Switching Family Trees ?!?!
 

Hi y'all, I just got back from my college's Homecoming a few weeks ago and when I visited my Chapter house I was surprised to find out that some of the girls had been switching Bigs and Littles!

Has anyone ever heard of this before? Some of the Alumnae are really upset including a good friend of mine who just found out that her family tree has died because her grand-little switched family trees.

I feel like someone should say something to the Chapter, but right now I'm still too dumb-founded and upset at the whole situation to figure out where to begin.

Has anyone else ever ran into anything like this or have any idea what (or if) we should say anything to the Chapter.

I've never really heard of someone just switching bigs/littles before, so that does seem kind of weird...

I have, however, seen some people become 'adopted' by another big if their own big was really busy or graduated right after getting a little.

Some people might disagree with me, but I personally do not feel anything should be said to the chapter.

While it might be really upsetting to hear that 'families' are dying out because littles are switching or whatever, you have to remember that the whole 'family' thing is a small detail of being part of your sorority. What you should really be concerned about is if the chapter is doing OK and that the *chapter* isn't closing. 'Families' are just a small part of the overall organization that you are a part of and love. If there are no longer members of the 'family' of bigs/lils, then so what? I'm sure you and your fellow sisters still love your sorority no matter what :)

In our Chapter people always "adopted" a Big sis or Little sis unofficially, but now they are changing while their Big sis is still in school or right after she graduates with out ever telling her.

It's just hard to come back and watch another sister say hello to a girl she was told was in her family line and then have that girl, explain that she took a different Big Sister- it's just so... weird.

I agree that the focus should be on the Chapter as a whole, but this situation also seems to be hurting morale, because people are not happy with whom they originally were paired with for Big/ Little's.

I don't know why so many New Members in the last two years have chosen to take different Bigs; it might be that our Chapter has a bad system of Big/ Little Matching. If you have any thoughts on this subject as well please let me know. :D

This is definitely wrong and the chapter should have a talking to about it!!! :mad:

It is one thing to adopt a little if her big drops out of school and is never heard from again...usually, someone within the family tries to "take care" of her. That's not always possible, and I can understand an adoption. My 5 adopted a big because her big dropped out. But she dang sure was still in my family and proud of it!!

But to switch after someone graduates, especially if they come back to visit, and not claim the old family at all anymore??? Let alone if they're in school?? That would be so upsetting I can't even imagine.

We had sponsors (ruby sisters are what they're called now, I think) for the first 2-3 weeks of pledging and then picked bigs & littles. This was mutual selection...same as bid matching.

Your big doesn't have to be your bestest friend in the sorority forever, but it is a special relationship and not one you should switch at the drop of a hat.

WIthout trying to sound above it all, this is the main reason why Alpha Delta Pi (and many other GLOs) discourage "bigs & littles" in all situations. Y'all are sisters and that's what's important! :)

But sometimes situations arise when a Big and a Little aren't matched very well. I've seen that happen, and in that case, I think it's fine if a Big/Little adopts another one. It seems kind of rude, though, to just switch...I mean, if I didn't have time for my Big or Little, or didn't really have much in common with her, I wouldn't mind if she were adopted by someone else but if she just cut me off I'd be kind of upset! :)

honeychile, you know I heart you, but, well, you are kind of sounding above it all. (This regards my GLO, so that's why I am a little defensive) I'm glad the "no bigs/littles" policy works so well for ADPi and everyone loves it, but that doesn't mean it is good for any other group. I also believe there are groups who have eliminated big/little and then brought it back.

One of our main recruitment philosophies has always been that more members join because of friendship with ONE MEMBER than any other reason. It would be completely contrary to this philosophy to eliminate big/little. We do have "Advantage Teams" which enable the pledges to meet every sister over the course of her pledgeship.

Bigs, littles and family lines only turn into "cliques" if the members allow it to happen. If that is a problem in a chapter, cliques will form no matter what the membership program.

I *think* what honeychile was trying to point out with ADPi (correct me if I'm wrong, honey! :) ) is that we still have that special friendship with one member (diamond sisters) rather than one sister "above" another (big/little). ADPi hasn't eliminated the philosophy of that type of relationship, they've just "redirected" it in a different way so that there isn't as many difficulties with the relationships between sisters, for whatever the reason.

I agree polarpi :) That is what I thought honeychile was trying to say too.

When I first thought of rushing for ADPi, I really wanted to because of an ADPi I met my first semester here. I didn't necessarily join because of her, but I did start going to recruitment events because I thought "if her sisters are as awesome as her, I would definitely like to get to know them". During the recruitment events I met so many awesome people, and *that* is what made me want to be an ADPi more than anything :) She ended up not being my diamond sister, but it didn't bother me, because we still have a great friendship :)

ETA: As far as bigs/littles go, I don't see why they feel the need to be switching. Just because you are a big/little does not mean that you need to automatically become instant best friends... you'll still be sisters whether or not you have every single thing in common :) ;)

No offense to the ADPi's here, but it sounds like Diamond sis is just a euphamism for big/little- different in name only, and probably operates that way at most schools.
I don't know any ADPi's at Pitt anymore, but I do know that only a few years ago when I pledged KD they still had big littles.
I'm certainly not attacking ADPi, it just does sound like you guys are trying to be "above it all" on this subject (to quote the phrase used here) when in reality it just seems like a euphamism.

Exactly - especially since so many ADPis call people their "Big <>" or "Li'l <>" which is something I've seen a lot on here.

Personally, I think it sounds like the chapter sucks at Big/Little matching. My chapter's had a few instances of girls being "adopted" but for the most part it was either because the big graduated or because the big was a crappy big who never showed up to anything when active or alum. I think a big thing to focus on here is that big/little pairings should be thought of carefully. Even if somebody really wants a little, if they aren't a good match, don't give them one! It should be somebody who not only has the time/money for a little, but somebody who they can relate to. I've seen so many girls who beg to have a little, and then they never do anything with them - it is supposed to be a special bond and you shouldn't do it just to have a little, you should do it to have THAT little that you love so much.

I started to post a long explanation of what I posted, but I've decided against it. Both polarpi & texas*princess have stated the case well, and if diamond sister is being used as a euphamism for a big/little relationship, that chapter is wrong in their operations. Our policy is a level playing field at all times, no one sister above another at any time.

However, if the whole big & little sister gig is working for your sorority, by all means, keep it! The last thing I mean to do is to insult another sorority in their policies.

How is big littles a power relationship? How does a big have "power" over a little? It's just a name.

How is ADPi's set up different than the tradition big-littles that most groups use?

It's the same sort of names as a family has- even though my brother is 20, no matter how old he is he'll always be my little brother :)

Hmm... Seems odd that people would be switching family trees, especially if it means families are dying out (aside from unusual situations like a big who deaffiliates or graduates). I know how hurtful it is to have no "family" (I am a founder and my only little deaffiliated :( ). But even if you have no "family", you do have a "family" - all your sisters. I think that's what texas*princess is trying to say.

As far as calling it big/little, diamond sisters, or whatever goes - no matter what you call it, you're still doing the same thing. The "older" of the pair makes sure the "younger" one feels especially welcome. She gives her gifts, takes her to dinner, makes sure she meets any sisters she might not have already met, may play a role in ritual, and so on. The difference is that some sororities (ADPi is one) place more of an emphasis on calling the relationship something that doesn't imply a hierarchy - once the "younger" of the pair is initiated, she is completely equal with the "older" sister.

I think my sorority did a pretty good job at matching bigs and littles. Both the new members and sisters would rank each other with #1 choice being the person you really want for a big/lil. Then, we were matched accordingly. If you became really close with someone, most likely they would have you as number one or number two. My big sister was my number one choice and my little was my number two. Unfortunately, my little sister dropped after a year. I became really close to a girl who's big sister never came around. During her junior year (my senior year), her big dropped so I adopted this girl. I now have a HUGE family with a bunch of grandlittles, great grandlittles, great-great grandlittles. This is really the only time my chapter will let someone adopt. If the big graduates, you can't be adopted. It wouldn't be fair. It's not as if this girl was being a bad big and never came around...they graduated and went alum. We've only had one situation where a little was adopted by someone else while the big was still active. This was because the two weren't matched right and there was a lot of problems between the two. Also, all adoptions must be approved by our new member coordinator before they become official. This prevents random switching.
We usually don't match our bigs/lils until about 4 weeks into the new member program. It gives everyone time to get to know each other better. There's a chapter on our campus that matches during bid day. They've had so many problems with their big/lil situation.
I don't think you should say anything to your chapter about it. Maybe instead work with the new member coordinator in trying to make a new system of big/lil matching so that both remain happy. I'm not sure what you all are using now and when bigs/lils are chosen. Also, maybe instill a policy that says you cannot adopt someone else their big went inactive. This should eliminate the problem of having girls come back to their chapter post-graduation only to find out that they no longer have a little.

ZTA Angel, I like the idea of waiting longer to match up Big's and Little's and I will pass that idea on to my VP of Member Ed. I also like the idea of Big's and Little's making a numbered list, but I don't quite understand the process, is there any way you could clairfy it for me? I understand that if two people are each other's number one's then they should be matched, but how do you match up all the others.

Does anyone else do Big/ Little matching diffrently?

Here's the number matching procedure:

The sisters and the new members are divided up.

The sisters will get a piece of paper that lists all the new member names with a box next to each name. The sisters will then go and rank them. Let's say there's a pledge class of 31. You would rank them 1-31.

The new members will get a piece of paper that lists all the sisters who want to take littles. They then rank the sisters.

The new member coordinator and assistants match these girls up by their rankings. It's long and tedious for the new member coordinator but it creates happier results.

I was going to say sisters and NMs each write their top 3, but I think I like ZTAngel's idea better. :)

That's how we did it...ranking top 3

Slight correction....at no time is the "younger" of the pair not equal with the "older" sister. Once a woman accepts a bid into ADPi, she has the same voting privileges of a current member. The only things they have not experienced until their initiation is ritual related stuff and membership selection.

I think the main thing behind our emphasis on the no "big-little" is that a diamond sister is a special friend that connects with the Alpha member. Your diamond sister is your sponsor through initiation, and some diamonds do give their diamond sister a gift, but at other times it may be a gift from the chapter rather than the diamond sister.

As honey has said, I'm in no way trying to say that diamonds are better than big/littles....if this system works for you, keep it! ADPi has found that it was better for them to switch from big-little to diamond sisters as part of our TME (Total Membership Education) program. I think mainly ADPi's use "big diamond" and "little diamond" because members of other GLO's (and even GDI's) understand the big-little concept and don't understand what a diamond sister is, plus they're using it to signify a specific diamond sister...otherwise, it gets pretty confusing saying my diamond sister for both your sponsor and the sister you sponsored!

Well that's certainly the same as KD and probably most, if not all, other NPC sororities.

How is this different from big littles????

once again, same in KD and other GLOs

[QUOTE}
As honey has said, I'm in no way trying to say that diamonds are better than big/littles....if this system works for you, keep it! [/quote]

There's no difference in the "systems", outside of different names

Once again, how is this different from big littles? Now you're even inserting big and little into the name.... so the only difference is adding a word, "diamond"

Nothing that has been said makes diamond sisters any different from big/littles besides the name. It's just a more PC term- like PNM instead of rushee. Maybe something has been missing from the explanations, but I don't see ANY difference.
To put down the traditions of other GLOs (that aren't harmful in any way!!!) and say that your way is better (which no one's outright said in those words... but it's surely coming across that way) and you're glad you don't do big littles, etc. isn't right.

I think we're talking semantics at this point, but I'm going to give this one final try.

The best analogy I can give for a diamond relationship is a non-GLO one. I'm into genealogy, and I've joined several lineage societies. You must be invited to join a lineage society, and that person acts as your sponsor. Once your application is accepted, and you're a full member, you thank your sponsor - usually with a gift. But your sponsor is never considered above you, just as those you in turn sponsor are never considered below you. You are all members. To further emphasize the point, I worked on a DAR project with a woman from Virginia, and was surprised to hear that her Patriot was George Washington's brother. Did that give her any special privileges? No - because all of our ancestors were fighting the same war, and are considered equal whether a general or a private.

I hope that helps, because I think the subject has been exhausted. Again, go with what works for you. Our International policy is to discourage any big/little relationships, and, if in getting involved in this topic offended anyone, I apologize for me and my sisters.

Here, you can't switch big sisters. If your big deactivates, maybe you'll be "adopted" by someone else, but your original big stays your big sister. There's no adoption for early graduation. (Which I wish there were!! Then I wouldn't feel so abandoned!!)

Phi Sig we have Sapphire Sisters, which are really "big/Lil" but eliminates one being "above" I suppose. We never switch (and I know some pairings haven't worked out too well, and it is sad for those people who aren't close with their "sapphire, diamond, Key, Big whatever you call her, sister, but hey we all are sisters and there has to be someone you are close to. I say as long as your big and you get along during your new member period that's the most important, but after that if you are not super close, that's kinda sad but there's no reason to "switch". I think that's crazy.

I definitely agree w/ what polarpi has stated as well as honeychile.

I just cut out this particular paragraph because it is something that I wanted to comment on.

I do say my "big diamond" or "lil diamond" only because both my diamonds have the same first name, and we have several other girls who have the same first name, so if I say "SuzyQ - my big diamond - " it is simply because it helps clarify who I'm referring to. :)

To met, diamond sisters sound a lot like Kappa's key sisters. They are just one facet of our Kore families, and to my understanding, were even not an original part of the Kore family. As I know it, they were added later, after it became apparent that collegians really missed the big-little system.

We are not supposed to refer to the Key sisters as "big keys" and "little keys" either. Admittedly, our chapter does it fairly often, simply because it makes things easier to distinguish, and girls from most other chapters on our campus are far more familiar with bigs and littles than they are key sisters. Every now and then we get reminders from our alumnae about the correct terminology.

Just out of curiosity, how does ADPi do the diamond sisters? Our key sisters are supposed to be assigned on bid day, and their is no revealing or selection involved. (My apologies if I missed this in an earlier post.)

I've never thought of my big being "above" me or my little being "below" me. My little and little little were both older than me, for Pete's sake. My big is older than her big.

The point of this whole thread was about problems with relationships being changed, whether you call it a big, sapphire, key sis, diamond, poopoo pal, whatever. It's NOT because anyone has a higher or lower status, it's because people are saying "I don't feel close to you, so I am severing this relationship" and feelings are hurt. Unless you stop calling someone your big, sapphire, key sis, diamond, poopoo pal, whatever, after pledging is over and never acknowledge them as such again, the same problem would exist.

Point taken. I'd argue that the new members and sisters aren't "quite" equal because of that one aspect, that the NMs haven't participated in ritual yet, but I know a lot of sororities, ADPi in particular, go out of their way to put the NMs on equal footing with sisters in all other aspects.

AEPhi draws more of a distinction between NMs and sisters. NMs, for example, are not allowed to wear the Greek letters. We also informally use the big/little terminology; according to our national office, we "shouldn't", but nothing happens to you if you do. I honestly don't know anyone in my chapter who was ever bothered because she was referred to as a little.

Now that we've completely hijacked this thread... :p Back on topic, I never saw a formal "adoption" in my chapter when I was an active, but sometimes when a family did something together, they'd call up a sister or two who had a smaller or nonexistent family, and ask them to come along. That was nice, and mixed things up a bit.