Who Has Removed Preferential Treatment for Legacies?

[Theta1234]

Over this last year, DD and I have had many discussions on the issue of legacy. Each of us are involved with two different chapters and it was interesting to see how the two chapters interpreted Theta's previous policy.

DD was completely in favor of adjusting the policy--but not eliminating all "perks" of legacy. She talked about the division that occurred in her new member class between the legacies and non-legacies. It broke my heart to hear that some of the ladies felt "less-than" for not being legacies.

She brought up some very valid points that I felt needed further exploration. If that discussion had been brought to the membership--or at least chapter leadership (advisors, officers, etc.) I think the ultimate decision would have been fully embraced--and perhaps the solution would look a little different that the current one. At the same time, with the way the decision was made--by just the Grand Council--it might just as easily be adjusted in the future.

I recognize there was a problem felt at some schools. With the vast expansion of chapters and the rise of "mega" chapters, at some schools, the number of legacies was simply overwhelming. The actives want to have complete control over who their sisters might be--just as we did--and the removal of special treatment for legacies gives the actives more control. I do wonder if this wasn't more of a control issue than an inclusion issue. Several of the chapters that I am familiar with look NOTHING like the Hollywood interpretation of a sorority.

I must admit, I was a bit heart-broken when I read the decision--especially the removal of a minimum GPA (if that part isn't public, please PM me and I will remove that comment.). The Mr--in his typical cheeky self--turned to me and sang one of our old college "songs." He sang, "Theta born, Theta bred..." He then offered a sage observation:

"Our daughter has three besties in her chapter. They could all be her twins. They all share the same values and same heart for other people. Their mommas all happen to be Thetas as well. If you really believe everything you spout--about how the values Theta permeate everything you do--don't you think that rubs off on others? Don't you think that actives would recognize those values in PNMS and they will rise to the top--with or without any extra help?"

(Ok, so he didn't get the whole actives and PNM terminology exactly like this, but bear with me.).

There was a lot of truth in that and at the same time it addressed the very issue at hand--are groups made stronger when they hold shared values or are they stronger when they embrace diverse values? At my heart, I can't dream of a world where scholarship, leadership personal excellence and a heart for humanity are not shared values. We may have differing personal experiences and paths that we follow to uphold those values, but in the end, doesn't there need to be some common ground to hold a group together and help guide its direction? These were all the things we discussed this last week.

Anyway, I'm firmly torn on this issue. It will be a very different recruitment this fall and it will be very interesting to see how things play out over the next few years. DD has observed that you will have two PNM classes that really don't know "how to recruit." I wonder if that isn't a bad thing. Perhaps these new classes will come up with different ways that reflect current values and not tradition. Will door stacks and bouncing be replaced by...?

After discussing this ad nauseam, the Mr asked if we could stop talking about "the whole sorority thing" and get back to listening to Hamilton on our Great American Road Trip. I think he actually sang that request as well.