Trying to explain things to you people is about like arguing with a brick wall.

Please explain to me how making pledges wear nice clothes, making them get to know every member on a personal level, making them learn fraternity knowledge, making them study, making them respect their house, and putting them in situations where they must learn to depend on their pledge and build some close bonds/trust is a BAD THING?? I really don't know of any other ways that I can put any of this. I'm beginning to think you have the reasoning skills of a 3 year old.

I, at no point, said anything remotely close to "our group is better than others because we haze." I said that the type of things that we do make our chapter stronger as a whole. Our pledges learn to respect and trust each other, respect the house/fraternity, and act present themselves like gentleman. I'm glad though that you felt the need to take the fact that we make our pledges clean the house as one of the points for your response, totally disregarding every other thing that I said we do. Even non-hazing houses that I know of have their pledges clean....not a big deal at all. They are pledges...pledges clean the house. I know of no other house that doesn't do this. SAE at Texas is a very powerful well known chapter in our organization......I can promise you we don't sign guys whose sole purpose in joining is to haze pledges after a year.

Yes.......there is. Thanks for the input.

Yeah, but, Macallan, the kind of guys who pledge SAE at Texas already have a pretty good sense of how to dress like you and act properly. You all are not going to pledge someone without the social background to know those things- and they probably also are already able to form the social bonds y'all have based on the fact that they've been doing that most of their lives, too. My guess is you'd have a pretty similar organization whether your pledges cleaned the house or not.

macallan:

You're obviously talking about a different type of hazing than most of the people on GC think about when they read or hear "hazing." All of it is considered hazing but having a debate when both sides of the argument are talking about different extremes is pointless.

Perhaps there is a difference between hazing and pledge training?
We can all put the word "hazing" into any search engine and come up with many sites with definitions and examples of what hazing is and is not. Many sites show the laws and requlations. Also show the "reasons" or "causes" for these laws and regulations.
Most, if not all, of those are out side of what Mac' listed.

I have not tried that with pledge training...could be interesting....

It all boils down to semantics and who gets pissed off enough to runtelldat.

YES THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Thank you for your kind support and seconding of my motion.:)
That was my point....part two of it was to talk, in detail, about the difference.....

DSTCHAOS;
OK, how about if we cull the argument down? Get off of the extremes? See if we can get to some sort of middle ground.
And also talk out all of this in the contex of rush and pledging....

Yeah, you are correct.

Buttonz:
You may wish to review some of the early postings on this thread, if not all of them.
Mac' did provide a list which you may wish to read and review.

The discussion is going fine as far as I'm concerned, as long as the extremes are duly noted.

The only conclusions that will come from these types of discussions are:

"Good" hazing = good...
"Bad" hazing = bad...
Because...
The legal definition = too broad...
But, doing things that fit into this definition = illegal...
Pledging does not = hazing...
But based on the legal definition of hazing, pledging usually = hazing...
For many organizations, pledging is illegal just as hazing is...
...and all the King's horses and all the Queen's men, or something like that.....

I never said you did -- my response was to Coramoor. Coramoor was pretty clear that he believes the chapters which haze are stronger than the chapters that don't, hence the larger pledge classes in hazing chapters. I only said what I said to you when you said "The right type of hazing absolutely makes your chapter better..." Maybe you meant that the right type of hazing makes your chapter better than it would be if you didn't haze at all, and I interpreted it to mean that the right type of hazing makes your chapter better than chapters that don't haze.

I don't think those are bad things. Like 33girl said, this sounds like pledge training, and I think these things are vital to the success of a chapter.

But, depending on how your chapter goes about achieving these things is what COULD be bad.

And, like DSTCHAOS and jon1856 have said, it sounds like the main difference of opinion here is rooted in semantics. But, some of the things you have talked about (i.e. putting pledges in positions where they are forced to trust each other, cleaning bathrooms, etc.) don't sound much like pledge training - they sound like the "bad" kind of hazing.

Umm, macallan, that's not hazing. That's pledging. As a pledge for most GLOs one has to follow the rules set by their chapter's actives in order to cross into full membership. Everything stated above is done for a reason.

i.e: Wearing nice clothes instructs pledges to be about business when in public.

Getting to know actives: Well they're going to be your Brother or Sister someday so shouldn't the pledges get to know you?

Learning Fraternal history: Do you really want people in your GLO that don't know the ins and outs of your group?

Making them study: Time management and making sure that the GLO's GPA doesn't drop drastically due to pledges' low grades.

The respect thing: If the pledges respect the house, then they respect the people living there, and, if applicable the Fraternity or Sorority the house belongs to.

Learning to depend on their pledge siblings and and building a sense of community and trust: I don't know how socials do things, but in Cultural GLOs, pledges have to form a strong line in order to finish the pledge process. The line has to be such that it cannnot be broken by any means, no matter what happens during the pledge process. If anything happens to one pledge, everybody else on the line has to come to that pledges aid. That builds the sense of community I was referring to earlier in this paragraph.

We in the Cultural Greek community have a word for pledge processes that don't involve at least most of the above: "skating". And no one respects skaters, period.

Yes, I do beleive in many of the things that are now considereded hazing, it is up to each of our GLOs to make the definition of what is and what isnt.

1. Do I beleive in study times! Yes. That is why people went to college isnt it?

2. Do I beleive in having New Associates learn about the Local and The National GLO? Yes. If they do not know, then they are just a club with Greek Letters.

3. Do I beleive in New Associates working as a group. Yes. They in the near future going to have to know who will be dependable and keep the Chapter growing and fruitful.

4. Do I beleive in mentaly or physicaly inflicting of pain on a New Associate. No!

But, this again goes back to what each of our GLOs think and have polociies doesn't it?

I never said it was. You just have a very narrow minded view of what hazing is.

I would imagine it would depend on the GLO wouldn't it?

Nice clothes: Are brothers expected to dress the same way? Or do they just dress nicely as pledges and then they get to be slobs? And, what is the point of having new members dress nicely if pledges don't? The majority of the men in a fraternity are initiated members and they will be the ones who set the standard for the fraternity as a whole. If you want them to be seen as gentleman who present themselves well, then why would that only happen while they are pledges? If it is an expectation for all members, then it isn't hazing.

Making them get to know every member on a personal level: Are the initiated members open and willing to let them get to know them? Why is this only accomplished via interviews? Wouldn't this be better accomplished by arranging for different groups of members and pledges to eat lunch together in a student center once a week or something? In my day, we did have to interview every member, but I REALLY got to know my sisters just from hanging out with them, not from an interview. I really liked them, so I wanted to hang out with them. I selected them because I liked and respected them and that's why they chose to give me a bid. And, there were always a few members who just didn't make themselves available or were too busy to meet with every new member for an interview. If you have members who aren't available or who make a pledge do outrageous things in order to "earn" an interview, or if there is "punishment" for not getting a few of the interviews done, that can lead to problems.

Fraternity knowledge: I don't think anybody believes that learning real fraternity history is hazing. Drilling someone at 3 am when they are sleep deprived, calling them names, making them do shots when they don't know some insignificant fact about a brother who was around 10 years ago.. that's a problem. Learning about fraternity structure and history isn't considered hazing.

Making them study: Isn't everybody expected to study in college?

Making them respect the house and members: Respect breeds respect. Initiated members set the tone. If they respect the house and their brothers, this shouldn't be an issue. If someone is disrespectful, don't initiate them. It's that simple. If initiated members trash the house purposely so that pledges have a huge mess to clean up in order to breed respect, then you're demonstrating a double standard of "respect the house until you live there, then trash it".

Depending on pledge brothers/trust/etc: Again, wouldn't this occur from the role models that your members are? It seems to me that it's up to the initiated members of any group to demonstrate this by supporting each other (helping a brother who is having a family issue, academic problems, etc), using team work to accomplish goals (such as getting a philanthropy project off the ground), etc. And, why do you want them to only have that with each other? Don't you want them working with the whole chapter that way?

And, if you aren't doing the things I pointed out as negative, then why do you call it hazing? And, why give a bid to someone who you don't want as a member just the way they are? Why bid someone whose character you have to rebuild to make them a functional productive member? Fraternities have even more leeway with this than sororities do. They have more time to get to their know their potential members in a different type of setting. So, why not wait until you are pretty sure that they'd be a good member before inviting them to membership?

Your many good points should be heeded as a good point to concentrate on!

I could not agree with you more on all of your points.

Dress like slobs, then the perception will be the same. I have often told my members, wear your letters proudly. Why wear Bud/Busch/Coors, etc. and not make a statement of who you are for others to see.

But cookie cutting dress makes a Fraternity look like just that.

Learning the Chapter and National History is a must or just be a club of wanna be members of a Group.

Treat the new associates as you want to be treated and show them they were good enough because you selected them.

If Active members treat them like crap, they will continually do it and finally it will catch up with them.

I'm just giving some examples of some things that I think are necessary.....obviously i'm not going to sit here and tell everyone everything about what we do. I know the difference between pledge training and hazing. You can haze pledges without it being dangerous and emotionally distressing.

True, but doesnt it depend a lot on what your IHQ poliicy states?:confused:

I think many of agree on many points, but once again it goes to IHQ.

Circles.

Do you honestly think most fraternities today go by what their national's state?

Yes and no.

If yes, they have no problems.

If no, then there could be repercussions from HQs.

Please do not ever think that GLOs are not taken off of campuses.
Example:
Sigma Nu, Un. Kansas.
Lambda Chi Alpha, Un. Mo. , Un. Arkansas, Un. Cal-Berkley.

Many at Un. Co.


This is just to name a few that I know of and there have been many more.

I never said GLO's weren't taken off of campuses.

Members join fraternities, but brothers pledge fraternities. My letters were not purchased i earned them. At the rate things are going freshmen will just go to the books store the day before class and pick up their history book, english book, fraternity letters and be ready for the first day of class. I hated being on line but wouldn't have went any other way

I'll throw my two cents in here.
If you are comfortable with using the word "haze" to describe your brother/pledge interaction, I become concerned.

Having said that, I am not in any way advocating the no-stress instant membership that several inter/nationals espouse.

Where I do have concerns are around these issues:

1. The combination of alcohol and pledge events, especially "voluntary" mass consumption events.
2. Extreme physical conditions, whether it be pushups/situps etc, temperature manipulation, or extreme sleep deprevation.
3. Public events involving unusal clothing or activities expose the fraternity to ridicule.
4. Just from a practical standpoint, house maintenance programs based on pledges tend to have two results; the attitude of members tends to be that " I don't have to do any more work after I initiate" and that most chapters don't have pledges half the school year. Who cleans the house then?

Every event and action involving the pledge program should start with an agreement of what you want the the program to accomplish and then designing events that fulfill those needs. These events should be planned in the least dangerous way possible.

Hanging out in group settings isn't always the best, especially for those who are shyer. Plus sometimes actives (especially seniors) don't come on to campus a lot except for class and to force them to, for example, go to the caf and sit with a bunch of pledges and actives to get to know the pledges just isn't feasible. Everyone has different schedules. I would have never gotten to know some of the seniors when I was pledging if I'd expected them to do that. But I'm glad I DID make the effort to go interview them. I think this is another reason why seniors become inactive sometimes - they get kind of tossed to the side if they can't do "group" things.

You're not supposed to know someone up and down the minute you finish your interview, but as busy as college students are, it's a lot easier to have things that are scheduled and open up a door to get to know someone that way than say "hang out with them, you'll get to know them eventually."

If there are members who don't want to be interviewed or are a-holes about giving their interview just to be a-holes, then that's another story. They should be disciplined, not the pledges.

If you're shy, I rather think setting up a meeting with a stranger and interviewing someone is an even more daunting prospect than sitting at a table with people wearing the same letter shirt as you as a pre-set time. If I was shy and had the alternative, I'd just take a seat at the table before having to make the first move and interview someone.

Members are so over-programmed. Making people interview members in their spare time is just one more thing on an already impossibly long list.

Here is another alternative to the interviews. Make it an all-chapter activity at chapter retreat. Have all of the members interview one another and make their own personal chapter directories. I'd be willing to bet there are seniors who don't know the sophomores, in addition to the new members meeting everyone and getting to know them. It could be kind of fun and loud and a good way to bond. Everyone gets a directory with a sisters' name and contact info on a page and blank questions like favorite color/TV show/fraternity, major/year in school/hometown, big/lil, and walks around filling in the blanks. Maybe even have cameras to take photos together and print them and paste them into your books. That makes it an all-chapter event and accomplishes some good group bonding.

You missed my whole point, which was that some of the MEMBERS may be shy. The pledges may never get to know them if everything is shoved into the constant group, group, group and I think that's sad.

Having it be something that has a structure to it and knowing it's part of the pledge program takes a lot of the pressure off both parties, IMO.

And as far as the over-programming - I think having people feel like they have to hang out at the house or wherever constantly to even see the pledges, or be required to come to endless group activities is FAR worse than a 15 minute interview.

Hazing, Good or Bad?

Trick question, obviously the answer is "great"

god forbid we make them do some pushups...

I think this is easier said too in chapters at the smaller colleges up here .. like in MI and PA, where chapter sizes and new member classes are relatively small. For a senior to do 10 fifteen minute interviews doesn't seem like a big deal, but when we're talking about campuses where quota is 50-70 and that means each senior would be spending more than 10 hours on interviews.. and conversely.. each new member would have to interview 200 women at 15 minutes each, well that's just ridiculous. I definitely didn't find the interviews that I had to do to have any value at all. It all just seemed silly to me at the time.

I think it's a combination of the huge chapters and the members who a-holes about giving their interviews who led to these types of things being banned. And, although my chapter didn't do it, it was fairly commonplace for fraternities and sororities to make their new members do something for each interview they didn't get.. like do a shot, so then they were introducing forced underage drinking. While I agree it should be the members who should face the music for being jerks, when there is a "hazing attitude" growing in a chapter, that's not what happens.

An idea that I like is having a couple members match up with a couple new members for lunch or coffee once a week. The groups change week to week. It's not a huge group that would feel intimidating for anybody, but it's not one on one, which I think, in the long run, is more time consuming.

Oh, I agree. I can't imagine doing that many and of course if quota is that big, there are probably about 150 members as well. In that case, I think drawing names out of a hat or doing it in groups or something would be a good idea.

Believe me, if I knew who the jerks were who said "you have to do so and so to get an interview" and made them a hazing tool and ruined it for everyone else, I would have been at the chapter stringing them up. We NEVER looked at them that way and to know there are chapters who did is as offensive to me as drinking during ritual or the like.

Interviews simply help finding out which pledges have their stuff together and are going to get things done when asked to. You can find out alot about pledges from interviews.

Unfortunately though some members take advantage of the interviews. Like the one member I knew back in the day who made a particular pledge drink so much beer that his Big Sis had to take him to the ER. :rolleyes:

For the larger 100+ chapters, interviews wouldn't work. Too many members, too little time.

Actually they work just fine, there are tons of 100+ chapters that make pledges do interviews. Too little time? If your chapter is worth a crap.....you have a semester long pledgeship.

I also realize you are in a sorority and it is completely different.