Beanies on Pledges?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

This is, arguably, hazing. THAT'S why it went out of style.

Lest we be reminded that GLOs have different ways to distinguish their prospectives from everyone else. I would never tell other GLOs that requiring prospectives to wear a pin or something else in this context is, arguably, hazing.

And, no, beanies did not go out of style in the non-Greek and Greek worlds.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Lest we be reminded that GLOs have different ways to distinguish their prospectives from everyone else. I would never tell other GLOs that requiring prospectives to wear a pin or something else in this context is, arguably, hazing.

And, no, beanies did not go out of style in the non-Greek and Greek worlds.

Beanie = embarrassing attire = hazing
Pledge pin = not embarrassing attire = not hazing

I'm not certain which part you are disagreeing with, that a beanie is embarrassing, or that embarrassing attire is hazing. In any case, it's not an argument I'd like to have with my dean of students.

(NB: I am talking specifically about the felt beanie-type things shown in the pics of Mu Theta.)

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Beanie = embarrassing attire = hazing

(NB: I am talking specifically about the felt beanie-type things shown in the pics of Mu Theta.)

No.

I disagree with your assessment of beanies and I also disagree with thinking you can tell someone what hazing is for their GLO.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

No.

I disagree with your assessment of beanies and I also disagree with thinking you can tell someone what hazing is for their GLO.

What is hazing arguably could differ by gender (forcing fraternity pledges to wear blue skirts every monday (hazing) vs. forcing sorority pledges(almost certainly not))

But within a gender, and more specifically within those groups of one gender within a council, I just can't see the rules on what is Hazing to be that different. Under what situations would Kappa Alpha Theta revoke a charter that wouldn't get a Delta Delta Delta chapter at least a *significant* visit from a board member? (just to pick two NPC sororities)

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by naraht

What is hazing arguably could differ by gender (forcing fraternity pledges to wear blue skirts every monday (hazing) vs. forcing sorority pledges(almost certainly not))

I see what you mean but using words like "forcing" makes it seem stronger than a requirement or criteria. GLOs have different attire requirements and criteria for meetings, conventions, rituals, etc. That is a different tone than "forcing" especially when you're talking about prospective members.

"Forcing" sorority pledges to wear dresses or skirts can be considered hazing if the context warrants such a consideration. One example of this is how not every woman is absolutely thrilled to be "forced" to wear skirts and dresses.

Originally Posted by naraht

But within a gender, and more specifically within those groups of one gender within a council, I just can't see the rules on what is Hazing to be that different. Under what situations would Kappa Alpha Theta revoke a charter that wouldn't get a Delta Delta Delta chapter at least a *significant* visit from a board member? (just to pick two NPC sororities)

I don't know the intricacies of Kappa Alpha Theta and Delta Delta Delta. More importantly, what Kappa Alpha Theta does or does not do doesn't determine what Delta Delta Delta does or does not do. It is fine if they are operating based on general criteria, school policies, and hazing laws that have been established after years of working through this stuff. It is not fine if people think they can apply personal opinions and their own GLO's likes and dislikes to other GLOs.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

No.

I disagree with your assessment of beanies and I also disagree with thinking you can tell someone what hazing is for their GLO.

Right, because state law and university policies are totally irrelevant, if my GLO says something is okay. Like it or not, there are things that we all agree are hazing.

In the case of beanies, I didn't say it was black-and-white. I said that it was arguably hazing, in a way that pledge pins are not. That is why it fell out of fashion around the same time that universities and/or the legal system started to crack down on hazing.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Right, because state law and university policies are totally irrelevant, if my GLO says something is okay.

Yes, that's obviously the context for this discussion.

Keyword: Scavenger hunts

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Like it or not, there are things that we all agree are hazing.

Beanies are not among those things so we are back to square one.

Keyword: Scavenger hunts

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

In the case of beanies, I didn't say it was black-and-white. I said that it was arguably hazing, in a way that pledge pins are not. That is why it fell out of fashion around the same time that universities and/or the legal system started to crack down on hazing.

Assuming they really fell out of fashion, are you sure that happened at the same time that universities and/or the legal system started to crack down on hazing? Maybe we are looking at different timelines.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Right, because state law and university policies are totally irrelevant, if my GLO says something is okay.

I will be absolutely amazed if there is any state law that makes embarrassing someone hazing.

No one has said state law and university policies are irrelevant. What we have said is hazing policies vary widely (as do hazing laws), so what is relevant are the state laws and university and GLO policies that apply to (general) you. The state laws and unuiversity and GLO policies that apply to others may not be like the ones that apply to you at all.

Like it or not, there are things that we all agree are hazing.

I bet not as many as you think. Like I've mentioned before, under the law of my state, it's not "hazing" unless the "recipient" is actually subjected to physical injury. That leaves out many things that most if not all GLOs would consider hazing.

That is why it fell out of fashion around the same time that universities and/or the legal system started to crack down on hazing.

Can you back up the cause and effect, or is it just speculation? If if that is the reason beanies fell out of fashion, then why did non-Greeks stop wearing them as well?

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I will be absolutely amazed if there is any state law that makes embarrassing someone hazing.

Maybe not, but the NPC and NPHC statements on hazing both do.

As I said, it's not black and white. I think most orgs look around, though, and think "what is so important about beanies that we'd risk it?"

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Maybe not, but the NPC and NPHC statements on hazing both do.

Then the matter is settled for the orgs with thos policies. (Maybe, and I'll leave it to someone in an NPHC org to say whether this accurately reflects their policy.)

But the majority of Greek organizations are not affiliated with the NPC and the NPHC.

I think most orgs look around, though, and think "what is so important about beanies that we'd risk it?"

Were beanies even an issue in most orgs? It always seemed like a very campus specific (and non-Greek specific) thing to me.

To be honest, I would guess that what happened to collegiate beanies can pretty clearly be seen in the first lines of Animal House:

Larry (Pinto): Take off that beanie.
Kent (Flounder): We're meant to wear them to homecoming.
Larry: Don't be a fruit, okay?

College students in many places decided they looked juvenile (or worse) and just stopped wearing them.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

As I said, it's not black and white. I think most orgs look around, though, and think "what is so important about beanies that we'd risk it?"

You're right it is not black and white which is why this discussion is happening. The same can apply to requirements like pledge pins.

I would not assume that most GLOs looked around and thought anything pertaining to beanies. There may have been no perceived risk as far as most GLOs were concerned. This may all be post hoc ergo propter hoc.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Beanie = embarrassing attire = hazing
Pledge pin = not embarrassing attire = not hazing

A completely subjective distinction. Which means, as a practical matter, a completely unenforceable and undefensible distinction. Who decides that beanies = embarrassing attire? What if the wearer isn't embarrassed? What if, on that campus, pledge beanies are considered a cool and fun tradition (see agzg's post)?

As has been said ad nauseum, different organizations and campuses have different definitions of what constitutes hazing. (That leaves aside state laws, which would never cover this.) If one wants to say "in my organization" or "on my campus this would be considered hazing," fine. But I just won't buy a general assertion that having pledges wear beanies is hazing (or arguably hazing).

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Beanies never went out of style.

Is it a sign of just how old I am that the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread was:



Oh, how I wanted a beany-copter so I could fly like Beany Boy.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Is it a sign of just how old I am that the first thing I thought of when I saw this thread was:



Oh, how I wanted a beany-copter so I could fly like Beany Boy.

LOL. I heart MysticCat.

I wear different types of beanies year-round including spring and summer beanies. When it gets colder, I will be wearing felt and non-felt beanies for the fall and winter. I hope no one considers them embarassing attire. I can tolerate being forced to wear embarassing attire. God forbid CHOOSING to wear embarassing attire. I wonder how my family and friends who wear beanies for cultural or religious reasons (even if they technically have different names) feel.