I'm not quite sure how I forgot I wrote this piece for publication two years ago, but I happened to come across it while searching for something else online. Here it is. I think it's pretty good.
A “Culture of Hazing”: An Unconventional Perspective
Matt Johnson, The Kettering Foundation
September 2006
It has become well documented that if we are to work toward eradicating hazing from undergraduate fraternity and sorority chapters, we must examine the problem from a cultural perspective. While this statement is generally accepted to be true, the difficulty lies within the thorny nature of culture as it is an intricate, ever-changing concept, which requires advisors to use an unconventional and perhaps unfamiliar lens. In this essay, I illuminate “the culture of hazing” using two theoretical concepts, symbolic interactionist theory and rites of passage, that may be peripheral to many advisors’ scopes as they are used almost exclusively by cultural anthropologists. I then suggest three possible courses of action derived from these theoretical concepts.
Symbolic Interactionist TheorySymbolic interactionist theory is a theoretical approach dedicated to the relationship between humans and society. Specifically, it posits that human action and interaction are understandable only through the exchange of meaningful communication of symbols. Sweet (1999) suggests, “hazing is the result of group interaction processes that are linked with students’ need for belonging, their isolation from other social relations on campus, and subcultural definitions that legitimize hazing events as a necessary component of fraternity initiation rites” (p. 355). Central to Sweet’s reasoning of why hazing occurs is that “self” is ever-changing and socially constructed. Therefore, students’ identities are tied up in the fraternity/sorority, thus making it incredibly difficult for students to resist hazing. In other words, new members engage in activities that they would otherwise resist.
In addition to this assertion, a person’s sense of self couples with symbols and other people in a culture to produce specific meaning, which Katz (1993) calls “packaging.” Students systematically place symbols and objects (e.g., robes, candles, crests) in the context of hazing activities, thus creating the perception of being critical for membership. For instance, if the same set of objects and symbols are part of a legitimate activity such as a pinning or initiation ceremony, students are very likely to equate the same trust and importance to other activities that are illegitimate.
Rites of Passage“Rites of passage are a category of rituals that mark the passages of an individual through the life cycle, from one stage to another over time…” (Myerhoff, 1982, p. 109). We must first understand that fraternal organizations involve leaving a previous state (new membership/pledging), and entering a new state (initiate), thus engaging in a rite of passage. In fact, many fraternity and sorority rituals are based entirely on this transformation. Furthermore, involved in the initiation process is the bestowment of values, symbols, and meanings unto initiates, which is characteristic of rites of passage. One of the paradoxes associated with rites of passage is that they “announce our separateness and individuality to us and at the same time remind us most firmly and vividly that we belong to our group and cannot conceive of an existence apart from it” (Myerhoff, 1982, p. 115). This may suggest that students feel like they cannot escape from their organization, even if the current members haze them. A final implication that Myerhoff suggests is that “keeping them busy in the obsessive, formal, repetitive activity that rituals require, consciousness and questioning may be inhibited rather than encouraged” (1982, pp. 117-18). This assertion may imply that hazed new members may not question their actions because of the incredible transformation that they feel and the repetitive nature of hazing activities.
What Can Be Done?Trying to chart a possible course of action to address hazing is an arduous task. By no means are the following suggestions exhaustive – quite the contrary. It is the hope that these suggestions serve as a different way to think about hazing as opposed to a traditional reward and punishment system. Perhaps these suggestions will shed light on addressing what so many deem (and rightfully so!) “a culture of hazing.”
1. First, we must try to minimize the separation of fraternities and sororities from other groups and the rest of campus. Are the chapters under our purview isolated from the rest of campus? Poll a few members of suspected organizations and ask them how many people they know in other organizations. One might consider strongly advocating that every new member class does 2-3 events with other organizations (both fraternal and non-fraternal) outside of new member parties and chapter socials.
2. It is imperative to work with our fraternity/sorority organizations to help identify safe, effective, and practical ways to meet the objectives they try to accomplish by hazing (e.g., building brotherhood, community). As Myerhoff (1982) argues, if rituals are not provided for students, they will provide them for themselves. Little advisement on safe, meaningful rituals and/or rites of passage greatly increases the likelihood that students will not only continue to follow dangerous rituals, but create equally hazardous ones as well.
3. We need to be very clear in helping members of fraternal organizations understand that it is not the end of the world, and they will be safe if they disaffiliate from their respective organizations. Symbolic interactionist theory helps us realize that fraternal organizations are very good at creating an atmosphere whereby members feel as though they cannot leave the organization because a large part of who they are is inseparable from their organization and they cannot visualize themselves outside of the organization.
By putting symbolic interactionist theory along with rites of passage at the fore of our work, we, as fraternal educators, can begin to nudge the hazing culture. Symbolic interactionist theory enables us to see how a student's need for belonging encourages his/her participation in hazing practices. Rites of passage allow us to understand individual member’s connection to the group and their fear of removing themselves from the group. Using these theories as framework in conversation with students will assist us in the slow process of eradicating hazing in our fraternal organizations.
References
Katz, F. (1993). Ordinary people and extraordinary evil: A report on the beguilings of evil. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Myerhoff, B. (1982). Rites of passage: Process and paradox. In V. Turner (Ed.), Celebration: Studies in festivities and ritual (pp. 109-135). Washington, C.C.: Smithsonian Institute Press.
Sweet, S. (1999). Understanding fraternity hazing: Insights from symbolic interactionist theory. Journal of College Student Development, 40(4), 355-364.
