KsigRc, the problem is that most of the people formulating these policies for the Nationals don't have the knowledge or experience to put together a coherent program. But they don't admit it . . .
Now I'm sure that this doesn't happen in Kappa Sigma, because as we are told, we have the best staff in the Fraternal World, but I am sure that other fraternities run across the problem that the people advocating change don't have the ability or training to put change ideas into a coherent meaningful structure and then train others to use it.
Sororities seem better at farming their programs out to real proffessionals or tapping girls within their system that know how to do this stuff.
However: I would wager good money that they still break down
Quote:
Originally posted by KSig RC
When the Great Anti-Hazing Backlash among National fraternities occurred, it was simple: "STOP HAZING!!! IT'S BAD!!!"
Few alternatives were offered - actually it might be closer to none. A series of goals was provided, but no path for how to reach these goals.
Well, that's not entirely true - the 'old path' was still around, and that seemed to reach all of these goals, right?
Basically, rules aren't the answer (to my mind) - rather, implementing solid programming suggestions that reach the same goals as a hazing program, but in a legal and safe way, is the key to killing hazing. These suggestions should be specific, detailed, and accessible - the current trend toward vague, idealistic prose without any sort of specific suggestions for pledge events, running of a pledge program, or means to reach the outcome provides little in the way of a viable alternative for those who are currently hazing.
Punishment does not work as a deterent - that has been proved in cases ranging from the death penalty to drunk driving laws. I will contend that we can extend it to this case as well.
|