This isn't a good look for the school. Hopefully, the individuals involved with this get expelled. After all of the hazing incidents at various schools over the last few years, we do not want this kind of attention.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/06/10/virginia-t...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
It's not a great look but it's much better that decisive action was taken before it hit the media. Anything else would look reactionary and, thus, would look worse. If anything, I'm proud that Virginia Tech handled it the way they did.
Agreed in full. Bad things like this happen everywhere. VT took an allegation seriously, investigated appropriately, and punished those involved. Well done by our administration.
Yeah, got to give Sands and company kudos for handling it quickly.
This is pretty messed up. I was in a fraternity in college and we didn't even come close to that level of hazing.
There is a huge difference between predominately black frats and other orgs. This statement clearly demonstrates one of the differences. Most Black frat members are actively involved in the frat from time of initiation throughout their lifetime. A lot of whites do it simply as entertainment during college years. Very rarely if ever will you hear a Black Frat member say i was "in a frat in college". Not justifying the behavior just pointing out that there is a real difference. I am talking about this in general not a blanket statement, I am sure some White Frat members continue throughout their life, but just not to the extent of Predominantly Black Frat members and for practical reasons. Same is true for the sororities.
But, sadly, the author of the letter sent it out with a grammatical error and that more so reflects badly on the university. We have the personnel & technology that should preclude this.
Never understood hazing that involved physical or mental abuse. I can't wrap my head around why people put up with this crap. Glad the university did what they had to do.
I am confused, what other kind of hazing is there?
I think he means "rites of initiation that don't involve hazing". Sometimes character or team building exercises are lumped in the term "hazing" even if they don't meet the definition.
At any rate, a lot is in the eye of the beholder, so careful consideration must be made. Would I be doing this if the CO was watching? If President Sands was watching? If TV cameras were present?
(speaking from military experience)
Speaking as someone who went to a military school in High School, Benedictine. I think some of the freshman "hazing, class bonding, that went on was what made my experience great and our class so close. From singing I'm a little teapot and the Barney song with my fellow freshmen, to doing wal chairs to eat my lunch, to having to only walk on the right side of the hall and not cross over, to having to ask seniors permission to pass their locker, to having to wear a brown paper bag over my head at assembly's. It to me was a great unifier of our class. When they got rid of most of those things at BHS I felt like the classes didn't. Bond as well. For people looking in from the outside it may have seemed like hazing and that's all the school admins cared about, how an outsider saw those things. I think sometimes people are too quick to jump on the "it's hazing" line. This case is clearly different because they were physically assaulted, but there has to be some leeway.
I think the distinction is "abuse"
It would seem that you can have "hazing" without it going into the "abuse" portion of the spectrum. IMO, having freshman sing I'm a little tea pot and making them ask seniors for permission before walking past their lockers doesn't fall under "abuse" but some (many, probably) would still consider that "hazing"
I think the definition of "hazing" may be a little hazy, if you will. It carries such a negative connotation these days that any mention of hazing immediately conjures images of abuse in the minds of the general public. Often times, I think, hazing is just equated to abuse flatly and that is the end of it for some people.
Thank you. I am referring to the abuse and not the goofy team building exercises like stupid songs or even pop quizzing a pledge. While embarrassing at the moment those things are often funny later on. Being physically punished is not something I would laugh about later.
I understand there can be fine line between hazing and team bonding exercises. Everyone has there own personal definition or line in the sand. I know mine and if I see someone else being pushed past their limit I will step in and stop it.
My father grew up going to Catholic schools in NYC and was in the military. He told me after my first year at VT that he was glad I turned down the Army ROTC scholarship I was awarded and a senator's offer of a letter of recommendation to West Point because I had an attitude issue. My mouth has written some checks that my ass couldn't cash. I don't care. I did what I thought was right in those moments.
I agree. The plebes at Annapolis have to walk on a line in the hallways (passage ways), and make square turns (left or right faces) when going around corners. Not physical abuse. Mental? These are maneuvers they would do during military drills or marches anyway, but having to do it all the time instills humility. Whatever background they came from, they were all on the same level, in the same boat, when they came to the Academy.
An obstacle course could be viewed as physical abuse by some, when in actuality it is a test of ability or an opportunity for teamwork.
I don't think an obstacle course should ever be considered physical abuse. At that point you would have to also consider any work-out class physical abuse. Or if you work with a physical trainer at a gym that would be physical abuse. The line has to be drawn somewhere and I really don't think an obstacle course would fall under abuse. Or should.
I think that the general definition of hazing is placing someone under duress.
Obstacle courses for "initiation" may have additional "obstacles" that involve humiliation or actual health risks, above and beyond (or should I say below) what you'd find at Recruit Training.
...
I was going to write an example of mental abuse that I know a female friend endured when she joined her college's (not VT) rugby team but I don't think it is appropriate here.
Guys aren't the only ones that can be hazed. From stories I have heard it seems women lean more towards mental abuse when hazing.
There was a huge lawsuit against a sorority (not VT) because the pledges were so sleep-deprived, a couple of them died in a car crash when the driver fell asleep at the wheel. What compounded matters were the sorority student officers attempting to cover up the abuse after the fact.
Gotcha, that makes more sense.
The reports of what the "assaults" entailed are vague, but since VT has a zero tolerance policy on hazing they seem to have acted correctly and decisively.
I have always thought that the definition of hazing was the act of putting an initiate under some form of duress. Whether physical or mental in nature, it serves the purpose of developing bonds between initiates while bringing out the true character of the initiate. Based on the response, the people doing the hazing could decide whether the initiate should be let in.
Granted, this can get out of hand, which can lead to "no tolerance policies" in our sensitive world.
My question is: If there is no hazing, what form do the fraternity "rights of initiation" take? Do they sit around and make cupcakes?
I'll be the first to admit I know jack squat about frat's. The place where I earned my undergrad degree has a protracted "right of initiation" and condoned most forms of hazing.
Making cupcakes would have been less boring. The rites of initiation are more of symbolic gestures that represent the values of the organization and typically lead up to a final ceremony.
apologies for the extra posts, the replies kept coming and my comment kept being inserted as a reply in the wrong place.
What does the Navy do now when you cross the equator?
They still do the shellback ceremony, and from what I understand the sub community is still pretty wild, but the surface side is much tamer than it was even a decade ago.
Hi sorry, but I'm gonna be the one to bring it up at risk of getting banhammered. Two years ago Alpha Kappa Psi (the VT business frat) was banned from VT for 5 years, also for hazing. Their hazing included sexual based offenses, link to roanoke times article. The issue I'm bringing up is that the Alpha Phi Alphas were banned for double the amount of the business frat for a similar offense. I don't believe it gives a good outside look when the black fraternity was banned for 10 years for a similar offense as the business fraternity which was banned for 5 years.
If I am missing something, key details as to why one ban is longer than another I would like to know. But my perspective with the information I currently have, I don't believe this is a good look.
Of course, the Alpha's should have been banned. I'm not trying to justify what they did and say they shouldn't be punished. I'm asking why is one punishment more severe than another for a similar offense?
I think that brings up a valid point/concern. You would think that the banishment of Alpha Kappa Psi would set the precedent. This brings up a couple of questions for me: Are there more details regarding the Alpha Phi Alpha ban that we simply don't know which would justify the longer ban? Are there social pressures from the current social landscape which influence a harsher ban than two years ago?
In the local paper the article cited the fact the national organization banned them for 10 years and that VT was following their example and imposing the same time frame.
Ah okay that makes a LOOOOOT more sense, thanks for clearing that up!
Edit: just found the roanoke times article on that here
tl:dr
Wow, I was an AKPsi brother not too long ago, and I hadn't heard of this. Guess that shows how good a brother/alum I am. Very disappointing to hear, though.
10 years seems excessively long, considering it only takes 4-5 years to overturn the student members of the fraternity.
Seems harsh, even if it's the national organization setting the timeline.
4-5 years is the normal for the school. Perhaps the national Alpha organization usually gives 10 year bans for hazing, this is just the first we are hearing about it so it seems unusual. Just a thought though not sure.