Originally Posted by badgeguy (Post 2264909)

If any society wants to get away from a hazing culture, is to call it what it really is, bullying.

Plain and simple, kids are hazed or bullied in high school, maybe even elementary or middle school. They then go on to college and are either "hazed" or bullied, or they become the person who does the bullying or hazing.

Hazing is a LEARNED trait...... It will take time, but we have to enforce acceptable behavior early in schools in order for those good people to come to college and stop it.

No amount of laws or charter withdraws will ever stop people from doing this. And as everyone has seen already, it's not just "fraternities" that haze, but many organizations have this in their midsts.....change the culture and you'll lower or eliminate hazing, or bullying as it really is.

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 2264867)

SAEalumnus - semi touchy question (shock). Are the guys on the Supreme Council from chapters that do everything by HQ's book, chapters that might not follow all the rules explicitly but pull huge numbers, or a mix of both? I know we all have those "chapters that can do no wrong" and wondered if they were coming from that vantage point.

Originally Posted by SAEalumnus (Post 2264947)

Speaking as a past chapter president, graduate of our national leadership school (twice), and current chapter advisor, hazing and similar examples of lack of maturity, intelligence, respect, or spine have very real consequences to all involved. It's a major problem that can't be left unaddressed. This new program has some bold -- though not completely original -- ideas. I am happy to see some action taken to contend with this, but am ashamed of our national leadership's decision to disenfranchise the undergraduate chapters of their inalienable right to vote as members of the Convention. The Supreme Council's claim of authority is a smokescreen and an unconscionable work of fiction.

Originally Posted by BlueOwl (Post 2264971)

I will reiterate that I am NEVER supportive of activities that could be physically harmful or deeply humiliating.

But....I still maintain that some pledge activities, be they silly, useless, or otherwise, can and DO build bonds between pledge groups and also with the older members. I do feel that there needs to be some sort of right of passage. I think that it is not reasonable to initiate in four days! That is simply not enough time for a chapter to fully evaluate the potential member, nor is it enough time for the potential member to truly know if SAE, or greek life in general, is for him!
I would support more mandatory and on-going education regarding safe practices within chapters.

Originally Posted by BlueOwl (Post 2264971)

I will reiterate that I am NEVER supportive of activities that could be physically harmful or deeply humiliating.

But....I still maintain that some pledge activities, be they silly, useless, or otherwise, can and DO build bonds between pledge groups and also with the older members. I do feel that there needs to be some sort of right of passage. I think that it is not reasonable to initiate in four days! That is simply not enough time for a chapter to fully evaluate the potential member, nor is it enough time for the potential member to truly know if SAE, or greek life in general, is for him!
I would support more mandatory and on-going education regarding safe practices within chapters.

Originally Posted by badgeguy (Post 2264985)

History would seem to prove otherwise.....
SAE was founded in 1856, right? How many days did it take back then to initiate someone? How long did the founders take to "evaluate" potential members? And new chapters?

Originally Posted by SAEalumnus (Post 2264994)

The first "bid" offered by our Founders was given to Newton Nash Clements (Alabama 1858), who was initiated a week after accepting it. The True Gentleman Experience is a bit more aggressive at a mandatory maximum of four days, but is otherwise historically consistent. The establishment of new chapters was similarly expedient, though I wonder whether the Supreme Council will likewise radically shorten the chartering process (I suspect a double standard will prevail).

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby (Post 2264859)

One question that I'm hoping an SAE can answer, but slap my hand if I'm too close to membership selection:

How difficult is it, comparatively, to remove a pledge? Does the fact that someone has been initiated make it much harder to throw them out of your chapter?

My experience on the NPC side has been that it takes a *lot* to get rid of an NM, and that most orgs don't let chapters make that decision on their own (i.e. it has to be run up the volunteer alumnae chain), so initiating early wouldn't make a huge difference in terms of kicking someone out.

Of course, if a chapter really wants to get rid of someone, they pressure her to leave "voluntarily," but I am curious how much the early initiation matters on this issue alone.

Originally Posted by itb2a (Post 2264996)

SAEalumnus:

Wasn't that because your Founders already knew him previously? Seems like I heard they were all former 'pledges' from the University of Alabama Phi Gamma Delta chapter...