[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by naraht

What is hazing arguably could differ by gender (forcing fraternity pledges to wear blue skirts every monday (hazing) vs. forcing sorority pledges(almost certainly not))

I see what you mean but using words like "forcing" makes it seem stronger than a requirement or criteria. GLOs have different attire requirements and criteria for meetings, conventions, rituals, etc. That is a different tone than "forcing" especially when you're talking about prospective members.

"Forcing" sorority pledges to wear dresses or skirts can be considered hazing if the context warrants such a consideration. One example of this is how not every woman is absolutely thrilled to be "forced" to wear skirts and dresses.

Originally Posted by naraht

But within a gender, and more specifically within those groups of one gender within a council, I just can't see the rules on what is Hazing to be that different. Under what situations would Kappa Alpha Theta revoke a charter that wouldn't get a Delta Delta Delta chapter at least a *significant* visit from a board member? (just to pick two NPC sororities)

I don't know the intricacies of Kappa Alpha Theta and Delta Delta Delta. More importantly, what Kappa Alpha Theta does or does not do doesn't determine what Delta Delta Delta does or does not do. It is fine if they are operating based on general criteria, school policies, and hazing laws that have been established after years of working through this stuff. It is not fine if people think they can apply personal opinions and their own GLO's likes and dislikes to other GLOs.