Comments on Testing an Anti-Hazing Law

• Stupid
• Posted by Martin on January 31, 2007 at 10:30am EST

• This will not be popular, I know, but I believe that putting those young men in prison is just plain stupid. Fraternity initiations, especially at HBCU's has traditionally been seen as a rite of passage. Yes, injuries occur from time to time, but trust me the young men know the risk and are willing to take said risks in order to join and once joined enjoy a lifetime of benefits and brotherhood that non-African-American people would not ever begin to understand. The argument that the state did not define "serious bodily harm" is a valid defense. One fraternity actually "brands" their symbol on the arms of those who want it. Is this serious bodily harm? It may be to one, where to another it may simply be seen as the rite of passage. However, what happens if the young man knowingly agrees to have the brand and then once applied cries that he has been harmed? Will those who assisted with the branding be liable? Where do we draw the line. I believe that when organizations knowingly and purposefully set out to injure a person, that should be a crime. When students or pledges knowingly go into a situation where certain acts will be performed, then they should use their judgement and decline to join the organization. To simply cry about an injury that you were well aware of the possibility of getting is absurd. It's kind of like a football player suing a team because he was injured while playing, but somewhere along the way the injured has to take some of the responsibility for the choice he has made. We live in a society where we want someone else to take the blame when we mess up, simple as that.

• Is Prison really warranted?
• Posted by Johnnie , Ph.D Student at Indiana University on January 31, 2007 at 11:25am EST

• I understand the courts position; however, in my humble opinion a two year prison sentence is not warranted by any means. There are two factors that contribute to my opinion, (1) the low preponderance of African American males in higher education and (2) the elevated prison population (murders, thieves, etc...); these two factors add up to the fact that these young men will better serve society in college and not in prison. I would understand if there was a rehabilitation process in prison, but come on (as young black people say, “let’s be real”), to survive they are bound to come out worse than when they went in. This is truly a SAD day for African Americans; we just created two more criminals to deal with in the future.

• Posted by Carl on January 31, 2007 at 1:20pm EST

• It is unfortunate that a historically black college was chosen as the first test case for the new law. I agree that more compassion, such as allowing the students to complete their degrees before being officially declared "guilty," was warranted here.

  I support the law itself, however, because I am disgusted every time I see a news report of another completely unnecessary death or injury due to hazing. Hazing is not made more palatable because it is a tradition or because it happens at an HBC instead of a large state university.

• racism and hazing
• Posted by Larry on January 31, 2007 at 3:10pm EST

• More than anyone else I think that victims of hazing deserve what they get, but I have a few points.

  1) The defendants were supposed to be scholars. Instead, they 1) beat each other up; and then 2) have people like Martin say that beating each other up is a part of the development of their scholarly acumen but fail to explain why. (Well, Martin’s explanation is somewhat racist, since it posits that black people are unable to communicate certain ideas to white people.)

  2) Johnie, Are you really saying that because there are a low number of black people in higher education (is it lower than the general population – I don’t know), that these criminals should get lighter sentences then what a similarly-situated white student would have received?

  3) Carl, this isn’t really a “test case” for the new law. In fact, to my knowledge, no serious arguments about the validity of the law were raised.

  That said, while I don’t have much sympathy, the world is better off with these violent criminals in jail.

• Seriously?
• Posted by Geoff on January 31, 2007 at 3:10pm EST

• I cannot believe that I am reading people defending the actions of the fraternity members in this case. The argument for “tradition” in fraternity and sorority hazing is exactly the complacent attitude that contributes to the alarming number of hazing related injuries and deaths that occur across this country. Regardless of tradition, these behaviors should not be tolerated. Behind the mask of brother/sisterhood and building lasting bonds, hazing is nothing more than an exercise of power by one person or group over another person. Because something is tradition does not make it right.

  Martin, are you seriously defending the actions of the fraternity wherein they repeatedly beat another person with a cane to the point that he passed out and then proceeded to revive him so that the beating could continue? This young man’s injuries were severe enough to require surgery to repair. How it is that this type of activity can be condoned is beyond me.

  The fraternity itself specifically outlaws hazing (including bodily harm of any kind – which I think both physical beatings and branding fall under) of any kind, and has done so for almost 20 years. To suggest that only through these barbaric activities can people build lifelong connections is ludicrous. All this activity does is reinforce power structures and demean other human beings.

  For inflicting this kind of harm upon another student these two men do deserve to spend time in jail. They should be aware of their fraternity’s policies, and they should be aware of the law. If they weren’t, they should still have the common decency to look at another human being and say to themselves “it is wrong for me to inflict pain upon this person.”

• Posted by Keith on January 31, 2007 at 5:01pm EST

• Thank you, Geoff, for bringing some compassionate reasoning to this discussion.

• You just new it would be HBC though, didn't you?
• Posted by Jon on January 31, 2007 at 5:01pm EST

• All of you commenters have made valid points. As a former fraternity member who was paddled to the point of passing out as part of my initiation, I worked to change our initiation rituals once I was a "full" (and I should say, healed) member of the group. If the current hazers have themselves gone through "it" (whatever it is), the culture is such that everyone assumes that the ritual causes (usually) no permanent damage, etc. It's this mindset we find in medicine, sports of all kinds at all levels, and even to some degree, in P&T and hiring in education.

  Not to excuse anyone - or argue the merits of this particular case -- I simple found it all too predictable that the first high-profile prosecution in a hazing incident has taken place at a historically black institution, and will, I infer, send two young people of color to jail for their actions. That's a bad way to keep the cynics at bay.

• Hazing traditions
• Posted by Lynda , College Counselor at Downtown Magnets High School on January 31, 2007 at 10:05pm EST

• I pledged my sorority down South in the 80's, and on my campus, an HBCU, all pledging was done out in the open and there were rules to follow. The school officials closely scrutinized the actions of the fraternities and sororities, and there was very little done "underground", for fear of getting caught and having the chapter suspended. Since the 90's when all pledging and hazing activities were banned officially, activities have moved underground. I was never hazed, although there was some psychological torture, I must say. We always knew, however, that it wouldn't go too far. I think these types of truly violent hazing incidents occur because schools are not paying attention to the process. Make the process public, and hold the members accountable, especially the dean, who is specifically in charge of the pledges. Greek life is fun and pledging is a bonding experience, but if you leave kids in charge unsupervised, somebody with authority issues is going to be abusive. Unfortunately, it's human nature. A little preventative work can keep this from happening over and over.

• Posted by Larry on February 1, 2007 at 7:50am EST

• Lynda, Somehow I have never met a sorority girl that claims that her sorority didn’t follow the rules, even after they are caught not following the rules. Therefore, to me, your statement has a credibility problem. Whatever the case, having not gone to a school with sororities, I don’t see why we should have any sympathy for the victims of hazing, when they knew what they were getting into. Probably the best preventative work would be for the school to simply get rid of you people and focus on providing the same opportunities to everyone.

• Response
• Posted by Martin on February 1, 2007 at 12:02pm EST

• I told everyone that my position would not be a popular one. Let me set a point or two correct. First, to Larry, while I enjoy your comments, mostly because they are thought provoking, on this on issue you are way off base. I never once infered or concluded in my statement that African-Americans were not able to vocalize their position to white America. Instead, I clearly stated that white America would never truly understand the brotherhood of traditional African-American fraternities or sororoties. I stand by that assessment using 25 years of direct experience with that segment of our population. I in no way intended my comments to appear racist to anyone. Next, I do not condone initiations that go to the extreme, where severe bodily harm may occur. I simply said that anyone who has ever pledged a fraternity knows of the rituals and expectations of that group. No, persons should not have to endure beatings to the point of passing out and having to be revived, only to have the beatings continue. In my experiences those are exceptions to the rule, not the rule of the order of fraternities. Finally, to Larry yet again, your comment that we should simply get rid of you people, while I understand that it was not intended to be racist, surely sounded racist. Let's face a fact, fraternities and sororities will not go away. If we take they off the campuses of our colleges or universities, students will simply take the order off campus or transfer to a campus that does allow these organizations. I think campuses who provide clear training to their student leadership and an oversite body tend to have fewer problems. That said, however, let's face this fact. There will always be someone who will take anything to the extreme. Due diligence on the part of those who elect to participate is the only way to curb this problem. Take responsibility for your own actions. But prison time, come on?

• One last point
• Posted by Martin on February 1, 2007 at 12:10pm EST

• One last point I failed to defend was from Larry, once again, when he questioned my defense of these actions as part of the scholarly acumen. Never once have I said that being a part of a fraternity is anything academic at all. Most, if not all, fraternities are social groups nothing more or less. While they may promote scholarly achievement, their main focus is in building networks for the future. Through his comments I sometimes wonder is Larry is a very social person or if he ever had any fun at all while in college. All work and no play makes Martin a dull boy, indeed...

• response to Martin
• Posted by Larry on February 2, 2007 at 8:41am EST

• Martin, Because my previous comments were eaten, I will keep this short.

  First, As to your remark that I am not a social person. I have to take umbrage at it. Although I come from a culture that sees “fun” much differently than your culture, I do not think your kind of fun is morally wrong. It probably has no place in college, but I don’t think that you are immoral for wanting to socialize all the time. I find it sort of strange that your idea of “socializing” means forming a group that keeps others out, but I guess this is one of those things connected with your culture that I don’t understand. But I am sure that with all your socializing you are quite an interesting person even to people outside your fraternity.

  Second, As to my assertion that your argument is racist, I am still confused. Which is it: 1) Black people are unable to articulate why this bonding and hazing is a good thing; or 2) White people can’t understand what the black people are articulating? Either way, you are saying that some race is incapable of at least one basic element of communication.

  Third, Fraternities and sororities will go away if a school wants them to. Believe it or not, college presidents can, should, and do consult law firms about the best way of getting rid of these bodies – or at least denying them recognition and kicking them off campus where they can’t hurt the academic climate.

  Fourth, These people committed a crime that was defined by the legislature. They were given a chance to have a trial. Instead of prison time, your argument is “come on.” These people committed a crime. They are a threat to society. They need to be in the house of detention. Not pretending to be scholars so they can beat more people up.

• Please consider
• Posted by Kingsley , Student at Florida A&M University on February 2, 2007 at 3:30pm EST

• I had the chance of sitting in clesses with these students who were recently charged of hazing. I feel the prison sentence is a bit harsh for guys who have never been in prison or jail. Hazing is part of life all over America. All of you guys who wrote comments have been hazed or has hazed once in your life. Whether it was mentally or pphysically we have all done it. Please do not look at these guys as criminals because they got caught doing something many of us have done.