I want to take a road trip!!

30 seconds? You must be including South Hazel, Tennessee in that tour as well.

After your grand tour, y'all can head "Down South" to Puryear for your beverages. Some of the best road houses ever! Or so I've heard. :cool:

Welcome to Hazel, Kentucky

I'm actually impressed they have a website!

If you *Goggle* Hazel (which I believe is not legal to do in at least six states) there are quite a few sites listed.

Hazel, Kentucky Antique Shopping District

Went through Hazel today . . .
 

. . .and the sign coming from Murray now says "First Chance". TSteven - Girls Gone Wild night is Dec.7 at the Spider Web in Puryear - mark your calendar now!

My chapter doesnt haze but I can certainly understand that there are benefits to it.
Certain things like scavenger hunts and team exercises bond the pledge class.
The bad stuff tests dedication.
As long as it doesn't get out of control (which it does a lot) then I can understand it.

You are correct in the point if it doesn't get out of hand and many times it does.

It is past history why so many things ate on the hazing list and a no no!

Most will think of paddleing, drinking of liquor or even water, physical exercise, dumping liquids or food on people.

It seems to have been done before, and that is why it is banned by GLOs, Colleges, and States and against the Law in many States and more to come.

Plain and simple.

Dang. I've got plans for that night.

I wonder how "wild" is wild? Word gets around quickly in that area. Heck, I often hear about "things" and I'm not even in the area. And the Good Lord knows I can't always be trusted to keep a good rumor to myself.

Any good chapter hazes, safely, and gets away with it

HAZE = Happily Advancing Zealous Education.
I don't think you will find a fraternity in the world, whether they admit it or not, that follows guidelines outlining the strict literal definition of hazing. Hell even having pledges wear Pledge Pins can be construed as hazing. In point of fact, when you want 20 strangers to bond closely in a short period of time its almost imperative to place them under undue stress. Only then will you see leaders emerge and those pledges/new members will build stronger bonds with each other. It may be an antiquated thought but certain forms of hazing do in fact build character. There is also stupid, pointless, and utterly degrading or even dangerous forms of hazing that are totally detrimental to the process of building new brothers or sisters.

As a new member and first time poster, you really should read the rest of the threads in RM before posting again.

Kind of hard and difficult to be a good chapter and haze these days; for any number of reasons.

All of which have been covered many times in many thread here.

I can't think of a half-way decent chapter here (at Texas) that doesn't haze.

As we have discovered in countless threads:
There does not seem to be, anywhere, a consensus of what hazing is.
So one has to follow their own moral compass, as well as the rules, regulations, policies of their school, group, as well as area municipalities.

And we have seen what happens when one gets caught.
Is it worth it??
Is losing a life worth it?
Your house?

And being that this is only your third posting in GC and all are in RM, perhaps you need to take time to read where you are posting.

I've read most of the big threads on the first page and it seems there are two parties, one that sees the benefits of hazing and one that sees it as the end of the world.

Our school administration has been adamantly anti-hazing but the big chapters still do it because they know how crucial it is to a chapter's continued survival and success.

And by hazing, I mean a combination of putting someone in a physical/mental stressful situation (ie. lineups), and forcing pledges to adhere to a set of standards (a dress code, working on builds, cleaning the house/apartments, giving rides, etc.)

Third point of view: There's a lot of stuff marked now as "hazing" that really shouldn't be, but it is because certain individuals or chapters have taken it to the extreme and people have gotten hurt and/or killed. Because of that the rules have changed, AND we should follow the rules and values of our national organizations.

I also don't think hazing is necessary or crucial and there are other ways to build bonds between members. Even if the hazing rules limit some of the beneficial things that chapters can do, there are plenty of other things that can be done.

Very well written and said.

Just have to wonder now how your definitions as well as what you report as "on going" activities at UT match up with any of the following laws, regulations and results in TX:
http://deanofstudents.utexas.edu/eve...Memorandum.pdf
http://deanofstudents.utexas.edu/gle...n-Summer05.pdf
http://www.stophazing.org/laws/tx_law.htm

Seriously? I guess the CU chapter of Delta Chi should be commended for this, then:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/feb/20/fraternity-pledges-arrested-for-damage/

http://http://www.thesmokinggun.com/...9081frat1.html

And that was only 10 pledges - imagine the "bonding" that could have occured with 20?

So am I supposed to sit around in a circle with a bunch of guys I dont know and play name games?

Or we supposed to go through extreme hardships together and learn to work as a team to make it through to the end.

You have to earn your way, just like you have to earn your way onto a football team, basketball team, etc.
I wonder how good the teams would be if you just let anyone on it? No, you have to cut the guys that cant do the pushups, running, hitting, etc.
Same with fraternities

Cmon man, no specifics on a public forum. We know that everything is voluntary but still. None of our chapters ever haze, you know that.

My husband is part of a nonhazing chapter of TKE. He has been out of school for 15 years and is still tight with his brothers. We had a dozen of his brothers at our wedding and we take vacations together 3 times a year. Trust me, this is a chapter that does things right, has awesome alumni communication and gets money from their alum when they need it. He actually gets a newsletter that is around 8 pages 2-3 times a year.
You don't need to haze to have a strong brotherhood or sisterhood.

i was talking about joining a football team....

my chapter doesnt haze anyways

Last I checked, fraternities did not have physical standards like the military does, nor should they not allow members with disabilities (your quote seems to indicate otherwise)...

If it's so important to you that you have to cut those that can't measure up, are your "brothers" "men" enough to advertise your hazing regimen? "Rush (GLO name here)! We'll beat the crap out of you!"

Hazing is wrong. Period. What seriously forces people to accept inhuman and degrading rituals in order to belong to an organization? I don't think the punishment for hazing is severe enough. Those who are caught hazing, get off way too easily unless they lose civil suits, and even then it's the parents who do the paying. The system of hazing still has not been changed. I think in order to change it, and put an end to it, stiffer penalties have to be imposed when someone dies or is injured. I think hazers need to be sent to minimum security prisons where they would have to take mandatory courses in some kind of behavior control.

The problem is that "hazing" is so vague. It's a joke. "Hazing" can be practiced without degrading anyone or putting them in any danger. All this has already been mentioned, but based on your post I'm not sure if you read it. It's not a black and white issue. "But it's illegal blah blah". To that I say, "do you drink? are you 21? do you ever speed?". To that you might say, "but hazing is more dangerous"...well not necessarily. We could go on forever with this issue. There is no definitive answer.

In the case of certain groups/systems, if these people need to be made into better individuals (through hazing methods per each org.) why are they getting bids in the first place? I wouldn't write a rec or bid a woman who didn't meet our standards, and what happens in the new member period and throughout membership should be polishing of qualities that already exist.

If I remember right, BigRedBeta said of men given bids by his chapter "we look for men who are Betas or hold Beta qualities, and may not know it" and I think that's an excellent way to find quality people and not deal with risk management or the university bringing sanctions.

I read some of it. I'm not sure if I repeated another post or not. I was just posting my opinion on the whole issue.
It's not a black and white issue?:confused: Uhmm, yes it is a black and white issue, and no it is not a joke. Hazing actually is an extraordinary activity, and when it happens too often, then it becomes perversely ordinary, and for those individuals who engage in it, grow desensitized to its inhumanity. We already know hazing can lead to death, and serious injury, as it has done every year since the 70s. It leads to death and serious injury when rituals bring out members innate propensity for violence. Also violent, aggressive members who act out toward pledges use them as scapegoats through which to vent their own frustrations. Now, binge drinking has become ritualistic in many universities. I think houses need to be more heavily supervised by responsible adults.

No, it's not that black and white. The problem is that we have about umpteen+ different definitions of hazing floating around out there. It's easy enough, for example, to say that hazing is illegal and think that has settled the argument, but each state has its own hazing laws. What may constitute hazing in one state does not constitute hazing in another state. Where I live, one must subject another student to physical injury for it to meet the legal definition of hazing. In other jurisdictions, subjecting someone to mental or emotional distress may meet the definition.

Then there are GLO definitions and institutional definitions, where sometimes the definition is loose enough to cover almost anything that differentiates between pledges/new members and actives. That's why you'll find pages of arguments on GC about whether it's hazing to require pledges to wear their pledge pins, with some people remaining adamant that it is, even though the policies of some GLOs expect pledges to wear their pledge pins almost all of the time.

I'm not defending hazing, not at all. But as long as people are using different, sometimes vastly different, definitions of hazing, its anything but black and white. It seems to me that all too often the arguments in these thread suffer from a lack of common understanding or agreement about what hazing actually encompasses.

And that's my point, as any such practices, by many definitions would not be considered hazing to begin with.

For example, most hazing statements contain prohibitory clauses against practices "which might cause mental discomfort."

-- study hall is hazing?
-- requiring people to attend meeting is hazing?
-- requiring people to pay attention in meeting and not goof off is hazing?

That sort of clause, I think (and it's in Sigma Nu's policy) is a nice catch all clause which makes it really difficult (impossible) to know whether a practice runs afoul of the policy or not.

I understand your point. And as others have noted, I too have an issue when hazing acts are not clearly defined. However, if something is illegal, well duh, it is illegal.

If you are under 21 and caught drinking, you can go to jail. If you are caught speeding, you can be fined. You may loose your license. You might even end up in jail. Even if you have not really put yourself or anyone else in harms way. As such, my point is that you (the general you) are taking a risk when you do something illegal. Even if it may not seem to be harmful. And this is the reason that illegal hazing acts fall under Risk Management.

To be clear, I do not think that all so called hazing acts are illegal. But if a specific act has been defined as illegal by the State, or by the University, or by your HQ, or by your chapter, then it is simply illegal.

But that's the problem. Very few things ARE "specific" or "defined." And even if there is a list of things, too often that "anything else which might cause physical or mental discomfort" phrase gets thrown in, and anyone who wants to take a chapter down can try to do so.

As I've said, my all time favorite is the sorority pledge from my campus who pointed out that she was being hazed by having to go to the anti-hazing workshop (since it was mandatory for all pledges and initiated members did not have to attend). Silly, but honestly, if you want to walk that kind of walk, she was 100% right.

I love it. I hope she became panhellenic president!

You are so right. It is the activities that are kind of general and non specific that often are the issue. If we go back to the driving example, it may be legal to drive at 70 MPH on the interstate in one state. But as soon as you cross the state line, the legal limit may be 65 MPH. As such, the same activity is legal in one, and not the other. So if you want to be safe, you know that you should never drive above 65 regardless of the speed limit.

So if this could be applied to GLOs, then maybe all the national organizations can set down and say, 65 MPH is going to be the limit regardless of the state. That way, we will never be breaking the law. And all chapters of all groups will have the same policy.

As for the less defined or specific acts, again I think there has to be some sort of clear and unified definition. I know many of us have said that. As such, I feel we need to find and define the so called "65 MPH limit". And if a specific organization wants to go above and beyond that (drop the speed limit to 60 MPH to use that example) that would be ok as well.

The sooner there is a unified definition, the better for all chapters.

How is this not a black and white issue? Hazing is hazing, whether on or off campus premises, and it's designed to produce mental or physical discomfort, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule.

Student guidelines often maintain that hazing can take place with or without the consent of the pledges being hazed. Schools fail to press charges if pledges have consented to some aspects of hazing, and this is a major problem.

What I get upset about is that the public and the media view hazing as primarily a college fraternity and sorority problem. Really, it's also been a social problem in the United States on amateur and professional athletic teams, in high schools, spirit clubs, bands, the military, and even in some occupations and professions.

All schools can suspend or expel students who haze and they know they can, but juducial groups made up of faculty, staff, and students are reluctant to term an action "hazing", which prevents justice from happening. I totally disagree with you about it not being a black and white issue. People just don't want to term it as such.

Hazing is:

1. Serving members, running errands, performing so called favors

2. Any kind of intimidation, use of derogatory terms to refer to pledges, terrorize, use verbal abuse or create a hostile environment

3.Engaging in acts of degradation such as required nudity, partial stripping, rules forbidding bathing, and playing disrespectful games.

4. Engaging in rough rituals involving physical force, paddling, beatings, calisthenics, and sexually demeaning behavior

5. Singing explicit songs as well as performing sexist, racist, or anti semitic acts, including denying someone membership in a glo on the basis of religion, or skin color. Oh, and lets not forget ancestry. (what's in the past, is in the past!)

6. Employing deception and deceptive psychological mind games

7. Suffering from sleep deprivation.

8. Coerce or be coerced by others to consume any substance, drugs, alcohol, rather they are of legal drinking age or not.

9. Keeping pledge books that require alumni members or big sis/big brothers to sign them.

10. Participating in road trips and kidnapping pledges or any type of abandonment.

11. Requiring the use of peer pressure to get someone to undergo branding or tattooing. Any mutilation of the skin. Period.

12. Participating in dousing of initiates involving dangerous substances or chemicals, animal scents, urine/feces (human or animal) retrieving objects from toilets or anything that's unsanitary. Eating spoiled foods that are capable of transmitting diseases or bacterial infections.

13. Making someone eat/drink anything he/she does not want to eat/drink

14. Making pledges learn fraternity/sorority history that interferes with academics.

15. Requiring pledges to wear silly or unusual clothing

I don't think I left anything out. Hazing falls under these guidelines, so there shouldn't be a question of what hazing is or isn't. Yes, it is a black and white issue, and one of the biggest problems of hazing is after it's been eradicated at a particular school, it seems to always come back. Guys, really! We all know what hazing is. Every state and university knows what it is and what it involves. It's not a grey topic.

There are grey areas. I've heard of fraternities trading pledges with another chapter for "hell weekend." Who gets punished there?
What if the pledges do all of these things voluntarily?
Once again, my chapter does not ever haze, but I know of others GLOs that do and have talked about it to my friends in other fraternities. We do #14 but it doesn't interfere with academics, my pledge class had a higher GPA than the fraternity (which is above the all-male average as well).

In answer to your question: Both could be.
Questions like yours truly get answered when TPTB, either school, local town, and/or HO, get involved and start enforcing regs et al.
None of us here can truly answer questions of than nature.
Unless it has already happened to them directly.

What I find most offensive is when policies tell me "you were hazed" even if I did things voluntarily for people and with people because I LIKED them - they just happened to be sisters and I was a pledge.

I bought fries back from Wendy's when I was going there anyway because a sister was sick and craving them. Does that mean I was hazed? I guess I'm not allowed to do something nice for another person.

I stayed up till 3 AM talking with my big - we were so involved in conversation we forgot the time - even though I had to go to class the next morning at 8 AM. I guess I was hazed because I suffered from sleep deprivation.

I drank too much at a mixer and a sister dragged me home and made sure I ate so I didn't get sick from drinking too much. I guess that means she hazed me by making me eat something I didn't want to.

Anyone who really wants to can take the most innocuous things that happen in pledgeship and make them into hazing.

The above does contain parts of policy items from my own organization's hazing policy, but the above is not my organization's hazing policy. I also know the state of Oklahoma's hazing law. The above looks nothing like that.

You, Sigma Nu and Oklahoma all define hazing differently -- and I only looked in three places.

Of course it's not a black and white issue. If I make a bunch of pledges go to STUDY HALL to IMPROVE THEIR GRADES......should I be kicked out of school and charged with hazing in court? I mean, technically holding study hall for pledges only is hazing.

I was hazed.......nothing I did was "designed to produce mental or physical discomfort, embarrassment, harassment or ridicule." It was a tough experience and it made me extremely close to my pledge brothers. Probably the one thing I loved going through that I wouldn't want to do again.

Why is it a major problem? That's dumb. So you're saying that the person who was allegedly "hazed" shouldn't have any say in what happens to the group that he was working hard to get into or the person that was "hazing" him? What if the kid loved what he was doing and felt no danger, distress, mental discomfort, etc. etc.

Ok

People don't want to term it as such because IT ISN'T A YES OR NO ISSUE. Hazing, the act of hazing, and what constitutes hazing will be debated till the cows come home.

For the third time, yes, it is a grey topic. There are countless things in that list that I don't think you would get in trouble for...ever.

Also, you know what really irritates the shit out of me....bullshit "hazing" designations like #14. Really? If we make our pledges LEARN THE HISTORY OF THE ORGANIZATION THEY ARE WANTING TO JOIN we are hazing? Really?

I hope cheerful greek this once and for all clears it up for you. What makes me mentally and physically uncomfortable is probably different then at least 50% of the other GCer's on here. Same goes for being embarrassed. The beauty of being an individual is that we all have our different breaking points and its impossible to set a standard line for everything.

Hazing is like any other political issue you will never get a 100% agreement. The will always be pro choice/prolife, anti-gun bearers/right to bear arms, for capital punishment/against capital punishment.


You dont have to agree with what is said on here, but you need to open your mind and try to see that it isnt black and white. You can't tell me that a kid who's parents forced him to go to military school and gets peed on or beaten with a 2x4 is the same thing as having a new member where a pledge pin to show pride in the organization he willingly chose to join.


*in case anyone is interested as my fraternity education chair one year I had the new members ask me one thing about greek life they wanted me to find out. They wanted to know where paddles originated from... While looking up the answer I stumbled across information that stated Hazing didn't start in fraternities until military men joined them and they transfered over what they had learned in the military to the brothers. After they left the uneducated brothers continued with the activities and didn't know where to draw the line.*

That's the same info I learned years ago, specifically regarding NPHC organizations and the military men who brought back military practices. Then of course it passed on to many sorority chapters.

I deleted your last sentence because I do not know about the military men leaving and the left over men not knowing where to draw the line. I think that some of the military practices themselves crossed the line in many ways. They were meant for military bonding, rites of passages and to prepare soldiers for combat, the possibility of being a POW, etc. Plus, in some chapters the military brothers stuck around long after they graduated, or did not go back into active duty, so they often had a hand in what was taken too far.