"I wish I had been hazed."

[KSUViolet06]

I actually appreciate our NM program due to many of the things people mentioned above.

We made the jump from Forever Sigma (my NM program circa 2004) to Essential Sigma in 2006.

However, we maintained a NM exam (must pass to initiate) and the requirement that our NMs earn participation points (85% of required points per month) just as our initiated members do.

New Members are also not exempt from the consequences of not making points. Ex: They are not going to be initiated with their class having failed to make points for two months.

So I dont relate to anyone who thinks "anyone who joined after the 80s had no expectations or requirements in their NM programs and just get candy and hugs." We are not that sorority.

[OrangeJacket]

Coming out of lurkdom because this thread conjures up so many fun memories (and because my oldest of three daughters is going through recruitment in January--sorority life is on the brain).

During my pledgeship in the early 90s, we had required study hours, scavenger hunts (had to fill up a bag full of ivy), and tests. We were not allowed in the chapter room at that time. This made it very special once we went to our first "formal" meeting after initiation. Pledgeship lasted from the beginning of school til just before Thanksgiving if memory serves me. I was at the house constantly because I had a scary potluck roomie in the dorms who was doing drugs. I met a ton of sisters who took me under their wing, even coming to get me from a scary fraternity party when I called the house. There was no alcohol involved at any time. Our big sisters gave us decorated paddles at initiation.

I was the pledge trainer (now called fraternity educator) myself and supervised all kinds of fun things that might now be considered hazing like intricate big sister reveals, participating in Phi Psi Field Day as a pledge class, etc. The memories are so wonderful.

I am very sad that activities that create such a deep bonding experience are now being shuttled. I don't think we even got our big sisters until a month or so into our pledgeships!

Alpha Phi

[AGDee]

So, for those who "had to" get signatures, learn info about members, etc. what happened if you didn't get a couple from sisters who were never around? What did you think would happen to you? What actually happened to you? How did they prevent sisters from making you do things to get the signature?

You all realize there is no such thing as phone duty, right? Cell phones=No house phone!

[suebarton]

I was in a service sorority, but we had to get signatures. The actives could ask us questions about the history, or Greek alphabet, or the song. If an active was never around, or balked at signing books, the pledge trainer would talk to her. If that didn't work, we were told not to worry about her signature.

I never knew of anyone who did not get all their signatures.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AGDee

So, for those who "had to" get signatures, learn info about members, etc. what happened if you didn't get a couple from sisters who were never around? What did you think would happen to you? What actually happened to you? How did they prevent sisters from making you do things to get the signature?

The sisters who weren't around (usually student teaching) coordinated with the pledge mom when they would be available. The "3 meetings" thing was not hard and fast, it was up to the sister.

I thought initiation might get delayed or something. In reality nothing happened. My pledge mom was the kind of person who made you want to put your heart and soul in it to make her proud.

The worst thing any sister "made" us do was introducing ourselves to someone we didn't know to get the signature. Oooh, how awful. Our sisters wanted us to be more outgoing and meet people who were important to them. What an onerous burden.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

I actually appreciate our NM program due to many of the things people mentioned above.

We made the jump from Forever Sigma (my NM program circa 2004) to Essential Sigma in 2006.

However, we maintained a NM exam (must pass to initiate) and the requirement that our NMs earn participation points (85% of required points per month) just as our initiated members do.

New Members are also not exempt from the consequences of not making points. Ex: They are not going to be initiated with their class having failed to make points for two months.

So I dont relate to anyone who thinks "anyone who joined after the 80s had no expectations or requirements in their NM programs and just get candy and hugs." We are not that sorority.

I think this is the route most groups went. The general rule that I would hear after we made these changes was "As long as the active sisters are required to do the same thing, it's ok." For example:

- New members making dinner by themselves for everyone to enjoy: not OK. New members and actives all making dinner together for everyone to enjoy: OK
- New members planning a philanthropic event and taking part in it on their own: not OK. New members being required to participate in the philanthropic events held by the chapter: OK

Basically, there's more integration and requiring new members to take part in the same activities of the active sisters (which isn't a bad thing). But basically ANYTHING extra that you ask of the new members is "hazing".

It's disappointing, but I can also understand the want to eliminate as much of the gray area as possible. That being said, I still can't see the logic behind the terminology changing and new member (pledge!) periods being shortened.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by 33girl

The sisters who weren't around (usually student teaching) coordinated with the pledge mom when they would be available. The "3 meetings" thing was not hard and fast, it was up to the sister.

I thought initiation might get delayed or something. In reality nothing happened. My pledge mom was the kind of person who made you want to put your heart and soul in it to make her proud.

The worst thing any sister "made" us do was introducing ourselves to someone we didn't know to get the signature. Oooh, how awful. Our sisters wanted us to be more outgoing and meet people who were important to them. What an onerous burden.

That's good. That's not what I've witnessed. I've witnessed much, much worse, especially back in the 80s.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AGDee

That's good. That's not what I've witnessed. I've witnessed much, much worse, especially back in the 80s.

Oh, so did I. But I didn't join a chapter full of a-holes. Forcing an entire system to become a watered down version of itself because a tiny fraction of its members are a-holes is like when the teacher punishes everyone because of what one kid did - and that didn't work either.

And on a side note, I know I've told this story before, but the ultimate result of this overcompensation came in the person of a girl who was briefly pledging my chapter several years after I graduated. At the time all pledges on campus were required to attend (I think it was a daylong) hazing workshop. She pointed out that since only pledges were doing it, and were forced to do it under threat of being depledged, the workshop itself was hazing. Pedantic maybe, but going by the standards they'd been told, she was absolutely right.

[naraht]

My rule of thumb is that the Alpha Phi Omega pledging process should be *less* stressful than a class. So requiring a pledge to be at an hour long pledge meeting *and* a two hour brotherhood meeting is fine. The national information to be learned should rarely exceed what is in the pledge manual (which is publicly available) and an equivalent chapter manual for which the pledges should be responsible for the same amount or less for memorization than the National Pledge Manual.

I know brothers who have been blind and I've known brothers in motorized wheelchairs (who actually had more control of their feet than their arms/hands). Nothing in the pledge process should exclude people with those characteristics, or at worst reasonable accommidations(sp?) should be made.

Note, since I am *horrible* with names and faces, there are chapters of my fraternity where I would have passed the requirements (and as it happens, I might not have become a brother if Alpha Phi Omega allowed blackballing)

As for Brother signatures, I'm fine with the concept as long as a brother refusing to sign/interview does not become an effective blackball. And I'm fine with having the pledges make something to be signed as long as it takes less than a pledge meeting to make.

As for Alcohol, obey the law and the same rules on identification that the brothers/sisters do. However I'm also a little hesitant of having a pledge kicked out if they are 21, are not in letters and not at an event mostly made of the pledge class.

[LAblondeGPhi]

Man... I have so many thoughts about this. In general, I DO think we need to make new members more accountable for investing in their organizations from the get-go, and that includes bringing back things that are now considered "hazing" - things like learning way more about the history of our organizations, memorizing/meeting more of the active members, and maybe doing a new member project.

I'm a big believer that people are usually more invested in things that they spend time and energy on, especially if there's a level of difficulty in achieving something.

I'd like our new members to be much more responsible for actually learning about the history of our organizations and Greek life as a whole - including basic information about at least the other organizations on campus. This would include the REAL facts about common Greek myths like the brothel law, and why Alpha Phi is pronounced "FEE" but Gamma Phi is pronounced "FIE".

To dovetail with all of the issues around the increasingly chaotic recruitment process, I have major concerns about our organizations' abilities to properly vet potential new members during such a fast-paced, chaotic process. I'd LOVE to see the new member period truly be an extended process of new members continuing to prove themselves with solid grades, active involvement and commitment, and good general behavior. A longer new member period into the second semester/quarter would facilitate this.

Whew - anyway, I think a longer new member period would also allow the extra requirements to be less intense. I agree that joining a sorority shouldn't be as intense as a class - that would be detrimental to grades, afterall - but there that doesn't mean we can't expect a lot of our new members. If we expect a lot out of our members, then we need to expect a lot of the new members from the get-go.

[33girl]

I'm also going to say that to think that one program (other than the basic history) can be customized for chapters from 15 to 500 members is completely insane. It's not the same experience and we need to quit pretending/hoping that it is.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by 33girl

I'm also going to say that to think that one program (other than the basic history) can be customized for chapters from 15 to 500 members is completely insane. It's not the same experience and we need to quit pretending/hoping that it is.

Or pledge classes ranging from 3 to 200

[SoCalGirl]

Not trying to stir up stuff but how is it that XO is the only exception to the shorter new member period? Why don't more groups buck the system? My best guess is that XO probably gets hit with a larger insurance bill due to it and their HQ and membership believes it's worth it. Why don't the rest of us?

[33girl]

It would probably be very easy to sell the insurance company on this. Al you have to do is show a lesser percentage of hazing and rm incidents with a semester long program than with a shortened program. Considering Chi O has a huge amount of chapters, the averaging out would most likely work in their favor.

[1964Alum]

.As a Chi O alum without an active chapter near me, I don't know why we have the same semester long pledge period that we had when I was a pledge! Nor do I remember reading about it in our Eleusis. But I am happy that we have retained it. Nor do I know what is now required during this period.

To back-track a bit, I don't really care for the term "New Member", much preferring the old "Pledge". We all understood that we wouldn't be members until initiation, and initiation required completion of a successful Pledge period. I really don't remember anyone complaining about it or balking at the requirements. Nor do I remember anyone not being initiated. In addition to the weekly pledge class meetings, we did the usual learning about our founders, our current national officers, our purposes, and meeting individually each and every active except those away from campus. We kept a pledge notebook and also wrote an occasional essay on an assigned topic having to do with Greek life. We worked with the actives on elections and homecoming, and went to visit sick sisters who were in the infirmary. We all attended the wedding of the rush chairman for when we went through rush. We had a weekend retreat for just the pledges. The actives had a pledge presentation formal ball for us and we pledges gave them a party. Much of that would likely be considered "hazing" now, but I don't remember a single thing that was degrading or unreasonable for becoming full members of Chi Omega. I hope much of that remains!