Letter to the Editor: Senior Speaks Out About Hazing
Issue date: 1/25/06 Section: Opinion
Dear Editor,
As much as we had all been looking forward to the end of Rush week and all of the awkward interactions that the event entailed, the proceeding weeks seem to offer little, if any, relief from the stresses of Greek life. The effects of pledgeship, new member education, or whichever euphemism that we use to define the 8 weeks following Rush are everywhere. From the exhausted, depressed, and confused freshmen boys to the upperclassmen who are hoarse from screaming obscenities, insults, and other degrading remarks at pledges, it seems that the cold weather is hardly the responsible party for the generally low spirits of Washington and Lee students during winter term. After four winter terms fighting the perverse and backward institution that is fraternity pledgeship, I would like to express to my fellow Washington and Lee men why I believe that pledgeship as it stands has no place at this school by examining some of the more popular arguments in favor of it.
One argument for pledgeship justifies the hazing, verbal abuse, and creatively demeaning chores because the active members had to endure the same treatment for their own initiation. This defense is so void of any reasonable basis that I am almost dumbfounded that the intelligent men here try to use it. You do not have the right to mistreat a young man because you yourself were similarly mistreated by someone other than the object of your cruelty. Whether you seek revenge, satisfaction, entertainment, or a boost for your lacking self-esteem, taking your frustration out on an guiltless freshman is shameful and not justifiable by this argument.
Another argument in favor for the hazing that inevitably occurs during pledgeship is to unite a pledge class. The logic behind this defense is that these young men will be united through their suffering and form lasting bonds of fellowship. In other words, these men are supposed to be joined in their anger and animosity towards the older, future fraternity brothers. However, none of the friendships that I have with my closest friends are based on enduring the kind of suffering marks the 8 weeks of pledgeship. There are many more positive ways to encourage friendships than giving a pledge class a common hatred of their abusers. This argument is just as fallible as the previous argument and is upheld because of the apathy of those who disagree and the irrationality of those who do agree.
As much as we had all been looking forward to the end of Rush week and all of the awkward interactions that the event entailed, the proceeding weeks seem to offer little, if any, relief from the stresses of Greek life. The effects of pledgeship, new member education, or whichever euphemism that we use to define the 8 weeks following Rush are everywhere. From the exhausted, depressed, and confused freshmen boys to the upperclassmen who are hoarse from screaming obscenities, insults, and other degrading remarks at pledges, it seems that the cold weather is hardly the responsible party for the generally low spirits of Washington and Lee students during winter term. After four winter terms fighting the perverse and backward institution that is fraternity pledgeship, I would like to express to my fellow Washington and Lee men why I believe that pledgeship as it stands has no place at this school by examining some of the more popular arguments in favor of it.
One argument for pledgeship justifies the hazing, verbal abuse, and creatively demeaning chores because the active members had to endure the same treatment for their own initiation. This defense is so void of any reasonable basis that I am almost dumbfounded that the intelligent men here try to use it. You do not have the right to mistreat a young man because you yourself were similarly mistreated by someone other than the object of your cruelty. Whether you seek revenge, satisfaction, entertainment, or a boost for your lacking self-esteem, taking your frustration out on an guiltless freshman is shameful and not justifiable by this argument.
Another argument in favor for the hazing that inevitably occurs during pledgeship is to unite a pledge class. The logic behind this defense is that these young men will be united through their suffering and form lasting bonds of fellowship. In other words, these men are supposed to be joined in their anger and animosity towards the older, future fraternity brothers. However, none of the friendships that I have with my closest friends are based on enduring the kind of suffering marks the 8 weeks of pledgeship. There are many more positive ways to encourage friendships than giving a pledge class a common hatred of their abusers. This argument is just as fallible as the previous argument and is upheld because of the apathy of those who disagree and the irrationality of those who do agree.