Hazing, which involves subjecting newcomers to abusive or humiliating tricks and ridicule, has historically been viewed as a clandestine practice on college campuses, particularly within fraternities and during the pledging process. Consequently, Dr. Mark Taff concluded in his article that, “.
A total of 168 cases of injuries and deaths have been reported in connection with fraternity hazing activities…
[occurred] in the United States between 1923 and 1982″ 2113. Young college men are being hospitalized and even worse, dying, simply because they want to feel a sense of belonging with their friends. The primary reasons for hazing include students’ longing for belongingness on a vast college campus, the college’s unawareness of fraternity activities, and the fraternities’ refusal to modify their customs. Considering hazing has persisted for more than a century, it is impractical to anticipate its complete eradication.
While it may take a long time for hazing to be eliminated from the fraternity scene, there are possible solutions that can decrease its frequency and eventually eradicate it. These solutions consist of enhanced education on fraternity hazing, more stringent laws against hazing, and greater intervention by college administrators. Hazing incidents continue to receive extensive coverage in the news media.
Opening the newspaper and reading the testimony of fraternity pledges is not an unusual occurrence. They describe being taken to a deserted park, blindfolded, and forced to sit on their knees for an hour.
Then they began aggressively slapping the back of our necks, and proceeded to pour scalding hot wax down our backs”, as stated by Milloy CL. Additionally, an article reported that “…
In 1978, a sophomore at Alfred University in New York was tragically forced into a car trunk along with two others. They were then coerced to consume a bottle of Jack Daniel’s, wine, and a six-pack of beer while enduring the harsh winter conditions. Unfortunately, the young man lost his life due to alcohol poisoning and exposure (O’Connor 32). It is deeply concerning that fraternities continue to engage in such dangerous hazing rituals without facing appropriate consequences. It is alarming to note that if a random individual subjected a civilian to such treatment, they would undoubtedly be apprehended and incarcerated.
According to fraternity beliefs, hazing is designed to create strong bonds between pledges and fraternity brothers. The theory suggests that enduring fraternity initiations together, which often involve excessive drinking, physical violence from fraternity members, and other challenges, forges a shared experience. Hazing victims are typically white males aged 19 to 20 who suffer injuries during the pledging seasons between February and April or September and October.
Men are suffering from a variety of injuries, such as those resulting from beatings, motor vehicle crashes, pedestrian accidents, falls from heights, cold exposure, heat exhaustion, gunshots, asphyxia, electrocution, cannon explosions, and beer-keg explosions. These are just a few examples mentioned by Taff 2113.
These activities aim to unite the fraternity, sororities, and black fraternities. Hazing exists in all three, but is perceived differently in each. However, hazing is less intense in sororities compared to fraternities. One reason for this is the reluctance to change long-standing traditions, as hazing has been practiced since the beginning of fraternities.
Hazing was employed as a means of assessing the suitability of pledges seeking to join the fraternity, thereby ensuring they possessed the desired qualities for fraternity membership. With regards to this practice, a pledge expresses that fraternity members share a common sentiment of “if I endured it, so should you…”
According to Milloy C10, if there are individuals in a fraternity who have experienced hazing, they believe they have the right to initiate it themselves. This perspective raises concerns about how to prevent hazing and avoid the tragic loss of innocent lives for the sake of friendship and a sense of belonging. Another factor contributing to hazing is the belief among men on college campuses that in order to make friends and become accepted, they must endure mocking and torment by joining a fraternity. While many individuals would not subject themselves to such treatment for the sake of friendship, it is unfortunately occurring every semester on college campuses today.
College men are risking their lives and even dying to be accepted as fraternity “brothers” by being hospitalized. However, the responsibility for these dangerous situations does not fall on the pledges themselves. Another cause of hazing is that fraternities are aware of their actions and often exploit the fact that college administrators are not effectively stopping it. The activities within the fraternity community are usually kept secret, with some going “underground” to evade detection.
This writing asserts that college administrators should be mindful of fraternities’ efforts to hide illegal and immoral actions. It is typical for fraternities to mandate their members to uphold secrecy, with severe physical punishments as consequences for any disclosure of criminal behavior by a fraternity member. Regrettably, universities frequently overlook fraternity hazing. Eileen Steven’s book “Broken Pledges” reveals this is because administrators have a limited understanding of hazing, leading to unreported instances of fatalities and injuries.
Hazing is commonly known as “Nuwer 27” and has been a tradition in American fraternities since 1830.
Despite the implementation of anti-hazing laws and punishments in certain states during the 1980s, fraternity hazing still exists on college campuses today. The persistence of hazing incidents can be attributed to several factors including students’ need for acceptance, lack of concern from college administrators, and fraternities’ refusal to let go of their customs. It would be perfect if there was a method to join a fraternity without compromising one’s safety. To effectively address hazing, fraternities and colleges must together embrace three essential solutions.
The text suggests that in order to address fraternity hazing, there are several solutions that can be implemented. These solutions include providing better education about hazing, implementing stricter laws to prevent hazing, and increasing college administrators’ intervention in such incidents. The text emphasizes that if college fraternities tolerate hazing, it will continue to persist. To tackle this issue, one effective solution is to enhance education on hazing for both fraternities and society. The portrayal of fraternities as groups of young men immersed in a party atmosphere with alcohol and women further highlights the need for addressing this problem.
Fraternities were initially established to emphasize fundraising, community service, and social connections for members.
“Fraternity Chapter Starts” I1. To change their reputation and break free from stereotypes, fraternities need to exert effort and work diligently.
Fraternities and sororities on college campuses are uniting to change society’s perception of Greek life, showing that they have a valuable purpose beyond alcohol and relationships. They have agreed to support a proposal aimed at transforming this negative stereotype by…
Marriott B3 argues that eliminating hazing would not only put an end to the long-standing tradition of pledging, but also raise the question of how to fully accept individuals into a sacred group without subjecting them to tests of merit. However, it is important to note that physical and “torture” tests are not the only way to initiate pledges. Some fraternities already have established procedures in place, such as requiring interviews and providing education about the group, before granting membership.
Even certain groups, including Alpha Phi Alpha, will use written tests instead of physical “torture” or drinking tests during initiation ceremonies. Additionally, if college men are knowledgeable about the experiences and practices involved in fraternity initiations, they may reconsider joining or advocating for changes within the fraternity. Current members who have already gone through the pledging process may reflect on the unpleasantness they endured and question why future members should go through the same hazing. Interventions by college administrations could also be implemented to limit and ultimately eradicate hazing.
According to author Hank Nuwer, fraternities have been getting away with serious offenses, including hazing, accidental deaths, and suicides. Between the years of 1978 and 1990, there were reportedly forty-five to fifty deaths in connection with fraternities. One notable case is the hazing death of Charles Chuck Stenzel, which gained significant media attention. During the memorial service for Stenzel, M. Richard Rose, who was the president of Alfred University at the time, delivered a speech.
[19] It was stated that no single student could be held responsible for the death, which Chuck’s mother referred to as a senseless hazing incident. Chuck passed away due to a hazing incident, caused by “acute alcohol poisoning combined with exposure to cold, and severe pulmonary edema.”
. “Although they deeply regretted the tragedy, etc., Stevens 24. The college stated that they could not accept any responsibility for what had occurred,” Nuwer 11.
The responsibility for holding colleges accountable falls on college administrators. They must take full responsibility for their students, including incidents within approved organizations like fraternities. Despite any hesitations, administrators cannot avoid the demanded responsibility. Author Hank Nuwer emphasizes that without scrutiny from the media and public, colleges and other institutions where hazing occurs will continue to downplay it under different names (27).
One possible solution to curb hazing and ultimately eliminate it is implementing more stringent laws that prohibit hazing. Currently, around 35 states have anti-hazing laws which are deemed legally valid according to Marcus B1. However, this does not necessarily guarantee the complete eradication of hazing. Hank Nuwer, an author, points out that district attorneys rarely utilize hazing laws in regards to the overall number of crimes committed each year.
In 1985, the first convictions for hazing in New York state happened, specifically involving a high-school fraternity” 250. Despite the passing of anti-hazing laws in certain states, it was not college administrators who advocated for these laws. It was the parents of individuals who died in hazing incidents who were responsible for pushing for the laws to be passed. According to “Broken Pledges,” Mary Lenaghan, the mother of Jay Lenaghan, a deceased pledge, shares the same determination to put an end to high-school hazing as Eileen Stevens, the mother of Charles Chuck Stenzel, who died as a pledge in college” 251.
Organizations such as CHRORUS, which stands for Campus Hazing’s Offensive Rituals Undermine Schools and was founded by Leanghan, played a role in the creation of an anti-hazing law in Massachusetts. Similarly, Eileen from the Committee to Hault Useless College Killings and Chuck have contributed to the development of a similar law in New York, as mentioned by Nuwer (251-252).
Nuwer also mentions other people such as Joan Cerra, Ray and Maise Ballow, and Dorothy Flowers.
According to Marcus B1, certain individuals have played a significant role in the accomplishment of anti-hazing laws in Wisconsin, South Carolina, and New Jersey, which has subsequently led to fraternity members realizing their susceptibility to legal consequences associated with alcohol-related incidents, hazing abuses, and sexual assaults.
According to lawyer Mr. Manley, fraternities face high financial liabilities in cases of hazing-related deaths. As stated in an article by Amy Marcus, students often fail to comprehend the potentially severe consequences such as jail time, bankruptcy, or a lifelong burden of paying off significant debts. To prevent further tragedies and ensure an end to hazing, all fifty states must enact anti-hazing laws.
According to Eileen Stevens, larger settlements and damage awards have led colleges to reevaluate fraternities and implement stricter rules (B1). Anti-hazing laws are ineffective without college administrators’ involvement in stopping hazing incidents. Although each of these measures can individually prevent hazing, implementing all three concurrently can effectively eliminate it. If fraternities receive education on hazing, they should acknowledge its significant presence.
Colleges have the power to discipline fraternities if they do not consider hazing a problem. If hazing persists, fraternities can be subject to penalties and legal consequences, as it is illegal in 35 states. Consequently, these three actions can effectively tackle and eradicate hazing in both the present and future.
