Blindfolds as Hazing?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I didn't recall this story, so I've been reading up on it. It looks like the lack of seatbelts and the fact that ten women were piled into one car contributed more than the blindfolds. While I don't believe the blindfolds had anything to do with her death, I also don't think there's ever any reason to blindfold people outside of specific ritual as mandated by an organization.

Are you kidding me?

While I don't know if not being blindfolded would have saved her life, at least she would have been alert and aware of her surroundings, enabling her to do whatever was necessary to not fly out of that window.

[tld221]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Not to diminish her death in any way, however, what did the blindfold have to do with her death?\

ETA: CLEARLY hazing was involved, but the blindfold seems to be rather minor given that the other women were able to escape from the car.

Originally Posted by Kevin

But your argument is that they were hurt while blindfolded and possibly could have been hurt more because of the blindfolding.

Do you not see that the fact that someone could be hurt doing something doesn't make that thing hazing? It could be dangerous, but not hazing.

But really... having a national rule because of something that happened one or two times ever is just silly.

The above was kind of what i was getting at. RaggedyAnn, I didnt mean to mock the situation (and may the girl RIP) but considering the additional pieces to the story, i think the blindfolding is further down on the list of hazards.

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

I didn't recall this story, so I've been reading up on it. It looks like the lack of seatbelts and the fact that ten women were piled into one car contributed more than the blindfolds. While I don't believe the blindfolds had anything to do with her death, I also don't think there's ever any reason to blindfold people outside of specific ritual as mandated by an organization.

Originally Posted by OTW

Are you kidding me?

While I don't know if not being blindfolded would have saved her life, at least she would have been alert and aware of her surroundings, enabling her to do whatever was necessary to not fly out of that window.

Hmm, i'm going with PJ on this one. being blindfolded may or may not have saved her life, but wearing a seatbelt and not being crammed in a car wouldve been more essential. but you dont see Nationals telling chapters to take the bus to rituals versus driving, now do you?

I just think the reaction is a little off. That accident couldve happened blindfolds or not.

[AOII Angel]

Blindfolding in and of itself may not be that dangerous, but unfortunately blindfolding is OFTEN associated with other activities that are. I personally don't see what is wrong with blindfolding for a ritual if the national organization finds that it is not hazing when considering risk management issues. Being blindfolded for a specific, non threatening event may not be a big deal. The blindfolding in the specific case above was just the icing on the cake. I think in that case if you tried to argue that blindfolding wasn't hazing, they would laugh you right to jail.

[Kevin]

Angel, find a legal definition of hazing where blindfolding alone is enough. It seems to me that the blindfolding could be a minor factor in deciding whether something is hazing, but I'd have to look at what was going on while the blindfold was on to know for sure.

Again, the fact that blindfolding is "often" associated with other activities is not in itself dispositive.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

I personally don't see what is wrong with blindfolding for a ritual if the national organization finds that it is not hazing when considering risk management issues. Being blindfolded for a specific, non threatening event may not be a big deal.

This answers the OP's question.

Blindfolding when performing a nationally sanctioned ritual is one thing. If it's something nationals gave the OK on, you can probably assume that you'll come out of it without a scratch, and that it has a purpose.

Blindfolding for a local big-little ceremony or a candle pass? Probably hazing per HQ (if it's not a sanctioned ceremony) but personally, fine with me.

But blindfolding people just to intimidate them? Blindfolding them and walking them across campus? Or blindfolding and putting them in a car and dropping them off in the forest? Hazing, and do not do.

It's normal to feel freaked out, scared, and that you are being hazed in the third situation. If you feel that way in the first two - i.e. if you are in fear every moment of your pledge period and you don't trust the sisters/brothers at all - then you should probably stop pledging that GLO post haste.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

then you should probably stop pledging that GLO post haste.

... and seek therapy and medication.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Angel, find a legal definition of hazing where blindfolding alone is enough. It seems to me that the blindfolding could be a minor factor in deciding whether something is hazing, but I'd have to look at what was going on while the blindfold was on to know for sure.

Again, the fact that blindfolding is "often" associated with other activities is not in itself dispositive.

If you read my post again, you'll see that I was saying that blindfolding is not hazing in and of itself, but in the unfortunate case we've been discussing, it was CLEARLY hazing.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

but in the unfortunate case we've been discussing, it was CLEARLY hazing.

I disagree. Was the blindfolding done in order to promote mental discomfort (a terrible standard, but it's NPC, I think)? Unless it is "CLEARLY" the case that the blindfolding was done for that purpose, then nothing is clear.

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by Kevin

This line of reasoning is scary. The pledge voting process itself causes fear that they will not "make the vote," ergo intimidation, ergo hazing by your definition.

Using your logic, I can say that just about anything is hazing.

Sensory deprivation is (in my opinion) proper used correctly, for example:
1) Trust exercises -- what organization would characterize going to a ropes course as being "hazing"? If there's still sanity, not one. Ropes courses routinely employ trust exercises, such as the "trust fall."

2) Team building: Sigma Nu's LEAD program actually has a module in which communication and teamwork are examined. In doing this, all of the participants are blindfolded except for a "leader" and an "observer." The participants have no idea what they're blindfolded for. The leader is handed a bucket of legos and a plan. He then dumps the legos out and instructs the participants as to how to build the project (the leader can't touch the legos) while the observer takes notes. That is programming directly from on-high for Sigma Nu.

3) Ritual.

Hence the reason why I use the words "can be viewed as hazing" and "may cause fear and therefore, intimidation". I am not advocating or discouraging the activity itself. I am simply stating why people may view it as hazing. If you read my entire post, you will have seen the example in which blindfolding was used as a trust exercise, under supervision.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by ree-Xi

Hence the reason why I use the words "can be viewed as hazing" and "may cause fear and therefore, intimidation". I am not advocating or discouraging the activity itself. I am simply stating why people may view it as hazing. If you read my entire post, you will have seen the example in which blindfolding was used as a trust exercise, under supervision.

Why do legal adults need supervision?

So now, according to you, "supervision" cures all? I'd be more comfortable with replacing the word "may" with "is calculated to." I don't think there should be such a thing as unintentional hazing. Otherwise, you have this amorphous moving target of a definition which fails to adequately inform collegiate members as to whether they are breaking the rules.

[emb021]

Originally Posted by naraht

I'd like information as to under what conditions blindfolding constitutes hazing as a legal matter or by various GLO, GLO Council or FIPG regulations. I believe that Alpha Phi Omega's (Service greek, member PFA) current rules are Blindfolds may be used, but should not be used if it conflicts with School rules or state law.

Randolph Finder
Alpha Phi Omega alumnus

Actually, APO's rules are that its a choice of the participant to wear them or keep their eyes closed.

School or state rules/laws would always trump that.

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Why do legal adults need supervision?

So now, according to you, "supervision" cures all? I'd be more comfortable with replacing the word "may" with "is calculated to." I don't think there should be such a thing as unintentional hazing. Otherwise, you have this amorphous moving target of a definition which fails to adequately inform collegiate members as to whether they are breaking the rules.

Dude, why are you contesting me? MY EXAMPLE was that of high school students participating in a trust exercise in a supervised, closed area. And yes, there SHOULD be supervision of some sort, if people's eyes are being covered. Supervision does not have to be an administrator or what not, but someone appointed to monitor the safety of the participants.

I said that blindfolding MAY have hazing implications because it MAY cause discomfort or injury, intended or not. Unintentional hazing would be something that was done that may have UNINTENTIONALLY caused somoneone pain, discomfort, anguish, etc. That is, you did not intend to scare someone by doing x, y, or z, but they freaked out.

As far as using real candles (from another post), many groups strictly prohibit open flames of any kind. Yes, they use fake candles.

[Kevin]

I don't know what you mean by "contesting," unless it's that I disagree with you. Your example of high school students on a forum dedicated to college greek life will be generally taken to mean that you're applying that situation to greek life -- in that you think that "supervision" (whatever that means) makes any hazing concerns evaporate.

That said, not every discomfort or injury which happens in the pledging process is hazing.

Also, the only way I know to cause an injury with a blindfold is to tie it too tight -- it's what you do while blindfolded that should count.

[ree-Xi]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I don't know what you mean by "contesting," unless it's that I disagree with you. Your example of high school students on a forum dedicated to college greek life will be generally taken to mean that you're applying that situation to greek life -- in that you think that "supervision" (whatever that means) makes any hazing concerns evaporate.

That said, not every discomfort or injury which happens in the pledging process is hazing.

Also, the only way I know to cause an injury with a blindfold is to tie it too tight -- it's what you do while blindfolded that should count.

1. I never said that supervision makes any hazing concerns evaporate. My ORIGINAL EXAMPLE was an illustration of how blindfolding is not necessarily something "bad". I was on your side.

2. I never said that every discomfort or injury is due to hazing. Let's say you blindfold your pledges, drive them around the block a few times, and bring them somewhere a half mile away. Your intent MAY be to have them work together to find their way home, but some of them may very well freak out. While some people may not say that the activity itself is hazing, what you have done may result in someone being terribly distraught at being somewhere they don't know, that they presume is far away, etc.

3. Blindfolding CAN cause injury because you are depriving someone of one of their senses. They may fall, walk into things, get scared, etc. It depends on the environment. Blindfolded in a closed room for ritual is very different than outside, open to traffic, strangers, etc. If you do something like this outside, you better make sure someone is monitoring the members/pledges, so that they don't end up injured, or worse. Even inside, esp if you are using candles, etc., I would think you would want someone watching the participants, or guide them.

Can you understand what I am saying now? If the point is trust, why would you not take any and every precaution to protect your soon-to-be brothers?