I don't think that national organizations are calling this "hazing" as much as they just think it's ridiculous and a practice that shouldn't become a habit.

NPC groups calling absurb things hazing is nothing new. Example: We were told a bulletin board in the house with our new pledges' pictures, majors and a little bit about them on it - quite handy for sisters who had busy schedules and not a lot of time to get to know the pledges right off the bat - was hazing. Reason? It "put the pledges on display." This is 15 years ago.

We're just commenting on the raaaaaaaayn on your wedding day that supposedly eliminating one "awful" term just caused another to spring up - one that many people find more "demeaning" than the worst word EVER CREATED EVER.

And I do agree w/ sherrybaby that it's a generational thing. I don't hate it because I think it's hazing. I hate it because I think it's stupid. I also think Hello Kitty is stupid and that ish is all over college campuses.

Baby-related side note: IU is big on the 'baby' terminology. Baby Hooters, Baby Squirrels, Baby Turtles...you get the idea.

'Baby hooters' disturbs me.

Yes. I think many of the policies, namely the "thou shalt nots," are reasonable at their cores, but then become over-expanded because of the risk of liability.
Example: We are not allowed to physically join new members together. Yes, typing pledges up is bad. Having them do a 3-legged race could be bad, even though some might see that as a fun activity. But we can't have them hold hands. So asking them to hold hands in a circle and sing a sorority song is considered hazing instead of a bonding activity.

I'm not so much frustrated with the policies themselves, but rather the general nature of society, in the sense that people like to blame and sue for anything they can, that makes a sorority have to ban hand-holding, scavenger hunts of any kind, etc. even though most people and organizations would only use those things with good intentions.

I've never heard of this hand-holding thing. Is this a new national policy of some groups?

To be honest, I can't remember if that specific policy was a national policy, or from UGA Panhellenic. I do remember reading it though, and it definitely specified hand-holding under the rule stating we can't physically put new members together.

The pacifier necklaces bid day picture was at IU, a couple years ago.

That sounds like a local Panhellenic rule passed because someone pushed this or that. Some panhels have a "no touching" rule during rush.

UGA has the no touching rule as well. You aren't even supposed to shake hands when introducing yourself to a PNM/active. They usually won't fine you for it, or if, say, an active sees a PNM she's related to and gives her a quick hug, but that active will probably have a Gamma Chi tailing her for the rest of the party if that happens.

Now I have the image of an active *married* to a PNM (Not in Georgia, I know...) and causing the Gamma Chi's head to explode when they see them greet each other...

(Note, I have *no* idea if any of the NPC sororities would consider a woman who is married to a sister as being a legacy or not)

(In my co-ed service fraternity, I saw a situation where the faculty advisor's wife was taking classes at the college and decided to pledge the fraternity, *that* was interesting.)

When I moved, I finally threw out my hand painted initiation baby bottles that I got from my big and other family members. They were filled with candy, obviously.

Maybe IU could start calling recruitment "crib rush" instead of bed rush. ;)

Absolutely not. They are in place for a reason and if it's going to keep all of my sisters safe then it's perfectly ok by me.

Risk Management: Money Can Be Put at Risk, Too! $165,000 Reportedly Embezzled

http://www.boston.com/news/local/mas...P4J/story.html

A longtime volunteer alumna working with an Alpha Phi chapter has been charged with “. . . embezzling $165,000 that the student organization had set aside for a new house. . . .”
“Her membership was revoked after the allegations came to light.”

Name, a few more details are in report; see link above.
Treasurers, RM chairs, house corporations, and so on: please consider independent audits, good-to-excellent financial controls, and the like. The allegations in this case are certainly not the first time we’ve heard of such things. And sadly, it won’t be the last.

When I first transferred to my school this past fall (I'm a sophomore at a northern Ivy), I had a lot of friends who already went here and who are now in sororities. My closest friend's sorority has very strict risk management rules, and she was yelled at for having dinner with me and going out with me the first week of the semester by her standards chair because I was unaffiliated. We do spring rush, so it's not like this occurred during the recruitment period, and the university I attend to doesn't have a policy against open contact except during recruitment. It was just her chapter. I can understand the reasoning behind many rules, but it seemed pretty harsh to bar her from seeing me. We're just very careful to hang out off campus now - luckily she has a car.

Are there Ivies that aren't in the north?

Risk management rules wouldn't have anything to do with going to dinner with a friend. I don't know what kinds of rules those would be, but they sound ridiculous. I've not seen something like that ever, unless it is recruitment rules. But those are not risk management rules. Risk management rules are more like- not drinking if you're under the legal age (follow the law.. imagine that?) and get buses if you're going to an event with alcohol that is not in walking distance, etc. Rules to reduce the likelihood that someone would be injured, killed, in trouble with the law, etc.

True, I guess they're all pretty much northern. And yes, I thought so as well. Her standards was just very paranoid about being reprimanded for "dirty rushing", apparently. It seemed a bit ridiculous to the both of us. I haven't gone through recruitment yet so forgive me if I've mixed up standards & risk management, I assumed they were pretty much the same thing.

There is some overlap. Standards violation are essentially violating any of the rules. That would include RM violations, but would also include other things like not paying your dues in time. Also, for the sorority women here, maybe it's some overblown silence rule like I've heard you guys talk about?
/swerve