|
My Dad tells me that back in the early 1960's a lot of the really gross hazing stories had their basis in truth but were designed to get the pledge class to pull together and refuse the task as a group. The idea was to demand that the pledges, or one pledge chosen by the class to represent them all, would be told to do something really unpleasant or even absolutely unacceptable. The idea was for the pledges to figure out where the line was drawn between unpleasant but acceptable (like scrubbing out a latrine with a tooth brush) and something unacceptable (like having sex with a dead dog). The class was supposed to figure out that 1. they needed to stand together in their decision, and 2. they needed to refuse to do something morally or philosophically repugnant. One was supposed to be bright enough to realize that no fraternity would want to initiate either a dead dog f****r or one who was so spineless as to go along with something like that. If some poor pledge agreed to do the deed he would be seperated from the pledge class and told to consider his choice carefully. If he still didn't catch on he might be told and ribbed about it for the rest of his life or he might be invited to depledge to save being blackballed at the next ball session.
Tough way to go but it did bring about pledge unity and teach a lesson of how to cooperate without being blindly obedient in unacceptable circumstances. "Think it through to its logical consequences" was always impressed on the victims, er... pledges.
|