Another negative cultural aspect of hazing is psychological torment. Verbal and/or mental abuse also falls into the category of hazing. Hazing can be violent, such as a paddle strike, or psychologically degrading, such as various types of verbal abuse. This abuse often leads to serious psychological damage to pledges. This damage can prove to be a negative cultural factor that actually leads to degradation of motivation and achievement in pledges. One problem with psychological abuse is that it is often perceived to be harmless. This form of abuse is viewed as an initiation ceremony designed to determine one’s worthiness as a prospective “brother” (Curry 95). Most existing fraternity members and the new members feel that the hazing process creates a bond between the two. These people feel that trust is the biggest out come of hazing. That is why new members feel that hazing is as important part of a fraternity. The bond between all the members could be made in a much safer way, for example the new members could share their moral values or beliefs with the rest of the members, or just being around all your brothers long enough will create a strong value of trust. Some examples of psychological test may be screaming, or verbal harassment, lack of sleep, and being humiliated in public. One example of this is the elephant walk. The elephant walk is a line of pledges that are naked and ask to walk around campus grabbing each other’s testicles from behind (Josephson). Each house annually invents ways to break down one’s self loyalty (Mathews 50). Hazing events can be very small like an insult or they can even be frightening or dangerous. The thing about our society is that most members yearn to belong, and want a better social life. So, some pledges stay because they are worried about being a social ingrate.
Hazing in fraternities often relates back to several faulty main ideas: that pledges have to prove that they want to be members; that pledges need to stick together to get through the pledge experience; or that the anxiety produced during the pledge term somehow builds character (Barr 32). The harmless perception of the hazing process has more than likely contributed to the growing population of fraternity members. Membership has increased to 400,000 members on some eight hundred campuses nationwide (Bernstein A1). Hazing is never mentioned in brochures the university sent to incoming freshman to promote fraternity membership (A1). Therefore, parents are never told what fraternities really have to offer. Most universities deal with this problem behind closed doors, “ the code of silence,” so their potential students for the university are unaware of this problem. With the increase of new pledges, the amount of hazing has increased, leading to more deadly outcomes for those involved in pledging.
The dangers of hazing usually overpower the advantages of any so-called brotherhood (Cooper A14). The tests that they do face are some of strength, endurance, or drinking ability rather that of dedication or any kind of tie to trust. Most of the members feel guilty during and after these devious activities, because they are so dangerous and degrading, but yet they still do not break the code of silence. That is why fraternity initiation remains the biggest secret of campus ritual and most dangerous (Leeman 107). Even after all the deaths and problems these fraternities excel and keep gaining new members. As you will see in the next paragraph, you will see how these dangers often lead to fatal outcomes.
As it was reported in the August 28, 1997, issue of the New York Times the head line read: “Students Help Bury a Fraternity Pledge, and a Tale of Heavy Drinking Emerges.”
It generally takes people years to drink themselves into the grave, but Ben Wayne, 20, to whom the young people were paying their last respect had accomplished that in a single evening with the help of his fraternity brothers. As the family asks why this senseless activity has taken their own son, the justice system has virtually failed to find out. (Cooper A14)
Events like these happen more often then people know about. These events take place during the fall pledge season. Not all hazing instances result in death, but they all will result in anything from humiliation to something as personal as sterilization. The insurance analysis of more than 900 claims against fraternities in a six-year period reveals that one out of four result in death, paralysis, or other serious injury.(Bernstein A1). This pole demonstrates how severe this problem has become and will continue to become if the whole university community does not take the proper steps in fighting the problem.
People never really hear about the universities themselves fighting the problem. When a problem takes place as much as hazing, one would think that the university would step in and take action. Instead, it seems that the universities are standing by the fraternities by keeping this quiet. Looking at it in this perspective, it seems the universities are betraying their own students. Although, hazing is illegal in thirty-seven
states, the protected place that fraternities occupy at the heart of a campus justice system operate at most of the nations 3,600 colleges and universities (BerenstineA1). In fact, behind those closed doors thousands of criminal offenses virtually disappear each year (Berenstine A1). By hiding the criminal acts, the students are victims of their own fate. Most universities do however, have policies that state such activity is not welcomed at their campus, but when it does take place the university must protect their institutions. It seems that if more of these cases were publicized, more people would realize that fraternity hazing is not a real good way to create trust between members. If the whole purpose of fraternities is to develop some sort of social responsibility; hazing is an ironic activity for one to use to accomplish this goal (Curry 116). Another interesting fact is that most universities officially condemn hazing. A twenty-six million dollar liability policy covers all undergraduate chapters, just in case (Matthews 54). It seems that all fraternities would rather leave the knife out and bandage the cut, instead of just putting the knife away to solve the problem all together.
Although fraternity culture does have its ugly faces, it also offers some good features. Fraternities offer positive cultural aspects such as the building of character, unity, and trust. Hazing can build character because nothing builds character like hardship and adversity. Hazing is merely a form of artificially created hardship (Sanz B1). Fraternities help pledges become strong minded and strive harder for what is needed to be done. They are also known to create unity amongst members to become a closer family through shared experiences and bonding.
Pledging builds camaraderie through shared experiences. It quickly enhances the relationship between the new members and the brothers. And helps the new members demonstrate dedication to the fraternity and to each other (Parker A2). Trust is the largest outcome of fraternities, which is why new members feel hazing is an important part of a fraternity. One source states that trust is needed to have contact, reinforcement, and the affection of others. (Nuwer A12). They believe if you are to belong to a fraternity you’re going to need to build trust in the fraternity. You will learn to trust fraternity members during the pledge process. Members of the fraternity will gain trust upon the pledge’s completion of the hazing process.
Hazing has become a true concern for most of the national fraternity members. Hazing does however, test ones physical, moral, and psychological status. It unfortunately can have tragic results for the students, the university, and the families of the victims that are injured or killed during this often-brutal activity. What makes hazing more painful is the results that often lead to serious outcomes. The universities however, only look to fix the results and not for the causes of the outcomes. The only way to truly fight the negative cultural aspects of hazing is for those who are involved in the hazing process to take full responsibility for there actions, and fraternities will see the true need to end this sort of initiation.
In conclusion, the diversity of culture that accompanies fraternities can lead to positive and negative results. The positive results include an increase in sense of belonging, as well as motivation for a successful educational career, while the negative include physical and psychological damage due to hazing. Hopefully, in the future, the positive aspects will outweigh the negative and increase students’ motivation to succeed.