Opinion
Rush process perpetuates cycle of exclusivity in Greek life
By Lo Sniderman ’19
February 9, 2017
Tags opinion
The first day of Hamilton’s spring semester, rush begins. This initial step of joining a Greek society can be an exciting sampling period for first-years as they make their way through events hosted by the various societies to discover where they fit best. At the same time, the rush process inadvertently excludes entire demographics of students as Greek societies are—however unstated this may be—predicated on gender and socioeconomic division. Why, then, despite our left-leaning campus community that promotes itself as being committed to diversity and inclusion, is Greek life so prevalent at Hamilton?
It is because even attending one of the country’s most prestigious institutions cannot quench the insatiable human thirst for exclusivity? Achieving membership in a Greek society permits students entry into the most exclusive enclave of university life. This entry is not evaluated on athletic ability or academic achievement, but rather on social skills, relative popularity and all too often on one’s ability to fit certain societal and gender norms.
Before I continue, it is important to acknowledge that I myself am a member of a Greek society and frankly, I love my sorority wholeheartedly. The few weeks after my initiation were some of my best at Hamilton; I found myself surrounded by an unwavering support system of women who share my interests, who bring me to tears each day with gut-wrenching laughter, and with whom I share an inexplicable bond. After a freshman year full of friendships that fell through and doubts about my ability to integrate into the campus community, Greek life is what let me find my footing at Hamilton. My newfound happiness about being a Continental is reflected not only in my social life, but also in my academic and extracurricular inclination. With that being said, I still find it impossible to deny the exclusivity fostered by Greek life which, because of my privilege, I am able to circumvent.
The first two steps of joining a Greek society—rush and the bid process—subject rushes to the arbitrary exclusivity that makes some students the “right fit” while leaving others to wonder where they went wrong. This exclusive nature of Greek life is not only reinforced by the ruling out of stu- dents that do decide to rush, but also by the population of students who might want to rush a sorority or fraternity but feel barred by the lack of racial, socioeconomic, and gender identity diversity.
Obviously no Greek society explicitly states criteria that might prevent a student’s acceptance. When, however, someone who is already marginalized on a predominantly white, straight, upper-class campus finds his or her- self in the small dominion where these traits most distinctly converge, a painful self-awareness becomes unavoidable.
This understandable reluctance of diverse demographics of students to participate in rush only perpetuates the cycle of conformity within Greek societies. Those who have been chosen pick the next students who will con- tinue the legacy of white, rich, heteronormative predominance, and the only chance at diversification will come when Greek societies specifically target the campus’s minority communities instead of waiting for students to autonomously join the rush process.
Members might argue that the last thing that Greek members want is an even bigger pool of rushes to choose from. With the removal of off-campus housing and Hamilton’s increasingly paternalistic alcohol policies, exclusive social organizations seem to be increasing in influence and popularity. The number of freshman girls rushing sororities, for example, has jumped from around 80 to well over 100 this year, reflecting students’ longing to substitute the scene of chaperoned all-campus parties with offcampus entertainment like bar-hopping and formals. Having to make cuts is, for many societies, already a very difficult process as it sometimes severs the connections made between members and freshman rushes, so recruiting a still larger group of freshman to join the rush process becomes a daunting task that inadvertently falls low on societies’ list of priorities. This logic, I think, is absurd.
This same argument might be made for prestigious universities that consecutively admit alarmingly heterogeneous bodies of students, and accepting this logic as valid does nothing besides rob the university of any potential for cultural diversity and perpetuate exclusivity. The entire appeal of Greek life has to do with its exclusivity, with the sense of belonging to a community that shares your interests and culture. By making legitimate outreach efforts to our campus’s marginalized communities, Greek societies would simultaneously create the opportunity to enrich the culture of their pledge classes and widen the scope of campus members that feel welcomed into Greek life. A simple first step might be the addition of a diversity committee to the various committees that already exist on the boards of greek societies (many of which—might I say—serve laughably trivial purposes). This diversity committee could work towards reducing the demographic rift within Greek life through targeted communication toward campus groups that might never consider Greek life due to its woeful lack of diversity.
A diversity committee would not, by any means, be enough to spark a meaningful shift in the uniformity of the members of Greek life, but could be a start. I know that I speak for the majority of Greek members when I say that the Greek experience has drastically changed my Hamilton experience for the better, and the unparalleled sense of community and support I’ve found within my Greek society should not be reserved for the one demographic that’s enjoyed, well, pretty much every other privilege in history.