Quote:
Originally posted by wrussell
I am wondering how this community feels about the intake process. Do people still want to keep on pledging people to near death because it make it seem like the worked for their letters and others didn't? Do people feel the the NME should be more about a holistic improvement in the pledges life?
I believe in the latter. I think pledging should be about improving yourself physically, mentally, and emtionally. I think that people should put more emphasis on the purpose of the organization, on the pledges reasons for pledging, on how to run a successful organization, on how to put on programming, and so on and so forth.
As far as hazing goes, if we are talking about getting paddle to death...uh...NO! That is stupid IT SERVES NO PURPOSE. If we are talking about pushing someone past their limits, the limits of who they are rigt now, well that to me has a purpose. As long as we keep that purpose alive, we would find that hazing wouldn't be a problem much longer.
|
I can only speak for my views, which are based on how my organize views pledging (we still call it that).
To me, the purpose of pledging is to prepare the pledge for active membership. This means getting them into the habits we expect of members (in our case, doing service, attending/participating in meetings, being a leader in the chapter, paying dues, wearing insignia, etc), educating them in our organization, its purpose, history, structure, etc, and overall giving them the knowledge that will serve them well as a Brother.
Pledging is not and should not be thought of as a gauntley, elimination course, 'survivor course', 'boot camp experience' or the like. While we would like pledges to improve themselves in the experience, this improvement needs to be done in a positive manner that does not violate the spirit of our organization. Hazing has no place in the pledge program.
I would think that every (if not all) GLO has set down policies regarding their pledging/NME programs and hazing. For my organization, we have our National Pledge Standards, Membership Policy, and Risk Managament Policy, all of which are both on our website and included in our National Pledge Manual.
(This is an area that I am somewhat knowledge about, as I've been a pledgemaster and have taught courses on pledging.)
Also, personally, I don't agree with the renaming of pledge/pledging into "new member" and "new member education". I don't agree with the attitude by some that just USING the term 'pledge' is hazing. Pledges are NOT 'new members', they are really 'probationary members'. There is no guarantee that a pledge will complete the process and become a full member. So using such a term gives, to me, the wrong impression.
Hope this is of interest.