She didn't actually say it was unfair, she just put scare quotes around the word hazing. She, in fact, specifically said they had to change their practices. Which means *ta da* they were doing some things that counted as hazing.

I get being frustrated, I just think you've picked a pretty awful time to white knight for locals. Being a local doesn't mean you get to haze. It doesn't mean that your org's definition of hazing is the same as national orgs, but it does mean you have to follow school policy. When someone says "Thank god we're still recognized" then they're NOT adhering to that. Everything she said sounded like they were only changing because they either got caught or just barely squeaked by.

I do not, and never will think that locals are inherently less than a national orgs, but I don't think they should get a free pass either.

Sorry 33girl, but I think we're just going to have to respectufully agree to disagree. I gave a suggestion that I know National GLOs and Locals both use as a way to educate their new members or pledges, and you can bet I'm going to tack my opinion onto that. To use the same line people use all the time on GC "You came and asked for advice. You got advice. Don't complain if you don't like it." It applies to everyone. I can understand your frustration with what you've experienced with what you see as a pile-on to Locals on here, but I've never been a part of that. It's up to the OP to take the advice or not. It has nothing to do with being a national versus a local, and has everything to do with what her college defines as hazing. If she wants to stay recognized on campus, then she needs to actually implement what they are looking for, and that doesn't mean a more quiet, secret form of "education."

Should add that while I may have been a sister as a pledge (the term was still in use back then), I can empathize with Locals not allowing new members to wear letters. There are Nationals that do the very same thing. ;) (And by that wink, I mean me).

What in the samhell are you talking about? Seriously.

It seems like you're the only one with the axe to grind. The rest of us were talking about pledging and hazing. Period. You are assuming way too much and that reflects on you more than on us.

When you say "national," it seems like you're talking about national GLOs in councils/conferences that have very strict member education/pledging policies (e.g. NPC, NPHC). Do Theta Nu Xi and Alpha Phi Omega fit your definition?

As I know nothing about Theta Nu Xi's pledging process, I have no idea if it fits my definition.

I'm speaking about social fraternities and sororities, not service based ones.

I know it sounds like I'm pulling this out of my ass and going batshit, but I've just seen it time and time again on GC over the years. The "Sorority Life" show threads were a basic example.

Perhaps but it is misplaced in this thread. Go off your rocker when it actually is happening. :)

LOL @ batshit crazy.

The reason I asked was because the flexibility we have in developing and executing our intake process is probably similar to the flexibility of a local or any org with no council/conference affiliation. I was going to say that my comments in this thread are based on my risk management experience as a former National Board member dealing with undergraduate intake. In no way do I want to come off as dismissing locals.

HOWEVER, you explained your concern about where it appeared the thread was heading.

Me too.

I'm still baffled over how anything said in this thread is unique to a Local aside from the "this is a local so you don't have nhq regulations to abide by" acknowledgements.

Same here.

And while I've certainly seen the piling on of locals that 33girl describes, I didn't assume there was hazing going on in this case -- or that the OP wanted to continue what might at least be borderline hazing -- because she's in a local; I assumed it from how she described her chapter's situation and what she was looking for.

Exactly this.