Quick Question for some Lambda Chis

[DeeZeeOE07]

On my campus we still sort of do big bros/little sisters and my boyfriend wants to be my new little sister's big bro. All this really means is they get shirts made but he's kind of excited. I wanted to do the shirts like this:
Her shirt with Delta Zeta greek block letters with Lambda Chi Alpha in english going across it. A Chop here that I'm friends with said it was against their rules to do that but a lot of girls have shirts made like that who aren't dropped or sweethearts. So I'm wondering if that's a national rule or just their chapter? Also, for his shirt I'm doing the same thing but the opposite, (Lambda Chi Alpha greek letters with Delta Zeta in english) My president said it was allowed from our side but is that ok for him to wear that? I wanted to know before I got them made. Thanks!

[Albert109]

I know of no rules governing shirt making, but there is an issue regarding having little sisters. A Resolution was passed in '90; the gist of which that there can be no little sisters - the wording as such:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity hereby disallows any type of women’s auxiliary organizations perceived as or resembling "little sister" groups to exist within the Fraternity.


But Shirts seem to be a non-issue as far as nationals are concerned.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Albert109

I know of no rules governing shirt making, but there is an issue regarding having little sisters. A Resolution was passed in '90; the gist of which that there can be no little sisters - the wording as such:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity hereby disallows any type of women’s auxiliary organizations perceived as or resembling "little sister" groups to exist within the Fraternity.

I understood her to mean the practice on many campuses of sorority members having a member of a fraternity designated as her "big brother," not of an organized (or even informal) little sisters group.

[le996]

As far as the shirt goes there is nothing in our national by-laws that prohibit it, as far as I know and I consider myself fairly familiar with them. That is, it's ok for a non-member to wear a shirt with the English lambda chi alpha on it and it's ok for our name to appear with other fraternities and sororities.

Any sort of formal recognition from from the chapter of a little sister organization and/or recognizing a brother to formally have a little sister, like they would have a little brother by LCA is against our national by-laws. However, if DZ has some organization for this, I believe Choppers would be allowed to participate.

[Tom Earp]

This goes back some years ago when there were big Brother/Sisters groups and IHQ felt that with the new equal laws coming about, they decided to stop this process and concentrate on the male proponent part of Fraternity.

It was because of this that it was discontinued. In some cases, it was becoming so very strong.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

This goes back some years ago when there were big Brother/Sisters groups and IHQ felt that with the new equal laws coming about, they decided to stop this process and concentrate on the male proponent part of Fraternity.

Most if not all fraternities have banned little sister orgs. The reasons were typically a combination of a potential threat to single-sex status and the increased liability that such orgs could bring about for the fraternity.

I still don't think, though, that the OP is talking about any organized thing.

[Albert109]

le996, I may be misunderstanding you, but I believe you're saying that we can't be little brothers of a women's group. This isn't the case - ie it only applies to us being Big Brothers of a woman's group. We can still be little brothers of big sis's

[33girl]

Originally Posted by le996

However, if DZ has some organization for this, I believe Choppers would be allowed to participate.

This isn't anything sponsored or sanctioned by DZ - there is not a group of "little brothers" being picked by DZ. This is basically individuals picking who they want to be their big/little brothers and/or big/little sisters.

[Albert109]

We can be Little Brothers of Big Sisters, but the other way (being Big Brothers for Little Sisters) is straight out a no-go. Can Lynn Chipperfield weigh in on this? This is the sorta thing he does....

[GammaZeta]

WHO CARES!

If you guys want to have a little sister/brother just do it.

What's going to happen? Are the LXA police going to come down to your campus with purple and gold lights flashing to take the t-shirt away?

Do what you feel is best for you.

[Shane Foley]

Who cares? I do!

The reason that the Fraternity does not allow little sisters is because this creates a second class of membership. This could threaten Lambda Chi Alpha's ability to operate as a single-sex organization. Is it likely that someone will file a lawsuit against the organization and threaten the its single-sex status? Probably not. However, it doesn't seem to be worth the risk in my opinion. Then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.

Some are trying to limit the ability of single-sex organizations to operate (www.calstate.edu/pa/clips2007/september/17sept/rights.shtml). Lets not give them the ammunition.

Shane Foley (and proud to sign my name to my posting)

[GammaZeta]

Shane, I think there are two types of laws/regulations that HQ has:

1. common sense rules for the enjoyment, safety and preservation of everyone - risk management, banning kegs, no underground chapters, ritual, etc.

2. then there are the rules/regulations that try to rob individual chapters and brothers of any individual identity - these "2nd" class of membership, everything outside of a strict set of guidelines is considered hazing, etc.

It's good to have a certain amount of uniformity. But it is also good to have a certain amount of uniqueness to each chapter. After all, chapters need to adapt and change depending on their environment.

I think that the application of this "little sister" rule is a little too Nazi-esque. As the original poster stated, it really is just a t-shirt and a sense of pride between a LXA dating a DZ; that they want to help each other out and watch out for each other.

I'm sure many, many chapters do not follow this rule (I know of several right now on the east coast).

I assure you, this will not, in any way, shape or form, ever be some sort of starting point to allow women in LXA.

[john1082]

I have a different perspective on little sister programs - I know that isn't how this thread started out but some of us have some very strong feelings on the matter. let me get it out in the open: I'm glad they're gone.

At one time each fraternity had a more or less formal little sister program. Ours were known as Crescents or Crescent Girls. Originally a way to have some sorority girls around to help with rush and social events, the program morphed into something that was close to unmanageable.

The Crescent chairman had a budget to recruit Crescent Girls. Some houses gave this officer almost as much as (or in some cases at least as much as) the High delta received. The existing Crescent Girls sometimes wanted veto power over the incoming 'class' of Crescent Girls.

They sometimes had chapter supplied budgets for independent activities. This alone should raise all sorts of red flags from a risk management perspective. We had no way to monitor or control what they did.

Some Crescent Girls wanted veto power over active chapter associations, after all, "We're the cool girls who only hang with the cool guys . . ."

If a brother was dating a Crescent Girl and they broke up - LOOK OUT!

At this point you can readily see how divisive they could be and often times were.

Add to this mess the legal issues associated with a ladies auxiliary and our desire to remain the single sex organization and the need to really be a single sex organization to secure and MAINTAIN that status . . .

It all came together about the same time and that resolution was passed. Not all agreed with it, but having been an undergrad with a large Crescent Girl contingent and then watching the entity that existed at North Dakota and to a lesser extent at Texas Tech, I am glad that they're gone!

[Ottor 246]

Originally Posted by DeeZeeOE07

On my campus we still sort of do big bros/little sisters and my boyfriend wants to be my new little sister's big bro. All this really means is they get shirts made but he's kind of excited.

Everyone...

Seems like I'm late for the party, but I read this a little differently than most of you. I don't see anything in this post about a "little sister organization." To me, this looks like what we used to call an "exchange." Basically, we would have a mixer with a sorority. Brothers would "adopt" the sorority pledges, and sisters would "adopt" the AMs. The AMs would go to the sorority house for an hour or so before the main party, where big sisters would give us t-shirts and trinkets with our letters on them, and the sorority pledges would go to our house for a similar reception. Then, we would all meet at one house or the other and have our mixer.

There was no "organization" to it, other than organizing the party. There were no meetings or anything like that. If you ran into your "big sister" on campus later, you'd say hi, maybe tease each other a little, and that was about it.

This may not be allowed anymore either, I don't know. After almost 20 years of "risk management," is anything still allowed? But in my opinion, exchanges were just harmless fun, and I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find out that some chapters still have them.

[GammaZeta]

Ottor just summed up this topic perfectly.

"After almost 20 years of "risk management," is anything still allowed?"

I'm of the opinion that our chapters be given a longer leash.