The words “hazing” and “Greeks” found their way into the headlines yet again this week. Lambda Chi Alpha earned probation, and the University is investigating Delta Gamma and Kappa Alpha Order – all for hazing. This news made us discuss University punishment for Greek hazing. Though we would never condone hazing in the form the punishment is intended for, we think the University should narrow its definition of what is wrong.
The Reveille editorial board is made up of two Greeks and three non-Greeks, so we all see this issue from different perspectives.
Overall, we’ve come to the conclusion that the current punishment system for Greek hazing is ineffective. Both the Greeks and those governing them need work to distinguish between harmless fun and hurtful activity.
We fear handing out punishments for hazing, such as in Lambda Chi’s situation, will not deter what is usually a very secret activity. Yet if the University backs off, it could leave room for even larger problems.
Should the Greeks stop hazing? Should the University punish hazing? Or should it be left to student judicial boards and national chapters? These questions stumped us.
Our definition of hazing is not quite as broad as the University’s. We define it as forcing people to do things, as stipulation for membership, that could or do result in physical or mental harm. This is the primary reason rules for hazing exist – to protect students.
Yet we think there is a difference between asking someone to prove brotherhood or sisterhood and damaging an individual. Some things the University defines as hazing exist to create the bond that fraternities and sororities are known for. Wall-sits while spouting fraternity information can do that, and we don’t think this differs from an athletic team forcing its rookies to shave their heads.
We understand there is a very fine line between group bonding activities and hurtful hazing. Rules exist to stop the latter. But when the University punishes for both, does it effectively accomplish its goal? We worry putting a fraternity on probation is only effective in keeping members or pledges from talking about hazing in the future.
We think it is good that the University is trying to ensure the safety of students in campus organizations. Someone needs to hold these groups accountable. Without the University watching, there is no way to ensure that there won’t be another incident like what happened to a Delta Chi pledge last year – he allegedly was taken out into a field, stripped and beaten, his head covered in an alcohol-soaked pillow case. He allegedly got sick after being forced to drink rubbing alcohol and coughed up blood.
Obviously the University recognized the difference between this and Lambda Chi’s offenses. Delta Chi was kicked off campus; Lambda Chi was put probation. The current definition of hazing encompasses very different things.
Next we should consider whether it is the University’s place to police this activity. Yes, the University’s image is at stake when official LSU Greek groups get into trouble. But there are two other groups that could be watchdogs for these organizations – judicial boards and national chapters. Though neither a flawless plan, some Greeks say a punishment from the national chapter or their peers is more effective than from the University.
We also must question the University’s intentions. Master Planners have already made it clear they want to free up some space along University Lake, and Greeks occupy much of that prime real estate. No one should automatically assume this is why the University is cracking down hard on these groups, but it is an unfortunate possibility lingering in Greek minds.
So how do you promote brotherhood or sisterhood and leadership training? How do you ensure that a fraternity on probation has a fair chance at recruiting strong leaders that would lift its program? If someone wants to lead an organization, he or she wants to lead one that accomplish things. Yet how do you successfully bat down harmful activity and hazing? And finally, how do you make sure regulations that are set for good reason are enforced?
Like we said, this issue is entirely gray. No system is perfect. We suggest narrowing the definition of hazing. But a strong leader needs to step up and make sense of the problem. The Greeks, Greek Affairs and the University are ineffective until they do so.