As soon as news broke that Acacia was being investigated for hazing, people flocked to social media to discount the claims made by a former pledge.
When a video featuring an Acacia pledge detailing the abuse he underwent during “Hell Week” was published by Tiger TV, the comments made were skeptical and dismissive.
“99 percent of this information he spoke is either completely false or very over inflated,” wrote an anonymous commenter. “The individual seems to be looking for attention. If any of this was true then surely someone else would have reported it in the last 57 years.”
On the sports forum TigerDroppings.com, a thread about the suspension contained hundreds of comments, most saying the student who filed the hazing report should have known what he was getting himself into by pledging, lamented the fact that “one person out of the thousands initiated by Acacia can end the entire fraternity’s existence” and called the student various slurs that implied he wasn’t “man enough” to handle the grotesque acts in which the fraternity was forcing him to participate.
“Welcome to America in 2015,” one commenter said on TigerDroppings.com. “The most powerful people are ‘victims.’”
The language people are using to attack the young man who spoke out regarding Acacia’s hazing practices is almost identical to the language used to undermine someone who reports sexual assault or rape on a college campus.
In both situations, the accusations are almost always met with doubt, scorn and condescension. People begin cutting the accusers down before knowing anything about the situation.
Speaking out about abuse has been turned from a courageous and dutiful act meant to bring justice to those who have been taken advantage of to an attention-grabbing act that should be swept under the rug.
Sexual assault is bad. Hazing is bad. These are accepted facts. So why do people continuously protect perpetrators of these deplorable acts by undermining those who choose to share their stories of abuse?
Because, if the accusations turn out to be true, then the University must take responsibility for allowing these things to happen under its watch.
The treatment of those who come forward with allegations of abuse is not the only similarity between reporting hazing and reporting sexual assault or rape. In both instances, the University has a vested interest in disproving the accuser.
Universities do not want to be known as “the school where people are always getting raped,” or “the school where people are constantly being hazed.” It’s bad for the brand.
If the accusations turn out to be true, it means universities will have to undergo serious changes in order to ensure the public ­— and the on-campus community ­— that they are taking actions against people who abuse students.
All of this is hard work. It means universities will have to devote time, money and a litany of other resources to damage control, both in the media and on campus. It is much easier to assume the accuser is lying than to contemplate the ramifications of their story being true.
The processes for handling claims of sexual abuse and hazing are also incredibly similar. Both take place within closed meetings that involve only those who are directly associated with the accusation. Information about how the accusations are researched, how survivors are questioned and how decisions are reached are all clouded in mystery.
Sometimes, the perpetrator of the assault is expelled and removed from campus. However, more often, they are given a slap on the wrist and allowed to remain at school because the accusations against them cannot be definitively proven.
The Greek community has a built-in culture of silence disguised as “brotherhood.” Those who violate the fraternal code must do so quietly for their own protection. The process for deciding what punishment a Greek organization receives is handled solely by the Office of the Dean of Students, and not much information is known about the office’s decision making process.
Acacia has had its charter revoked and is completely removed from LSU’s campus. But the identity of the former pledge who came forward has begun to circulate on social media. This person has to share the rest of his collegiate experience with people who happily tortured him for no reason other than they could. He is forced to live in constant fear of retaliation from his former “brothers.”
No one should have to share a campus with their abuser.
The people who speak out against abuse — both sexual and hazing — are not victims. They are survivors. They are people who have their human worth eroded and have made the brave decision to expose the people that exploited them.
They do this despite a culture that will attack them for telling the truth in the hope they might prevent their abuser from harming anyone else.
Unfortunately, with the way survivors are being treated on college campuses across America, fewer abused people may step forward in the future.
The discounting of accounts of those who attempt to bring justice to those that deserve it most must stop. People must believe accusations before discounting them and realize that coming forward is not an act of cowardice but one of the bravest things a survivor can do.
Otherwise, abusive cultures will be given a chance to thrive in secret on campuses nationwide, creating toxic environments in which no students will want to involve themselves.
Logan Anderson is a 21-year-old mass communication senior from Houston. You can reach her on Twitter @LoganD_Anderson.