Quote:
Originally Posted by Langox510x
I mean if an organization was to fallow the true definition of what hazing is then it would seem likely they would drive a wedge between those people they wanted to recruit.
I looked up the state laws on hazing and honestly although organizations on my campus might be considered by Greeks as hazing their pledges, according to state law they really don't.
|
Although I have no idea why you treated the OP's post like it was worth responding to, this obervation from you is.
True, much of what is commonly considered hazing doesn't constitute hazing under state hazing laws. All that means is that the behavior in question can't lead to criminal prosecution by the state. The same behavior, though, might fall under university/college hazing policies or (for those of us not in locals) our national organization's hazing policies, not just deter criminal conduct.
There is no one "true definition of hazing." But for any given chapter, there are definitions that apply -- legal, institutional (college) and organizational (GLO). And you can almost always bet that the instutional and organizational definitions are going to be more expansive than the legal definition, because they are designed to limit the institution's and organization's potential liability.