[FuzzieAlum]

I really don't believe it's all a matter of perception.

To be hazing, it does not have to be an official, structured organization like a sorority. It can also include general peer acceptance, which would be the case here. Hazing implies those being beaten are not the "enemy" as in gang-on-gang violence but the "friend." That's not a small distinction. If my gang beats me up to test my toughness so I can get in, that's hazing. If my gang goes out and beats up the next gang over, that's not hazing.

Now either way a cycle of violence is perpetrated, but in a different way. With hazing, it's the recent hazees that become the next hazers. With gang violence (or a family feud, or long-standing ethnic wars like in the Balkans), it's the same people going back and forth. The Serbs attack the Croations and then the Croations attack the Serbs ad naseum. But with hazing, the hazees don't rise up and haze the hazers back.

P.S. I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered assault. But assault is a very broad category. Hazing is a more specific term and might not even involve assault is some cases (forcing pledges to drink too much). There's no reason not to charge these girls with both hazing and assault.