Your definition of hazing...

[Imperial1]

Since all this talk about hazing and stuff, I'd like to know how greeks AND non-greeks define hazing in their own individual definitions. Speak on it.

Imperial1

[Tom Earp]

Interestingless question.

Has been dicussed may times.

Just talked to someone from LSU, SX put on two year suspension.

That is the Kiss of Death for a Fraternity!

Anyone with class does not call us Frats.

News Media are Idiots, fight with them every Chance I get!

Actually, no response needed!

[KSigkid]

Originally posted by Tom Earp
Interestingless question.

Has been dicussed may times.

Just talked to someone from LSU, SX put on two year suspension.

That is the Kiss of Death for a Fraternity!

Anyone with class does not call us Frats.

News Media are Idiots, fight with them every Chance I get!

Actually, no response needed!

I don't know...although there may be one legal definition, I think people have their own ideas on what they think crosses the line.

Also...I don't know if I'd say that news media are "idiots." As a former member of the media, not everyone in the industry is worthy of scorn.

[Tom Earp]

Stand corrected, NOT ALL NEWS MEDIA PEOPLE are IDIOTS!

TV Peeps read what is put in front of them when on air. Print media do have a tendency to screw up, be biased about many things.

Seen and read it to many times.

[Senusret I]

If I was not in a GLO, I would think that hazing would be defined by having options removed from you.

I would have assumed that if you submit to something, that it was not hazing.

I know different now, but I still have my own opinions about it all.

[AGDee]

I think Imperial is asking for our own personal opinions, rather than a legal definition. I'm going to give it a shot...

Any activity that causes mental, physical discomfort or harm (including embarassment or being demeaned) which is perceived as required for membership and/or an attitude/treatment toward/of certain members (usually new members) that they are lesser people simply because they are newer members of the organization (termed loosely to include sports teams, etc), including having to "earn" membership by activities as described above, particularly when there is an inter/national organization that details membership requirements and such activities being done locally are not included in those membership requirements. (i.e. a standardized exam given in a prescribed manner isn't hazing, but if a group makes up new rules pertaining to that exam, it could be construed as hazing). Activities which are perceived as required or expected for membership which are in direct opposition to the organization's purpose/creed/vision/goals.

Wow, that's tough to define!

Dee

[Imperial1]

Originally posted by AGDee
I think Imperial is asking for our own personal opinions, rather than a legal definition.

You are correct.

Imperial1

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by KSigkid
I don't know...although there may be one legal definition, I think people have their own ideas on what they think crosses the line.

Seems to me that a big part of the problem is that there isn't one legal definition. There may be hundreds. And they're, for the most part, remarkably vague.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by KSigkid
I don't know...although there may be one legal definition, I think people have their own ideas on what they think crosses the line.

Also...I don't know if I'd say that news media are "idiots." As a former member of the media, not everyone in the industry is worthy of scorn.

That's the truth man.

I've heard individuals say how some REAL bad stuff isn't hazing just because they don't hit their pledges.

But they do have late night hole digging sessions, they make them sit for extended periods on their "bows and toes" (elbows and toes) which results in bleeding, etc... But to them, this was not hazing

My youngest brother, a member of another GLO on my campus will freely admit that he was hazed of course. And he derives pleasure as an alum of his chapter in going back to haze their pledges -- what a way to promote alum involvement!

[sairose]

Here's how I look at it:

When considering if something is hazing...think, "would I do this to a friend or family member to make them closer to me?" It's a good way to think about it.

Anytime pledges/new members are degraded, made to do extra things that don't serve a good purpose, etc, it's hazing to me.

If it makes pledges/new members nervous, afraid, annoyed, etc etc then it's hazing.

Pledging should be a positive thing. It shouldn't be something you struggle through to "earn your letters."

Although I *personally* do not think it is hazing to not allow pledges to wear letters until initiation. Then again, this is a national policy for us so it's okay for other orgs to have differing opinions.

[Imperial1]

Originally posted by sairose

Although I *personally* do not think it is hazing to not allow pledges to wear letters until initiation. Then again, this is a national policy for us so it's okay for other orgs to have differing opinions.

O that is definitely forbidden in my org. Pledges shouldn't wear the letters if they don't know the meaning of them nor have they been given rites of passage to do so.

Imperial1

[DeltAlum]

Way in the past when I was a pledge, we could wear and/or display Delt letters -- but not the Crest because we did not yet understand it's secrets.

[Imperial1]

Originally posted by Wine&SilverBlue
wash u is very tough on hazing. i wish they werent ... i feel like some of the stuff like scavenger hunts and other activities like that would have helped our pledge class of 51 to be closer. the events we did have helped, but still...

obviously i wouldnt want "real" hazing like physical or emotional harm.. i guess i feel like scavenger hunts arent bad

on the other hand, a student group i am part of required 80 hours of training and, in my opinion, hazed us mentally. they put us through loads of crap that we would put up with because we really wanted to be a part of the organization and didnt want to quit after putting in so much time and effort already. i know more than one person who cried because of people in this organization, which is very ironic considering the purpose of it. they always made us feel like we could get kicked out at any second, and i would dread going to their events.

i can now understand why people put up with hazing, although i dont want to treat the next training class like that "because i had to go through it" .. i want to change the system to eliminate that BS.

overall, i feel like my school cracked down too much on greeklife and overlooked the "hazing" that can go on in other organizations

Well alrighty then!

Imperial1

[RACooper]

Originally posted by DeltAlum
Seems to me that a big part of the problem is that there isn't one legal definition. There may be hundreds. And they're, for the most part, remarkably vague.

Basically I look at hazing as something that I would not want done to any of my younger brothers or sister... motto I lived by in the military, and a motto I carried over to the Fraternity.

[Tom Earp]

I think it can be said, that if not all Greek Orgaizations but most have taken a jaundiced eye at Hazing. Ergo, the Risk Management proclimations and higher Insurance costs per chapter which raises Chapter dues.

In many regards, have gone totally overboard. With Grades being upper most in College, We cannot have a forced study time for New Associates

One should remember, that Abuse, physical or mental can be very dangerous. Each individual is different on what can be handled.

If an individual is good enough to recruit, then why not treat them as Possible New Members who will some day be a Brother or Sister.

As ktsnake stated, His Brother, a member of another Greek Organization feels since He was Hazed then it is okay to keep doing. Passing the torch so to speak!

Since when did violence promote Brother/Sisterhood?