George W. Bush: Hazer

[KyleMcGuire1983]

People still get hazed today. I was in a non greek society type organization at a tiny liberal arts college and I was paddled (once as part of a ceremony), had to do sit ups, push ups in the mud, line ups and drills, I was deprived of sleep, served as basically a slave to the members, etc. etc.

This was in 2002 not 1962.

When I joined Sigma Nu in 2005 (at a large public university) I discovered that most national GLOs are pretty tame when it comes to any of that stuff. I didn't have to do any kind of hazing to get into Sigma Nu and I'm pretty sure the situation wasn't too bad at other fraternities on my campus from what I've heard.

I still stay in contact with some of the guys from my first college and from what I've heard there is still plenty of hazing going on with both the male and female groups.

It's a shame, but honestly I don't believe pledges are helpless. I know back in 2002 I could have walked away at any moment and said "screw this BS, I'm out." Quite a few guys did. I'm not condoning hazing, I'm just saying I don't buy the claim that people who are being hazed are totally helpless. I didn't feel I was involved in anything that put me in any real physical danger at anytime.

I dunno does anybody else feel there are "levels" of hazing? I shrug at the stuff I went through while I am totally disgusted with the alcohol hazing.

[DeltAlum]

Originally Posted by KyleMcGuire1983

I know back in 2002 I could have walked away at any moment and said "screw this BS, I'm out." Quite a few guys did.

So, the natural question (at least to me) would be is hazing worth losing those guys who you at least thought were the kind of man you would like to call "brother."

When I look at our chapters (or any one elses) who pledge thirty guys and initiate fifteen, I think two things. First, that they probably haze and second, what a waste of time and resources to lose members of your pledge class that you've had to work hard to win.

It makes no sense to me.

But then, after being a alumni volunteer/officer, I can't condone hazing at all.

ETA, thinking of the title of this thread, it is kind of a stretch since, as has been pointed out, there weren't really "hazing laws" back then. If situations got bad enough, there could be prosecution under other laws, as has also been pointed out.

[sasquatch]

Originally Posted by DeltAlum

So, the natural question (at least to me) would be is hazing worth losing those guys who you at least thought were the kind of man you would like to call "brother."

When I look at our chapters (or any one elses) who pledge thirty guys and initiate fifteen, I think two things. First, that they probably haze and second, what a waste of time and resources to lose members of your pledge class that you've had to work hard to win.

It makes no sense to me.

But then, after being a alumni volunteer/officer, I can't condone hazing at all.

ETA, thinking of the title of this thread, it is kind of a stretch since, as has been pointed out, there weren't really "hazing laws" back then. If situations got bad enough, there could be prosecution under other laws, as has also been pointed out.

The thing is...many chapters pledge thirty guys with the intention being to only initiate 15. It's very common. I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that a lot of times losing half the guys is all part of the plan, so the actives do not see it as a loss.

Edit: Forgot to mention that just because they GOT 30 guys doesn't mean they worked hard (or at all) to get them. Some chapters are lucky enough to be able to sit back and let 150 years of history work it's magic.