I think several national fraternities have changed their terminology, ours has as well. However, it varies by chapter. I think at big state schools, you'll be much less likely to find chapters following their national's plan, and probably only use the new terminology when necc. All of our national literature refers to pledges as associate members, but we really don't ever use that terminology.

Right. We changed our terminology about 30 years ago, and there is a proposal before our National Assembly this summer to change it again (from "probationary member" to "candidate").

What do you call your Pledges?

Same O or Same O:)

The Terminology or Name may be different, but is the Period of Learning different?

This debate becomes rather interesting as you look at it from the "being PC" point of view.

In my opinion when you argue the semantics of the language it can appear to be a superficial solution. Personally it's the program itself that makes the difference to me. Fraternities and Sororities will always have a probation period of orientation to ensure that the decision made by the individual to join and the chapter to offer that opportunity were the right decisions.

Recruitment in many areas is far too competitive to wait until you know absolutely everything about someone before you offer a bid. And it’s funny that some National offices are pushing for higher membership numbers driving that competition into frenzy on some campuses...but also pushing for smaller pledge periods with fewer requirements. This prevents chapters from effectively "filtering out" potentially bad members (which CAN be done through academic and conduct standards during the probationary period and NOT hazing). This may also be a result of the attitude of entitlement that some students are entering higher education with. Everyone wants the privileges but don't think they should have to meet the responsibilities. To those individuals I say..."good luck in life because it's going to be hard for you out in the real world"

Calling individuals "candidates, new members, associates, or pledges" really isn't the issue. It's how chapters treat those individuals. My chapter uses the term pledge. And we have a great pledge program that focuses on the positive aspects of Delt and Greek Life. Another fraternity may call them by any other name...and have serious hazing issues. So what difference did a name change make?

I somewhat understand the argument that the term "pledge" has come to hold negative connotations associated with hazing. But so will any other term a chapter chooses to use if the outrageous activities of a few chapters that create that negative connotation are not ceased. Perhaps someday even the word "associate" will hold the same bad stereotype as "pledge".

It would be easy change the jargon until we run out of words in the dictionary, but by doing that are we just trying to out run the real problems?

I know many GLOs take an active stand in trying to face the issues of hazing and I applaud each step of progress Greek Life makes in the direction of ridding our systems of those issues. Because that's what will bring a real solution. And then we can call them "candidates, new members, associates, or pledges" in good conscious.

Amazing simply amazing that someone puts it in a simple Post But So True!:cool:

i personally prefer calling them pledges, or "you" or whatever. They arent in my fraternity yet. Despite the modern moves toward inclusion, some places still require you to earn it.

Yes, agree totally. They are all pledges....and I hate every one of them.....atleast for a period of time.....then I love them all after they earn it.

haha, thats funny that you mention "you." I live out of house now because I am older and I often find myself not knowing many of the newboy's names. So "you" "you there" and "hey you" are used often.

On a related note, regarding the negative connotations of the term "pledge"... For the most part, anybody who would be put off by the term pledge, for whatever reason, is not one I care about being in my fraternity. If somebody is that scared of hazing or whatever it may be, I'm really not interested in bidding them.

also, you PLEDGE your self, loyalty, and honor to your fraternity. Hence the name PLEDGE for one who has made such a PLEDGE and then enter the PLEDGE program and engage in the verb "TO PLEDGE"

The reason someone would be initially put off by the word pledge would be that they are probably unaware of what it REALLY means. It's likely their only exposure to the word "pledge" in Greek Life terms is through negative stereotypes and/or stories about hazing from the few chapters who do us ALL disrespect by their immature and inappropriate actions.

If a chapter's "pledge" program is something positive and respectable (as in they would feel comfortable telling students, parents, college officials, and the media EVERYTHING about what the chapter does in regards to "pledges") or even something you can truly be proud of as an organization; then it's rather easy to break someone's negative image of Greek Life.

Someone may merely be scared because they just don't know what's true and what's hearsay. And if a chapter has to hide what they really do in order to not frighten off potential members...well then...that chapter has to ask itself what is it that they are ashamed of?

Insecurity stemming from uncertainty is understandable.
Insecurity stemming from the truth is fear and guilt.

It may be un-PC and very old fashioned, but I'll never be comfortable with anything but "pledge."

You're right, my point however was that generally, the kids who are unsure about pledging because of stories or whatnot, are not the ones I want. Our guys generally come in with the knowledge that it is gonna be a tough period, and some might not make it. There is still uncertainty of course, because they aren't sure what it will entail, but they are somewhat mentally prepared and desire to go through it. Generally this isn't a problem, as we rarely take people who have had no connection with a greek system. They are usually legacies of some sort to some org, or have friends in fraternities, etc.

Student's coming in knowing that there are higher academic, conduct, service, involvement, and respect standards and being uncertain if one can rise to the occasion to meet those high ideals is one thing. Sure some guys may not meet them and won't make it to initiation.

But those who do are truly better off not only for their success but also their attempt, as are those who may not have made it but tried. That's what positive programming does, challenges future members in the areas that will not only make the chapter more successful...but also themselves. And you can be upfront about all of those requirements. Pledges can know from day 1 what's expected of them. Will they still be motivated by uncertainty of meeting those standards...sure. But it's not uncertainty based on some immature hazing stunt that has no real basis in an organziations value system. And the standards are something that your chapter can truely be proud of.

Coming in thinking it will be tough because they're not sure if they can put up with some idodic hazing stunt is not a concern to be legitimized by a chapter. You can't create good members or good people by tearing them down first.

Don't get me wrong. I have no idea what your chapter does with their pledge program so non of the above comments are acusitory. For all I know you could have a model program in place with NO hazing.

I think I like what your fraternity stands for.

We also don't officially use the term "pledge" -- instead we say "new member". Basically, it means you're afforded all the respect of a regular member, since "pledge" has a negative connotation.

Although I have to admit using the word "pledge" a few times. Oh well.