Initiation

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by Thetagirl218

If I got a dollar for every time some non-greek as me that, I would be rich!

Probably every Greek could say that. I was guilty of the confusion before I was Greek as well, thank you Dazed and Confused. Also, with the word "ritual", some people hear the word and think of human sacrifice and torture so they think that ritual=hazing. For the OP, a quick definition of a few important and often confused terms....

Initiation: A ceremony that makes pledges/new members into full members for life. Almost all GLOs reveal secrets in the initiation ceremony (except DU). Of course I only have experience with my own GLO's initiation ceremony, but I would bet that the founders of every National GLO, and most locals, designed a beautiful, moving initiation ceremony that does not involve hazing.

Ritual: An all-encompassing term for several ceremonies that are limited to initiated members and pledges/new members (except DU). Some GLOs only consider initiation to be ritual. Ceremonies held usually include an official beginning to the pledge/new member period, initiation, and a ceremony to induct graduating members into the alumni/alumnae phase of membership. These rituals were designed by the founders of your organization and have likely changed very little if at all since the founding of the organization. Again, I would bet that hazing was not intended to be a part of any ritual ceremony. Whether a chapter follows their ritual book may be another story, like Kevin mentioned.

Hazing: Many people disagree on the exact definition of hazing, but I think most would agree that hazing is any activity, action, or attitude (usually directed toward new members) that causes or has the potential to cause physical or mental discomfort or harm. Hazing is against the values of any GLO founded on brotherhood or sisterhood (which is all of them), which is why it is not a part of rituals designed by founders. As if being counter to the ideals of every GLO isn't enough, hazing is also illegal.

[notyouraverage]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

Initiation: I would bet that the founders of every National GLO, and most locals, designed a beautiful, moving initiation ceremony that does not involve hazing.

which is why it is not a part of rituals designed by founders. As if being counter to the ideals of every GLO isn't enough, hazing is also illegal.

I'm going to have to very respectfully disagree. We all like to believe that our rituals are as old as our organizations... and while some *elements* of them may be the same, I don't think it's all that uncommon for the rituals to change and be re-written based on the social and political climate. I think we romanticize our founders, but which of them actually knew what they were doing? How many just thought it would be fun to form a club that promised to be friends until death? How many made up a silly "initiation ritual" because they had heard about other organizations? I'm not saying that those rituals haven't come to mean more, but thats doesn't mean our founders started them that way. I've seen minutes from conventions in 1885 that ruled to ban hazing. Kudos to the convention for banning hazing, but what was going on before then in an organization less than decades old?

[DeltAlum]

Just a couple of quick things. There are other ceremonies, but our "Ritual" is our initiation.

The founder who was most responsible for our Ritual was a Mason, and as it is with a number of other fraternities, that experience helped guide the establishment of our own initiation ceremony. That is not a secret, and is spoken of openly in the history of our organization at www.delts.org.

Finally, changes in our Ritual are are not taken lightly, but are fairly common and voted on and instituted usually at our Karnea (international conference) every two years.

There is no hazing in our Ritual.

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by notyouraverage

I'm going to have to very respectfully disagree. We all like to believe that our rituals are as old as our organizations... and while some *elements* of them may be the same, I don't think it's all that uncommon for the rituals to change and be re-written based on the social and political climate. I think we romanticize our founders, but which of them actually knew what they were doing? How many just thought it would be fun to form a club that promised to be friends until death? How many made up a silly "initiation ritual" because they had heard about other organizations? I'm not saying that those rituals haven't come to mean more, but thats doesn't mean our founders started them that way. I've seen minutes from conventions in 1885 that ruled to ban hazing. Kudos to the convention for banning hazing, but what was going on before then in an organization less than decades old?

Sigma Kappa's ritual is not 100% the same as it was 1874, but there have been few changes, things that are taken seriously and approved at Convention, not just changing with the whim of a chapter. What is the point of having a ritual for all of your members to share a common bond if "it's [not] uncommon for the rituals to change and be re-written based on the social and political climate"? I guess not everyone's ritual is timeless.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by violetpretty

Sigma Kappa's ritual is not 100% the same as it was 1874, but there have been few changes, things that are taken seriously and approved at Convention, not just changing with the whim of a chapter. What is the point of having a ritual for all of your members to share a common bond if "it's [not] uncommon for the rituals to change and be re-written based on the social and political climate"? I guess not everyone's ritual is timeless.

And those changes are documented for us to see and trace!

Also, I agree 100%.

[notyouraverage]

no need to get upset; I'm only saying that 14 and 15 year old founders don't always come up with inspiring and timeless rituals. They're just as likely to come up with silly rituals that might be considered hazing now. It doesn't mean that some other dedicated sister didn't come along a few years later and add more meaning and I'm not saying that sisters in some sororities don't share something meaningful - just that founders maybe didn't take their sorority as seriously when it was founded as one today might take it when one is initiated.

disclaimer: obviously I know that there are founders ranging in ages from 14 to 24 and that organizations were founded for a variety of reasons. Some may have been extremely serious at the time, some may have not. In fact, I can think of at least three that were not so seriously founded. I'm not trying to insult anyone's ritual or history. I just think the attitude of the founders is an interesting addition to the discussion of initiation.

[ISUKappa]

Originally Posted by notyouraverage

just that founders maybe didn't take their sorority as seriously when it was founded as one today might take it when one is initiated.

I think most founders took their organizations seriously, but didn't either have the creativity to develop a huge, elaborate ritual or didn't think their little group would become so inter/national in scale and their first rituals probably reflect that.

I don't disagree that many group's rituals have changed, some probably very significantly since their founding, but also think others may have changed little.