'Hazing' is a nice word for white kids who act violently
 

'Hazing' is a nice word for white kids who act violently

May 11, 2003

BY MARY MITCHELL SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST

If you think there's plenty of blame to go around in the Glenbrook North High School beating incident, consider the double standards this story has exposed.

From school shootings to domestic violence, when violence erupts in suburbia, the subtle suggestion is that we ought to be shocked. The Glenbrook North High School debacle, in which five junior girls were injured as a result of an assault by senior girls in off-campus hazing, is no exception.

The videotaped beatings of the girls have been broadcast across the world. Even Oprah wants to talk about it. Yet the so-called powder puff football game that included senior girls using objects to punch the heck out of junior girls is the same kind of beatdown that routinely occurs when young black teenagers join a gang.

I don't think Oprah has ever had a segment about that.

When white kids behave violently, it is either an "oh-my-God-how-could-this-happen-here?" or a "teens-will-be-teens" moment. Unless one of them is gunned down, violence between black teens is often ignored.

There is an exception to this rule, however.

When black kids behave violently, or for that matter, if too many show up in a white neighborhood, then we are back to "oh-my-God-how-could-this-happen-here?"

Remember FreakNic a few years back?

When thousands of black college students showed up in Schiller Woods on the Northwest Side and some of them engaged in lewd and drunken behavior (only 22 people were arrested in a crowd estimated to be 10,000), the media went wild because homeowners were upset. Needless to say, that was the end of FreakNic.

Although girls involved in the Glenbrook incident sustained broken bones and bruises, the worldwide public has been told more about this episode than they were the murder of 15-year-old Jonathan Williams in April. The New Orleans high school student was killed and three teenage girls wounded when gunmen armed with an assault rifle and a handgun sprayed more than 30 bullets in a packed gym.

These students were black. The shootings were gang-related. And that was the end of that.

There wasn't a segment on Oprah about that violence, either.

The reason we are getting a blow-by-blow report of the Northbrook beatings is because the violence involved white students from an affluent suburb. This is a double standard that reinforces negative stereotypes about black youth and also feeds the myth that lives of poor black people have less human value than the lives of well-to-do white ones.

Even the words we choose to describe the violence in a Northbrook vs. the words we use to describe urban violence show a bias. For example, the Northbrook seniors were "hazing," not "assaulting," as if hitting people in the head with a trash can is a perfectly normal rite of passage.

We may not get the connection between the girls who join street gangs on the South Side of Chicago and those who mark their ascension into the cool crowd by going through a beatdown, but the mentality is the same. Although we abhor the low self-esteem that drives a young person to seek approval from a gang, we tolerate the same behavior when it comes to "cliques."

Black youth are not the only ones harmed by this stereotyping.

White youth who believe it is OK to do whatever--from driving their parents' luxury car into a bad neighborhood to score drugs because they know they won't be stopped for DWB, to participating in a drunken brawl in a local forest preserve because they know whatever happens, it won't impact their future goals--are on a dangerous path.

What the Northbrook hazing incident shows is that unsupervised teenagers can make some incredibly bad decisions no matter where they come from. And, bad parenting is not confined to urban homes.

According to a tip received by Northbrook police, there's a good reason the "powder puff football" game turned violent.

Apparently, parents provided these underage girls with a keg of beer or two.

After watching the Northbrook beatings explode in the media, I asked Reta Wilcox, CEO of Girl Scouts--Illinois Crossroads Council what she thought. Girl Scouts seems to be a place girls from Northbrook would have passed through.

"People find this kind of incident shocking because they try to believe that in the modern world values are not important," said Wilcox, who grew up in Girl Scouts. "But as it turns out, it is the lack of values that causes this kind of thing," she pointed out.

"Values stick. Anyone who was honest and fair, considerate and caring, or responsible for what they do or respectful to others, would be precluded from such rash actions," Wilcox said.

Honey, hush.

When white, middle-class kids are involved, we don't talk about that.

White people aren't the only ones who have been accused of hazing, using that exact word. I agree that it's unfair of society to be more shocked when violence occurs among the white community, but the author is confusing "hazing," which is a legal term, with the amount of media coverage. It wasn't hazing because the kids were white; it was hazing because it fit the legal definition, which refers to only a certain kind of violence among young people of any race.

A gunman going into a school and shooting is much worse than hazing, and it may be totally unfair that it received less coverage than this hazing incident. That doesn't mean that it's wrong to call one "hazing" and the other a "shooting spree."

I agree that he doesn't understand the term hazing...hazing can include assault.

And I think we have heard all these same arguments before during the JonBenet Ramsey saga. I don't think it has to do with black or white. It has to do with the sick happiness of seeing rich people with their balls caught in a vise. If this had happened at my high school - which is pretty much all white, but not anywhere near as affluent as GBN - I doubt we would be seeing all this media coverage either.

I think that the fact that there is a videotape of these white girls is the reason that there is a story here. I never heard of FreakNic.

In NYC many of the news stories about violent crimes have victims who are all different races. I do agree that the big national stories about school violence and shootings seem to focus on suburban white victims, as if the violence in big city public schools with non white victims was insignificant. I remember in the mid 1990s, many students of color were being shot in NYC public schools as if that were a part of the educational experience. The country finally noticed when the shootings occured in suburban or rural schools with white victims and shooters.

Is this article about hazing vs. violence or black vs. white crimes? :rolleyes:

Hmm, the author does however make an interesting point....why is this incident called "hazing" instead of assault or (for lack of a better term) a violent beatdown? It's not like the juniors were "pledging" to join a high school organization (From reading post in the High School hazing thread)?

What really is the difference between what these girls did vs. gang jump-ins or activity? Could the only difference be the media's coverage? Has America just become immune to urban violence and just don't believe that the 'burbs are as safe as they think?

Well, even if other folks don't get it, this article did make me think about this?

I agree with Honeykiss1974 on this one. My highschool had a few "hazing" incidents of its own. But they were never called hazing. In fact, the perpetrators were arrested and charged with assault.
What I'm not understanding, is when serious injuries occur how these individuals are NOT charged with assault?

edited because I can't spell

I really don't believe it's all a matter of perception.

To be hazing, it does not have to be an official, structured organization like a sorority. It can also include general peer acceptance, which would be the case here. Hazing implies those being beaten are not the "enemy" as in gang-on-gang violence but the "friend." That's not a small distinction. If my gang beats me up to test my toughness so I can get in, that's hazing. If my gang goes out and beats up the next gang over, that's not hazing.

Now either way a cycle of violence is perpetrated, but in a different way. With hazing, it's the recent hazees that become the next hazers. With gang violence (or a family feud, or long-standing ethnic wars like in the Balkans), it's the same people going back and forth. The Serbs attack the Croations and then the Croations attack the Serbs ad naseum. But with hazing, the hazees don't rise up and haze the hazers back.

P.S. I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered assault. But assault is a very broad category. Hazing is a more specific term and might not even involve assault is some cases (forcing pledges to drink too much). There's no reason not to charge these girls with both hazing and assault.

When it comes to initiation into a gang, every year (or however often they do it) current members of the gang are bringing in new people. Again, how is that different in terms of being labeled "hazing"? :confused:

I guess to put it bluntly, what I object to is the article's suggestions that "hazing" is a meaningless euphamism for something else. Hazing has a cultural definition and a legal one just as much as assult does.

I'm not shocked it happened in a nice white part of town. I'm not sure it deserves any more attention that dozens of other incidents of violence. I'm not sure the attention isn't due to the participants being white, or to them being rich.

And heck, what I object to in this article is only in the headline, so maybe it reflects the copyeditor more than the writer. But hazing is not a "nice word," nor is it only applied to "white kids."

To repeat myself: "If my gang beats me up to test my toughness so I can get in, that's hazing."

But if one gang beats up another, that is not hazing.

So a gang has two kinds of violence going on - hazing inside and inter-gang violence outside. However, even if a gang decided to be kinder and gentler to its members and model their new member process on the most PC sorority ever, inter-gang violence would still be taking place.

They just had a story about gang initiation on the local news last night. These girls were being raped in order to become members of the gang. I forget the details. That was enough for me. :(

There is a racial bias in the media. I don't think that is surprising.

a few months back, i saw a documentary about gangs. the focus was mainly on female gangs and i was shocked to hear these women speak about why they would want to be in a gang. personally, i was thinking why would these girls do these terrible things...what could they possible get from being a part of a gang. then the women explained that they were searching for....sisterhood...someone to be there always...family...support...acceptance... so many of those are reasons that people tend to join glos. as for gang initiations, this particular documentary highlighted several different activities. some of which included the "members" being abusive to the "initiates" as well as making the "initiates" perform acts such as killing or stealing. i can't imagine that at any time in history as part of a pledge program for a glo, new members were asked to kill someone else. it is very interesting to parallel gangs and glos.

Exactly, that is why I am saying that this is NOT an example of hazing, so to repeat myself, why is this story being pawned off as that? Yes, you can argue the technicalities of the word hazing, but seriously, let's call it what it is...

The legal reason not to consider this hazing is that many hazing laws require the activity to occur in a student organization; some laws go so far as to require the organization be school-recognized. If what you're saying, Honeykiss, is that under those laws this is not prosecutable, you are absolutely correct. I was wrong earlier when I said it didn't have to be a structured organization.

If we decide to limit our use of the word "hazing" to the legal definition, however, then violent gang initiations are not hazing either, since gangs are definitely not school-recognized.

More colloquially, I think hazing is used slightly more broadly, and I would include this high school assault in that slightly broader definition. No one else need accept anyone else's colloquialisms, of course, but I do think that from the other responses here that many people accept a wider definition of "hazing" than just violence pertaining to school groups - as most of us called gang initiation hazing. I don't think that for most of us the intent of calling this hazing is to whitewash the serious of what occurred, double entendre intended.

Here is one anti-hazing law; it happens to be West Virginia's but is very similar to most states'. The behavior described in it is similar to much of what occurred in the high school incident, but the unsanctioned powder puff game would not qualify as "any organization operating under the sanction of or recognized by an institution of higher education."

Hazing" means to cause any action or situation which recklessly or intentionally endangers the mental or physical health
or safety of another person or persons or causes another person or persons to destroy or remove public or private property
for the purpose of initiation or admission or affiliation with, or as a condition of continued membership with, any organization
operating under the sanction of or recognized by an institution of higher education. The term included, but is not limited to,
any brutality of a physical nature, such as whipping, beating, branding, forced consumption of any food, liquor, drug, or other
substance, or any other forced physical activity which could adversely affect the physical health and safety of an individual or
individuals, and includes any activity which would subject the individual or individuals to extreme mental stress, such as
sleep deprivation, forced exclusion from social contact, forced conduct which could result in extreme embarrassment; or any
other forced activity which could adversely affect the mental health or dignity of the individual or individuals, or any willful
destruction or removal of public or private property: Provided, That the implied or expressed consent or willingness of a
person or persons to hazing shall not be a defense under this section.

*just edited to add that some laws are considerably broader, such as Arkansas' - see http://www.uca.edu/divisions/student/greeks/hazing.htm

Honeykiss, I'm sorry, but I don't quite understand your last post. Maybe we are looking at the gang comparison from two different angles? I considered these high schoolers to be one gang initiating a new, younger set of members, and I thought you were looking at it the same way. Do you consider that they are one gang beating up on another instead?

The "Black /White" comparison between Hazing and Gang Related situations is totaly out of Line and uncalled for!:o

Please, do belittle yourselves by trying to bring bigotry, stupidity or anyother racial tones into this!

I dont care what color you are, as I think WE ALL feel this was something that should not have been done!

It is lucky that these Moronic asswhole kids took videos! Do not say because they were white it is called hazing and gang initiation is not! That is B S!

"HAZING" has become a Pol. Correct word to cover a ton of things!

Color is becoming a factor on this site when many are trying to take it out!

Dont let your pigmentation be a problem, as it will be yours alone!

Hmm...
 

Tom,
Why do you think the 2 should be separated? I think you are personalizing this situation. We are looking at perception and ways to change this type of biased reporting in the media.

Let's be honest...this was not the first time this form of initiation has taken place...BUT...this time it was caught on tape. MOST gang initiations are not videotaped, but this one was...and surely no one thought it was going to be viewed on the news.

*How many gangs do we associate with white suburban highschool kids?*

The secret is out. Yes, this was a gang initiation ritual, brutal, disgusting and labeled "hazing" instead of assault...BECAUSE it did not take place "in the hood" or "under the bridge" in the inner city, where this type of behavior is acceptable...and expected.

Race is an issue in life. The discussion of race matters will not go away, nor should it. We the college educated, are tasked to expose and figure out ways to address these issues in society. No, its not a comfortable topic, but it is worthy of discussion.

I am looking at it from one group beating up another.
If this was the Cheerleading squad (for example) and juniors cheerleaders were made to come out for the powderpuff game and get beat up, then I could see were this example could be classified as hazing. But this was just "random" seniors inviting juniors to beat them up.

I guess some people are looking at this at the fact the "organization" that both groups (juniors and seniors) belonged to was the high school.

And again, even if this was some sort of organized group, why is the media calling this hazing and not assault?

Remember not you ( "you " in general and not specifically you Fuzzy), but the media?

***********

Tom, behaving in a brutual, savage manner is not mutually exclusive to just a certain group of people. Is just isn't.

I am sure I'll be repeating what other people have said . . .

I am not going to touch the minority angle much lol. Thats a tough one. I will observe that there is an awful high percentage of minorities versus whites in our prisons, but that might have as much to do with income and deserves another thread.

Obviously the video and the curse of 24 hour news has a lot to do with this situation. Any video will give you a lot more attention from the media.

The race issue aside the backstory is probably the most important factor in the determination of hazing versus asault.

In the perception of investigators here, this is a rite of passage situation between two recognized groups, juniors and seniors, in a recognized organization, a high school.

In a gang situation, as I believe fuzzie was saying, the group itself is considerd to be inherently ilegal and not any type of official organization.

And who makes the charges? The local prosecutors or DA's, so it depends on their take of the situation.

At my high school we had a "freshman initiation week" where we had activities that could be construed as hazing depending on where you are from. We were made to push soda cans across the cafeteria floor with our noses, sing songs and dress up in costumes given to us by our senior "big sis". I went to an all girls catholic high school and if you didn't participate in the I-week activities you were looked down on. Most of the girls who refused to particpate ended up transferring before the end of the first semester.

Are you telling me this isn't hazing? The only group that we all belonged to was my high school, and yes this was a 99% white school in an affluent suburb. We didn't video tape what went on and what happened was no where close to what happened to those girls but in the same way there was after school activities that involved drinking and other risk management nightmares. If there had been video involved, trust me it would have made it on to the nightly news.

At our brother school the soccer team would duct tape their freshmen to the goal posts on the football field naked and kick soccer balls at them. They made the mistake of video taping this and the tape was leaked. That did make it on to the news. Now maybe because this was a sports team it was hazing and what I went through as a freshman wasn't. To me it sure felt like hazing when I was forced to push a soda can across the cafeteria floor with my nose while wearing a hat that had all kinds of things stuck to it and signs around my neck saying "I love seniors".

Jess

P.S. to those who say that those who were hazed are the ones who are generally the worst didn't meet my HS graduating class...when we were seniors we changed I-Week to just in-school activities that consisted of each day dressing a theme. We also participated to bond the two classes. We took a lot of flack from the sophomore and junior classes for our decision but we didn't want these freshmen humiliated like we were.

I am not trying to seperate between the two!

It was stated earlier that in the white community it is hazing and in the ethnic community it is gang initiation!

Any way you want to call it, it is a hazing situation!

Do I condone Hazing--Hell No!!

Beleive me, there are gangs of white kids also. It is not just one or two societys!

Just because it was caught on tape and most are not, does not make it any better!

I am glad that it was on tape to show the world the stupidity and violence that does go on.:cool:

I just love how the parents are so against their little kiddies getting their butts in a ringer! Da!!!:o

i think if this was in an inner city neighborhood, this wouldn't even get any kind media attention. the kids would up and get sent to jail. the shit is assault, point blank. don't let them graduate...and give them the same exact punishment a 40 year old man would have gotten for beating down another 40 year old man. you let them off because they're in a rich white neighborhood, you're sending the wrong message. that shows that mommy and daddy can afford for you to act a fool as long as they have enough money to bail your dumbass out.

Tom Earp
Moderator

Registered: Mar 2000
Location: Kansas City, Kansas USA
Posts: 3984

You are reading this correctly!

They should get their diplomas for the work that they did and do jail time for in turn what they did!

I just love the parents of these little asswholes who sued over the whole thing when it was on tape for the whole world to see!

The parents ought to be sued by the victums for being dumb assed parents who have no damn control over their brats!

I do not care what damn neighbor hood they are from, they should be punished to the fullest!


__________________
LCA

Tom Earp
LXA LX Z # 1

Everyman A Man,
Every Woman A Woman,
Every Person A Person.
But Naught Without Labor.

I guess they're looking at it as hazing because they were looking at it like I was, as one group beating up its newest members, not as a group beating up another one.

Obviously, I can't know what's going on in anyone else's mind, but I think they called it hazing because that was the first thing they thought of - genuinely and not as "what's the euphamism we can use." And then once it's the "hazing story," that's what it's going to keep on being called, whether or not anyone or everyone decides "assault" is a better term.

AMEN brother! The parents need an azzwhuppin too for NOT punishing their kids. The offenders were not allowed to go to prom...boo EFFING hoo!

The parents created a prom for them! :eek:

They condoned that behaviour IMO!

Regardless of their race they should be UNDER the jail! And the parents should be locked up for providing the alcohol!

Glad they were "smart" enough to provide the video to incriminate themselves!

This should NOT be a black vs white thing! :rolleyes:

This is a matter of kids who are not raised right and have NO home training!

I agree with LeslieAGD on this one: I don't think it's fair and reasonable to say that hazing is when "white kids behave badly" because there have been cases where NPHC sororities and fraternities have had their charters and/or actions questioned because of what was believed to be hazing. Since those are all historically black organizations, I don't think you can make a case to say that hazing is a term that is used for white people.