Confession: the only reason I read this book is because I really like Robbins' writing. But finishing this was more of an endurance contest than anything else. That's not Robbins' fault at all--I just have such little tolerance for the shenanigans of the mean girl culture.

SPOILERS: I was actually a little disappointed in the lack of development of the girls she followed, as well. I kept hoping one of them would realize that the sororities were completely altering their world views, but that never seemed to happen.

But if you were never in a sorority and want to see into their world, this would be a decent place to go...and might even make you grateful you avoided that mess. ( )

The author managed to get herself inside several sororities undercover, which was promising, but her decision not to name any of the real universities, sororities, or people she talked to (to preserve her sources' anonymity and thereby protect them from the fury of their scandalized sisters) and aimless crosscutting between stories dried up my interest pretty fast. ( )

A nonfiction expose of sorority life at an unnamed college, primarily through the experiences of four girls over one school year (first edition published in 2005). The author also conducted supplementary research (26 pages of endnotes!), attended sorority-related meetings, and interviewed past and present sorority members. All I can say after reading this book is that I am *so* glad that the large university in Texas that I attended did not have sororities and fraternities while I was there. ( )

The author can't write very well, and she has nothing insightful to say. Nevertheless, the topic (a slightly sociopolitical look at sororities) is interesting enough to make the book readable. ( )

Since Robbins attempts to portray her novel about sorority life as research, I will treat it as such. This review is how I would critique any written piece claiming to be research. Lucky for me I’m taking two classes this semester dealing specifically with proper research procedures.

1. Lack of Randomization. Robbins follows around four sorority girls. Four, out of thousands in the country. Although Robbins has reasons that she cannot follow more girls (prohibited by most national sororities and kicked off of a few campuses), this does not mean that her sample of 4 girls (all at one university, three in the same sorority) can be generalized to sorority life across the country. It cannot even be generalized to their university, let alone their sorority specifically. Right here, this point, delegitimizes her entire book as a valid research. But of course, that is not what Robbins is after, she is a journalist, a writer. Her goal is to sell books. If she wanted to do research, she would likely work in the background at a university, not parading around as a nineteen year old (something she proudly admits in the introduction as something not all people in their late twenties can do). Furthermore, perhaps four girls who allow themselves to be selected for such a project agree to participate because there is something they don’t like about the sorority. Unknown.
2. Data acquisition. I have issues with her methods. I don’t really mind that she went undercover, I think interesting things can come from it. But at what intervals did she interview her subjects? Were they equal intervals? How many times did she contact them? I don’t know, because she doesn’t tell us. (BIG no-no in research studies.) She does tell us that the girls would contact her when they were upset. It is any wonder, then, that the information she got from them was damaging to the sorority? When I’m upset about something, I turn to who I think I will get the most sympathy from…if these girls were upset about something in their sorority, and they happen to be part of a ‘research’ project about sororities, it makes sense that is when they would talk to Robbins. But when something was going great, perhaps they chose to celebrate with their sisters, or simply didn’t think to tell Robbins. We don’t know, because Robbins doesn’t tell us. Once again sacrificing legitimate research techniques to create a sensational best-seller.
3. Experimenter/Researcher Bias. Although Robbins claims she set out to write a ‘truthful’ book about sorority life, I have to challenge that a bit. She seems to be out to show what she deems historically white Greek organizations as the worst thing a girl could be a part of. She glosses over the positives that Greek life might bring (like service and philanthropy) to dictate that every sorority girl drinks, is loose, and likely doing drugs. To not be accused of my own bias, these are her words, “The blondes, the super-thin, the rich, the promiscuous, and the girls who smoke marijuana are separated and recognized as being distinctive, nonoverlapping groups.” (116) Basically, you can find whatever you want. If you want to see thin, party girls in a sorority, they are there. If you want to see the student body president or girl who’s working to pay her way through college, you can find that as well.

Going back to issue number one—inability to be generalized—I didn’t find that I could relate to many of the situations these girls found themselves in. Several chapters were dedicated to hazing (and implying that every organization hazes), but I was not hazed. Does that mean it doesn’t happen? No, because I, unlike Robbins, cannot speak for every person in Greek life. I also was not lied to during the pledge process, nor do I feel I was judged based on my wallet or really my looks (anyone who knows me knows I lack all form of style—this was deep into my toe sock phase). I was never pressured not to study in order to party, and remember the house having several study nights. But that’s just me.

I knew that I could not have an opinion on this book without reading it, and I encourage you to do the same. Don’t take my word for it, whether you are pro or anti Greek. But you should take into consideration what I feel to be fallacies in her logic.
( )