panhel

Please name the non-affiliated, and their greek-letter chapters.

(not that greekrank is the best source of real information, but this could be a starting point)

Not sure the statement that having 'non panhel' members is a non issue is entirely true or that I agree. Just because panhel approved the inclusion of non affiliated sorority members doesn't necessarily make it right or good for our panhel. We have a panhel organization comprised of national organizations. Having a non affiliated member in a group comprised of national organizations doesn't seem to make much sense given the purpose of panhel. I understand why this change was approved/slipped in but why was there no broader discussion? It seems to me that non affiliated organizations have their own group and as such should not be on our panhel.

I thought they had new elections in November? So they don't have office anymore.

That's not true. All 12 Panhellenic chapters voted to let the AOPi women finish out their terms, which I personally supported, btw. I was a Recruitment Counselor who worked with the women in question, and they both worked really hard and filled vital roles that would have been irresponsible to leave empty for an entire semester. However, National Panhellenic Council forced the removal of these women from their positions even though the campus community felt it appropriate to let the women finish the duties to which they had been elected. So please stop spreading misinformation, and besides, why does it matter so much?

Policing activity and comments means asking for removal of posts. Never did it, never will. Conversation still flowing.

Liz: Did you take my previous suggestion and contact the National Panhellenic Conference Area Advisors? How did they help/hurt your panhellenic cause? Did the NPC Area Advisors tell you to sit down and shut up (doubtful, but you do sound angry).

I can only guess from your tone,but do you represent, or are you promoting the idea of, a group of Cal women who are working toward a new non-NPC group for Cal's campus out of the old AOPi chapter? Will Cal's panhell not work with you to make the non-NPC chapter you and/or they want a reality? Is this why you are mad at both Cal's panhell and NPC?

If you are not in that type of group, you must remember monetary costs associated with any new NPC coming to your campus will be very high. Can women desiring to go thru Cal's recruitment in Fall 2017 take-on that type of cost?

There may also be NO NPC group desiring to come to your campus (although I doubt that, it had to be said). So far at Cal there has only been ONE recruitment period with overwhelming numbers of women joining (Fall 2016). Many NPC groups will want to see continued recruitment growth over a longer time frame.

I understand Cal's Fall 2016 PNMs feel they were sometimes treated in a not-too-friendly manner by sorority members at Cal's houses. PNMs need to know some of the sorority women they meet are rushing, as initiated members, for the very first time and they are just as nervous and scared of the process. As to wonderful young PNM women having bad tastes in their mouths due to a lousy rush experience, bid day recruitment results can happen when a PNM chooses to overlook her mistreatment and ONLY look at the houses that want her and treat her with respect!

Griping PNMs say top houses make PNMs feel unwanted due to the large number of PNMs not being invited to specific formal parties. You need to know the top sororities are required by National Panhellenic Conference recruitment rules to disinvite the largest percentage of PNMs from their formal parties due to the fact they are very popular PNM choices when ranked throughout rush. That rule was formulated and agreed upon at the national level by all 26 national sorority groups. While it is unfortunate some PNMs are dissatisfied with the official way recruitment invitations work, they must accept it so the top 4-5 Cal houses don't have 100 pledges each while less popular homes acquire 25-30 pledges each during the same rush period.

okay so tell me why we have to accept status quo and why any house that wants 100 pledges can't? if they changed rules once change them again lets get REAL people lots of prestige women are being OVERLOOKED because they want top houses that should be able to TAKE them! if they qualify its their right to choose and also their right to belong.

Oh, with age comes wisdom I truly don't know sometimes where to even begin to respond to your postings. Tonight though I think I will respond to your theory that the reason so many PNMs experienced rudeness, feeling uncomfortable or otherwise dismissed is because the sisters they were speaking with were doing recruitment for the first time and were themselves nervous etc. I am not sure you are actually serious or just playing with us? How about houses take responsibility for how PNMs coming through their houses are treated? If a sister cannot or will not be civil then she should not be at an event. If the issue is pervasive at the house then have training sessions on how to treat people so they don't feel dismissed, disinterested or invisible as were all widely reported last fall. I don't know why Cal can't do what other schools do which is to have feedback cards to each house visited so these issues can be identified and dealt with in a timely fashion. Nobody should encounter rudeness or be dismissed but those sentiments were shared about 2 houses in particular on an almost daily basis this fall. Did these houses heed the informal feedback? Nope, they just denied it and chalked it up to sour grapes. The treatment of PNMs by any single house reflects on the ENTIRE system and this fall I thought we had too many issues on this front to say that its not an issue. Houses need to take RESPONSIBILITY for how they treat each other and PNMs. The entire situation is pathetic

Some life lessons I have learned:

1) The true reflection from sorority members that most women will not become a member of their particular sorority should not be cause for alarmist thumb-sucking and complaints by college-age women. In a real and future life some people will refuse to give others the time of day. Be glad of the opportunity to experience mind-blowing rejection while one is young. Learn from it. The meanies are teaching you a valuable lesson.

2) Each sorority makes individual recruitment decisions and acts accordingly.

3) Strong women need to look BEYOND those sororities who make them feel like crying and join houses they deem upright and ethical instead of dropping from recruitment. The houses that make pnms feel angry and depressed will still make quota because some women fancy a value in joining them, but the confident pnms will join and know houses of greater integrity.

4) The world functions with a balance of both good things and bad. So does the fraternal system. If you want the fraternal system to be balanced join it and keep your sisters working toward only the good, the true, and the beautiful.

A campus panhellenic is REQUIRED on all campuses having 2 or more NPC sororities (Cal has twelve) by the National Panhellenic Conference (NPC). NPC voluntarily works for the good of all 26 of its member groups and by so doing, the good of collegiate and alumnae women who are its lifeblood.

NPC is over 100 years strong and can bring help and guidance to lost panhellenics. If Cal's complainers are interested enough to inquire their address is in Indiana look it up.

Should the Cal Berkeley administration immediately do away with panhellenic without consulting NPC (which the administration will not as it knows better and there is no need) the NPC would strongly object.

What would replace it? Maybe just get rid of all the sororities? THAT would solve a lot of the complaints being made on this site.

To @NPC. I'm curious what value add you see from panhel here at Cal? Based on watching it now for 2 years it seems like it only awakens during fall recruitment and then goes into hibernation mode. My friends at other schools report much more activity and forward planning from their panhel leadership vs anything I've seen here. Do you think that the issue is that our panhel doesn't think its mandate is to have a leadership role on campus or for our community? I'm truly baffled.

According to the newly updated Cal Panhel web pages, their Fall 17 head recruitment counselor is serving her second term on exec board. She's planning NOW for the recruitment six months from now. She already has a perspective on what occurred rightly and wrongly during Fall 16 recruitment.

Recruitment Counselor applications are available and should be turned in/completed by February 24th.

Take time to read the new Cal Panhel pages, it seems they want to improve and are including the Cal community in the discussion.

@NPC. The proof of a commitment to making sure PNMs are treated with dignity, courtesy and respect will be seen only after fall recruitment. I do however question having someone in charge in 2017 that was affiliated with with the 2016 situation. The fish always stinks from the head especially in highly bureaucratic organizations such as ours so I think we need someone new and untainted. I will volunteer for the recruitment counselor role as its important and frankly I we needed many more of these people than we had in 2016. I hope more people volunteer too so we can hopefully do a much better job in 2017. We all deserve better than what was delivered in 2016.

NPC is relevant because its the only organization we have to work with. So, we need to fix it as based on its performance its totally dysfunctional.