Plegdes wearing letters???

Originally Posted by LadyTical

That would never happen with Zeta Phi Beta. There is no way anyone who is not a national member of the organization would get away with that.

That's right.

A member can get away with using sorority money to buy personal items but they can't get away with using letters.

[Psi U MC Vito]

We don't let pledges wear letters, at least not in my chapter. The main reason is that they don't know what they represent, so they really appreciate them. We believe strongly in earning your letters through learning about the fraternity and everything it represents. And our pledge pin doesn't have any letters on it, so you can't tell a Psi U pledge just by the pin unless you know alot about greek life. Even most greeks in my school don't know what our pledge pin looks like.

[knight_shadow]

^^^ Great post.

[ASTalumna06]

Well, sorry if that's how I came off. Not my intention at all.

And you're missing my point about the actual letters, and choosing them, and needing history to make them important... so I'm not going to attempt to explain that further

And by saying that my letters are "meaningless" to other people, is to say that they don't know anything about my organization. My letters mean little to you because you're not part of my organization. Just like yours mean little to me. Do I understand that your letters are important to you and that they mean something, yes. Because I'm part of a Greek organization I understand that. But I couldn't tell you one thing about your organization, so when I look at them, all they are is printing on a shirt. And that's not insulting your organization, that's simply your take on why a new member can't wear letters.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

Well, sorry if that's how I came off. Not my intention at all.

And you're missing my point about the actual letters, and choosing them, and needing history to make them important... so I'm not going to attempt to explain that further

No, I get what you're trying to say. While this may have been the case with several organizations, it's not wise to assume that this is the way all organizations do it. Unless you're a founder yourself, you really don't know what went into choosing letters.

And by saying that my letters are "meaningless" to other people, is to say that they don't know anything about my organization. My letters mean little to you because you're not part of my organization. Just like yours mean little to me. Do I understand that your letters are important to you and that they mean something, yes. Because I'm part of a Greek organization I understand that. But I couldn't tell you one thing about your organization, so when I look at them, all they are is printing on a shirt. And that's not insulting your organization, that's simply your take on why a new member can't wear letters.

That's not where I was going with that. Like MysticCat's organization, wearing letters is something reserved for brothers of my organization. If you don't know the history of my organization and the meaning/significance of our symbols and ritual, you are not a brother. Therefore, you can't wear letters.

[pbear19]

For my local organization at the time I was in college (I don't know how much they may have changed policy in the time since I graduated - I keep in contact with them but not in regards to things like this) we were not allowed to wear or display letters until after initiation. Not because we hadn't earned them. But because until initiation we weren't considered members. Only members of the sorority could wear letters, and we were still considered to be, for lack of a better term, aspiring members. At least, that is how I interpreted it.

When the more PC terms came about, we struggled quite a bit with what to call our pledges, because we didn't like the term 'new member' as that didn't embody what our pledges were. They weren't new members, not yet. To us, new members were those sisters who had most recently been initiated, not those ladies who had most recently received bids.

At one point when it came up for discussion about wearing letters, we decided to allow Taus (pledges) to wear the recruitment shirt for the recruitment that they joined under. They participated in that recruitment, so it seemed fair to acknowledge their participation. I'm not sure how logical that may seem to others, but it worked for us.

I thought I would toss in the example as yet another reason to withhold letters until after initiation, one which has absolutely nothing to do with hazing.

[SweetHardt]

I am a Delta Zeta at Shepherd University. The sorority cannot say we are not allowed to wear letters , but out of respect we did not wear them until we were initiated. It can be considered hazing to tell members they are not alllowed the letters,

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by SweetHardt

I am a Delta Zeta at Shepherd University. The sorority cannot say we are not allowed to wear letters , but out of respect we did not wear them until we were initiated. It can be considered hazing to tell members they are not alllowed the letters,

not at you but at the broad definition of hazing.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

not at you but at the broad definition of hazing.

For real!

I don't care what hazing law says. If you're not a member of my organization, you're not wearing my letters.

[fantASTic]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

For real!

I don't care what hazing law says. If you're not a member of my organization, you're not wearing my letters.

And THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is where the real issue comes in. In NPCs, it is a generally accepted rule that new girls are new MEMBERS. Members is the key word in that sentence. In other organizations, this is not true - your pledges or aspirants or whatever the heck you call them are NOT members.

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

And THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is where the real issue comes in. In NPCs, it is a generally accepted rule that new girls are new MEMBERS. Members is the key word in that sentence. In other organizations, this is not true - your pledges or aspirants or whatever the heck you call them are NOT members.

If someone doesn't know the full scope of your (general you) organization and what everything means, I don't see how they can be viewed as members. Giving someone the perks of being in your organization when they don't understand it is a bit odd.

Not wrong, just different.

[pbear19]

Originally Posted by fantASTic

And THIS, ladies and gentlemen, is where the real issue comes in. In NPCs, it is a generally accepted rule that new girls are new MEMBERS. Members is the key word in that sentence. In other organizations, this is not true - your pledges or aspirants or whatever the heck you call them are NOT members.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make in my post *about my local organization TLS*, why we never used the 'new member' terminology when the word 'pledge' was dropped *at the time I was in college*. In a way they were still potential new members, even though they had been given a bid. Potential members, prospective members, aspiring members, etc. But not members, and therefore not 'new' members.

ETA - in our case, after we stopped calling them pledges, we called them Taus.

*Edited again to specify the organization and the time frame, since as I mentioned in the first post I do not know what the exact current policy is.

[Psi U MC Vito]

I know D Phi E at least at my campus lets their pledges wear letters.

[ta kala]

Only initiated Kappa Deltas may wear the crest. This is because our badge is the center of our crest, and only initiated members may wear the badge.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by ta kala

Only initiated Kappa Deltas may wear the crest. This is because our badge is the center of our crest, and only initiated members may wear the badge.

Here's where I'm intrigued. If, as has been said in this thread, new members are members and, therefore, can wear letters, why can't they wear the badge or crest? Isn't that hazing too?