Dear Francis,

Thank you for your article about being in support of hazing (https://www.theodysseyonline.com/support-hazing). I appreciate your courage to write about such a controversial matter and to voice your opinion in support of the unpopular side. You wrote an article that really grabbed attention across the nation, and that cannot be denied. I am writing this in response to that article. As you presented your argument in support of hazing, you addressed solid points about respect, and building character. You also acknowledge that there is so much backlash from the act of hazing, and offer alternatives, and that is great. However, In spite of your argument in favor of hazing, I must say that I am on the opposite side of the fence: I do not support hazing.

Even though hazing has been around for a long time, as you mention, describing hazing to be synonymous to "the subjection to harassment and ridicule" is not the best way to describe hazing. A simple Google search renders hazing, in the context of a fraternity, as "humiliating and sometimes dangerous initiation rituals", so why support something that has been even sometimes dangerous yet still a ritual? Yes, people will be excluded, and I have absolutely no issue with that, but why base the exclusion on someone's ability to do stupid things? For example, if you're willing to accept someone who isn't able to walk up a set of stairs after drinking three beers, yet you cut someone who willingly helped up an individual who was clearly disoriented during recruitment yet the rest of the people didn't bat an eye, think about what that says about your character, especially the character of your fraternity, and the morals, or lack thereof, that your fraternity has. Would you want that reputation bestowed upon your fraternity, or worse, upon yourself? Additionally, the header photo your article uses is of military cadets doing wall-sits, which is perfectly acceptable. That is better than doing something that is sometimes dangerous, like drinking alcohol, which may or may not come in standard drink sizes. Compare those two activities. Wall-sits are not dangerous, and they build character, but does drinking alcohol do that? It does not build character, and it's also sometimes dangerous. You tell me which one is more suitable. It's not even a contest.

Furthermore, to humiliate someone is not the same as to ridicule him, but rather, it shows that fraternity recruitment/initiation is essentially a dictatorship. Why be willing to fight for something that involves people (potentially) losing lives by doing stupid, such as the recent instance at Penn State University? Do you want to be part of the problem even though you are not fully at fault? That is the consequence that 18 fraternity members, who were and still are, subjected to at Penn State. One wrong move can be a catastrophe for many more. Here's a solution: reward character rather than the willingness to do stupid things for the sake of recruitment. You want to have unforgettable experiences and build character, right? You'll never forget seeing someone help a potential brother out. That's what builds character and respect.

With that being said, does hazing really build character or respect? No, it doesn't. It destroys character. It allows people to take abuse without being allowed to tell anyone. In an August 2016 article by Business Insider, those who administer hazing are basically let loose. "However, there are no penalties defined for those who initiate hazing. (http://www.businessinsider.com/no-one-really-gets-...)" That's hypocritical in a world where we're consistently told to stand up for ourselves. It also allows you to hide from being respectful. Hazing is, in essence, just you and your initiates being nice to your "temporary overlords assigned" just to try to be in their good graces in hopes of receiving a bid, where they may assign you to do things that are, as you describe, as "so stupid and excruciatingly hard." Like a dictator, you try to be on his good side, but do you want to fight for it against someone who is always above the law? Is it worth that commitment, given that only a select few make it in? It's not worth it, unless you make the cut. That's a stern wake-up call. Take it.

So "Hazing is perfectly okay within certain boundaries"? If so, the hazing you go through in fraternity recruitment is way out of bounds. I know this article was written over a year ago, and since then, your opinion may have changed, but it seems clear that hazing does not actually build respect and character.

Here's a parting shot: You worked your way into college, and you did some hard things, like taking the ACT and SAT college entrance exams, and you did it where you went through a healthier style of hazing, one that came from your parents, better known as discipline. They made you do the dishes or take out the trash, or they took away your video games. That is certainly within the boundaries of which hazing is okay. You've earned respect from the most important people in your life. Your temporary overlords will never be of more importance to than your family is, and they will never know you like your family. Your family disciplined you the right way, since they know what's best for you. Hazing from a fraternity standpoint undoes everything your parents taught you about respect and character.

You've certainly learned a great deal from your experience, especially about respect, and character, and I have the utmost respect for the fact you've done that. However, the bigger issue is that while hazing in the recruitment context is tough and designed to be so, it isn't appropriate. It's not within the boundaries that are acceptable, and it doesn't do the utmost of justice in teaching the importance of respect and character. You have the right intentions with hazing and how it should be done, but we were raised with it in a healthy fashion (discipline) and should continue to carry that forward. Thank you for taking the time to write about this topic. God Bless.

Sincerely Yours,

Paul Shen