Quote:
Originally Posted by excelblue
Both those events are official and are openly discussed with campus and nationals.
|
Then I guess things are fine as long as the dialogue remains open and things are carefully handled.
Unfortunately, there are individuals and chapters who have gotten in trouble for doing things that the school and local/regional/national body were fully informed about. Things can change and schools and local/regional/national body change their minds about something they previously approved of. That includes schools and local/regional/national bodies having selective memory and acting as though they never approved of something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by excelblue
I'm just saying that if it had been some surprise without consent, it'd be hazing.
The idea is that the intent of the event is to build bonding by having the pledges (and participating brothers) support each other and push their limits. We make sure they're well-hydrated and stop the activity if anyone looks like they're actually being pushed too far for their own safety.
|
This is not the formula used to determine whether something is hazing.
"Pledge" consent does not mean it is not hazing and "pledges" have minimal power through which they can truly control the outcome. There are a lot of bonding activities that are technically hazing and that includes bonding activities that can cause mental and physical harm. Giving "pledges" water and stopping if they are pushed too far does not make it nonhazing. Schools and GLOs are not buying this logic that members try to use.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by excelblue
Despite being well-intentioned, someone could still get hurt. Also, if a random person sees us doing this (often wearing letters), chances are, they'll assume it's hazing.
|
You all need to rethink this and be careful with whom you share this information until you rethink this.