Legalized Hazing

[Little32]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Sorry, but I don't. I think it constitutes work.

Exactly, by definition most of what most of us endure on a given day at work constitutes hazing according to these over-zealous definitions--especially if we are young in our careers.

Why should our organizations be forced to coddle people under threat of law suit, when our bosses get away with hazing us every day.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Little32

Exactly, by definition most of what most of us endure on a given day at work constitutes hazing according to these over-zealous definitions.

No, it doesn't -- not according to any actual definition of hazing I have ever seen (as opposed to rampant popular misconception about what constitutes hazing) -- and it's just plain silly to claim otherwise.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

No, it doesn't -- not according to any actual definition of hazing I have ever seen (as opposed to rampant popular misconception about what constitutes hazing) -- and it's just plain silly to claim otherwise.

I think that legal definitions of hazing are pretty good, but that the anti-hazing plans that GLOs have or the execution of those plans in the hands of undergraduates get goofy sometimes.

I think there's a tendency today to classify any number of risk management issues as hazing rather than explaining the difference that you can't to this because it's hazing vs. you can't do that because it's likely to be stupidly dangerous.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I think there's a tendency today to classify any number of risk management issues as hazing rather than explaining the difference that you can't to this because it's hazing vs. you can't do that because it's likely to be stupidly dangerous.

Exactly. And there is a parallel tendancy to consider anything that distinguishes between initiated members and pledges/new members/probationary members/your GLO's term here, no matter how reasonable or benign it might be, hazing.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Exactly. And there is a parallel tendancy to consider anything that distinguishes between initiated members and pledges/new members/probationary members/your GLO's term here, no matter how reasonable or benign it might be, hazing.

Yep. And as I've said before I think this is dangerous in the long run because it's likely to be a little like the boy who cried wolf. If you call everything hazing, is anyone likely to really pay attention when the issue is serious?

[violetpretty]

Originally Posted by Little32

Why should our organizations be forced to coddle people under threat of law suit, when our bosses get away with hazing us every day.

Because friendship and respect are core values of all Greek organizations, but they are not necessarily values that employers care about.

[Little32]

But does friendship equal coddling? Does respect equal coddling? I am not so sure.

Again, I am just talking about the over-zealous definitions of hazing, which I often have heard about on this board. That was my perception of the question.