» GC Stats |
Members: 329,738
Threads: 115,667
Posts: 2,205,087
|
Welcome to our newest member, sydeylittleoz87 |
|
 |
|

09-20-2011, 04:33 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: N 37.811092 W -107.664643
Posts: 5,317
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by thetaj
My chapter does say "Theta babies." I'm trying to get them to call them Thetartots but it's kind of hit or miss  Someone suggested "kittens" once but that's just creepy.
|
No.
Just, no. Read this, below, and then tell me that Bettie Locke Hamilton would approve of Thetartots (wince), or Theta babies (ugh), or kittens (really?), or anything else.
http://books.google.com/books?id=JJ3...page&q&f=false
Sorry the link is funky, I'm too annoyed to make it pretty.
__________________
"One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision." Bertrand Russell, The Triumph of Stupidity
|

09-20-2011, 04:44 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 33
|
|
"Baby" doesn't bother me at all, but I get why people don't like it. I would much prefer "Pledge" but for some reason my chapter considers using it as a form of hazing...? We're supposed to call them new members but theres no rule against calling them babies, and most people do. I don't really have a problem with it.
__________________
My Recruitment Story - Posted under a different name
One life to live. One love to give. One letter forever.
|

09-20-2011, 04:44 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Shackled to my desk
Posts: 2,958
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by psusue
Our national headquarters discourages the use of 'baby violets', 'baby sailboats', etc. I personally think it's ridiculous for our organization, because we don't have an animal mascot, we have a sailboat and a skull and crossbones. Neither of which has been or will ever be a baby. I don't mind the idea in theory, as all new members are 'babies' in their new organization, but I also know that it sounds demeaning and infantilizing to others.
I kind of wish we could do something like ADPi or Phi Mu and call our new members 'alphas' or 'phis', however that is the unfortunate downside of only having one letter.
Also, a pledge is a promise, not a person. What I learned from my new member period. 
|
I think I've pretty much established my anti-babyness, but when I started thinking about Sigma's mascots as you noted them, "Baby Skulls" went through my mind. I mean no disrespect, but I did giggle a little.
__________________
Actually, amIblue? is a troublemaker. Go pick on her. --AZTheta
Last edited by amIblue?; 09-20-2011 at 04:45 PM.
Reason: can't spell or type
|

09-20-2011, 04:53 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 814
|
|
The baby thing was big when I was in college. Chapters often gave their new pledges big toy baby bottles filled with candy in their sororities' colors.
("Thetartots" cracked me up!)
__________________
Alpha Sigma Alpha
Blest be the tie...
ASA Volunteer since 2007!
|

09-20-2011, 05:12 PM
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hotel Oceanview
Posts: 34,519
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaFrog
It personally doesn't bother me, but I think I remember campus and National encouragement against it.
Our new members are Pearl Sisters, or just Pearls.
|
I thought we weren't allowed to say just Pearls anymore.
I also dislike "New Members" because it's a misnomer. They aren't members yet. They haven't been through the initiation ritual. New Members just kind of reinforces that NPC pledge periods are a cakewalk/present-fest and that once you have your bid, you're basically in. If that's the case, let's just initiated them on bid day and be done with it, without the pretense that there's a "maybe" about them becoming sisters.
I say ditto-infinity to everyone who says "baby insertmascothere" is waaaaay more degrading and setting-apart than "pledge." Then again, this generation likes a LOT of things that we would have not been caught dead doing or wearing because they were too babyish.
__________________
It is all 33girl's fault. ~DrPhil
Last edited by 33girl; 09-20-2011 at 05:16 PM.
|

09-20-2011, 05:19 PM
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hotel Oceanview
Posts: 34,519
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlphaFrog
As far as I know, ASA pledges have been Pearls loooooooooong before the 90's, whether they were commonly referred to as such or not.
|
There was no usage of Pearl until after at least the 1994 convention, or it might have been 1996. It definitely wasn't used when I was an active.
Oh and what about our chapter that goes by Apples. They could call their pledges Li'l Seeds, their alumnae Cores and the sisters who drink too much Baked Apples.
__________________
It is all 33girl's fault. ~DrPhil
|

09-20-2011, 05:22 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,731
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shellfish
And you'd never see fraternities call their new members something like "Baby Kappa Sigs."
|
Well, you'd likely never see most fraternities referring to someone who hasn't been fully initiated yet as a "new member" either.
I never understood why calling someone a pledge could be considered demeaning. (Full disclosure -- we stopped calling them pledges in the 70s, instead using "probationary member," often shortened in practice to PM, probe, probate or the like.) Demeaning was when we used to call pledges "worms."
Quote:
Originally Posted by psusue
Also, a pledge is a promise, not a person. What I learned from my new member period. 
|
Except in the orgs that do call persons pledges. I understand the motivations behind statements like this, but IMO they come across as subtle criticisms of other orgs that do things differently.
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
18▲98
|

09-20-2011, 05:23 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,730
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
I also dislike "New Members" because it's a misnomer. They aren't members yet. They haven't been through the initiation ritual. New Members just kind of reinforces that NPC pledge periods are a cakewalk/present-fest and that once you have your bid, you're basically in. If that's the case, let's just initiated them on bid day and be done with it, without the pretense that there's a "maybe" about them becoming sisters.
|
lane swerve/
I think this is a good point because aren't they still PNMs but just PNMs who have accepted a bid? That's where the "Pledge" title came from. They are undergoing a "pledge process" in hopes of making a "pledge" (which doesn't have to include hazing but tends to for many chapters of many GLOs) even if NHQs do not like "pledge" being used.
/lane swerve
|

09-20-2011, 05:24 PM
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hotel Oceanview
Posts: 34,519
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
Well, you'd likely never see most fraternities referring to someone who hasn't been fully initiated yet as a "new member" either.
I never understood why calling someone a pledge could be considered demeaning. (Full disclosure -- we stopped calling them pledges in the 70s, instead using "probationary member," often shortened in practice to PM, probe, probate or the like.) Demeaning was when we used to call pledges "worms."
Except in the orgs that do call persons pledges. I understand the motivations behind statements like this, but IMO they come across as subtle criticisms of other orgs that do things differently.
|
Ugh, I remember that "a pledge is a promise not a person" statement. I want to respond with "you may have members, but I have sisters."
If that's the reasoning they're going to use, call them "pledge sisters." "New members" gets shortened to "NMs" and WTH is that?
__________________
It is all 33girl's fault. ~DrPhil
|

09-20-2011, 05:27 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Shackled to my desk
Posts: 2,958
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jen
It's like when I saw "baby hooter" in a thread here.
|
Oh, me too on that one, especially when it's written in the plural.
__________________
Actually, amIblue? is a troublemaker. Go pick on her. --AZTheta
|

09-20-2011, 05:36 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 14,730
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
I never understood why calling someone a pledge could be considered demeaning. (Full disclosure -- we stopped calling them pledges in the 70s, instead using "probationary member," often shortened in practice to PM, probe, probate or the like.) Demeaning was when we used to call pledges "worms."
|
The title of Pledge was most often attached to the treatment of pledges--a pledge process which was linked to hazing for many chapters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
Except in the orgs that do call persons pledges. I understand the motivations behind statements like this, but IMO they come across as subtle criticisms of other orgs that do things differently.
|
Exactly.
A pledge is a person and a process and a promise.
(How did this thread turn into another one of THOSE threads. LOL.)
|

09-20-2011, 05:43 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: With Germs and a Lack of Sleep
Posts: 1,001
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
I also dislike "New Members" because it's a misnomer. They aren't members yet. They haven't been through the initiation ritual. New Members just kind of reinforces that NPC pledge periods are a cakewalk/present-fest and that once you have your bid, you're basically in. If that's the case, let's just initiated them on bid day and be done with it, without the pretense that there's a "maybe" about them becoming sisters.
|
Concur. That's why I really like Alpha Omega Epsilon's term of "candidate". I think it is fully respectful without the insinuation that you are already in.
However, I don't honestly see anything wrong with "pledge" or "rushie". I feel like changing those words is like Netflix changing to Qwickster. It creates the illusion of addressing the problem, without actually doing much of anything.
__________________
My Heart will always be with Alpha Omega E.
LET'S GO BIG RED!
Let me teach you how to Bucky!
|

09-20-2011, 05:44 PM
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hotel Oceanview
Posts: 34,519
|
|
Netflix changed to Qwickster?
I'm so glad I never bothered getting a subscription there. It sounds like it's getting worse day by day.
__________________
It is all 33girl's fault. ~DrPhil
|

09-20-2011, 05:47 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: With Germs and a Lack of Sleep
Posts: 1,001
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 33girl
Netflix changed to Qwickster?
I'm so glad I never bothered getting a subscription there. It sounds like it's getting worse day by day.
|
Sort of. The streaming part is still Netflix and the DVD by mail is Qwickster. This was their "apology" for hiking the prices 60% to $15.99/month.... although the price is still $15.99 and now you have to sign up and get two separate bills each month and your queues don't transfer.
/end side note/
__________________
My Heart will always be with Alpha Omega E.
LET'S GO BIG RED!
Let me teach you how to Bucky!
|

09-20-2011, 05:57 PM
|
GreekChat Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,731
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPhil
The title of Pledge was most often attached to the treatment of pledges--a pledge process which was linked to hazing for many chapters.
|
Oh I know that (though I might disagree with the "most often" part.) I still say, though, that the term "pledge" isn't in itself demeaning. To me, it's a baby-bathwater thing, or a cosmetic change, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrPhil
lane swerve/
I think this is a good point because aren't they still PNMs but just PNMs who have accepted a bid? That's where the "Pledge" title came from. They are undergoing a "pledge process" in hopes of making a "pledge" (which doesn't have to include hazing but tends to for many chapters of many GLOs) even if NHQs do not like "pledge" being used.
/lane swerve
|
For us, at least, the pledge is the beginning of the "pledge process," not the end or goal. At the beginning of the process, a man makes a pledge not to join competitor orgs and to present himself, if he is ultimately approved, for full initiation at the end of the process. (We still us the term "pledge" to refer to this promise.}
My impression is that many orgs used/use the term this way. At the same time, I think that some here have said that New Members are indeed members of their orgs, with the only difference being members who haven't experienced ritual yet. Not my lane though, so I could be wrong.
And this kind of thread almost always becomes one of THOSE threads.
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
18▲98
|
 |
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|