Switching Family Trees ?!?!

[ZTAngel]

I think my sorority did a pretty good job at matching bigs and littles. Both the new members and sisters would rank each other with #1 choice being the person you really want for a big/lil. Then, we were matched accordingly. If you became really close with someone, most likely they would have you as number one or number two. My big sister was my number one choice and my little was my number two. Unfortunately, my little sister dropped after a year. I became really close to a girl who's big sister never came around. During her junior year (my senior year), her big dropped so I adopted this girl. I now have a HUGE family with a bunch of grandlittles, great grandlittles, great-great grandlittles. This is really the only time my chapter will let someone adopt. If the big graduates, you can't be adopted. It wouldn't be fair. It's not as if this girl was being a bad big and never came around...they graduated and went alum. We've only had one situation where a little was adopted by someone else while the big was still active. This was because the two weren't matched right and there was a lot of problems between the two. Also, all adoptions must be approved by our new member coordinator before they become official. This prevents random switching.
We usually don't match our bigs/lils until about 4 weeks into the new member program. It gives everyone time to get to know each other better. There's a chapter on our campus that matches during bid day. They've had so many problems with their big/lil situation.
I don't think you should say anything to your chapter about it. Maybe instead work with the new member coordinator in trying to make a new system of big/lil matching so that both remain happy. I'm not sure what you all are using now and when bigs/lils are chosen. Also, maybe instill a policy that says you cannot adopt someone else their big went inactive. This should eliminate the problem of having girls come back to their chapter post-graduation only to find out that they no longer have a little.

[alphabug02]

ZTA Angel, I like the idea of waiting longer to match up Big's and Little's and I will pass that idea on to my VP of Member Ed. I also like the idea of Big's and Little's making a numbered list, but I don't quite understand the process, is there any way you could clairfy it for me? I understand that if two people are each other's number one's then they should be matched, but how do you match up all the others.

Does anyone else do Big/ Little matching diffrently?

[ZTAngel]

Here's the number matching procedure:

The sisters and the new members are divided up.

The sisters will get a piece of paper that lists all the new member names with a box next to each name. The sisters will then go and rank them. Let's say there's a pledge class of 31. You would rank them 1-31.

The new members will get a piece of paper that lists all the sisters who want to take littles. They then rank the sisters.

The new member coordinator and assistants match these girls up by their rankings. It's long and tedious for the new member coordinator but it creates happier results.

[33girl]

I was going to say sisters and NMs each write their top 3, but I think I like ZTAngel's idea better.

[AUDeltaGam]

Originally posted by 33girl
I was going to say sisters and NMs each write their top 3, but I think I like ZTAngel's idea better.

That's how we did it...ranking top 3

[polarpi]

Originally posted by aephi alum
The difference is that some sororities (ADPi is one) place more of an emphasis on calling the relationship something that doesn't imply a hierarchy - once the "younger" of the pair is initiated, she is completely equal with the "older" sister.

Slight correction....at no time is the "younger" of the pair not equal with the "older" sister. Once a woman accepts a bid into ADPi, she has the same voting privileges of a current member. The only things they have not experienced until their initiation is ritual related stuff and membership selection.

I think the main thing behind our emphasis on the no "big-little" is that a diamond sister is a special friend that connects with the Alpha member. Your diamond sister is your sponsor through initiation, and some diamonds do give their diamond sister a gift, but at other times it may be a gift from the chapter rather than the diamond sister.

As honey has said, I'm in no way trying to say that diamonds are better than big/littles....if this system works for you, keep it! ADPi has found that it was better for them to switch from big-little to diamond sisters as part of our TME (Total Membership Education) program. I think mainly ADPi's use "big diamond" and "little diamond" because members of other GLO's (and even GDI's) understand the big-little concept and don't understand what a diamond sister is, plus they're using it to signify a specific diamond sister...otherwise, it gets pretty confusing saying my diamond sister for both your sponsor and the sister you sponsored!

[kddani]

Originally posted by polarpi
[B]Slight correction....at no time is the "younger" of the pair not equal with the "older" sister. Once a woman accepts a bid into ADPi, she has the same voting privileges of a current member. The only things they have not experienced until their initiation is ritual related stuff and membership selection.

Well that's certainly the same as KD and probably most, if not all, other NPC sororities.

I think the main thing behind our emphasis on the no "big-little" is that a diamond sister is a special friend that connects with the Alpha member.

How is this different from big littles????

Your diamond sister is your sponsor through initiation

once again, same in KD and other GLOs

[QUOTE}
As honey has said, I'm in no way trying to say that diamonds are better than big/littles....if this system works for you, keep it! [/quote]

There's no difference in the "systems", outside of different names

I think mainly ADPi's use "big diamond" and "little diamond" because members of other GLO's (and even GDI's) understand the big-little concept and don't understand what a diamond sister is, plus they're using it to signify a specific diamond sister...otherwise, it gets pretty confusing saying my diamond sister for both your sponsor and the sister you sponsored!

Once again, how is this different from big littles? Now you're even inserting big and little into the name.... so the only difference is adding a word, "diamond"

Nothing that has been said makes diamond sisters any different from big/littles besides the name. It's just a more PC term- like PNM instead of rushee. Maybe something has been missing from the explanations, but I don't see ANY difference.
To put down the traditions of other GLOs (that aren't harmful in any way!!!) and say that your way is better (which no one's outright said in those words... but it's surely coming across that way) and you're glad you don't do big littles, etc. isn't right.

[honeychile]

I think we're talking semantics at this point, but I'm going to give this one final try.

The best analogy I can give for a diamond relationship is a non-GLO one. I'm into genealogy, and I've joined several lineage societies. You must be invited to join a lineage society, and that person acts as your sponsor. Once your application is accepted, and you're a full member, you thank your sponsor - usually with a gift. But your sponsor is never considered above you, just as those you in turn sponsor are never considered below you. You are all members. To further emphasize the point, I worked on a DAR project with a woman from Virginia, and was surprised to hear that her Patriot was George Washington's brother. Did that give her any special privileges? No - because all of our ancestors were fighting the same war, and are considered equal whether a general or a private.

I hope that helps, because I think the subject has been exhausted. Again, go with what works for you. Our International policy is to discourage any big/little relationships, and, if in getting involved in this topic offended anyone, I apologize for me and my sisters.

[veemers]

Here, you can't switch big sisters. If your big deactivates, maybe you'll be "adopted" by someone else, but your original big stays your big sister. There's no adoption for early graduation. (Which I wish there were!! Then I wouldn't feel so abandoned!!)

[Glitter650]

Phi Sig we have Sapphire Sisters, which are really "big/Lil" but eliminates one being "above" I suppose. We never switch (and I know some pairings haven't worked out too well, and it is sad for those people who aren't close with their "sapphire, diamond, Key, Big whatever you call her, sister, but hey we all are sisters and there has to be someone you are close to. I say as long as your big and you get along during your new member period that's the most important, but after that if you are not super close, that's kinda sad but there's no reason to "switch". I think that's crazy.

[texas*princess]

Originally posted by polarpi
I think mainly ADPi's use "big diamond" and "little diamond" because members of other GLO's (and even GDI's) understand the big-little concept and don't understand what a diamond sister is, plus they're using it to signify a specific diamond sister...otherwise, it gets pretty confusing saying my diamond sister for both your sponsor and the sister you sponsored!

I definitely agree w/ what polarpi has stated as well as honeychile.

I just cut out this particular paragraph because it is something that I wanted to comment on.

I do say my "big diamond" or "lil diamond" only because both my diamonds have the same first name, and we have several other girls who have the same first name, so if I say "SuzyQ - my big diamond - " it is simply because it helps clarify who I'm referring to.

[sherbertlemons]

To met, diamond sisters sound a lot like Kappa's key sisters. They are just one facet of our Kore families, and to my understanding, were even not an original part of the Kore family. As I know it, they were added later, after it became apparent that collegians really missed the big-little system.

We are not supposed to refer to the Key sisters as "big keys" and "little keys" either. Admittedly, our chapter does it fairly often, simply because it makes things easier to distinguish, and girls from most other chapters on our campus are far more familiar with bigs and littles than they are key sisters. Every now and then we get reminders from our alumnae about the correct terminology.

Just out of curiosity, how does ADPi do the diamond sisters? Our key sisters are supposed to be assigned on bid day, and their is no revealing or selection involved. (My apologies if I missed this in an earlier post.)

[33girl]

I've never thought of my big being "above" me or my little being "below" me. My little and little little were both older than me, for Pete's sake. My big is older than her big.

The point of this whole thread was about problems with relationships being changed, whether you call it a big, sapphire, key sis, diamond, poopoo pal, whatever. It's NOT because anyone has a higher or lower status, it's because people are saying "I don't feel close to you, so I am severing this relationship" and feelings are hurt. Unless you stop calling someone your big, sapphire, key sis, diamond, poopoo pal, whatever, after pledging is over and never acknowledge them as such again, the same problem would exist.

[aephi alum]

Originally posted by polarpi
Slight correction....at no time is the "younger" of the pair not equal with the "older" sister. Once a woman accepts a bid into ADPi, she has the same voting privileges of a current member. The only things they have not experienced until their initiation is ritual related stuff and membership selection.

Point taken. I'd argue that the new members and sisters aren't "quite" equal because of that one aspect, that the NMs haven't participated in ritual yet, but I know a lot of sororities, ADPi in particular, go out of their way to put the NMs on equal footing with sisters in all other aspects.

AEPhi draws more of a distinction between NMs and sisters. NMs, for example, are not allowed to wear the Greek letters. We also informally use the big/little terminology; according to our national office, we "shouldn't", but nothing happens to you if you do. I honestly don't know anyone in my chapter who was ever bothered because she was referred to as a little.

Now that we've completely hijacked this thread... Back on topic, I never saw a formal "adoption" in my chapter when I was an active, but sometimes when a family did something together, they'd call up a sister or two who had a smaller or nonexistent family, and ask them to come along. That was nice, and mixed things up a bit.