Is this sort of hazing normal?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Ultimately it is up to excelblue's chapter's school and GLO to determine whether what they do is hazing.

This, but add state law to the mix. What some groups consider hazing, others do not. What matters is what your GLO, your campus and your state law think.

Originally Posted by excelblue

Both those events are official and are openly discussed with campus and nationals.

Also, I just realized that I worded (1) a bit weirdly: in our case, pledges were told there's going to be a couple hours of intense physical activity in advance. I'm just saying that if it had been some surprise without consent, it'd be hazing.

If your campus and HQ are cool with it, I'm not going to argue.

But I do think it bears repeating that under most definitions of hazing I am familiar with, consent is not a defense -- if an activity is otherwise considered hazing, then it's hazing regardless of whether the pledge consents or not. I'm just guessing, but my guess is that your campus and HQ are okay with what you're doing not because the pledges consent but because you have structured it in a way that, to use the definition Kevin gave earlier, your are not "recklessly or intentionally endanger[ing] the mental health or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation."

[DrPhil]

This is where it gets sketchy and excelblue's chapter, school, and GLO need to be careful. If something happens, his chapter may be thrown under the bus. His chapter needs to protect its neck.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

to use the definition Kevin gave earlier, your are not "recklessly or intentionally endanger[ing] the mental health or physical health or safety of a student for the purpose of initiation."

Yeah. So under the Oklahoma statute, if blue's chapter is forcing pledges to do extreme calisthenics, that's going to be at least reckless unless they take some real CYA steps like requiring all new pledges to get physicals prior to the extreme physical activity. Even then, it'd be really iffy to the point where I'd definitely veto the activity.

Forced calisthenics are a particularly risky activity. Imagine you have a member with an undiscovered heart condition and they have a full-on cardiac arrest in the middle of your activity.

These things aren't forbidden (mostly) because of some high-minded moral code. These things are forbidden because your national and local leaders don't want to be sued into oblivion for allowing members to negligently harm other members.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Kevin

These things aren't forbidden (mostly) because of some high-minded moral code. These things are forbidden because your national and local leaders don't want to be sued into oblivion for allowing members to negligently harm other members.

Yep.