardly anecdotal. Read "Weird Rush Stories" again. I bet that hardly a recruitment goes by at big schools where there aren't several women who do this kind of thing. There are many women who do things that aren't acceptable to the sororities at their campus and then scream unfair when they don't get a bid. Thinking here about a girl who pulled trains with men all over campus the summer before her freshman year and then went berserk (and so did her father) when she was cut from all 7 groups after first parties. Women like this want to break the rules and they don't care if they embarrass their GLOs, but they'll tell the world how wrong sororities are for not taking everyone.

I have written in this thread why I don't think the legacy policy is responsible for the lack of diversity and neither are recs...I won't write it again. Legacy policies and ripping up our fabric have nothing to do with each other. I think the timing of these organizations in announcing the new legacy policy is ridiculous. Not to mention, recruitment starts in a month and there are some very angry alums out there.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by carnation

Haven't you seen articles online for years that scream that sororities are exclusive and must be made to take all interested women? They've been all over the place.

Yes, I have. And I don't think eliminating the legacy policy is going to change this, nor does it force a chapter to "take everyone".

My story about the purple-haired girl is hardly anecdotal. Read "Weird Rush Stories" again. I bet that hardly a recruitment goes by at big schools where there aren't several women who do this kind of thing. There are many women who do things that aren't acceptable to the sororities at their campus and then scream unfair when they don't get a bid. Thinking here about a girl who pulled trains with men all over campus the summer before her freshman year and then went berserk (and so did her father) when she was cut from all 7 groups after first parties. Women like this want to break the rules and they don't care if they embarrass their GLOs, but they'll tell the world how wrong sororities are for not taking everyone.

I'm not sure how the legacy policy has anything to do with crazy potential new members. There will forever be "Weird Rush Stories", and they will be generated because of PNMs with different-colored hair and PNMs who are tall, skinny blondes. Crazy doesn't discriminate.

I have written in this thread why I don't think the legacy policy is responsible for the lack of diversity and neither are recs...I won't write it again. Legacy policies and ripping up our fabric have nothing to do with each other. I think the timing of these organizations in announcing the new legacy policy is ridiculous. Not to mention, recruitment starts in a month and there are some very angry alums out there.

When would have been a good time? At what time of year or under what circumstances do you think all alumnae would be happy?

[carnation]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Yes, I have. And I don't think eliminating the legacy policy is going to change this, nor does it force a chapter to "take everyone".

--I didn't say it did. Eliminating the legacy policy, like I said, does not = taking everyone.



I'm not sure how the legacy policy has anything to do with crazy potential new members. There will forever be "Weird Rush Stories", and they will be generated because of PNMs with different-colored hair and PNMs who are tall, skinny blondes. Crazy doesn't discriminate.

--It doesn't.



When would have been a good time? At what time of year or under what circumstances do you think all alumnae would be happy?

I think that these groups were trying to figure out when to dump it on their members--99.9% of whom were not given a say or a vote in this--and then voila! All this horrible stuff happened in this country and by eliminating the policy at this time, these groups could virtue signal!

[SWTXBelle]

My concern has been when percentages are bandied about - if 20% of a student population is a minority, that doesn't necessarily mean that 20% of NPC group members should/could be minority. We need to acknowledge that they may have options in NPHC and multi-cultural Greek organizations, while making sure that NPC groups are open to them as well.

I like Sen's idea of an across the board introduction to all groups for students. Even if they aren't interested in joining, it would be good for students to know about the other groups. I know that my alma mater has a kind of open house for freshmen, but it is all campus groups, not just Greeks. I will note that when I suggested including NPHC sororities in our sorority information session for Murray State we were politely refused by the NPHC groups. That was over 10 years ago, so certainly a great deal has changed.

[thetalady]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

This is extremely antecdotal and is missing the big picture. And who here is arguing that a chapter should be forced to take anyone and everyone?

Again, not sure where we're ripping up the very fabric of our organizations and destroying decades of history by eliminating our legacy policies.

But ripping up the legacy policies is just the start. This is just the very beginning of the dramatic changes to come and come quickly. Hold on to your seat. I think we will all be rather nonplussed by purple hair, when inclusion at ANY price becomes the goal of our organizations. And it is certainly coming.

[carnation]

Originally Posted by thetalady

But ripping up the legacy policies is just the start. This is just the very beginning of the dramatic changes to come and come quickly. Hold on to your seat. I think we will all be rather nonplussed by purple hair, when inclusion at ANY price becomes the goal of our organizations. And it is certainly coming.

What she said!

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by carnation

I think that these groups were trying to figure out when to dump it on their members--99.9% of whom were not given a say or a vote in this--and then voila! All this horrible stuff happened in this country and by eliminating the policy at this time, these groups could virtue signal!

And I'm sure that's why these alumnae are upset... because of all the virtue signaling...

Originally Posted by PersistentDST

I think the diversity conversation is very layered. There are more reasons than just having options.

It’s also about having an honest and deep look at current NPC membership. Is everyone ready for inclusiveness? Organizations can post about support for diversity and social justice all they want, but still have sisters wearing blackface on Snapchat or proudly attend a “Mexican” party, where actives are dresses as stereotypes. I’ve even seen troubling comments from alumnae in the past few weeks. Those things hurt the reputations of all of the NPC and damage the things you are working towards. As a POC PNM (or a parent), I may second guess participation in recruitment when these things happen yearly at different schools across the country. It’s not that we generalize, we know it’s not everyone, but no one wants to land in the system where it happens. No one wants to be down the hall from the “sisters” that smile in your face and then say the n-word on social media. No one wants to complain to their chapter leadership about micro-aggressions, only for nothing to be done about it. No one wants to be the token.

It’s not just about parents wanting their daughters in the NPHC because of culture and tradition, it’s also about safe spaces. Will they be supported and have a positive sorority experience in the NPC? I’d rather have my loved ones be GDI’s than potentially have them deal with discrimination.

At this point, the inclusiveness focus should really be on two groups:

1. The diverse actives and alumnae who fell in love with your sororities and may have some perspectives about what can be done for your membership, because they are your sisters. Before I would speak to anyone, I’d give them the opportunity to talk about their experiences and share ideas.
2. The diverse PNM’s who are committed to the recruitment process. The goal should be to see, understand and respect each persons differences (just say no to “colorblindness“), but to treat each PNM with the same kindness, consideration and expectations.

While I appreciate the concerns about poaching from the NPHC, it’s a non-issue for us. However, clear and present are the POC PNM’s on message boards asking if they should consider recruitment. Those are the young ladies that need the inclusion commitment from your organizations.

All of this. And quite frankly, when AST posted their "messages of inclusion" on Instagram, which read much like other NPC organizations' messages, there were a lot of members who demanded more. There were sisters who were flat out upset. It was disheartening to read at first, but I agree that more needs to be done to ensure our members and chapters are not only more inclusive, but aren't flat out racist. We can't just post a message of inclusion and think that's enough. We need to take action.

I attended a workshop a couple weeks ago which included both collegians and alumnae of all NPC organizations, and the first part of it was a question-and-answer portion where black women in the NPC were asked questions about their recruitment experiences. They provided answers for everyone to hear ahead of going into smaller breakout groups for more personal discussions. One of the women when asked, "What should chapters do to be more inclusive," answered: "Just like white women, we're not all the same. Make all women be seen and heard for who they are. But understand that black women are probably putting the most on the line by showing up for NPC recruitment." This really speaks to everything you said above, PersistentDST.

Originally Posted by PersistentDST

I think the NPC should also think about inclusion outside of recruitment activities. Perhaps chapters make a commitment to meeting, collaborating and supporting diverse organizations on their campus. Not a mandate...but a genuine commitment. Build trust with the campus community outside of the NPC/NIC. It’s about creating the culture. Once others see and feel that commitment, you may be surprised who approaches about joining. Sometimes it’s about learning to be comfortable in those spaces and meeting the diverse PNM’s where they are.

Another question asked in the workshop was: What were some of your fears entering recruitment? One woman made mention of glancing around during the first round of recruitment and realizing that no one else really looked like her. She believed she would have to work twice as hard as everyone else to receive a bid. Perhaps if she saw - even outside of an official recruitment event - the NPC sororities "mixing" with other more diverse organizations, that would have made that woman feel more comfortable. How many women of color out there didn't have that same level of confidence, even if minimal, to even try? How many walked away or thought NPC wasn't for them?

I'm sure the white NPC members here were already nervous and freaked out enough when they were a PNM. Add on that extra level of anxiety, panic, and feeling of being excluded and then wonder if you would have even tried, especially if you had no personal connection to any NPC.

Originally Posted by andthen

Its a long time in coming not only to perhaps alleviate a barrier but more and more people are attending colleges and by virtue of this become involved in greek life. As more and more individuals become members and then have kids of their own there is bound to be a proliferation of legacies, as compared to the early part of the 20th century where not a lot of women were attending college. Simply put regardless of the reason I just don't see the practice as sustainable long term.

Exactly this.

Yes when there is such a big shift there is going to be some who are all for it and those against it. But honestly groups need to evolve and really need to look within their own membership beyond those who have remained actively involved past college, what will help sustain and help these organizations. After college as some have noted there is a bit of attrition from NPC group members. Why? I feel as though this is the elephant in the room that no one wants to address. Even if your legacy decides to join your sisterhood still doesn't mean that mom/daughter will continue involvement with ABC after DD graduates. Even within my own geographic area outside of the alumnae group I'm involved with there are loads of sisters who live in the area and choose not to be involved? Again why? Often times when I am out volunteering somewhere I will often see NPHC members or even MCG's represented and they represent their organizations proudly. For whatever reason at least where I'm at this doesn't seem to be a big thing or as much of a priority.

All this to say I feel like groups should be seeking out members who really want to be involved and participate not just for their collegiate years but beyond. Look I understand that sometimes life happens to all of us as adults, illness, kids, aging parents etc. But at least from my vantage point there is a small yet vocal portion of the population that feel as though ending legacies will signal doom and gloom. But frankly and take it from someone who doesn't adapt well to change, we do need to evolve. We do need to at least crack the door open to provide opportunities to be more inclusive especially at the campus level.

For those of you who raised daughters sharing your experience with your sorority and the joys of it that is wonderful. And no one is diminishing that or telling you to not share those stories. But at the same time, your kids need to find their own path to which ever group suits them the best. So they might not share in the ABC sisterhood with you, but instead decide hey I'm more of an XYZ, that's still something to be celebrated because your child is exercising healthy independence.

This this this. We have much bigger fish to fry, and us NPC groups have struggled to make the 'Not just four years... but for life!' more than just a slogan. Where is the disconnect? Why do PNMs and members only value the collegiate experience and dismiss alumnae membership? There are now so many ways for sisters to stay involved after graduation, but there is a huge dropoff. What messaging are we not getting across? Are we pledging legacies simply because they're related to a sister and not because they're going to truly advance our organizations beyond a few years?

Originally Posted by thetalady

But ripping up the legacy policies is just the start. This is just the very beginning of the dramatic changes to come and come quickly. Hold on to your seat. I think we will all be rather nonplussed by purple hair, when inclusion at ANY price becomes the goal of our organizations. And it is certainly coming.

We'll cross that bridge when we come to it. All I know is that organizations have talked for years about getting rid of their legacy policies and something finally occurred to make them act. It always seems that NPC orgs won't make any huge, meaningful change until their backs are against the wall.

Question: can anyone tell me - outside of diversity or upset alumnae or doom and gloom and "the end of sororities as we know them" - what is the actual problem in getting rid of the legacy policies? Are they sustainable? As andthen mentioned above, at what point - if we're not already there - do so many women go to college and join sororities that we have too many legacies and the entire system gets watered down and becomes obsolete? When does it become - again, if it isn't already - too much of a burden on chapters to push through all of the legacies signing up for recruitment?