Sweethearts wearing letters?

[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.

[RutgersPIKE]

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.

I agree with that completely that is just another way of singling out who is pledging and who is already initiated. Just like sigma chi, we allow our pledges to wear PIKEs and that gets the word out, as for not knowing the greek alphabet ive had quesions on what is nka, or table k a, or why is pi with letters if pi is 3.145

[33girl]

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.

Our letters and our pledge pin have an open meaning, which is our motto.

Our crest and our member badge have hidden meaning that are only revealed at initiation.

Ergo the letters/crest distinction.

I don't know what the rest of y'all do.

Seriously, calling someone a pledge and/or not letting them wear certain items is not in any state hazing law - unless you stretch it like Rosie O'Donnell's underwear.

(That should kill this thread.)

[SWTXBelle]

The answer is to look to your inter/national headquarters for direction. Not to chapter tradition, but to what has actually been voted on and enacted as the standard(s) for your GLO. I'm sure every NPC and IFC group has taken hazing considerations into account, and it's always best to go straight to the source for information.

[fantASTic]

I'm not claiming to be an expert on hazing laws, and I can't answer all your questions. What I DO know, however, is that we in my chapter DO NOT call new members pledges, because WE, and the other GLO's on campus [excluding the NPHC] consider it hazing. This is a rule that each NPC/IFC group on our campus follows. During my new member period, I learned from my New Member Educator that to not allow someone to wear letters is HAZING. I don't think we would do that if it wasn't actually hazing, because I know most of the sisters get a little angry about it sometimes, and feel that the laws are too strict. We just happen to have decided to follow them.

What you do is up to you.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Our letters and our pledge pin have an open meaning, which is our motto.

Our crest and our member badge have hidden meaning that are only revealed at initiation.

Ergo the letters/crest distinction.

I don't know what the rest of y'all do.

Which raises a very fundamental point that should probably be in any list of what has been learned on GC: There are very, very few statements that can be made that apply to all GLOs. Everybody does things differently -- in some orgs, the meaning of the letters is open, in others it is not. In some orgs, the colors or other symbols have secret meaning, in others they don't. In some orgs, non-initiated members can wear the letters, in others they can't. An on, and on, and on . . .

About the only statement that would apply to all fraternities and sororities is that they are all organizations with some kind of collegiate connection.

Seriously, calling someone a pledge and/or not letting them wear certain items is not in any state hazing law - unless you stretch it like Rosie O'Donnell's underwear.

(That should kill this thread.)

I don't know about the thread, but it killed my appetite for the rest of the night.

[ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl]

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.

Good point. Personally, I think sometimes (and it's usually sororities guilty of this, at least as far as I've seen in my limited experience) the new members are given too much on a silver platter from the get go. They spend their entire new member period essentially being waited on hand and foot, wearing the letters even though they don't know the importance of them yet, and being allowed to do pretty much anything that actives can do with the exception of knowing ritual. It doesn't do much to prepare them for life as an initiated member, because if you're a good one, you are EARNING those letters...it's an investment of time, energy, soul, emotion, and of course money...it's NOT easy breezy like the new member period. I think that's why they tend to drop out right after it...at least for my chapter.

This is definitely not always the case, but I think sometimes knowing the importance of the letters helps members try to represent them a little better. If they aren't really important to you, why bother going to the trouble to represent them well?

[RutgersPIKE]

Originally Posted by ΑΓΔSquirrelGirl

Good point. Personally, I think sometimes (and it's usually sororities guilty of this, at least as far as I've seen in my limited experience) the new members are given too much on a silver platter from the get go. They spend their entire new member period essentially being waited on hand and foot, wearing the letters even though they don't know the importance of them yet, and being allowed to do pretty much anything that actives can do with the exception of knowing ritual. It doesn't do much to prepare them for life as an initiated member, because if you're a good one, you are EARNING those letters...it's an investment of time, energy, soul, emotion, and of course money...it's NOT easy breezy like the new member period. I think that's why they tend to drop out right after it...at least for my chapter.

This is definitely not always the case, but I think sometimes knowing the importance of the letters helps members try to represent them a little better. If they aren't really important to you, why bother going to the trouble to represent them well?

My feelings exactly, I couldnt have said it better myself