why/how do alumnae have so much control?

I understand your chapters are huge but your houses are comparable to houses at many SEC schools. If a smaller number of members can fund and run a house at other schools with only limited alumna input it can be done at Ole Miss as well.

When our presidents and vp's and executive boards and recruitment teams are all legacies who's moms attended ole miss it's not so easy to get rid of the alumni. It's very political! Non-legacies get no say so, whatsoever! Seriously, I wouldn't be on this site complaining if my chapter allowed me the opportunity to voice my opinions.

We vote on new members, officer positions, membership terminations, even house mom; then turn around and find out that our votes didn't really count after all. The alumni controlled executive committee does whatever they like.

@Lol I get it. Y'all are up against more than I realized.

I agree - it's annoying.

We make this big fuss about choosing the right kind of girl to be in our house - well spoken, academically successful, socially connected, strong reputations, school leaders, well-mannered and honestly, women who we believe exhibit maturity and good judgement. But then we don't allow them the responsibility of running their own houses, selecting their own pledge classes, choosing their own exec board?

I personally think we are a bit hypocritical in that way - alumnae are supposed to advise. Not control. But it just doesn't play out as logically as that. To be fair, few things in life do.

I personally think it would be really interesting to see what would happen if a house was allowed to "ditch" the alumnae factor for a full year. I think the alumnae assume it would fall apart. The reality is, the chapters, would do just fine. We are talking about college women, not 14 year olds.

But that's just my opinion and I know it's an unpopular one, so bring on the horrified responses I suppose.

How many alumnae are directly involved in the chapter? Consider that a chapter needs a chapter advisor, a rush advisor, an operations advisor, a financial advisor, and maybe a house corporation board if they aren't a part of their national's house corporation. How does this compare to what's in place now?

I think is was said before, but I'll say it again. We love and respect our alumni. We are thankful for all they do for us.

We just wish they would allow us some say so in the running of our sororities. Legacies are not the only ones who would make great presidents and vp's and executive boards. Non legacy members would make a great part of the recruitment team.

That's true. But not for most.

Probably not the adpi and certainly not for aphi.

I believe it. My guess is the chapters with less in state members and less in state alumni support can operate relatively free of alumna control: AOPi, Pi Phi, Theta, and possibly Kappa and Phi Mu. DG alumna control everything in all large DG chapters and there's no doubt KD, Tri Delt, and Chi O is run by their alumna.

There are drawbacks and positives to having alumni controlled houses. In the alumni controlled houses, there is more support. The sororities run a little more smoothly, there is less drama and fight for control. When we need something, we ask our alumni, and if our request is good, we usually get what we want. Their support also means greater budgets, better parties, more treats, etc.

Membership selection is a toss up. We don't internally fight over which girls receive bids, that is controlled by alumni & rush committees. We can however approach our alumni (especially those who pushed for us to get bids), and give them our lists of girls we want, and they write recs & support those girls. They do their homework on girls so we know girls that receive bids are great girls. (Exceptions are chapter legacies, but that's a whole other discussion)

Officer selections are usually a joke in alumni controlled houses. We say what positions we are interested in, we hold a farce of an election, the nomination committee comes in and slates girls into positions (they didn't run for and don't necessarily want), and we are forced to approve the slate or lose social functions. This is the only drawback I see in alumni controlled houses.