DePauw University president Robert G. Bottoms severed ties with the Delta Zeta sorority after a 98-year association. Turnabout is fair play. DZ tarnished DePauw’s reputation by casting off members who didn’t fit the sorority girl stereotype. Now, DeP…

Part of my reasons for feeling this was important was because of my experiences with a prominent African-American sorority. I have an older first cousin who was an alumna of a chapter on the campus of a college I was seriously considering.

When I applied to college I was going through this process with another first cousin Liz who was the same age. We were inseparable growing up and were hoping to attend college and possibly pledge together. Although we both applied to several colleges we only applied to three in common. We visited those three college campuses together. The problems came when our cousin met us for one of the visits. She was excited about going with us to a function at her former sorority but she stressed how difficult it would be for both of us to pledge. We thought she was trying to be supportive and missed the implications of what she was saying she seemed to be coaching us on what to say and trying to give us insights into what her sorority would be looking for in a potential pledge.

After the social event we understood what she was trying to say covertly. I personally was stunned. I was not prepared to be judged on how I looked, how dark I was, what my parents did for a living, my views on men with respect to serving and helping the affiliated fraternity men by providing a social outlet and support. I agree with littlem a lot of the focus is on what you are willing to do to for fraternity members.

One other issue I have not seen discussed is how some sororities expect members to be academically dishonest and do work for affiliated fraternity members. The “support” the sorority members we interacted with described was often academic. My cousin and a couple of her friends (also alumnae) were talking about this how they “tutored” fraternity members. Although the word “tutoring” was used they actually described doing assignments for the frat guys and actually bragged about how writing papers for frat guys improved their writing skills and how it showed how loyal they were to the fraternity they were affiliated with. Sadly they even discussed a frat member who they suspected was barley literate and how they helped him get through college. From their discussions the “social outlet” duties could include dating and I suspect sleeping with fraternity members although no one said openly that sex was expectation of membership but a couple of people hinted at it which was disturbing. One person actually told us that one of us had virtually no chance of being admitted because “you are too chocolate” this really is what changed my opinion about the idea of pledging.

I decided to attend a small college that did not allow fraternities or sororities on campus it was the best decision I ever made. My cousin went to a larger college with a large greek system and successfully pledged and she was very happy with her choice. The main difference I see is that I have a more diverse group of friends from all socio-economic classes, at least 9 countries, and every region of the U.S. In contrast all of my cousin’s friends are from her sorority and they are all from very similar backgrounds they all from the US, same race and class. College for me was an experience that meant exposure to many cultures and groups she was granted membership to an exclusive and extremely homogeneous group.

As a woman of color and sorority woman, and IU graduate, for the time being I’m going to sidestep the NPC/NPHC color issue that B raised — except to note that the fact that she drew the analogy between white and non-white sororities and white and non-white feminism, and then went on to just conclude that NO ONE considers the points she raised when discussing “GLO elitism” just tells me we still have a loooooong way to go in generating awareness of everyone’s issues.

(B, all I really have to say about that without sounding unduly contentious is that you don’t know if someone’s thought about it unless you’ve asked them — and I’m referring specifically to people who don’t necessarily share your ethnic background. Because I’ve certainly thought about it, and I’m sure I’m not the only one.)

I am, I guess, about to throw a bomb in this neat, tidy, civilized discussion because once again, a central issue in the brouhaha appears to have been neatly sidestepped. Especially on a feminist blog that deals - usually - with “lookism”.

A commenter on another blog “the sexism and looks-ism of gender conformity expectations played some part in the entire ugly affair, to the extent it plays a role in supporting the greek affiliation social structure.”

Let’s discuss the characterization of the sorority on campus as the “Delta Dogs” and the “least desirable” sorority on campus to pledge because the majority of the members did not, in another member’s words, “please the fraternity men.”

Let’s discuss the culture on campus that apparently actively promoted the supposition that “thin, white, blonde, and not demonstrably smart” are the only way to be “desirable”.

Let’s focus on the fact that “desirability” according to these standards, pleasing men with these standards and being punished by the patriarchal apologist women who held national office with the sorority, was apparently the ONLY way to be a “socially successful female” on a campus that’s 80% Greek.

I’ve noticed a lot of discussion about the appalling behavior of the women at Nationals. And I’m in full agreement that it was appalling — however rewarding one’s Greek experience in another chapter, on another campus, whatever.

However, what I think I’m getting at is the interesting concomitant reluctance to discuss the “standards” of the fraternity “men” that ENABLED such behavior — or at minimum, has silenced discussion on the topic.

According to various reports from members suffering through the various stages of reorganization (and in particularly from one of the “conventionally pretty” women that left in solidarity with the 23), it was all “you have to lose weight, you have to party more, you have to wear more makeup, you have to be more sexually appealing to men, you have to do whatever you have to do to PLEASE THE GUYS.”

And no, I don’t have a problem being encouraged to be social and appealing (although some women might, and that’s another issue). I have a problem when “being sexually appealing” is forced on me - or on anyone - and characterized as the first or only trait that determines my acceptability in society, and anything else that I have to contribute is immaterial and irrelevant — or pushed down so low as a comparative priority that it might as well be.

That’s apparently the DZ National patriarchal apologist party line, and it seems to me to be the very center of sexism. That party line, IMO, was espoused in direct response to the pressure that Nationals has ostensibly felt for 100 years to please men at all times as the foundation of the organization’s existence.

And Nationals, who responded to the pressure, abhorrent as their actions were, is getting ALL the blame. The cultural pressure to which they were responding?

No one who has blogged about the issue is even addressing it.

Let me echo B: what I love about ritual and tradition is the way they’ve been passed down since 1898. They’re not about telling other girls they’re ugly or not good enough, but about sisterly love and support. I know how trite that sounds–40 strangers do not become sisters overnight. Maybe I could have could have found friends this awesome without Sigma, but I still love these girls, and I love writing to them in purple pen. I loved pinning my Sigma little with my own badge. Little things like that.

My point in all this is that it’s not about who’s skinnier or blonder or wears better shoes. It’s about treating people right, and learning from each other.

But that’s as close to Greek life as I ever got. My college didn’t have any frats or sororities, and I’ve never been a group-oriented person.

And none of it has been positive.

The Frat boys are loud and obnoxious, with music that bothers the dorms late into the night. We’ve had more than our share of “don’t go to that house, unless you want to get raped”.

The sorority girls I’ve had the misfortune of having to work with on group projects have been more interested in talking amongst themselves than the work at question, and always have a “meeting” to go to on why they can’t work on their project. When the actual project rolled around, they seem to put more effort into their appearance than the powerpoint.

They claim that they do community service, but I don’t see it. It just seems like they host a lot of parties and then donate the door to charity.

We have a few Greek societies that have no houses, and they seem okay. But some combination of entitlement, alchol, and a house make the rest of them annoying as all hell, and a detraction from the school.

For decades, sororities were no less diverse than the female student body; until the latter part of the twentieth century, that meant that sororities were overwhelmingly white and middle to upper-middle class.

I don’t think this is true, fwiw. White sororities systematically excluded Jews and, on integrated campuses, African-Americans. It’s not just that sororities were non-diverse because colleges were non-diverse. Sororities *were* less diverse than the surrounding campuses.

I don’t really have strong feelings about sororities. They were there at my undergrad institution, but they weren’t that important. They didn’t have any more power than the radio station or the Korean students’ union. Their housing wasn’t superior to that available to other people. They were just a thing you could do if you were so inclined. I wasn’t, and that was fine. I didn’t have any desire to pledge, but sorority life didn’t strike me as any odder than the Society for Creative Anachronism or the marching band or a lot of other things that seemed to consume some of my classmates’ lives. So no big deal.

Where it does, I think, become a big deal is on campuses that are really Greek dominated. If frats and sororities cease to be merely one extracurricular choice among many and become the way that campus social life is organized, that’s a problem. It’s a problem if there’s stigma attached to being outside the Greek system. It’s a problem if the powers that be on campus are so beholden to the Greeks and to Greek alumni that they let frats and sororities get away with stuff that they don’t let other people do. Otherwise, I consider this pretty much a different strokes for different folks type situation.

Not in this thread, but in real life when people find out I’m a sorority alum?

Out of curiosity, what traditions? And, if you can speak to the issue, what sorts of secrets and rituals?

I share Marian’s sentiments, so I’ll answer your questions as well. As far as traditions, my sorority’s founding members were the only five women at their New England college in 1874. One of them was even valedictorian of her graduating class, and yet she wasn’t permitted to have the title since she was a woman. Academic achievement was one of the most important values to these women, and it always pushed me through the day a little bit when I’d stop and remember their stories. Also, the fact that those five women created our rituals and traditions that long ago and we still hold onto them faithfully gives an extraordinary sense of history and pride at what a bunch of women in their late teens/early 20s can preserve.

The secrets and rituals, which I can’t name specifically, build on that and are special because our Founders chose them as guiding principles and examples of their values. When people ask me if we do anything scandalous, I always smile and ask them if they can really picture a bunch of college Christian women in the late 1800s drinking goat’s blood or something like that. Everything they created for us is beautiful and meaningful.