T-shirt club

[whittleschmegg]

Originally Posted by DGTess

They're a (small) part of the problem - students who can't act as adults because they aren't permitted to. That translates into graduates (read: workers) who can't act as adults either.

Parents and American culture don't allow children to grow up and be young adults. Most American teenagers are catered too bailed out of their problems and excuses are constantly made for their screw ups. How can you expect them in one or two years to understand what going to far is. It is just unrealistic to think that they can make these types of decisions.

For clarification I was hazed I had to do interviews and scavenger hunts and be put into line-ups and sometimes it did get out of control. I couldn't imagine if God forbid someone was killed or something had happened to a potential new member. I earned my letters I say that with confidence and I wouldn't want to go back and have it any other way, but when me and my pledge sisters became older sisters we took steps to make our program positive. It's not my fault that hazing is illegal look at yourself and people of your generation who abused their power and crossed the line one to many times.

Disclaimer: I DO NOT AND NEVER HAVE FELT HAZING WAS THE BEST WAY TO DO ANYTHING. AND BY NO MEANS DO I AGREE WITH THE ACTIONS OF THOSE WHO TAKE PART IN IT.

[texas*princess]

Originally Posted by DGTess

If you couldn't get to know all your sisters in five months, what makes you think someone can now in six weeks? If you had to memorize things about 100+ people just for the sake of memorization, you had a choice to make -- was it worth it to you? Obviously you thought so.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that NA "obviously" thought it was "worth it" to do 120 interviews and memorize them. The post did state, and I quote: "Trust me, I would happily have lived without it." and "I had to wait to wear my letters too but that period of waiting (and "earning" them as some people just love to call it, which I call hooey on), really added nothing to the sum total of what I got out of my greek experience."

But I digress... that's for NA to clarify

NA -- good post

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by DGTess

I don't appreciate the psychoanalysis.

Questioners rarely enjoy being questioned.

Disappearing, keeping my mouth shut, not pointing out inconsistencies, not working to get people to think about what I see as hypocrisy, and playing rah-rah-cheerleader are not ways to make things happen.

Granted, but you're not proposing what could be re-integrated into TODAY's college climate in light of why current rules have been put in place; you're just complaining that things aren't how they used to be and why that's so wrong.

And your claim that you're just "pointing out inconsistencies" isn't quite reflective of the message you're sending --- you flat-out say in your blog that today's greek organizations aren't providing real leadership opportunities. And then you reduce it to questions of how asking greek members to vote for someone in a pageant or contest is considered leadership. That's just silly. And simplistic. And unfair to the community as a whole.

What about the women (and men) who are in huge chapters that also have a chapter house? Do you have any idea how many "real world" issues they have to deal with? Leases and laws and paying bills and maintenance ON TOP of all the internal organization stuff. Some of those chapters must have yearly budgets well over a million dollars. How can you demean the real experience those members are having by taking on that level of responsibility and leadership? And how can you overlook the need to protect the investment in that chapter, in that facility, in their relationship with the university and greek system, through real and effective risk management measures?

But I also refuse to believe that a six-week pledge period somehow gives you time to make a decision for life.

I've actually heard that it's more like 8 weeks normally, but tomato tomahto. And why is your opinion on this right more than someone else's? How long "should" it take and who gets to decide that? Did I know after 2 months of pledging that I for sure wanted to be in my sorority? Absolutely. Truth be told, I was sure sooner than that, but we still had to wait it out for the full 5 months. Your message seems to be that "intelligent" women shouldn't be "herded" and "forced" to make a lifelong decision after just 6 (or 8) weeks, but aren't you, on the flip-side questioning these women's intelligence and whether they're capable of making that decision for themselves? Who are you to tell them they're not ready to do so?

If you couldn't get to know all your sisters in five months, what makes you think someone can now in six weeks? If you had to memorize things about 100+ people just for the sake of memorization, you had a choice to make -- was it worth it to you? Obviously you thought so.

TexasPrincess already did a fine job of responding to this (and thanks, TP ). And doing the interviews had nothing to do with my "getting to know" anybody, it just was what it was, something we had to do because we were pledges. Just because I knew one sister was from Shippensburg and another one was from Philly didn't really tell me squat about "who" they were.

ETA: I have no idea if I did the split-quote thing correctly through this, so if it's a garbled mess, I apologize...

[adpiucf]

A great reason to belong to a "t-shirt club" --> today, hazing is illegal.

Fraternities and sororities are non-profit organizations that must follow the law. A collegiate member is not above the law.

So to those of you who break the law today, bravo. You are "real" men and women, without a doubt. It must be very nice to scoff at the laws that the rest of us have to follow.

[LPIDelta]

I agree with those who have cited the leadership challenges for being in a sorority today, and it does not just extend to large chapters. Just tonight I had to discuss the business/management sides of sorority membership with a chapter of 30 women. They are learning to make decisions about their organization based on the financial bottom line as well as trying to balance personal relationships and use interpersonal skills in dealing with one another. All important things for when they enter the workforce.

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but DGTess, it seems to be that you are against following the herd or being sheeple, yet you are advocating that things should be done the way they were in your day, therefore, adhering to tradition (following the herd) regardless of whether it works for today's students or organizations. This seems, to me, to be hypocritical. Maybe you can explain that further... I too am curious about your thoughts on the Greek system in universities. If not in university communities, then where?

[Denise_DPhiE]

Originally Posted by LPIDelta

I agree with those who have cited the leadership challenges for being in a sorority today, and it does not just extend to large chapters. Just tonight I had to discuss the business/management sides of sorority membership with a chapter of 30 women. They are learning to make decisions about their organization based on the financial bottom line as well as trying to balance personal relationships and use interpersonal skills in dealing with one another. All important things for when they enter the workforce.

Which is why I love our organization and women like you who GET IT. Makes me very proud that you are carrying on the legacy and not subscribing the herd mentality. You go girl!

JSL,
Denise

[nittanyalum]

Sorry, but IMHO, "Coke dates" =/= "interviews" (in the traditional sense)

[33girl]

Originally Posted by nittanyalum

Sorry, but IMHO, "Coke dates" =/= "interviews" (in the traditional sense)

I'm just stating that an interview, which in our case had 3 parts - a coke date, an interview, and a signature - was far from a one-sided thing. It's not like we pledges had to show up, clean the house with a toothbrush and then MAYBE get the interview. It was definitely a mutual getting to know you process and you could choose your own questions. One of mine was favorite band - obviously if a sister and I like the same bands we're going to DISCUSS it not just have me say "oh. ok."

Not everyone is comfortable just going up to new people or having new people approach them in a free form style - interviews gave you a template and a reason to do so. I think as alums we tend to forget this - hell, at 18 some of those seniors were intimidating! I know there's people I might have avoided had I not been required to get interviews. Would I have gotten to know them eventually? Maybe yes, maybe no.

Until we radically change our style of rush and membership selection, how rushees and sorority members relate to one another - who likes who - is going to be the MAIN reason one girl joins ASA and another joins ZTA. To prevent those sort of "getting to know you" activities in pledgeship, or to dilute them into group activities where the quiet members never get to speak up, IMO completely defeats the purpose.

[whittleschmegg]

It's not the interviews that are dangerous but its how they are used. A "new member" interviews a sister and then the next day is asked a series of questions about the interview and the conversation may go something like this:

Sister: Where does sister Melissa live?
New Member: Ummmm I'm sorry sister but i don't remember
Sister: Why don't you know, didn't you interivew her yesterday?
New Member: Yes, yes I did but I do not remember where she lives
Sister: Well can you tell me two things about her that you do remember
New Member: Yes, she has two brother and her major is business
Sister: How about telling me something I don't already know about someone I have lived with for 2 years. First I want you to go and apologize to sister melissa for not knowing anything interesting about her and wasting her time yesterday during your interview. Next I want you to find out 5 things about her that I do not know and tell me tom. when you come and visit me.


The interview was harmless most likely it was an enjoyable time until the next day. The problem is if you give an inch people will take a mile.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SydneyK

Does anyone here know if there's an active attempt to define hazing for Greek organizations. Like, is there a Greek Task Force somewhere, with representatives from NPC, IFC, etc., whose goal is to clearly define hazing? It seems there's a need for such a definition; I wonder if we'll ever get one.

I have not heard of such an attempt. Of course, the NPC has its definition of hazing (you have to scroll down to get to it).

And like Kevin, I think that many orgs would be reluctant to cede that kind of authority to those outside the org.

Even if such an attempt were made, though, it would still leave open the problem of as many as 51 different legal definitions of hazing throughout the country, plus hundreds of collegiate definitions (remembering that a college's concern with hazing extends, or should extend, beyond GLOs).

Originally Posted by adpiucf

But I disagree that the law is unreasonably broad. Laws should have some specificity to allow people to police themselves, but should be open enough to allow broad interpretation -- to keep up with all of the things people will do to try and get "away with something."

I would argue that the hazing laws are able to be interpreted.

I would have to disagree, unless you are using "laws" to mean policies of GLOs and universities. Violation of hazing laws is a criminal offense. One of the foundational principles of criminal law is that the law must be sufficiently clear put to a reasonable person on notice as to what conduct is prohibited. A person shouldn't have to wonder whether a judge or jury will consider doing x a violation of the law. Yes, I know there are the obscenity laws, but as a general rule, allowing broad interpretation = vague = unconstitutional.

I would hazard a guess that almost everything that has been mentioned in this thread as "going to far" (such as interviews) is perfectly legal under legal definitions of hazing, but not permitted under a GLO's policies or institutional policies.

Often, the policies of your GLO are even stricter than the state laws.

I would say that almost always they are.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by LPIDelta

When I did interviews when I was joining my local organization--I had to set up the interview by asking in person, come with a list of questions, be early to the meeting, and then I could get the signature. The point is, nothing was two way--it was all on me. Further, if they didn't like the questions, the sister could refuse to sign. And one sister made me come back the next day because the first day she wanted to watch Days of our Lives. This is the kind of interview experience I am talking about--and it was light compared to what I have seen other people have to do to "get" interviews.

So what happened when I initiated? I knew a ton of useless facts that I had memorized and I knew a little more about the actives, but they did not know me. That did nothing to make me feel welcome in the group and it did nothing to unite us as an organization. It just created a division--and I was involved in everything and I did go to events all the time.

Originally Posted by whittleschmegg

It's not the interviews that are dangerous but its how they are used. A "new member" interviews a sister and then the next day is asked a series of questions about the interview and the conversation may go something like this:

Sister: Where does sister Melissa live?
New Member: Ummmm I'm sorry sister but i don't remember
Sister: Why don't you know, didn't you interivew her yesterday?
New Member: Yes, yes I did but I do not remember where she lives
Sister: Well can you tell me two things about her that you do remember
New Member: Yes, she has two brother and her major is business
Sister: How about telling me something I don't already know about someone I have lived with for 2 years. First I want you to go and apologize to sister melissa for not knowing anything interesting about her and wasting her time yesterday during your interview. Next I want you to find out 5 things about her that I do not know and tell me tom. when you come and visit me.

The interview was harmless most likely it was an enjoyable time until the next day. The problem is if you give an inch people will take a mile.

BOTH of these are hazing and NEITHER is the way to do interviews. Neither of your groups should have been allowed to use them in this fashion and the privilege of doing them should have been taken away. From YOUR CHAPTER -not your whole organization. (And yes LPI, I know yours was local)

We NEVER had to spit facts back out about sisters - I think one time someone jokingly asked me what a sister's pet cow's name was, but it was quite obvious it was a joke. The only time we had sisters complain about questions was when one of our pledges (who was later terminated and probably shouldn't have been initiated in the first place) was asking really crude things along the lines of "do you look at what's in the Kleenex after you blow your nose?" The only hard and fast requirement we had was that we had to call and set up the interviews in advance - and that's just common courtesy. And if a pledge was visiting the house during her free time, some sisters - MANY sisters - would say "what the heck, I've got some time, do you want to do my interview now?"

I'm sorry you guys had such a crappy experience with them, and I'm sorry your chapters were full of jerks on power trips, but that doesn't mean that the groups who used them correctly and successfully should have to give them up - any more than ritual should be eliminated because some chapters made hazing a part of it.

[LPIDelta]

It is sad that such things get banned because a few bad apples ruin it--again, we're back to if you give an inch, someone will take a mile. And while it would be great to tell XX chapter that they can no longer do a certain activity because they abused the privlege, I think we unfortunately default to just banning it all together because it would get pretty difficult to keep up with which chapter could do what.

To this day, I still remember some of the random facts I had to memorize about sisters during my associating period-- I am not scarred or anything by it, but I guess I just wish they would have taken the time to get to know more about me...and more than just things like having a pair of socks to match every outfit or the first and middle names of each sibling!!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by LPIDelta

And while it would be great to tell XX chapter that they can no longer do a certain activity because they abused the privlege, I think we unfortunately default to just banning it all together because it would get pretty difficult to keep up with which chapter could do what.

We keep track of chapters' grades, the number of pledges they took, and their activities so we can give out awards. We keep track of chapters that are on social probation for this or that. Why would it be so hard to keep track of interviews - yes or no?

Sorry for the massive bump, but I was searching for something and realized I wanted to respond to this.

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by Crowboy55

Be Men.

That's insulting.

It's also ill informed and childish.

You don't have to be hazed to be a man.

Some would argue that real men don't take any crap from anyone.

Especially hazing.

Show your real manhood -- eliminate hazing.

Just because that's the way it's been in the past doesn't make it right.

[DEVODUDE]

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

That's insulting.

It's also ill informed and childish.

You don't have to be hazed to be a man.

Some would argue that real men don't take any crap from anyone.

Especially hazing.

Show your real manhood -- eliminate hazing.

Just because that's the way it's been in the past doesn't make it right.

DeltAlum, what an EXCELLENT response and very well stated!!!! I totally agree!!!!! This is similar to what we tell our chapters at very Regional Conclave and International Conference.


ZBT: "Inspriring Todays College Men to Become Leaders Of Tomorrow."