Potential New Members, New Members, Brothers-to-Be, Recruitment, etc.

[Kevin]

What you state is not universally true. Not every fraternity refers to its pledges as "pledge" -- or at least that's not what their organization's national norms prescribe. Sigma Nu, for example refers to pledges as candidates (although often pledge is used). The words mean the same thing.

I agree as to the PC bullcrap though. Candidates or pledges have no guarantee, and in some chapters, not even a likelihood of being initiated. To call them a BS name like "Brothers to Be" is silly. Of course, in some organizations (not judging rightness or wrongness) initiation is actually guaranteed after you become a "brother to be".

Personally, I think the phrase is a little silly sounding. As for not calling it "rush", and instead "recruitment", I see no difference. Whatever is the norm where you're from is what should be used. Speaking from a semantics standpoint though, I prefer "recruitment". For fraternities, it's more accurate as on most campuses, I'd recommend a chapter actively recruit members that would complement their chapter rather than to have "rush" which implies they come to you.

Change for the sake of change is bad, but so is tradition for the sake of tradition.