Fraternity Rush at Kansas

[Kedzman]

Originally Posted by RU OX Alum

winning awards from your inter/nationals doesn't mean anything, positive or negative

I'll wager Lee Iacoca would find value in winning National awards...

[Kedzman]

FSUfiji, crackerbarrel, elephant walk & Phigam -

You are all clearly in the same line of thinking. I am in a different camp. We'll just have to disagree on this one.

I am disappointed in your thinking because it's too easy and common. Most Greeks join for a lot of the wrong reasons - they just wanna party. They miss the point that all of our national organizations were founded 100+ years ago for virtuous and nobel reasons. Somewhere along the way, the culture changed, values changed and so did fraternities.

National organizations offer their top awards to high-achieving chapters that live out their founding principles. This takes a lot of hard work, dedication, delayed gratification, discipline, accountability & more. The fact that you don't value such awards or the organizations who earn them is an indictment on your character.

Throwing big parties and breaking the rules isn't unique or difficult. Rather, it is common and easy. Thus, you are members of common, lethargic organizations. You are like dinosaurs marching toward extinction and you don't even realize it. You laugh at hard work and embrace folly.

I guess we simply have different values.

[CrackerBarrel]

Originally Posted by Kedzman

Throwing big parties and breaking the rules isn't unique or difficult. Rather, it is common and easy. Thus, you are members of common, lethargic organizations. You are like dinosaurs marching toward extinction and you don't even realize it. You laugh at hard work and embrace folly.

No, we aren't. Even if you threw out the parties on our side and awards on yours, I would challenge that our chapters are still better than the others. The ideals which my fraternity was founded on weren't to include everyone or to make sure everyone felt welcome. It was to provide those with a common purpose a chance to have a brotherhood. You may argue that the "traditional" chapters are elitist and have lost sight of their purpose, but I think that's entirely untrue. Yes, we probably are somewhat elitist and very selective. So were our founders. No fraternity that I know of was founded and then went out to try to recruit as many men as possible. The purpose was to unite those who had a common purpose, and that role is best filled by the elite (or elitist, however you see it) chapters. When more value is placed upon how many members you can get, or how many philanthropies you won (again, no where does my fraternity's history mention community service hours) or how you do at intramurals or any of these other qualities that nationals gives awards for, I'm pretty sure it's your houses who have lost sight of the fraternity's purpose. The fraternities have decided to turn from what they used to be - a very effective (if somewhat elitist) training ground for future leaders - in an effort to be more politically correct. You gain a lot more in terms of character from a hard pledgeship, nationals looks down on it. You watch out for your house and keep brothers out of trouble by having a pledge driving program, nationals says it's hazing. You have a tighter brotherhood by having very strict standards before a bid is given, nationals thinks you're being discriminatory. National Fraternities have tried too much to keep up with the "changing times" and it's them that lost track of what a fraternity is.

[nate2512]

Damn I go to the office, come back, and I'm already too late.

[nate2512]

Because everyone aspiring to be a true Southern Fratty Gentleman longs for this:

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel

No, we aren't. Even if you threw out the parties on our side and awards on yours, I would challenge that our chapters are still better than the others. The ideals which my fraternity was founded on weren't to include everyone or to make sure everyone felt welcome. It was to provide those with a common purpose a chance to have a brotherhood. You may argue that the "traditional" chapters are elitist and have lost sight of their purpose, but I think that's entirely untrue. Yes, we probably are somewhat elitist and very selective. So were our founders. No fraternity that I know of was founded and then went out to try to recruit as many men as possible. The purpose was to unite those who had a common purpose, and that role is best filled by the elite (or elitist, however you see it) chapters. When more value is placed upon how many members you can get, or how many philanthropies you won (again, no where does my fraternity's history mention community service hours) or how you do at intramurals or any of these other qualities that nationals gives awards for, I'm pretty sure it's your houses who have lost sight of the fraternity's purpose. The fraternities have decided to turn from what they used to be - a very effective (if somewhat elitist) training ground for future leaders - in an effort to be more politically correct. You gain a lot more in terms of character from a hard pledgeship, nationals looks down on it. You watch out for your house and keep brothers out of trouble by having a pledge driving program, nationals says it's hazing. You have a tighter brotherhood by having very strict standards before a bid is given, nationals thinks you're being discriminatory. National Fraternities have tried too much to keep up with the "changing times" and it's them that lost track of what a fraternity is.

*standing ovation*

[FSUfiji]

Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel

No, we aren't. Even if you threw out the parties on our side and awards on yours, I would challenge that our chapters are still better than the others. The ideals which my fraternity was founded on weren't to include everyone or to make sure everyone felt welcome. It was to provide those with a common purpose a chance to have a brotherhood. You may argue that the "traditional" chapters are elitist and have lost sight of their purpose, but I think that's entirely untrue. Yes, we probably are somewhat elitist and very selective. So were our founders. No fraternity that I know of was founded and then went out to try to recruit as many men as possible. The purpose was to unite those who had a common purpose, and that role is best filled by the elite (or elitist, however you see it) chapters. When more value is placed upon how many members you can get, or how many philanthropies you won (again, no where does my fraternity's history mention community service hours) or how you do at intramurals or any of these other qualities that nationals gives awards for, I'm pretty sure it's your houses who have lost sight of the fraternity's purpose. The fraternities have decided to turn from what they used to be - a very effective (if somewhat elitist) training ground for future leaders - in an effort to be more politically correct. You gain a lot more in terms of character from a hard pledgeship, nationals looks down on it. You watch out for your house and keep brothers out of trouble by having a pledge driving program, nationals says it's hazing. You have a tighter brotherhood by having very strict standards before a bid is given, nationals thinks you're being discriminatory. National Fraternities have tried too much to keep up with the "changing times" and it's them that lost track of what a fraternity is.

damn some one give CB a national award or a trophy for this awesome ass post! couldnt have said it better **thumbs up**

[Kedzman]

The fraternities have decided to turn from what they used to be - a very effective (if somewhat elitist) training ground for future leaders - in an effort to be more politically correct. You gain a lot more in terms of character from a hard pledgeship, nationals looks down on it.

Fraternities are developing more leadership programs than ever before. In fact, many of those programs are designed to educate their members on how to facilitate leadership training and develop leadership attributes without putting them through "a hard pledgeship". You have a desire to develop leaders - so does Headquarters. Unfortunately, your idea of character development is humiliating people by hazing them. Preventing the humiliation of people is not being politically corrent - it's called treating people with dignity. Get a clue.


You watch out for your house and keep brothers out of trouble by having a pledge driving program, nationals says it's hazing.

The primary problem isn't that pledges are driving your drunk, underaged brothers around. The problem begins with the drunk underaged brothers. The fact that there are pledges driving them around is secondary, not primary. Trying to cover up risk management issues with a "pledge driving program" doesn't eliminate the risk management issue.

Poking holes in your logic is so easy it's silly. For some reason, you think you are the wise one - perhaps because you have some equally naive followers supporting the decades of bad traditions you have bought into.

[gtdxeric]

Originally Posted by CrackerBarrel

You watch out for your house and keep brothers out of trouble by having a pledge driving program, nationals says it's hazing.

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. If it's really about keeping brothers out of trouble, why not have a program where both brothers and pledges take a turn driving people around? This would ensure that you could keep the program going year round, not just in fall when you have lots of pledges.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by gtdxeric

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. If it's really about keeping brothers out of trouble, why not have a program where both brothers and pledges take a turn driving people around? This would ensure that you could keep the program going year round, not just in fall when you have lots of pledges.

I know a woman who used to be an advisor to her sorority had told the girls if they ever needed a ride to call her, and the national told her SHE wasn't even allowed to do so. The reasoning that was if a member - pledge, alum, or collegian - drove someone home, it put the liability burden on the sorority for anything that might happen.

I'm sure lots of chapters do have programs like this - because they care about their brothers'/sisters' safety - but sadly, they have to do it under the table.

[EE-BO]

Originally Posted by Kedzman

I am disappointed in your thinking because it's too easy and common. Most Greeks join for a lot of the wrong reasons - they just wanna party. They miss the point that all of our national organizations were founded 100+ years ago for virtuous and nobel reasons. Somewhere along the way, the culture changed, values changed and so did fraternities.

National organizations offer their top awards to high-achieving chapters that live out their founding principles. This takes a lot of hard work, dedication, delayed gratification, discipline, accountability & more. The fact that you don't value such awards or the organizations who earn them is an indictment on your character.

Throwing big parties and breaking the rules isn't unique or difficult. Rather, it is common and easy. Thus, you are members of common, lethargic organizations. You are like dinosaurs marching toward extinction and you don't even realize it. You laugh at hard work and embrace folly.

I will try to be polite here.

I strongly disagree with your first paragraph. We are talking about SOCIAL fraternities here. While it is absolutely true that founding fathers of fraternities put forth noble ideals to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood and create an organization greater than any individual member- the concept was always socially driven. And if you read up on your history you will find that partying and pranks etc. were a HUGE part of fraternity existence in the early days. Fraternities have been mistrusted and misunderstood from day 1 by a segment of the population and by many universities.

Big parties are just a reflection of what most people do when they are young- no matter what kind of organizations or friendships they have. When my parents and grandparents would have dinner parties or other events with fellow Army buddies- they retold great stories about the parties and the fun times. They did not sit around reading from the Officer's Code.

When I go to alumni parties, we talk about all the crazy stuff we did in school- we don't sit down and reread our pledge manuals.

Partying together is where the brotherhood comes from. It does not have to involve alcohol or drugs, though it often does. But again that is no different than any other group of people on this planet.

What is forcing some change right now are legal realities which affect other organizations besides fraternities. GLOs are not the only groups that routinely get sued when someone cannot control their own behavior and is seeking a scapegoat.

Now we do have to deal with that, but it does not mean that in dealing with it we are rejecting 100+ years of history and saying "that was all bad and this new way is all good." That is just salesmanship and spin- usually uttered by professional fundraisers seeking to raise tax free money for national fraternities. It has its place in the current financial environment for most fraternities, but it is not the 100% reality.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Kedzman

Most Greeks join for a lot of the wrong reasons - they just wanna party. They miss the point that all of our national organizations were founded 100+ years ago for virtuous and nobel reasons. Somewhere along the way, the culture changed, values changed and so did fraternities.

Brother, I hear what you're saying, but I don't agree 100%.

Back a few years ago, when I was just starting off in my own colony's existence, a long time alumnus who also happens to be very influential within our organization introduced me to the 'iron triangle,' or 3 B's of recruiting -- that being babes, bucks, and booze (not necessarily in that order). These things are key to how many very successful organizations operate today.

Later on, I attended our College of Chapters in 2001 (the first return to Lexington). There, HQ introduced the Values Based Recruitment program. I think that's what you're alluding to. VBR is great in that it involves somewhat of a paradigm shift in recruiting. No more do they want us to go after the guys who are going through Rush only to have a good time -- we want the guys who are after what we're after -- Brotherhood, Support and Friendship. We talk up things like our core values, the reason we were founded, etc.

I still think that the key to success lies somewhere between the old and the new. I think values based recruiting is wonderful, but at the same time, we shouldn't forget the social aspect of the organization, the old 3 B's. Both things are important. I'm not going to pretend to have some sort of cohesive philosophy about recruitment and what works. It never really was my forté. I just think that the truth is somewhere in between the old ways and the new way.. and I'll just leave it at that.

(my opinions are my own, and I do not speak for any other person or entity here)

[Kedzman]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Brother, I hear what you're saying, but I don't agree 100%.

Back a few years ago, when I was just starting off in my own colony's existence, a long time alumnus who also happens to be very influential within our organization introduced me to the 'iron triangle,' or 3 B's of recruiting -- that being babes, bucks, and booze (not necessarily in that order). These things are key to how many very successful organizations operate today.

Later on, I attended our College of Chapters in 2001 (the first return to Lexington). There, HQ introduced the Values Based Recruitment program. I think that's what you're alluding to. VBR is great in that it involves somewhat of a paradigm shift in recruiting. No more do they want us to go after the guys who are going through Rush only to have a good time -- we want the guys who are after what we're after -- Brotherhood, Support and Friendship. We talk up things like our core values, the reason we were founded, etc.

I still think that the key to success lies somewhere between the old and the new. I think values based recruiting is wonderful, but at the same time, we shouldn't forget the social aspect of the organization, the old 3 B's. Both things are important. I'm not going to pretend to have some sort of cohesive philosophy about recruitment and what works. It never really was my forté. I just think that the truth is somewhere in between the old ways and the new way.. and I'll just leave it at that.

(my opinions are my own, and I do not speak for any other person or entity here)

Brother,

I am disappointed to see you perpetuating "the Iron Triangle" or the "3-B's" of recruitment. Just because that alumnus is influential doesn't mean he is right. We are called to a higher standard than that.

I've been involved in Greek life since 1987 and seen a lot. The 1980's were indeed "the big '80's" where fraternities surged in numbers, in part, due to the popularity of movies like Animal House (1977) and others to come. Until about 1986 or so, there were no rules. Fraternity parties were wide open. As a result, there were many alcohol related deaths, property damage to our historic homes and injuries - and of course, law suits. Risk management rules imposed by National organizations were the result of unchecked liability. Law suits financially threatened the existence of our National organizations.

Risk management heated up in the 1990's. Huge numbers of chapters around the nation were shut down. Other chapter went by way of the dinosaur and were victims of their own actions. The mid to late 1990's on my campus were devastating. At our chapter, for example, I knew it was game over when I saw our "good kids" leaving and the knuckleheads staying. Parties and drugs were increasing. Chapter involvement, GPA and recruitment numbers were decreasing. That was the beginning of the end. You cannot recruit quality TO the organization if you do not have quality IN the organization. Alumni stepped in a quitely pulled the charter. Massive drug busts happened at Delta Upsilon and Sigma Chi in 1999 - two of our historically best chapters. There was a strong "anti-establishment" attitude in the mid to late 1990's influenced by the "grunge" culture with young people - kind of similar to the decline of Greek life in the early to mid 1970's.

In 2005 and beyond, it seems many organizations are becoming a lot more responsible. New groups like ours are starting out on the right foot. Other organizations are trying hard to turn the tide of the culture because of the risk and poor results they have gotten.

I'll challenge you to make a slight paradigm shift. Instead of leading with Beer, Babes and Bucks - try leading with all of the attributes a top fraternity offers by way of leadership development and personal growth. What will happen is the best of the best will be attracted to you. From that, the bucks will come from higher manpower. The Babes will beat a path to your door because quality women desire to be with quality men. The Beer is simply a constant on a college campus and within fraternity culture. Everyone knows it's there. You don't need to flaunt it or promote it. Pushing parties only hurts you - it cannot help you. What I mean is, a party-centric recruitment message can scare away top students who become concerned that they will not be able to be high-achievers if the culture is too party oriented. Conversely, the party-only guys will find a home at your fraternity and they may bring little else to your chapter and put you at risk.

Again, if you lead with personal development, the bucks and babes will follow. The beer will always be there.

[PhiGam]

Originally Posted by Kedzman

Brother,

I'll challenge you to make a slight paradigm shift. Instead of leading with Beer, Babes and Bucks - try leading with all of the attributes a top fraternity offers by way of leadership development and personal growth. What will happen is the best of the best will be attracted to you. From that, the bucks will come from higher manpower. The Babes will beat a path to your door because quality women desire to be with quality men. The Beer is simply a constant on a college campus and within fraternity culture. Everyone knows it's there. You don't need to flaunt it or promote it. Pushing parties only hurts you - it cannot help you. What I mean is, a party-centric recruitment message can scare away top students who become concerned that they will not be able to be high-achievers if the culture is too party oriented. Conversely, the party-only guys will find a home at your fraternity and they may bring little else to your chapter and put you at risk.

Again, if you lead with personal development, the bucks and babes will follow. The beer will always be there.

Nationals are supposed to say this kind of stuff, not actually mean it.

Wow, this thread sure got derailed.