Sweethearts wearing letters?

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

First of all, not allowing pledges to wear letters is hazing. It's also hazing to call them pledges instead of New Members. [That topic, however, is debatable, and let's not go there.]

Secondly, just because we don't know what IIKA stands for doesn't mean that a sweetheart who has worked for your chapter doesn't appreciate what you do and who you are, and wants to strive for your fraternity to succeed in the highest degree. And you know what? That means something.

Not allowing pledges to wear letters or calling pledges "pledges" is not hazing. For example, if a man chooses to accept a bid from Sigma Chi Fraternity, from that point on he is considered a Sigma Chi pledge and may wear shirts, etc., with the words "Sigma Chi" or "Sigs" but not the Greek letters Sigma Chi. This is a national regulation. I believe that Alpha Epsilon Phi, Kappa Alpha Theta and Pi Beta Phi have something similar in place regarding "new members" wearing letters. As for pledges being called pledges, I'm fairly sure other NIC/IFC fraternities do this as well. However, I am not sure about any NPC organization doing so.

Also, many organizations have strict or specific rules (policy) about non members wearing their letters. With guidelines as to how and why.

[kathykd2005]

Originally Posted by TSteven

Not allowing pledges to wear letters or calling pledges "pledges" is not hazing. For example, if a man chooses to accept a bid from Sigma Chi Fraternity, from that point on he is considered a Sigma Chi pledge and may wear shirts, etc., with the words "Sigma Chi" or "Sigs" but not the Greek letters Sigma Chi. This is a national regulation. I believe that Alpha Epsilon Phi, Kappa Alpha Theta and Pi Beta Phi have something similar in place regarding "new members" wearing letters. As for pledges being called pledges, I'm fairly sure other NIC/IFC fraternities do this as well. However, I am not sure about any NPC organization doing so.

Also, many organizations have strict or specific rules (policy) about non members wearing their letters. With guidelines as to how and why.

The reason we are running into a brick wall with reference to what hazing is, is because NPC has a very distinct definition of what it is. According to NPC, hazing IS not allowing women to wear letters, and calling them pledges instead of new members. Although fraternities and sororities share many likelesses, therein lies the difference between NIC/IFC and NPC organizations.

[fantASTic]

Actually, in my state, calling a new member a pledge is against the law because it's hazing. Nationals also condemns it. It is reminiscent of the days in which a new member was required to participate in unfortunate events in order to initiate, aka hazing.

At least in AST, not allowing a new member to wear letters IS hazing, because it's telling them that they can't do certain things unless they're initiated. It's the same thing as requiring them to wear certain clothing all the time, which IS hazing.

Whether a certain org's nationals have strict rules about non members wearing letters is one thing. However, if Nationals does NOT say that it is verboten, then it is left up to the individual chapter, and it shoudln't matter to us.

[kathykd2005]

Hazing is defined as any action or situation with or without consent which recklessly, intentionally or unintentionally endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, or creates risk of injury, or causes discomfort, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule or which willfully destroys or removes public or private property for the purpose of initiation or admission into or affiliation with, or as a condition for continued membership in a chapter or colony of an NPC member fraternity. All member groups will affirm their policies denouncing hazing and inform their membership of this NPC position denouncing hazing through mailings and through their inter/national magazines.

http://www.npcwomen.org/policies/p_resolutions.php

Kind of cryptic, but it covers all of the bases, I guess.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by kathykd2005

Hazing is defined as any action or situation with or without consent which recklessly, intentionally or unintentionally endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student, or creates risk of injury, or causes discomfort, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule or which willfully destroys or removes public or private property for the purpose of initiation or admission into or affiliation with, or as a condition for continued membership in a chapter or colony of an NPC member fraternity. All member groups will affirm their policies denouncing hazing and inform their membership of this NPC position denouncing hazing through mailings and through their inter/national magazines.

http://www.npcwomen.org/policies/p_resolutions.php

Kind of cryptic, but it covers all of the bases, I guess.

Since Alpha Epsilon Phi, Kappa Alpha Theta and Pi Beta Phi do not allow their "new members" to wear their letters prior to initiation, I guess the NPC doesn't consider it hazing. Or at least it doesn't fall under the y'all's Unanimous Agreements.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

Actually, in my state, calling a new member a pledge is against the law because it's hazing.

I'm sorry, but I simply can't believe that. Aside from the fact that the First Amendment would trump any law that prohibited the use of a word, which is what you're talking about, there are too many fraternities that still officially use the word pledge. I have seen lots of legal definitions of hazing, and I have never seen a legal definition, as opposed to, say, the NPC's definition, that would cover calling a "new member" a pledge. (And I think it's debatable that the NPC definition covers it as written, but I will certainly defer to the NPC's interpretation of its own policy.)

[RutgersPIKE]

I guess its a good thing im NIC because we a)use the word pledges and b)dont allow pledges to wear letters, we allow them to wear PIKES but not the letters. I dont see why that is hazing, its just like making your high school sports team, if you dont make the team, you dont get a jersey, so why is it different for fraternities or sororities, if you dont make it, why should you wear the letters?

[Tom Earp]

Originally Posted by RutgersPIKE

I guess its a good thing im NIC because we a)use the word pledges and b)dont allow pledges to wear letters, we allow them to wear PIKES but not the letters. I dont see why that is hazing, its just like making your high school sports team, if you dont make the team, you dont get a jersey, so why is it different for fraternities or sororities, if you dont make it, why should you wear the letters?

Mind set for some!


What ever one wants to call it, you still allow nebies to wear some kind of recognition and that is good!

It is still called ADVERTISING Your GLO for others on campus, right?

Gosh, who may seem some neat guy or gal and say hey, I want to talk to you about Your GLO! OOPS, may get a new prospect! Da, Me for not getting it!

[RutgersPIKE]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

Mind set for some!


What ever one wants to call it, you still allow nebies to wear some kind of recognition and that is good!

It is still called ADVERTISING Your GLO for others on campus, right?

Gosh, who may seem some neat guy or gal and say hey, I want to talk to you about Your GLO! OOPS, may get a new prospect! Da, Me for not getting it!

Yea we can advertise our GLO to others on campus by the brothers wearing the letters and if we do allow others to wear the shirts, we allow them to wear shirts with PIKE on it and not ΠKA, since pike is our nickname. Im sorry but I just see the meaning behind the letters as being more than just the letters.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

Actually, in my state, calling a new member a pledge is against the law because it's hazing. Nationals also condemns it. It is reminiscent of the days in which a new member was required to participate in unfortunate events in order to initiate, aka hazing.

Which state?

At least in AST, not allowing a new member to wear letters IS hazing, because it's telling them that they can't do certain things unless they're initiated. It's the same thing as requiring them to wear certain clothing all the time, which IS hazing.

That may be an Alpha Sigma Tau rule, but it isn't for all organizations. Again, my understanding is that Alpha Epsilon Phi, Kappa Alpha Theta and Pi Beta Phi do not allow their "new members" to wear their letters prior to initiation.

Whether a certain org's nationals have strict rules about non members wearing letters is one thing. However, if Nationals does NOT say that it is verboten, then it is left up to the individual chapter, and it shouldn't matter to us.

There is specific language in Sigma Chi Fraternity's Constitution or the By-laws that states who may wear letters etc.

[KyleMcGuire1983]

Originally Posted by TSteven

Not allowing pledges to wear letters or calling pledges "pledges" is not hazing. For example, if a man chooses to accept a bid from Sigma Chi Fraternity, from that point on he is considered a Sigma Chi pledge and may wear shirts, etc., with the words "Sigma Chi" or "Sigs" but not the Greek letters Sigma Chi. This is a national regulation. I believe that Alpha Epsilon Phi, Kappa Alpha Theta and Pi Beta Phi have something similar in place regarding "new members" wearing letters. As for pledges being called pledges, I'm fairly sure other NIC/IFC fraternities do this as well. However, I am not sure about any NPC organization doing so.

Also, many organizations have strict or specific rules (policy) about non members wearing their letters. With guidelines as to how and why.

Is that really in your Fraternal law or just in your tradition? I recently found out that Sigma Nu has no such rule against pledges wearing letters....we just don't let them do in 99% of our chapters because it's messed up.

[Tom Earp]

I do not really see what the Heck the big deal is.

Sweet Heart of XYZ is showing they are ladies who feel XYZ and the members are special. They are not pronouncing them selves as members are they?

Same things go for Moms or Dads. LOL!

PNM wearing letters show who they are affiliated with, wearing the Coat of Arms is a no, no.

This is a form of Advertising for that GLO!

Goodness, the popcycle unstuck from an oraface!

If Your GLO has rules then do not do it. If it is not spelled out ask!

The problem today is not enough GLOs are proud enough to let others know their affiliation by wearing letters, C of A, or Pins! Is that saying you are not PROUD of Your GLO?

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by Tom Earp

I do not really see what the Heck the big deal is.

Sweet Heart of XYZ is showing they are ladies who feel XYZ and the members are special. They are not pronouncing them selves as members are they?

Same things go for Moms or Dads. LOL!

(1) PNM wearing letters show who they are affiliated with, wearing the Coat of Arms is a no, no.

This is a form of Advertising for that GLO!

Goodness, the popcycle unstuck from an oraface!

(2) If Your GLO has rules then do not do it. If it is not spelled out ask!

(3) The problem today is not enough GLOs are proud enough to let others know their affiliation by wearing letters, C of A, or Pins! Is that saying you are not PROUD of Your GLO?

I agree for the most part. But a few things I would like to address.

1. What is the difference with respect to hazing in allowing a pledge/new member/affiliate to wear letters but not the coat of arms? If it is hazing to not allow letters, then why is is not hazing for the coat of arms?

2. Yes, if the GLO has rules about it, then they should be followed.

3. Sigma Chi pledges are encouraged to wear shirts that spell out Sigma Chi. Which quite frankly, gets the word out quite well. Especially to those that may not know the Greek Alphabet. No "What does EX mean" questions. At least not yet.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by TSteven

What is the difference with respect to hazing in allowing a pledge/new member/affiliate to wear letters but not the coat of arms? If it is hazing to not allow letters, then why is is not hazing for the coat of arms?

Taking that very good question a step further, if it is hazing to forbid a pledge/new member/affiliate from wearing letters or the coat-of-arms, isn't it also hazing to forbid them from wearing the badge? Doesn't having a separate pledge/new member pin tell the new members that they're different and can't do certain things unless they're initiated?

Just asking.

[TSteven]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Taking that very good question a step further, if it is hazing to forbid a pledge/new member/affiliate from wearing letters or the coat-of-arms, isn't it also hazing to forbid them from wearing the badge? Doesn't having a separate pledge/new member pin tell the new members that they're different and can't do certain things unless they're initiated?

Just asking.

Nice follow up.