U of Alabama Suspends All Fraternity "pledging" Activity
 

'Bama is suspending all fraternity "pledging" activity pending investigation of a number of alleged incidents.


See, for example:

http://blog.al.com/tuscaloosa/2012/1...y_privile.html

UA Greek Affairs Executive Director told the CW the following about the fall semester pledge period, according to a tweet: "The pledge program is over. It's not going to be brought back. It's done."

"The office of Greek Affairs will continue to investigate the allegations, refer to past events, and work with other universities to ensure that the future pledging is safe for all students and safe for all individuals involved," Davis also told the CW. "There's a new day at the University, a new president. We can't allow the things that have taken place in the past to continue."

The Greek Affairs office said UA Media Relations will release more information between 4-4:30 p.m. on Thursday.

See also


http://www.wafb.com/story/19856954/u...rnity-pledging
http://www.myfoxal.com/story/1985695...rnity-pledging
http://blog.al.com/tuscaloosa/2012/1...y_privile.html

I love this quote from the last article.

^^^ No words being minced there!

Hm, at least one of the orgs listed doesn't even have a pledge period, officially.

Leaked letters, responses, and omg loss of football game seating. The drama continues. ["If you have pearls, prepare to clutch them now."]

http://jezebel.com/5953199/after-all...ing-activities

I find this part of the original article interesting:

"The release also says that, during the last week, UA has received confidential and specific allegations via the school's hazing hotline involving Phi Gamma Delta, Chi Phi, Sigma Nu, Kappa Alpha Order, Kappa Sigma, Pi Kappa Phi and Zeta Beta Tau.

After investigating, Greek Affairs and Judicial Affairs have cleared Phi Gamma Delta, Sigma Nu, Kappa Alpha Order, Kappa Sigma, Pi Kappa Phi and Zeta Beta Tau."

So if those groups have been cleared, then why is everything halted for all fraternities? It also makes it seem like perhaps some of the calls to the hotline were not credible.

Yes, "cleared" certainly can mean "not caught." This time.

I honestly don't know how administration can eliminate all hazing. I don't understand why frats take the risk, or what purpose it serves -- or has EVER served.

AGDee;I find this part of the original article interesting:

After investigating, Greek Affairs and Judicial Affairs have cleared Phi Gamma Delta, Sigma Nu, Kappa Alpha Order, Kappa Sigma, Pi Kappa Phi and Zeta Beta Tau."

So if those groups have been cleared, then why is everything halted for all fraternities? It also makes it seem like perhaps some of the calls to the hotline were not credible.

AGDEE, you maybe correct and I would agree with you that a few of these calls and allegations to the hotline were probably not true, especially when 6 fraternities were cleared of any or all hazing allegations. Sounds like someone or somebodies just want to paint a negative image on fraternities.

ZBT: "Brotherhood and Beyond."

This has really got to be one of the most unprofessional tweets I've ever read. Was this accompanied by a memo to the houses? A discussion at IFC? Official announcements of this magnitude shouldn't be made over Twitter.

Alabama Hazing
 

I see sheer frustration in the tweet. I think the University of Alabama is improving on many different levels and the administration is simply not going to tolerate the old school SEC attitudes any longer.
I think a twitter release probably was not the best way to announce this but all the Fraternities are on notice. I don't doubt from the text of the tweet if any further serious allegations are found to be true that expulsions and chapter closings will take place.

LOL.

If Twwwitter ever wants to be taken seriously, they need to get less ridiculous terminology.

While I agree that hazing is bad and should not be allowed, what I don't understand is why it is only wrong when done in college and high school. It's perfectly acceptable in our society for certain segments of the military, professional football, some NPHC groups, etc to haze. When we accept it in one area it's damned difficult to explain why it isn't in another.

Because it represents a huge "unfunded" liability for the university... The whole university system is facing huge economic uncertainty. When a pattern of behavior puts the college at risk (this includes both student safety as well as impacting federal dollars and other monies) then the university has an obligation to respond. It's not as if there haven't been some egregious incidents in the past. There's a drip, drip, drip of events which leave the impression that the GS is losing its way. It's not making kids do push-ups that's the problem. It's the under-age excessive drinking, drugging, promiscuity and date-rape as part of a pledging "rite-of-passage" that passes for normal behavior that's scaring parents and university administration throughout the country. It may not be every fraternity--but its hard for IFC to single-out one when they all have similar flaws to varying degrees.

But it also represents one for MLB and the NFL. And to allow NPHC groups to brand and not allow "bows and toes" for IFC ones is a hard sell - to the undergrads and the insurance companies. You can't an 18 year old male that it's not OK in an IFC group because of "unfunded" liability and then tell him it's OK to be branded by an NPHC group. It makes no sense. The basic issue is that it is demeaning. And that's why it's wrong - not because it's going to cost big whoop dee do U a bag of cash,

Wow! I'm applying to this school for next year. Does anybody know if any of the sororities are under investigation or are suspended from pledging acitivites? Thank You!

No. It was the 7 mens' groups named in the articles...

NPHC as a governing body does not allow, nor does it condone branding.

Branding is done by those individual members who choose to do so. Much like getting a tattoo.

Different types of hazing have different levels of Risk *and* different levels of risk relative to what they are asked to do every day. At one end of the scale is the public Rookie Baseball hazing. For the Washington Nationals, one thing in the Rookie Hazing is wear women's clothes on the train trip from DC to New York.

As for NPHC Branding (as well as branding in the Philippines), I can't see that being done by those who aren't full members of the Organization. For example, I *truly* pity someone getting an Omega brand who isn't a full member of Omega Psi Phi...

Full members can still be hazed. The threat of retribution is enough for it to be considered hazing - and that covers all sports/bands/fraternal organizations/etc. IFC and NPC do not condone hazing but it still exists.

That depends on what legal, campus or organizational definition one is talking about. Some definitions define hazing to include any prohibited acts done either as a condition to initiation or continued membership. If I recall correctly, the NPC definition does this.

But some other definitions of hazing only cover acts done as a condition of initiation. I know of some state criminal laws on hazing that only extend that far.

There is no single, universal definition of hazing. While there are certain things that everyone would identify as hazing, there are other things where the application of different policies will yield different answers. Chapters need to be concerned with the laws of the state they are in, the policies of the campus they are on and the policies of their own GLO.

Just because there isn't a law against it doesn't make it right. What would our founders think about all this? Really.

Where did you get that from what I posted? There are lots of wrong things that aren't hazing. It's no different from saying that all homicides are not murder. No need to overdramatize by wringing hands over what our founders would think.

My state's criminal law defines hazing as "to subject another student to physical injury as part of an initiation, or as a prerequisite to membership, into any organized school group, including any society, athletic team, fraternity or sorority, or other similar group." N.C. Gen. Stat. 14-35. By this definition, a full member can't be hazed, because the definition only applies to those becoming members. He or she can be assaulted or otherwise wronged in some way, but not hazed. By contrast, under my fraternity's policies, a collegiate member or even an alumnus member can be hazed.

It seems to me that the word "hazing" gets thrown around a lot as a general term for anything wrong, sometimes (often?) getting applied to things that some laws and organizations do not classify as hazing. The point is not whether an act is right or wrong. The point is whether it is hazing. I think we need to show care in flatly stating that "x is hazing," when various policies or laws can disagree on whether x actually is hazing. But whether it's hazing or not, x can still be wrong.

I was not necessarily directing that at you, MysticCat. I'm appalled that most here think in terms of the damage and liability to the university rather than the psychological - and possible physical - damage to the young people involved. Have any of you heard Mary Ann Callais, Theta Phi Alpha, talk about living your ritual? She's awesome - and it's an awesome talk. That's what I am talking about. How does any behaviour - hazing or just otherwise wrong- perpetuate your ritual? It doesn't.

Gotcha. ;)

Along those same lines, it drives me nuts when I hear hazing referred to as "ritual[s]." I see that in news stories all the time. It leads non-Greeks to think that when we talk about ritual, we're talking about hazing.

^^^^^^^This!

Ummm... we must be reading totally different threads. The university took action because of its CONCERN for students who were pledging. My reference to "unfunded liabilities" was to acknowledge that concerns for individual students ALSO represent a risk to the university writ large.

I have no dog in this fight. But some of the comments here are frankly ridiculous. If this blog doesn't "get" that what happened at UA is serious or that there's danger that the Greek System is becoming a pariah -- then maybe you don't visit sites like TFM or Greek Rank. Much of the commentary is pretty shocking. It reflects poorly on the attitudes and behavior of GS members. Period. UA has drawn a line.

True, it does represent a risk to the university - but a much smaller one than to the individuals, IMO. You weren't the only one to mention the possible cash outlay by the university but I personally think the damage done to the young men in question and to the reputations of these fraternities in particular and the Greek System in general is due a lack of understanding of the meaning of their ritual. If they lived it, these things would not happen - anywhere. And that's the more important thing - in my estimation.