|
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. |
Quote:
You, Sigma Nu and Oklahoma all define hazing differently -- and I only looked in three places. |
Quote:
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. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
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? |
Quote:
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.* |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
Hazing occurs when the line between brotherly love gets blurred with unbrotherly stupidity.... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
None of this falls under what hazing actually is. It's not grey, but people make it grey, by posting opinions like the one you quoted. It's black and white, because it involves a group's request (or the request of individuals within that group that the person in a subservient position perceives to be important) that a potential new member take some action in order to be held in esteem by the group and/or to gain entrance into an organization. I think request defined as hazing can be explicit, or implicit, either way it's hazing and it's wrong. The problem is people who haze and expect those who are hazed to behave in a certain way fail to consider the fact that some pnms could be chronic worriers who could be distressed by verbal abuse, or that some come to the fraternity/sorority with a bad past, have thought about quitting school, are addicted to alcohol/drugs or perhaps have considered suicide. Even strong and healthy people have limits to which they can be pushed. Add to the fact that many hazing traditions are inherently negligent, and sad consequences such as wrongful deaths become all too likely, especially when binge drinking is involved. macallan25, I totally disagree with you. Members who haze justify actions that are outside the range of normal human behavior. People who join by allowing themselves to be hazed, crave relationships and acceptance, not primarily because they respond to the organizations particular ideology. Some people allow themselves to be hazed because they find themselves in an unfamiliar surrounding their 1st year in college away from family and childhood friends, so they then seek a feeling of belonging. To these people, enduring hazing rather it's physical and/or mental, beats the pain of loneliness. I'm not saying joining a fraternity or a sorority is wrong, I would be a hypocrite if I said that. But I don't think anyone should have to risk their health in any way, shape, or form. Also macallan25, because my opinions are different from yours doesn't make them dumb! I don't agree with 99.9% of your posts in many threads that you've posted in, but I don't call them dumb or stupid. Your opinions on OJ are the only posts I've ever agreed with. If you think my opinions are dumb, then you don't have to respond to them. |
If someone doesn't have the mental fortitude to deal with the small amount of stress induced by hazing, I probably don't want them in my chapter.
Membership in the organization is not free, you're going to have to work for it. Some people hear about 'hazing' and realize they may not want to be a part of the group that badly anymore. Things like serving dinner, cleaning the house, study hours, are just paying your dues. You have to contribute before you can join. |
Quote:
My collegiate chapter shows up to football games in shirt and tie -- sometimes coat and tie. Do you think that new members, pledges, feel maybe just a tiny bit of peer pressure to also show up in shirt and tie? Do you think they might be asked to change clothes if they didn't? Yes and yes. That's hazing to you? It is under your definition. That said, I've never heard of anyone in the history of the world being charged with hazing for activity such as that. My collegiate chapter emphasizes social graces, good manners and etiquette. We teach our new members how to act, how to treat women with respect, etc. When they're at formal, do you think new members feel like they're under a bit of a microscope when it comes to how they treat their dates? Do you think they will be corrected if they do something wrong? Might that correction (done in a polite, nice way) create some "mental discomfort"? Yes, yes and yes. So now, according to your newly minted definition, and perhaps my own organization's insanely vague definition, teaching etiquette and expecting members and new members alike to exhibit good manners is hazing. In order to be initiated, our new members are required to reach a certain GPA. The GPA they are required to reach is different from that which is required to remain a member. Is requiring that new members get good grades hazing? Again, you'd be the only person in the history of the world to think that, so choose your answer carefully. |
Quote:
The thing is - Greek membership IS NOT EASY. Has it occurred to you that if someone's a chronic worrier that sitting through hours of membership selection as a sister isn't exactly going to be the best thing for her? Should someone who can't handle being around alcohol at all really join a fraternity who doesn't overindulge but does offer alcohol at their parties? Someone who's suicidal should work that out with a psychiatrist or a counselor at the student center - NOT expect a group of 18-22 year olds to help him/her through it just because he/she is a pledge. 18-22 year olds shouldn't be doing that. Pledgeship is training for active brotherhood or sisterhood. If you find out during pledgeship that it's not for you, you can quit. Greek life is not for everyone, and it's time we stopped pretending it is. |
The voluntary versus involuntary isn't a strong argument so the grey area isn't because of that.
99% of the hazing is technically voluntary, ranging from technically allowing someone to paddle you to allowing yourself to be "forced" to drink gallons of water or alcohol. Even the alleged milder forms of hazing like scavenger hunts are voluntary but we all know that people do these things because they think they should. People who refuse to go through these things will be treated accordingly--and in most chapters that means that their experience will be made into a nightmare. So voluntarily being hazed, enjoying some of the experiences, and thinking that what you went through is a reasonable rite of passage doesn't change anything. You were still hazed, based on many definitions, and what you experienced can always be taken to an extreme if placed in the wrong hands. That applies to the hazing of 50 years ago and the hazing of today. The REAL grey area is that we know that some people are responsible and don't take power to the extreme so they aren't hoping to truly physically or mentally damage people (I acknowledge that "truly" is subjective). However, as I said before, the hazing laws exist because "some people" isn't enough insurance and people seeking membership have different physical and mental tolerance levels that aren't always considered. One pledge could do 300 pushups with ease and another not only can't but can end up in cardiac arrest because of it. Harmless or a "fluke" outcome of a hazing incident that justifies why hazing is illegal? |
Quote:
Real training for active membership includes giving "pledges" assignments like program ideas and implementations. Teaching "pledges" how to interact with their future brothers and sisters--since they won't be running errands forever. But lo and behold that type of training can still be hazing if it is outside of the national organization's intake guidelines and the aspirants can't say "no" and still be treated the same as someone who says "yes." |
Quote:
And I agree, it is far from being a black or white issue. There are many grey areas. |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:42 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.