Sigma Chi branding - Page 2

Kevin · #16 06-08-2004, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by msn4med1975
Unless you have amazing healing powers most brands don't fade. At least not on any of the men I've seen them on. They weren't forced to get them, everyone in the chapter makes a decision as to whether or not they want them. It's not sponsored by the org and is usually not done in any capacity that is connected to an official fraternity function. Branding may not be your cup of tea but I wouldn't insult an aspect of SOME fraternity culture just because it doesn't line up with your personal values.

Not insulting it. Just observing how for NIC groups, this act probably does fall under the definition of hazing. From the NPHC groups' hazing policies that I've seen, this would probably fall under their definition as well. It doesn't have to be sponsored by the organization to be hazing. You're getting your letters burned into your flesh. I don't think most juries would have a problem finding the connection there.

ZZ-kai- · #17 06-08-2004, 08:44 AM

I agree with many on this thread, that if he is an adult and did this on his own free will, who cares? It's his body, his choice, let him do it. If there were 10 of the chapter brothers doing it, at their own free will and they are all adults - yippe-kai-ayyy! Good for them.

Now, if it's forced on them, or a mandatory pledge event, or done when someone is passed out...etc., then they should be in trouble. But, with all the negative press about Greeks as it is, we should not be assuming that this was a hazing event.

Dedicated2Delta · #18 06-08-2004, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
Not insulting it. Just observing how for NIC groups, this act probably does fall under the definition of hazing. From the NPHC groups' hazing policies that I've seen, this would probably fall under their definition as well. It doesn't have to be sponsored by the organization to be hazing. You're getting your letters burned into your flesh. I don't think most juries would have a problem finding the connection there.

If it was a part of the intake process, then yes it would be considered hazing. However, from my experience, as far as NPHC orgs are concerned, you can't get branded unless you are a member.

And like my Soror Msn4med1975 stated, it is a personal decision whether or not you want to get branded.

Kevin · #19 06-08-2004, 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dedicated2Delta
If it was a part of the intake process, then yes it would be considered hazing. However, from my experience, as far as NPHC orgs are concerned, you can't get branded unless you are a member.

And like my Soror Msn4med1975 stated, it is a personal decision whether or not you want to get branded.

Hazing can be either an official or unofficial part of your intake process. Hazing can also be perpetrated on both members and pre-initiates. Hazing can also be consentual or non consentual. It just depends on your organization's definition. I'm not expecting anyone to change their behavior. I recognize the chances of anything going "wrong" with this are slim. But if you really care (I really am not concerned) you could call your group's HQ to see if it's permissible.

Personally, it's not something I'd be comfortable comfortable calling the head of my organization to tell them we were doing.

DeltAlum · #20 06-08-2004, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
Personally, it's not something I'd be comfortable comfortable calling the head of my organization to tell them we were doing.

This is actually a pretty good point.

Pontificate all you want about adults choosing what they want done to their body, and being old enough to make their own decisions, etc.

At the end of the day, though, would you be comfortable telling your central office what you're doing. If not, you probably shouldn't be doing it.

33girl · #21 06-08-2004, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by pixell
You guys are assuming that the son is telling his father the truth. Chances are when the parents freaked out over the brand, even if he was the one who decided to get it, he's probably not owning up to it. My guess is that if it was voluntary he either insinuated to his dad (or flat out told him) that it was required so his parents would be mad at someone else. Probably just said it was a requisite part of being a member and that not having one wasn't an option.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's some truth to this, considering the way he keeps referring to his 18 year old (probably closer to 19 year old) son as a child. Then again, if the son is blaming his actions on others, he's kind of right.

ZZ-kai- · #22 06-08-2004, 10:35 AM

I don't think anyone here is disagreeing on what hazing is: official or unofficial, mental or physical, pledge or member. But, if this kid did it on his own (pledge or brother), with no pressure or force, then there is no issue here.

All it is, is a dad who disagrees with his sons choice. My parents couldn't belive that I got a few Beta tats on my body, but now they see it as a way I express my dedication to my fraternity. I don't regret it and neither do my parents, and its been 8 years.

If the state were to call a hazing suit against my chapter because I got letters painted on my body (or I branded myself for that matter), I'd go Waco on them in court, because that would be completely ludicris. I question hazing laws.....

preciousjeni · #23 06-08-2004, 10:46 AM

Yeah...what if you DO brand yourself. Would a court be able to call it hazing?

Kevin · #24 06-08-2004, 11:02 AM

I'd assume that the court would only really get involved if say a brother who consented to be branded along with a few of his pledge brothers developed an infection due to the brand and lost a limb (something extreme like that). He would certainly have a good case against his group. Please try to make the case that in a situation where your pledge class chooses to brand themselves that there's no peer pressure. I need a good laugh.

You may not regret it. It may have been purely consentual. The definition of hazing for most of our groups does not care abut either of those things.

ZZ-kai- · #25 06-08-2004, 11:10 AM

If a group of pledges chose to brand themselves, resulting in infection and loss of limb, that is their own fault. The justice system would eat that up and the chapter/national HQ would be sued...blah blah blah. That is why its unfair - because these adults (in most cases) made a decision on their own (assuming no force or pressure), and have to live with the results.

Anyway, how many stupid things did you do when you were 18? I bet you can think of a few.

Kevin · #26 06-08-2004, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZZ-kai-
If a group of pledges chose to brand themselves, resulting in infection and loss of limb, that is their own fault. The justice system would eat that up and the chapter/national HQ would be sued...blah blah blah. That is why its unfair - because these adults (in most cases) made a decision on their own (assuming no force or pressure), and have to live with the results.

Anyway, how many stupid things did you do when you were 18? I bet you can think of a few.

Sure it's unfair. I didn't say it was fair. I did say that this is an example of poor risk management -- which it is.

Dedicated2Delta · #27 06-08-2004, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
Hazing can be either an official or unofficial part of your intake process. Hazing can also be perpetrated on both members and pre-initiates. Hazing can also be consentual or non consentual. It just depends on your organization's definition. I'm not expecting anyone to change their behavior. I recognize the chances of anything going "wrong" with this are slim. But if you really care (I really am not concerned) you could call your group's HQ to see if it's permissible.

Personally, it's not something I'd be comfortable comfortable calling the head of my organization to tell them we were doing.

Personally, I could care less as well.....like I said, it's a personal choice. Either you want to get branded or you don't. I have never heard of pledges getting branded (not saying that it doesn't happen) but that is just from my personal experience. Especially in the NPHC orgs, seeing as you can't even wear letters until after you are initiated/crossed. So when I hear of branding the last thing I think of is hazing. Most of the people I know who are branded couldn't wait for it to get done. They were excited about it!

ZZ-kai- · #28 06-08-2004, 12:00 PM

Just so we are on the same wave-lengths here, please explain to me how this is poor risk management. This may be poor personal risk management on ones part, but that is a choice they make. Chapter risk management plays zero part in this incident (again, assuming this was not a 'hazing' event forced upon them).

Crossing the street outside of a cross walk is also considered poor personal risk management.

Quote:

Originally posted by ktsnake
Sure it's unfair. I didn't say it was fair. I did say that this is an example of poor risk management -- which it is.

preciousjeni · #29 06-08-2004, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Dedicated2Delta
Personally, I could care less as well.....like I said, it's a personal choice. Either you want to get branded or you don't. I have never heard of pledges getting branded (not saying that it doesn't happen) but that is just from my personal experience. Especially in the NPHC orgs, seeing as you can't even wear letters until after you are initiated/crossed. So when I hear of branding the last thing I think of is hazing. Most of the people I know who are branded couldn't wait for it to get done. They were excited about it!

In NPC and IFC orgs, pledged are considered "new members" of the organizations. In other orgs, the pledges are considered "aspirants" but do not become members until they are initiated.

I can't IMAGINE why a "new member" would want a brand or why an active would want to brand a "new member" who isn't fully part of the organization. To me, that's giving something sacred to someone who has not yet earned it.

I'm sure in orgs where pledges are "aspirants," a pledge who got a brand of his/her org would be dismissed from the Intake process for his/her lack of respect. Then that pledge would have to deal with the fact that he/she is not a member but has a lifetime mark!

Kevin · #30 06-08-2004, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ZZ-kai-
Just so we are on the same wave-lengths here, please explain to me how this is poor risk management. This may be poor personal risk management on ones part, but that is a choice they make. Chapter risk management plays zero part in this incident (again, assuming this was not a 'hazing' event forced upon them).

Crossing the street outside of a cross walk is also considered poor personal risk management.

If a bunch of pledge brothers and myself decide to go off and get branded after we are initiated -- and even if we do it on our own accord, and then something bad happens.. say a serious infection -- the group as a whole can be held liable.

Any time your letters are involved the actions reflect back on you. Whether or not this is official chapter programming is really beside the point. Check out your organization's risk reduction guidelines sometime. A lot has changed in the last 8 years.