How to stop hazing in my fraternity?

[dnall]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

The juxtaposition of these two statements made me laugh. Sorry.

It's a completely normal fraternity with ragin parties, serious risk mgmt concerns, etc. It's not church deacons. We're all comfortable with the juxtaposition of the two by now.

Originally Posted by 33girl

I don't think you can say that overall, as there are many religious or ethnic groups out there who part of their purpose, if not their primary purpose, for being founded was that they were denied membership in other groups. You can't really blame them for "losing their purpose" when society has moved forward and (hopefully/theoretically) made their purpose moot.

I would say their founding was short sighted. They have lost their purpose & therefore should dissolve or remake themselves with a new change the world purpose. Otherwise it's sitting in a car that's out of gas blasting the radio and pressing on the pedals thinking you're getting to your destination. I'd rather see them out of the way so those members will go to orgs that do actively have a serious change the world mission to accomplish.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by dnall

I would say their founding was short sighted. They have lost their purpose & therefore should dissolve or remake themselves with a new change the world purpose. Otherwise it's sitting in a car that's out of gas blasting the radio and pressing on the pedals thinking you're getting to your destination. I'd rather see them out of the way so those members will go to orgs that do actively have a serious change the world mission to accomplish.

Can we unban Rudey for a day or two?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by dnall

It's a completely normal fraternity with ragin parties, serious risk mgmt concerns, etc. It's not church deacons. We're all comfortable with the juxtaposition of the two by now.

Oh, I know. It was just humerous.

I would say their founding was short sighted. They have lost their purpose & therefore should dissolve or remake themselves with a new change the world purpose. Otherwise it's sitting in a car that's out of gas blasting the radio and pressing on the pedals thinking you're getting to your destination. I'd rather see them out of the way so those members will go to orgs that do actively have a serious change the world mission to accomplish.

So only "serious change the world" missions are valid or worthwhile missions? Anything else is short-sighted? My org certainly has what I would call a "serious change the world" mission, but I can't imagine ever suggesting that other orgs with different kinds of missions (like, say, change/grow the person) aren't equally worthwhile or valuable.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by dnall

I would say their founding was short sighted.

Those who live in glass houses...

[knight_shadow]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Those who live in glass houses...

Exactly. According to its website, ATO had a "whites only" clause until the 60s.

Guess the ATO founders were short-sighted, as well.

[Regina.George]

Originally Posted by dnall

I would say their founding was short sighted. They have lost their purpose & therefore should dissolve or remake themselves with a new change the world purpose. Otherwise it's sitting in a car that's out of gas blasting the radio and pressing on the pedals thinking you're getting to your destination. I'd rather see them out of the way so those members will go to orgs that do actively have a serious change the world mission to accomplish.

WTF.