I don't think that's quite what people are doing. Some are saying that some of the circumstances—particularly the immediate media involvement and the involvement of Gloria Allred—cause them to wonder if she was really hazed. That's a legitimate question.

Not every accusation is a truthful accusation.

We are questioning whether this was "hazing" in the sense the word is typically used.

Throughout our lives there are pressures to conform and "fit in". People can be very mean even after we have joined groups. This can include physical altercation.

But, here's the thing, and this has been said in previous threads, we need to stop throwing the "hazing" label on everything that makes someone frown. And we need to stop pretending that label is void of any questioning and discussion.

If this was truly as forced as this woman claimed, there are so many things she could have done without going to the media (she called the police but what about the sorority representatives and even the school?). She can't claim she was afraid of being ostracized and therefore contacted the media after calling the police. She better hope there's enough evidence to substantiate her claims or she could be risking having her membership revoked (if this sorority revokes memberships).

DrPhil - the sorority in question does have procedures in place that can be used to terminate membership.

I do not know anything about the actions that have been or will be taken in this situation.

I'm with you Dr. Phil on the fact that we get peer pressure throughout life. It wasn't hazing in the usual sense of Do X or you won't get initiated.

I think their's a big gray area in this. Was everyone in that room in either SAE or KKG, how is this different from a group of kids from the 4H club pressuring one of their friends to drink.

I think a lot of this has to do with it being a GREEK organization and the scrutiny the media has being giving it lately.

This situation could happen to anyone at college. Just because everyone is Greek doesn't make it hazing.

Point of clarification: It's implied in the video that she was a pledge, not an initiated member. In the beginning of the video, Hillary said that she started college in Hawaii but wanted to try out the east coast which is when she applied to UConn. I know it's not common to rush as a junior transfer but if she did, then the "it's not like she was a pledge" arguments become moot.

That being said, there are still lots of gaping holes in the story. Like her assertion that she "held on to the wine bottle for awhile" because she didn't want to drink it. Also, the wine story went unfinished--when she refused to drink it, what did the other girls do? What stopped her from doing that with the beers, the shots, etc? She said she "knew her limits" and held on to the wine instead of drinking it but offered no explaination of why she didn't exercise the same decision at other points in the night. That part may have been explained and edited out but that gap leaves lots of things to wonder.

I'm not blaming her for this incident (and it sounds like several students are open to disciplinary action) but her inconsistent behavior does call for some pause.

Don't know anything other than what I saw on the very stilted presentation with Gloria Allred in all her glory. However, have there not been other issues at UConn involving sorority/fraternity hazing issues recently? it sounds like a systemic issue that may be a problem on that campus that does need to be addressed. Not taking it to the national media but addressed in house.

The more I think about it, the more bogus it seems. Putting myself in the shoes of the alleged victim, let's say I wake up in the hospital after a night of extreme partying, maybe even some hazing. My first instinct would be to thank whoever put the entire organization on the line by getting me potentially life saving medical treatment.

That's actually the real issue I have with this thing blowing up the way it has. It tells our undergrads (who are college students and underage drinking is always going to happen with college students, greek or non-greek) that if they suspect one of their brother/sisters has overimbibed to the point of needing medical attention, that if they seek that medical attention, they are probably going to lose their charter and even face discipline on campus... and hell... maybe even Gloria Allred will spew some bile about them on Nancy Grace.

Our respective HQs and even state legislators need to look at policies granting immunity to individuals and organizations who procure medical treatment for individuals who have overimbibed. This current policy of creating severe consequences for doing the right thing is going to get people killed if it hasn't already.

I know that some schools have a good Samaritan policy (for lack of anything better to call it) for people who take care of over-imbibers, underage or not. The fear with GLOs is that someone will turn it around and say having such a policy means excessive drinking is something that happens often and possibly open them up to more lawsuits. Obviously I think this is crap, but I also think it's what would happen with a written policy.

I know its a whole different discussion, but I honestly think lowering the drinking age to 18 is the responsible thing to do. It's difficult situation for a college since students start underage and come of drinking age during college. The alcohol will always be there, but underage drinking is still illegal so as a result kids drink more quicker, go to great lengths to hide it including not getting someone help and many other things.

If it was legal at 18 I think it would solve a lot of these issues.

When I was in college, the drinking age was 18 for beer and wine, and 21 for liquor. I know the reason for the federally-forced change was drunk driving among young drivers. I'd be interested to see statistics analyzing whether the change in the drinking age had an effect on that problem. It certainly seems to me that binge-drinking among college students is much more of a problem than it was when I was in school, though I have no clue whether that is just my perception and whether a variety of factors may be at play there.

But I've always thought it odd, to say the least, that a 20-year-old can be sent off to war to die for his country, but he can't legally have a beer before he goes.

I've always thought that, and also its weird to me that at 16 you're mature enough to drive and get a job but aren't ready for the responsibility of being able to vote.

Part of the drunk driving issues were people driving over state lines (PA has always been 21 and Ohio was 18 til the last minute, to cite one example).

The only reason states changed was that they were blackmailed - if they didn't change they lost federal highway funding.

This should be eliminated, but to avoid the state to state issues you should either have to be a permanent or temporary (college id) resident to drink at the lower age. That would eliminate a lot of the crossing of the border.

Legally speaking, I think it's a pretty strong defense for GLOs that our undergrads assume the risks of what goes along with drinking when they do so and therefore assume the liability for the foreseeable consequences. I really don't think this young lady has much of a legal case. I'm not hearing that she was under any sort of duress when told to drink. Peer pressure, legally speaking, is not the same thing as duress. A gun held to her temple is duress.

The hazing concerns are real though and any investigation should rightly address those issues.

What makes her story unbelievable is not that she's legal to drink, or that she may have been an initated member, but her own language.

"I was driven to dinner"

"I was led..."

"I was told..."

Not:

"They blindfolded me and shoved me into a car then pulled me out of the car and dragged me by the hair into a fraternity house"

"They threatened me that they'd take away my membership if I didn't do what they wanted"

"They forced me to play beer pong by tying a string to my arm and making me 'throw' a pingpong ball across a table full of red solo cups filled with beer"

"They held me down and poured alcohol down my throat"

Every accusation in the (albeit edited) interview is a passive statement. Victims don't normally speak that way; they typically use active verbs.

Obviously, I don't want her to have been hazed/hurt/threatened, but the story just doesn't add up to her victimization.

I absolutely agree with you.

I hate the idea of 'pregaming.' Drinking before an event because students think they will be unable to drink at the event. So they try to guess how much to drink before they leave. They usually overestimate. Then if alcohol is present they continue to drink to excess.

I also hate the mystery punches common at some schools. What the heck is in there?

Allowing 18 yos to consume bottles or cans of beer allows them to monitor their intake more closely and become responsible drinkers.