But I don't think we should expand the definition of "hazing" to include anything stupid or harmful a group might do.
***************
Good point! I think that a lot of people have gone overboard when it comes to what they define as hazing.
"Hazing" as a term should cover physically harmful (or potentially physically harmful) or intentionally humiliating things that people are forced to do to pursue full membership in a group.
We should have other names and other legal definitions for all the other harmful things that groups might do to people under different circumstances.
Assault? Harassment? Negligence?
I just object to the over-application of the word "hazing." Everything bad doesn't have to be called hazing.
The girl in the video may have been victimized but I wouldn't call it hazing. (Was she in danger of being kicked out of youth group if she didn't do it?)
************
I doubt that there was intent to scare her, but the outcome was the same. My point is that if we switched the groups, we'd be reading, "Terrified Sorority Pledge Dumped Off Plank in So-Called 'Trust' Exercise." I think that the organizers of that particular activity showed very poor judgment. She could have twisted a knee, broken an ankle or knocked out some teeth.
Personally, I think most of the sort of false-risk, trust-building stuff is a load of junk anyway.
************
I was once involved in a "trust-walk" activity in a group. I had a broken leg at the time and was on crutches, so I got to sit down in a location where I became one of the "obstacles." The object of the exercise was how trust and responsibility go hand-in-hand (trust from the unsighted person and responsibility from the sighted one). Afterward the group leader had people talk about the experience. -goldenphoenix
|