If deemed necessary, reported comments will be removed within 7 - 10 days but usually sooner. Please submit this report ONLY if you STRONGLY believe this needs to be removed. Multiple illegitimate reports slow down the administrative process of removing the actual and more seriously unfavorable content.

Poster Name:
Here it is

Poster Message:
This vague definition of hazing is a problem at a lot of universities. LSU, in its report following the death of a pledge in 2017, specifically identified the vague use of the term hazing as a contributing factor to the cultural problems of their Greek system and indirectly to the death of a pledge. This whole report is worth reading. It claimed that LSU definition of hazing was so broad that made it impossible to run any pledge program and so the hazing rules where completely ignored. LSU is working to narrow down the hazing definition to something more practical. Pledge rides, for example, aren’t hazing; they were implemented in the 80s to address the serious issue of drunk driving in the Greek system. Requiring pledges to clean around the house, attend study tables or dress in coat and tie should not be the same infraction as beating pledges, force feeding them dog food, or requiring them to deadly amounts of alcohol. The legal definition of hazing by the state of Indiana is “as a condition of association with a group or organization; to perform an act that creates a substantial risk of bodily injury”. It is a much clearer definition that if IFC adopted would allow you to effectively eliminate activities that are dangerous while halting harassment for infractions that aren’t really hazing. Is it not surprising that with organizations like Delts, SNU and Kappa Sig kicked off campus for hazing in recent years it appears no individuals were held accountable for their actions (as far as I can tell)? If members of these chapters were engaged in activities that were a “danger to the health of the IU community” such that their 100+ year old organizations needed to be closed wouldn’t you think that at least one member of those organizations would be expelled or criminally charged with hazing? Again, correct me if I am wrong on this and if anyone was expelled from the university for hazing in either of these instances. Indiana is one of only ten states where hazing is an actual criminal offense. The current Indiana state hazing law was actually written with help from IU IFC officers sometime in the late 1980s or early 1990s in a student and alumni led effort to end dangerous hazing. Make it known that if a chapter is found guilty of hazing (again as defined by the state), the IFC Judicial board will notify the local DA. Potential individual criminal charges for chapter leaders are the only way that I see to effectively and permanently end dangerous hazing at IU. It has to happen but you can’t make that threat when IU’s current definition of hazing is so broad that it is entirely meaningless. Chapters and individuals that truly pose a danger to their pledges will get the punishment they diserve while sparing everyone else from erroneous hazing charges and unnecessary harassment.