right/wrong

[bluemay414]

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

I'm not telling you that. Your university administration and your lawmakers are. I'm not taking a position on whether they're right or wrong.

Your name calling doesn't fix anything. No matter what you say or believe, hazing is ILLEGAL, whether the definitions are right, wrong or indifferent.

I've been around this stuff for years as an undergraduate, an advisor and a division officer. Frankly, some people act like spoiled little wet behind the ears rich kids who, as near as I can tell, have no clue about how much trouble this stuff can cause. How's that for name calling? But this isn't a matter of who can yell the loudest and call people names. It's a matter of survival for not only our chapters, but the Fraternity and Sorority system as we know it.

I went through rush and pledging before this stuff was against the law, and frankly I doubt that you have any idea of what went on in that period. If you think that our brotherhood stronger, you're wrong. That's rhetoric instead of reality.

You can yell "naive" all you want, but some of us have a whole lot of experience that you (global you) don't and we can use that experience to come to logical conclusions that you don't have the background to even consider.

Times have changed, and the stuff that your daddys and I went through have to be memories -- or our chapters will be. I hope that you don't discover that the hard way, given present circumstances.

University administrations and state legislatures have decided that they have to stop hazing because little things lead to bigger ones and sooner or later someone gets badly hurt or killed. Maybe some have over reacted, but that's beside the point. They have the elected or appointed right to do that.

On both sides of the argument, it's the famous, "give them an inch and they'll take a mile" syndrome. Unfortunately, the cliche' is too true all too often.

Insurance companies have decided that because of the rules and laws that have been put in place, they won't insure chapters that don't obey those laws. Suits have been filed against everyone from chapter members, officers, advisors, nationals, house corporation members, university administrators and even parents. Even if you're insured, if you break the law or the rules, the insurance company isn't going to pay damages -- they're going to cancel the policy and run the other way. They have the power to do that, too.

Want to write a few million dollar checks out of the chapter treasury?

When are you all going to figure out that it doesn't matter whether study tables, quizes, scavenger hunts, house cleanups, sleep deprivation, lineups, hell week and the like may not be dangerous? Somebody in authority at the university, the legislature or the GLO have decided that they won't be tolerated. Did I mention that they have the power to do that until a court decides they're wrong?

That doesn't even touch on drugs and underage drinking.

The bottom line is this -- take a look at the threads in this forum. Check out how many chapters have been suspended. See how many university administrations are cracking down. Look at how many nationals have been backed into a corner and forced to crack down on chapters for things they might have overlooked in the past. Consider how insurance rates have skyrocked. More than that, look at how many lawsuits have been filed. Even worse, consider how many people have been hurt or even killed when little things went just one step too far.

Then, when your chapter is gone, consider who is the moron. Who is niave. It's not the ones who enforce or obey the rules, it's the ones who break them.

Don't be an idiot.

Blah! Blah! Blah! Still.......far too many STILL get away with it!!! To many people look the other way.....don't want to be uncool....are too chicken to get envolved or are so shallow and desperate to be with the 'cool' crowd that they put up with this crap just so they can say they are in the 'best' chapter. Please.....I am going to throw up. I am so sick of listening to you so called experts say that this is ILLEGAL. Well......either you are so totally clueless or you are guilty and know it is going on but are afraid of your precious chapter being caught and closed and therefore ruining your so called status as being in the so called 'best' chapter.

[AKA_Monet]

Hazing is illegal and it is wrong. Hazing is defined by State. I suggest you review your state's laws against hazing. Hazing is never tolerated--even if the potential new member desires it. Why? Because I cannot pay more in dues when hazing gets out of hand as it often does. It is a matter of "Murphy's Law".

But, you are free to ask DIRECT questions and hope to get a DIRECT answer...

[jessiwannabe]

okay yeah it's illegal now what. what do you prefer tell me please. If you created a organization how will you know if they are worthy or not?

[jessiwannabe]

no some of that stuff you just named is harmful take the harmful shit out damn how many times do i have to say that shit. IF IT CAN HURT YOU OR DEMEAN YOU DON'T FUCKING DO IT IT'S YOUR CHOICE I'M NOT FOR THE HURTFUL PART DAMN JUST TELL ME A GOOD WAY THAT I ASKED FOR DAMN IT

[jessiwannabe]

NOTHING WILL CHANGE IF NO ONE MAKES AN EFFORT TO I'm all for not hurting anyone one but tell me a good way to go about if you know so much

[macallan25]

Hahahahhahhahhahha, easy there psycho.

[jessiwannabe]

Just trying to make a point you keep missing the point (nothing harmful nothing harmful)

[REE1993]

Originally Posted by jessiwannabe

Just trying to make a point you keep missing the point (nothing harmful nothing harmful)

*rocking back and forth* \

"nothing harmful nothing harmful nothing harmful..."

[Dionysus]

Originally Posted by jessiwannabe

Just trying to make a point you keep missing the point (nothing harmful nothing harmful)

Well, they're just trying to point out that point blank...

[ladygreek]

Originally Posted by jessiwannabe

Just trying to make a point you keep missing the point (nothing harmful nothing harmful)

You need to go to the Delta Sigma Theta national website and see what is defined as hazing by that organization. Hazing=those Intake activities not sanctioned by the national body of the organization. Whether those activities are harmful is subjective.

For example, what if b3eing forced to clean someone's home causes you to have an allergic reaction, because they have a cat and you end up in the hospital. No one INTENDED for it to be harmful, but it was. In addition it was demeaning and degrading.

[SWTXBelle]

I LIKE MLA style - am I the only one? Footnotes make my head hurt.
Also, the book is nice and thick - useful when being attacked by those opposed to good grammar and spelling.

[KappaKittyCat]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I LIKE MLA style - am I the only one? Footnotes make my head hurt.
Also, the book is nice and thick - useful when being attacked by those opposed to good grammar and spelling.

I guess I just prefer reading the body of the work uninterrupted by citations. If I'm using a piece for research I first want to read it over to get an idea of what it says and the tone. Then I go back and find passages I like, at which point I care about the source. The in-line citations, to me, break up the reading process. I guess it comes because I'm a historian by training and I like reading "stories." And for what it's worth, the Chicago Manual of Style is no magazine... I imagine a good whomp on the head with it would cause a nice, shiny bruise.

PS: I too am a grammar Nazi, but I refuse to say "an historian" unless the pompous punks who insist upon the use of "an" before an aspirate H will say "an hockey puck."

[AlphaFrog]

While we're all being huge nerds, this is my favorite grammar book. I had a professor my freshman year of college (Honors King Aurthur's Literature, Writing Intensive, great class) that made us all get one. Includes such phrases as: "The subject is that part of the sentence about which something is divulged; it is what the sentence's other words are gossiping about...". It's brilliant, really.

[LPIDelta]

Originally Posted by KappaKittyCat

I guess I just prefer reading the body of the work uninterrupted by citations.

When I read things written in APA, I tend to totally ignore the citations--I guess I must be used to it. Only after I've read through once do I go back and pay attention to who they were citing, if I need to.

(And Kevin, she's in college, hoping to transfer).

[Dionysus]

Haha, you all have this girl cursing.