Post by petehsiung on Nov 26, 2010 17:18:51 GMT -5
According to this so called glorified frat professor, Dr. Alan DeSantis from University of Kentucky ( which I have doubts about his view), here is how he views and describes the hierarchy from the book Greek U, on some typical campus ( or he calls it animously GU) that has a strong greek system. I would definitely take what he thinks with a grain of salt since in my opinion, he seems biased and it does not apply to every chapter nor college on campus as they all vary in terms of strength and what they do. Also I really don't completely agree as perhaps it would mostly apply to his campus he teaches as well as southern part of United states.
Elite chapters: " The elite organizations were GU's first tier greek organizations. They were wealthy, well established, influential, popular, and large, and their members lived in a fraternity and sorority house. They wielded a disproportionate influence on campus, were unanimously recognized by the greek community and university officials as GU's top greek organizations and had produced the wealthiest, most influential alumni. They were also the most homogenous groups, composed of attractive middle to upper class, popular, white, christian, heterosexual men and women who behaved in traditional masculine and feminine ways"
In other words, these top tier or the top few or maybe 3 to 5 are like basically very rich yet also more conservative and less tolerant of deviance in their behavior and pattern of thinking. Typical of american's middle to upper class. Also seems reflective of the american aristocracy or oligarchy.
Aspirer chapters: "the aspirers organization were GU's second-tier greek organizations. They were not as wealthy, selective or influential as the elites and membership in them was not coveted. Their ranks were often filled with students who missed the "elite" cut but still want to experience greek life. Consequently membership was slightly more diverse yet likely to behave more androgynously , which means different from others. Its important to remember that they accepted these "differences" , even though they aspire for elite status, but because they were forced to , by university imposed quotas, and their own financial exigences to be less selective when recruiting".
Although they hope to be at the top of the food chain as they compete against each other for resources and stuff, they at least are more accepting of differences of who they are.
Struggler chapters: "These greek pariahs were significantly smaller, did not participate in collective greek activities, did not own/lease/ rent a communal living space, were much newer ( less then a decade old) , were far less influential and visible on campus and had virtually no alumni support. Their members were too ethnic, too heavy, too unattractive, too unpopular, too uninvolved, too uncool to receive bids from aspirers or elites."
Keep in mind, these kind of chapters vary from campus to campus ( which as I have found out for example, sigma nu at Oklahoma state under his definition would be considered "elite" while on others, it may not be. )
Based on his presumption from the book GreekU, what are your takes?
Elite chapters: " The elite organizations were GU's first tier greek organizations. They were wealthy, well established, influential, popular, and large, and their members lived in a fraternity and sorority house. They wielded a disproportionate influence on campus, were unanimously recognized by the greek community and university officials as GU's top greek organizations and had produced the wealthiest, most influential alumni. They were also the most homogenous groups, composed of attractive middle to upper class, popular, white, christian, heterosexual men and women who behaved in traditional masculine and feminine ways"
In other words, these top tier or the top few or maybe 3 to 5 are like basically very rich yet also more conservative and less tolerant of deviance in their behavior and pattern of thinking. Typical of american's middle to upper class. Also seems reflective of the american aristocracy or oligarchy.
Aspirer chapters: "the aspirers organization were GU's second-tier greek organizations. They were not as wealthy, selective or influential as the elites and membership in them was not coveted. Their ranks were often filled with students who missed the "elite" cut but still want to experience greek life. Consequently membership was slightly more diverse yet likely to behave more androgynously , which means different from others. Its important to remember that they accepted these "differences" , even though they aspire for elite status, but because they were forced to , by university imposed quotas, and their own financial exigences to be less selective when recruiting".
Although they hope to be at the top of the food chain as they compete against each other for resources and stuff, they at least are more accepting of differences of who they are.
Struggler chapters: "These greek pariahs were significantly smaller, did not participate in collective greek activities, did not own/lease/ rent a communal living space, were much newer ( less then a decade old) , were far less influential and visible on campus and had virtually no alumni support. Their members were too ethnic, too heavy, too unattractive, too unpopular, too uninvolved, too uncool to receive bids from aspirers or elites."
Keep in mind, these kind of chapters vary from campus to campus ( which as I have found out for example, sigma nu at Oklahoma state under his definition would be considered "elite" while on others, it may not be. )
Based on his presumption from the book GreekU, what are your takes?
