I didnt watch the show but thats funny that she was complaining because in the SEC issue she brags about how everything on and about her is "REAL" even her blonde hair.

Right now playboy is working on a sorority girls issue. Its primary due date is six months. They will sorority girls that have posed before to pose again and have many more new ones. From what I here all but 2 girls are in NPC sorority. The other 2 are locals. Can wait for that issue. A must for any fraternity guy.

If that's true, then they probably need to call it the ex-sorority girls issue. I have a feeling that a lot of badges are going to be taken up if this issue goes through. And, to me, they SHOULD be taken up. Like someone else said, you represent your organization whether you have your letters on or not. I personally don't feel like someone posing naked for a men's magazine is being a good representative for my sorority. Just like I don't think someone entering a wet t-shirt contest on Spring Break is being a good representative for my sorority. It's just plain tacky.

Ah it all depends on whether you look good! If you look good it might be a pretty good way to represent actually. I think less girls would actually be turned away from a sorority than you might think by having someone pose like that, or seeing a bunch of girls having a really great time at Spring Break.

But if you ask them, publicly they might condemn such behavior . . . ;)

lmao

Playboy
 

:) Hi there

Whether a girl looks attractive or not isn't the point, James. There are plenty of sorority members who could easily make the cut for Playboy, but that doesn't mean that they all should run out and pose. It's tacky and tasteless, and I personally don't want anyone in my organization to be labeled as such. Nor do I want my organization to get an unsavory reputation simply due to the inconsiderate actions of one member.

As for your other comment, I wouldn't even begin to suggest that putting sorority women in Playboy would be a good marketing strategy for NPC groups, as you've hinted. Nor would I ever encourage my sisters to get plastered and join a wet t-shirt contest with DZ letters on down in Panama City on Spring Break in the hopes of getting the word out that DZ's are fun-loving girls who know how to party. :rolleyes:

There are a million ways to get a GLO's name out to potential rushees that don't require a girl to take off her clothes. Maybe those other ways aren't as thrilling to you as a Playboy centerfold, but, last time I checked, we weren't rushing guys so it really doesn't matter.

How attractive you are isn't the issue. I cannot speak for a national organization, but I know I wouldn't agree to it if I were playboy material or suggest someone else to do it.

I think all of this has been gone over and over again in this post...

Well said, dzrose93! You read my mind. James, I am sad to hear you say what you said. I IN NO WAY would ever join a sorority that was proud of having sisters pose in Playboy OR were party sluts on Spring Break. That is just not the reputation I would EVER associate myself with. I am a well-respected person, and I'd like to keep it that way.

I cringe replying to this topic since it's been drawn out for way too long. BUT so many people are criticizing this woman for wanting to appear in Playboy when there are countless other ways someone could tarnish their chapter's reputation that are WORSE than Playboy. And you know what, all of your chapters probably have at least one person who's already doing some of those things. So, step off your soapboxes and let this woman do her thing. After all, it is HER decision--not her sisters' or Greekchat's.

Actually, it isn't JUST her decision. Why? Because when you join a sorority your decisions no longer affect just yourself. They also affect every other member of your GLO, and you have to keep that in mind when you say/do something. You don't want to do anything that is embarrassing to your sisters, just like you don't want your sisters to do anything that is embarrassing to you.

If you choose to do something that many, many women are strongly against and consider to be demeaning, then you should be willing to accept the consequences -- which may include the termination of your Greek membership.

Part of being Greek includes making responsible choices, and many sororities include strong morals as something that they look for in their members. If a girl is more interested in making money by posing naked for a men's magazine than she is in following the standards of her sorority, then that's fine. But she shouldn't be shocked if she gets called on the carpet by her chapter and/or her National Headquarters if she follows through with her decision to pose.

The bottom line is this: Just because you CAN do something or WANT to do something doesn't always mean that you SHOULD do something. And there are always consequences to every action you make.

Playboy
 

That's fine, except that I believe she began this thread by asking for advice and opinions. If she is concerned enough to ask and if the trend of responses seems heavily weighted against, then it seems to me that Greekchat would be letting her down by not providing the advice she requested in the first place. Yes, it is her decision to make. As part of her decision making process she has asked for opinions on the possible implications and side effects. Wouldn't you feel let down if you asked for opinions and everybody said Hay, cool, its your call, and then she got slammed by her chapter and or national? She had the forethought to ask and that seems pretty smart to me.

LOL oh really??!!! Check out the current issue.....they always put old pictures of themselves on their "data sheet." Maybe I need glasses but the 8th-grade picture in there sure looks like a brunette to me!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't have this month's issue yet :(

Women don't pose in Playboy and say, "I'm an XYZ; look at me naked!!" Correct me if I'm wrong, but when a woman is in the magazine, the caption doesn't say "so and so, member of XYZ at so and so university." So how do national headquarters find out to terminate membership?

You don't need a private investigator to find out whether or not the model's a member of a GLO.

The world isn't as big as you think. Members (collegians and alumnae alike) from her house will eventually find out. Word will spread around the campus. Members of the I/NHQ are out there watching us even when we think they aren't looking!

I guess I'm not the type of person who finds out some Playmate is in a sorority and researches names, chapters, and universities to satisfy my curiousity, and then turns her into her national headquarters. Maybe the people who are doing this need to find something to do with all the time on their hands.

:rolleyes: Fine, but it seems like you still don't seem to get it.

It's not a matter of how much time a person has on her hands. If a girl decides to pose, she needs to be ready to deal with the repercussions that may happen. boycrazy, if you yourself are in a house, you'll know that word travels fast...sometimes secrets can't be kept. I'm pretty sure something like this would raise red flags on a local level... and it's only a matter of time before I/NHQ finds out. If a girl doesn't want her membership eligibility in jeopardy, maybe she should think twice about posing. So yes, this is ultimately her decision, she just needs to think about what's more important to her.

And this isn't only limited to Playboy. We are to be considered representatives of our respective organizations, and when we get caught misbehaving... our HQs find out (especially if we have our Greek affiliation in our usernames!)--just ask some of the GC members who have already been contacted by THEIR HQs because of something they had done on GC. I'm aware that there are members of my International Council who read our posts daily, and that's fine with me because I try to be on my best online behavior as much as I can.

Though I'm just adding my $19.04...I think it's time someone else gets off their soapbox. :rolleyes:

Yeah, yeah...preach on. I understand that some people think Playboy is dreadful and sinful, but there are also people who think the magazine is just fine. I'm just raising the question of why it's "misbehaving" to be a Playmate and why someone's membership is in jeopardy if they do. After all, did your pledge book say, "Thou shalt not appear in Playboy and whoever does gets expelled"?

No, boycrazy, my pledge book does not say, "Thou shalt not appear in Playboy and whoever does gets expelled."

However, my book DOES say: "The purpose of this sorority shall be to unite its members in the bonds of sincere and lasting friendship, to stimulate one another in the pursuit of knowledge, to promote the moral and social culture of its members, and to develop plans for guidance and unity in action; objects worthy of the highest aim and purpose of associated effort.

It's all about living up to the standards of the organization of which you are a member... Many sororities pride themselves on selecting women with high moral worth -- they want women with good reputations who are going to be an asset to the rest of the chapter. In my sorority's case, women who want to pose naked for a full-color Playboy centerfold aren't doing anything to promote the moral culture of Delta Zeta's members. In fact, they're doing exactly the opposite. And that's why any DZ who posed for Playboy would be reprimanded.

This isn't to say that women who pose for Playboy aren't nice people -- it's just that they don't fit in well with the standards of my sorority. And that's fine -- as long as they aren't members of my sorority.

My point is this: Anytime you join a structured organization, there are going to be certain rules and regulations that must be followed. The rules are out in the open, and if you don't agree with them, then you can leave. However, if you willingly break a rule while you are a member of an organization, then you must take responsibility for your actions and accept the consequences.

Cheergirl,
I'm not sure what your problem is with Phi Mu but I get the feeling there is one. I read the article and it says that there is no written policy regarding Phi Mus and posing in playboy. While I believe this is true - as I know of no such written policy, it does say in our creed "To walk in the way of honor, guarding the purity of our thoughts and deeds." I will be the first to admit that no one is perfect, but we are taught during our pledge period that our actions reflect on Phi Mu sorority and that in public, especially on a national scale, that our actions should reflect the values of our creed.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by boycrazy
[B]Yeah, yeah...preach on... I'm just raising the question of why it's "misbehaving" to be a Playmate and why someone's membership is in jeopardy if they do.

Seems to me it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out if one's National's policy is generally understood to be dead set against certain conduct one should not be too surprised if there are penalties attached to one's decision to go ahead and take these actions. I was under the impression that taking responsibility for one's actions was one of the things we learned when we gave our words to uphold certain values and ideals. We agreed to hold ourselves to a higher standard and to accept the consequences of our actions.
This was a troubling issue for our Playmate and she asked for advice. The general tone of that advice was whether or not its OK in the broader scheme of things your National is not going to be happy and you should consider the consequences.
I suppose there are a couple of issues here. Personal responsibility is key. If an action is not illegal or otherwise legitimately prohibited no one has the right to forbid you to do something. It is your decision and you must take responsibility for it. Which brings us to the next issue. If you elect to join an organization and agree to uphold its ideals, rules, and traditions then you are obligated to do so if you wish to remain a member of that organization.
Whether or not you consider it perfectly acceptable to be a playmate is largely irrelevant. Society at large has a generally held view that a woman who displayes herself in pointedly provocative photographs of a prurient nature and does so for money and/or other percieved rewards and benefits is simply stated not a lady. Now this may sound hopelessly outmoded and completely out of date and out of place in the modern world, but, every Greek woman I have ever spoken with about Greek life has used words like Ideals, Values, Womanly Virtues, Ladylike behaviour, "to be in all respects and at all times - a Lady", "to cause no scandal and to give no cause for the perception of scandal". I think all sorority women will recognize the foregoing words and quotes from open literature and publications of their own and other orgs. Nationals and their chapters have in my experience been pretty clear as to what they consider appropriate and what they consider inappropriate conduct and actions.
Then there is the unfair reality that we all wish had died out a long time ago. As my sister likes to point out, the old double standard is alive and well and has teeth to bite those who refuse to understand this.
So, the bottom line has to be that if you want to be a playmate then go ahead and do so. If you do so then don't complain that the rules should not apply. They do. Life is not necessarily fair, life simply is - so deal with it.

Side thought: On a fantasy level it's hard to beat the air brushed perfection of a playmate, and I freely confess to being a red blooded straight male of the species who enjoys looking at beautiful women. However, in all honesty I prefer to look at a real woman, not perfect, not technologically altered image of a fantasy, but a real honest to God woman. Like the guys all used to say, there are the girls you want to go to bed with, and then there is the one you want to wake up with. Part of that magic quality is that she is a lady. And, you know what? When I am with a lady its a lot easier to be a gentleman.

More side thoughts: My sister describes the whole playmate question in one word - tacky. Wasn't it Jonothan Winters who said "tacky should be a capital offence".
Wasn't it Justice Oliver Wendel Holmes who opined that "Life would be so much easier if we could understand that life is not fair". And finally, Capt Jean-Luc Picard, "I hereby assume command of this vessel taking responsibility for myself and my crew in all that we do and all that we fail to do". Then, turning to the crew, "I am confident that you will do no less."

Cheergrl!, I agree. You're out of line. I'm sorry you didn't have a positive experience with your sorority, but it's ridiculous of you to consistently post these angry, negative references to Phi Mu.

Hundreds of thousands of us are proud to wear the letters, proud to be part of the sisterhood.

Let it go.

Are you people wierd or something? Or are you privy to some posting pattern of Cheergrl I'm not?

I searched her posts. She had 7. She has two posts that reference Phi Mu. Neither post is negative, both are informational, and the one in this thread is completely on topic and relevant.

So I am giving you a fair opportunity to explain exactly what you and lionlove mean by saying that she is consistently posting ". . . angry, negative references to Phi Mu."

If you are unable to explain your position for personally attacking her because you disagree with the content of her posts, I am going to respectfully ask you all to stop verbally attacking one of our infrequent posters. IT doesn't exactlky make these people feel welcome.

I am not asking you as a moderator but as a concerned member of the community.

Thank you and have a nice day :)

James

James, I PMed you

something like this could do great harm to a chapter. Think about your dicision before you do it and consider both the consequences for you and for your chapter. Would you be willing to give up friends and your chapter to have your picture in a magazine?

She's definately deleted at least one of her posts. Every time I've had the opportunity to read something she's written, it reflects negatively on our sorority. Furthermore, when called on it, she just kind of disappears -- doesn't back up her statement in any way.

With rush coming up I think it's important for PNMs to see that although, YES, there are many different sides to any organization in the greek system -- no GLO is going to stand by and watch it get trashed.

Switching topics, In the October issue for the girls of the Big 12 section some of the pictures were taken in front of the Kappa Sig house not sure which school.

Clemson sorority member expelled for
posing in Playboy
By Bryan Torres
The Tiger (Clemson U.)

(U-WIRE) CLEMSON, S.C. -- Last year it was discovered that Playboy was planning a trip to the Clemson campus to look for perspective college women to pose in their recently released "Girls of the ACC" issue. Some sororities warned their members that posing could be grounds for expulsion.

This lesson was learned first hand by Mary Elizabeth Haselden, a member of the Zeta Tau Alpha sorority here at the University.

Haselden, a second semester freshman in general engineering, posed nude for the "Girls of the ACC" pictorial in the November 1998 issue of Playboy under the assumed name Veronica Traub.

In meetings late last week, Zeta Tau Alpha decided to begin the expulsion process of Haselden.

Haselden did not comment on the present matters surounding her impending
expulsion.

According to a source close to Zeta Tau Alpha, the expulsion process is taking longer than expected because of complications with the national office.

Farrah Sullivan, the president of Zeta Tau Alpha, was unavailable for comment on the situation.

This expulsion has caused quite a stir on the campus. Many people on campus believe that the expulsion of a member of a Greek organization due to the participation in a Playboy layout is wrong.

"It is not our role to pass judgment on Clemson women," stated Mary Anne
McDonald Bigger, president of the Clemson Women's Council. "Personally, I feel that if an individual, male or female, wants to pose for a magazine, then that is their right as an American. This is a choice that they have to make, realizing that many individuals may be offended by their actions."

Teppi Waldron, a senior in PRTM and a member of Gamma Sigma Sigma, added, "There was nothing about Zeta Tau Alpha in the magazine. She did not use the sorority to boost her image, so I don't think that she should be expelled."

A central issue seems to be that since there was no mention of the sorority in the pictorial, then there are no grounds for expulsion.

"I think that it is stupid, ludicrous," stated Jeremiah Kenworthy, a senior in
management. "It doesn't make any sense to me. If she is comfortable with it then that is fine. She is not wearing letters anywhere in the picture. I don't think that there is any relationship with her posing for the magazine and being able to perform as a sister of Zeta Tau Alpha. It seems like sororities, and all groups, should support their members instead of deserting them."

Aaron Sipe, a junior in pre-veterinary science, said that posing for the magazine is a personal decision and that is does not reflect anything on her sorority as a whole.

"They let her in because of the type of person that she is, and I don't think that posing changes that," he said.

From Playboy's meager beginnings to its ascension to national recognition, anything vaguely related to it has been the object of debate, controversy and interest to many people.

It appears that the campus of Clemson is no exception

University of Oklahoma junior Kristi Bryan was rejected by her sorority, Delta Delta Delta because she posed in Playboy. The organization stripped Bryan of all membership privileges for appearing nude in the magazine's "Girls of the Big 12".

As of October Bryan was seeking legal action to keep her sorority membership. On Nov. 8, 1996, Kristi was on Inside Edition. The program made the Tri-Delt Headquarters look unorganized and uninterested and the local chapter look like prudes after shovelling the Inside Edition camera people out of the chapter house

Although I'm not against women showin' their stuff in Playboy, I can't believe the stupidity of the sorority members who have done so and then claimed to be surprised when their Nationals start expulsion procedures against them.

There are sororities that don't allow their members to smoke while standing or to drink alcoholic beverages out of the bottle, yet these girls are shocked when posing naked or nearly naked in a mens' magazine is frowned upon??

I also have to wonder what exactly these women expect to come from their posing? It's not for the immediate money ($150 clothed, $250 topless and $500 nude in 1989). Do they think Eileen Ford is going to see the issue and say "Oh my gosh, it's the next Claudia Schiffer with a staple in her bellybutton!"

Maybe it's a form of self-validation being asked to pose for Playboy? I sure hope no woman gets her primary sense of self esteem based upon something like that. Sure, the women in the "Girls of the..." issues are pretty but, hey, it's college! Most girls that age, with professional hair and makeup, are pretty. Any one of my sorority sisters could have had her picture in Playboy, guaranteed, if they had chosen to show up at the cattle call. (well, not everyone I guess since they wouldn't have had space enough)

And the most irksome thing is that some of them try to fight the expulsion. How long has Playboy been doing "Girls of the (whatever conference)" pictorals? A pledge in my sorority did the "Girls of the Big East" issue 12 years ago and fought her expulsion and lost. I'm sure that dozens of women have done the same thing since and I would be shocked if anyone actually had gotten back in after being expelled. Do the girls that pose now actually think it won't happen to them?

I guess my point is just, go ahead and do it if you want to. Just know that it probably will not lead to stardom, and if you are in a sorority you will most likely be kicked out.

I just read the article... Is it true about Phi Mu and the Doublemint Twins? :eek:

There are really sororities that REQUIRE that? Most women I grew up around follow those rules, but I've never known them to be required. That's really interesting!

OK, I've noticed that (warrning - generalization ahead) most of the men in this thread think posing in Playboy should not deserve expulsion, whereas most of the women do. So how about this:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/4pm/on...ylor%20Playboy

Frat Suspended Over Playboy Photo
Wednesday, August 28, 2002
Last updated at 10:03:44 AM PT

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WACO, Texas -- A fraternity was suspended from Baylor University for a year after a picture of some members - fully clothed - appeared in Playboy magazine.

About 50 men and four women, all students at the time, posed on a sand volleyball court, some wearing Sigma Phi Epsilon T-shirts and others waving Baylor pennants.

A student who has since graduated posed nude for another photo and used an alias. The pictures are in the October issue featuring the Big 12 conference.

Officials at Baptist-affiliated Baylor called it a salacious publication and said it runs contrary to the school's ideals. In the past, Baylor administrators have threatened to expel any student who poses for the magazine.

Larry Brumley, a university spokesman, said discipline for the students appearing in the October issue could vary. He declined to elaborate, citing federal student privacy laws.

Elizabeth Norris, a "Playboy" spokeswoman, said some fraternity members called the magazine about a month ago and asked editors not to run the picture.

Sigma Phi Epsilon members at Baylor declined to comment.

Thats stupid they guys were not even naked. Last year there were several pictures taken at the TKE house in the girls of the SEC issue. At least 20 Tekes were in the picture with some nude girls and nothing happened to them which is the correct action. I wonder if anyone will make a big deal about pictures at the Kappa Sig house in the girls of the October 2002 Big 12 issue.

If those guys were just posing fully clothed and not surrounded by naked women, I do not see the big deal. As it has been pointed out, Playboy can be touted as a literary magazine.

However, those two girls mentioned in iamachiogirl's posts....well, who needs a sorority when Playboy is going to open up the world of high fashion modeling to you? :rolleyes:

Playboy at Baylor
 

It wasn't the fraternity that suspended them it was the school. They were suspended for sexual misconduct on the school's code. Maybe they should have been more careful when posing for playboy at a baptist university.

2 points about Baylor and Playboy:

1. People who go to Baylor make a promise to keep certain standards. If they won't or can't keep those standards, then they should not go. To go, and then purposely break those standards is an act of dishonor. Acts of dishonor are beneath the offical standards of all national fraternities and sororities with which I am familiar, including my own (TKE).

So the moral of the story -- If you want to pose naked for public titilation, go to ASU or USC, not Baylor.

2. As far as the Tekes cited above, all I can say is that it's obvious we have a double standard. A woman who poses nude for playboy is not considered a lady and expunged from her sorority and fraternity. A man who reads or views playboy is just considered a natural man. Of course he is into porn. He's a man. It's expected. It's expected by his brothers, and to be honest, it's expected by all of the sorority/fraternity women. Of course, the women shake their heads and talk about those "bad boys." Yet, they can't wait until the next party or mixer to associate with us.

In my view, a bunch of Tekes taking pictures with playboy (with clothes or not) violates Teke standards. I won't recite them here, you can go to www.tke.org. I am sure the events at Baylor also violated their national standards. In theory, the moral standards for male fraternities are not different than for female ones. But, in practice, standards are a joke among male fraternities. None of us really believe or follow them.

What is surprising to me is not that we don't follow them (after all, most people will do whatever they are allowed to get away with), but that the women tolerate it. They can't get enough of us "bad boys." And to me, that makes them even more pathetic than we are. You have to get some credit for knowing who you are: "To thine own self be true." At least we admit we are pigs.

Well it must not be against TKE IHQ standards because they are well aware of the picture and even a few guys that work for IHQ have congradulated them on it. No Grand officers that I am aware of but who knows?

Congratulated them on it? Exactly! Which was my point.