[Mick]

Iin 1977 chose Stanford.  At that time I found the whole idea of exclusive clubs of any kind revolting--and especially so clubs that had a reputation for being all-white, wealthy, and filled with kids who saw college primarily as a place to network.  As a grad student I had the same reaction to Princeton's eating clubs.  They were much worse, though, given that virtually everyone who was a member was white, and nearly all the employees were Black.  The one time I was invited to attend dinner I was appalled.  Rich white kids in designer clothes bossing around poor black waiters and maids.  And the "clubs" were in mansions that looked like Tara.  It was a little bit of antebellum America.)  Perhaps my perception of fraternities  was unjust, but that is what I thought at the time.  I convinced myself that Stanford was more egalitarian than the Ivies--there was some evidence to think so, given that it refused to give preference to legacies, it had the best middle-class financial aid, and it had a very small Greek system that was kept on a short leash.  (My future wife actually lived in the Delt house--the year after the Delts were kicked off campus and their house confiscated and turned back into general use.)  So Stanford's lack of a Greek system was a real attraction to me--and I know other students who felt the same way. 

Your comments on Princeton's eating clubs are interesting.  It's changed a smidge in the 35+/- years since your experience.  There are 11 clubs with differing degrees of exclusiveness.  Five are sign in--you sign up and you're in.  As for the waiters you reference, only one club has ever had them, the other ten dine cafeteria-style.  As for the antebellum nature of the mansions, well...one of them has the architectural style of the antebellum south, the other ten do not.  And since each has over 100 members, well, they're going to be large structures, since they have large common dining areas.  And all of them have been co-ed for at least 25 years, unlike fraternities and sororities, which -- by definition -- are not.  And 3/4 of Princeton undergraduate juniors and seniors (the only classes eligible for membership) are members of the eating clubs.  I don't think 75% of the student body constitutes horrible exclusion.  And unlike fraternities, very few members -- just the officers -- actually live in the buildings.  Most live in dorms.

Anyway, one of my sons was in Tiger Inn, the other was in Ivy.  Why those elitist institutions accepted a couple of middle-class Catholic kids, I'll never know.

And let's face it, if you're in at Princeton or Harvard or Stanford...you're already a member of an exclusive club, revolting or not.

[Mick]

Iin 1977 chose Stanford.  At that time I found the whole idea of exclusive clubs of any kind revolting--and especially so clubs that had a reputation for being all-white, wealthy, and filled with kids who saw college primarily as a place to network.  As a grad student I had the same reaction to Princeton's eating clubs.  They were much worse, though, given that virtually everyone who was a member was white, and nearly all the employees were Black.  The one time I was invited to attend dinner I was appalled.  Rich white kids in designer clothes bossing around poor black waiters and maids.  And the "clubs" were in mansions that looked like Tara.  It was a little bit of antebellum America.)  Perhaps my perception of fraternities  was unjust, but that is what I thought at the time.  I convinced myself that Stanford was more egalitarian than the Ivies--there was some evidence to think so, given that it refused to give preference to legacies, it had the best middle-class financial aid, and it had a very small Greek system that was kept on a short leash.  (My future wife actually lived in the Delt house--the year after the Delts were kicked off campus and their house confiscated and turned back into general use.)  So Stanford's lack of a Greek system was a real attraction to me--and I know other students who felt the same way. 

Your comments on Princeton's eating clubs are interesting.  It's changed a smidge in the 35+/- years since your experience.  There are 11 clubs with differing degrees of exclusiveness.  Five are sign in--you sign up and you're in.  As for the waiters you reference, only one club has ever had them, the other ten dine cafeteria-style.  As for the antebellum nature of the mansions, well...one of them has the architectural style of the antebellum south, the other ten do not.  And since each has over 100 members, well, they're going to be large structures, since they have large common dining areas.  And all of them have been co-ed for at least 25 years, unlike fraternities and sororities, which -- by definition -- are not.  And 3/4 of Princeton undergraduate juniors and seniors (the only classes eligible for membership) are members of the eating clubs.  I don't think 75% of the student body constitutes horrible exclusion.  And unlike fraternities, very few members -- just the officers -- actually live in the buildings.  Most live in dorms.

Anyway, one of my sons was in Tiger Inn, the other was in Ivy.  Why those elitist institutions accepted a couple of middle-class Catholic kids, I'll never know.

And let's face it, if you're in at Princeton or Harvard or Stanford...you're already a member of an exclusive club, revolting or not.