BRANDS & TATOOS

[QUEEN]

DST BRAT,
THANK YOU FOR EDUCATING THOSE WHO DID NOT KNOW!!!
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT IT IS AGAINST PROTOCOL.
SOMETHING OF WHICH I STAND FIRM ON!!!!!

IF IT IS WRITTEN YOU MUST ABIDE BY IT!!!!

[PrettyKitty]

I know people who are branded in all NPHC organizations. Now it is a matter of choice, but is in frowned upon. For some orgs, it was not a choice or option back say 50-60 years ago. I am not sure who was the first to brand, and but I don't think it was Omega b/c they were Omega Men b4 they switched to the "Que dawg" image...

Anyways, branding has been around within NPHC orgs for decades, like other traditions that folk have tried to stop or change...it's not going to happen...people will continue to get them, whether their Nationals likes it or not...

oh, just so that u know, I don't have a physical brand...but Zeta will always been branded upon my heart :-)

------------------
The Epitome of Style and Grace, Always Exemplifying Good Taste, A Zeta Woman, A Finer Woman, That's Me!

Before we were officially initiated in our sorority, my sisters and I were going to get identical tatoos with the sorority letters. After we became members, we learned that it was in poor taste and actually belittles the organization to brand cherished symbols on body parts. We decided against it, because we would not want to hurt or undermine our beloved sorority in any way.

This is in reference to the comment made by dstbrat. You mentioned a scenario that if one of you members were arrested and their mugshot showed their brand or tatoo. What would be the difference if they were wearing a T-shirt or a charm? I personally have three brands and I don't regret either one. I have never heard of a policy that says anything about branding or tatooing (voluntarily) is against the rules. To me it shows a since of pride. A brand is going to stay with you for the rest of your life, showing your true love for your organization. I am not saying that you have to have one to love your org. but it d**n shows others how much you care. Blue Phi til the day I die.

[DiSTinguished]

Pain3_97
My Soror was talking about our Sorority, not PBS, so that is why you never heard of the rule...

PrettyKitty,
As far as who was the first to brand, I actually had been told that the Ques were the first ones (although I won't swear by this since I am not a Que). However, it has nothing to do with Omega versus Q-dog....every brand I have seen has been of the Greek letter Omega (with some variations), but I have NEVER seen a brand of a dog, so you can't use the terminology to date the origins of branding.

SOPHISTICATED1,
Hope this answers your question....

Originally posted by Pain3_97:
This is in reference to the comment made by dstbrat. You mentioned a scenario that if one of you members were arrested and their mugshot showed their brand or tatoo. What would be the difference if they were wearing a T-shirt or a charm? I personally have three brands and I don't regret either one. I have never heard of a policy that says anything about branding or tatooing (voluntarily) is against the rules. To me it shows a since of pride. A brand is going to stay with you for the rest of your life, showing your true love for your organization. I am not saying that you have to have one to love your org. but it d**n shows others how much you care. Blue Phi til the day I die.

[dstbrat]

queen is correct in that i was referring to my sorority in particular. additionally, while brands and such are voluntary actions, images or symbols that are copywritten can be regulated. in our case, that is the justification that National provides. they legally own the right to the symbols and certain images so they can sanction people who use them without permission like vendors and individuals who permanently affix them to their bodies. to me the difference in brands and tats is that they are forever. shirts and charms can be removed.

[rho4life]

any new input on this topic????

[sigep533]

It's your choice I beleive.

[madmax]

Link to branding article.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...ures/brand.htm

[MareImbrium]

For us it's just in our policy that such a thing be not condoned. The policy goes to say that if we do tattoo or brand our letters on ourselves and have sexual intimacy, then the idea is that the guy is pretty much having sex with the rest of the sisters in the chapter.

I once saw some people with branding and it just looked horrible. It's like why would anyone conceive of having such an idea to do so? Some people say it's to show dedication.

[alphabug02]

My Chapter (which is National) doesn't belive in branding or tatooing with our letters or crest, but there are a lot of us who have gotten a tattoo of our mascot - my self included.

Personally mine is in a discreet place which I can cover up, and it was something I choose to do on my own. There are Frats at my school that required branding or tattooing, for us it's not something that is pressed on anyone, but I think for those of us who have done it, there is a sense of pride.

Then again I think we have a way cute mascot - Yay Ladybugs !!!

[Lady Pi Phi]

There are orgs. that require branding and tattoing? Isn't that a little extreme? Not to mention hazing. Getting a tattoo should be a very personal decision and it's not for everyone (I have 3 and love them), but others couldn't do it. To force someone is just wrong!

[alphabug02]

I totally agree, with you Lady Pi Phi on the hazing thing. Actually the two organizations that do it are both National. One requires getting a tattoo of their organizations letters on the ankle and the other brands their letters on the their arms or shoulders. I can't say if there have ever been any exceptions for not getting it done (medical reasons, just not wanting it ... whatever). I don't know if it is still going on, but I know that it went on every year I was an undergrad. I am also pretty darn sure that this is NOT something that their National organization knows about or condones.

Personally, I didn't even go with my sisters to get my tattoo, in fact most of them didn’t even know I had gotten one for weeks. It was a choice I thought about for two years and when I felt sure of my decision, that’s when I got it.

Tattoos are permanent and I think it is horrible that anyone should be forced into the decision of getting one, if it is not what they really want.

[ChaosDST]

Originally posted by Lady Pi Phi
There are orgs. that require branding and tattoing?

I know you're speaking of an "informal requirement," so I would answer YES, but NO.

*I'm not an expert on other orgs., but I do know that*

Within the organization that is most known for branding, there remain members who do not have brands. Since being branded holds great significance to those within that organization, NOT being branded is usually a very deliberate and personal thing. In other words, members tend to have very explicit and "valid" reasons for NOT doing so.

So, the weight that the "informal requirement" holds would more depend on the chapter than on the norms of the organization, as a whole.

[Sister Havana]

At IU, the Phi Beta Sigma guys got branded. they had large Sigmas branded onto their forearms. I'm not sure if this was required or if it was optional...I never asked any of them.