Topic of hazing elicits mixed student views
By Clare Coffey, The Dartmouth Staff
Published on Monday, January 30, 2012
While 97 percent of students surveyed by The Dartmouth acknowledged that they are aware that hazing occurs on campus, only about 55 percent said that the administration should take increased action to discourage hazing. Student reaction to the issue of hazing, addressed in a Jan. 25 opinion column by Andrew Lohse ’12, ranged from disbelief to disgust.
Of 102 students surveyed in a convenience sample on Sunday, 64 individuals — approximately 64 percent — said that hazing is a problem on campus and poses a threat to members of the community. About 32 percent said they believe hazing is not a marked problem on campus, while five individuals declined to answer the question. When asked if administrators should take greater efforts to prevent hazing practices, 56 individuals responded in the affirmative, while 42 participants said no, and four chose not to respond.
Lohse’s allegations — which included specific, graphic descriptions of hazing at his former fraternity and claimed that administrators failed to adequately address his concerns — sparked controversy among students and led some to question the author’s credibility and motives. Other students, however, said the piece sparked a necessary discussion about both hazing and the function of the Greek system at the College.
“I was a member of a fraternity that asked pledges, in order to become a brother, to: swim in a kiddie pool full of vomit, urine, fecal matter, semen and rotten food products; eat omelets made of vomit; chug cups of vinegar, which in one case caused a pledge to vomit blood; drink beers poured down fellow pledges’ ass cracks; and vomit on other pledges, among other abuses,” Lohse said.
Stephanie Pareja-Fernandez ’13, a member of Alpha Xi Delta sorority, said she was overwhelmed by the notion that students would subject themselves to the rituals described by Lohse.
“I was absolutely disgusted,” she said. “I couldn’t even wrap my mind around the idea that anything that foul went on.”
Pareja-Fernandez also said she found the administration’s role difficult to understand, particularly given the voluntary nature of hazing.
“I don’t understand whether [Lohse] wants the system abolished, or what exactly he’s trying to accomplish,” she said.
Whether full responsibility lies with the victim of hazing is unclear, according to Alexis Monroe ’13, who is unaffiliated. While outsiders may suggest that potential victims of hazing “just say no,” unequal power relationships can leave individuals vulnerable to psychological pressures, she said.
“I wouldn’t necessarily blame him,” she said. “I don’t think it necessarily reflects a personal weakness if someone is in a very power-oriented relationship.”
Some students interviewed by The Dartmouth questioned the credibility of the allegations.
Ari Jackson ’13, a member of Chi Heorot fraternity, said that Lohse’s anecdotes of hazing seemed “skewed” and that he did not believe all of the claims.
Jesse Gomez ’12, who is unaffiliated, also expressed reservations about the content of the column and its implications.
“I never suspected Dartmouth of hazing before,” he said. “But I’m critical. I question the validity of it, and I’m not sure it’s anything to be concerned about.”
Lohse’s article brings into public view a formerly obscure area of campus life, whether or not the particulars are accurate, Hikaru Yamagishi ’12, a member of Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority, said. While students may wish to focus on Lohse’s history, his story merely confirms what many have heard in private, she said.
“Student body discussion needs to move away from Andrew Lohse because we’re all involved in the Greek system to some extent, and we all know what we know,” she said.
Moreover, the allegations bring rumors of hazing that previously circulated informally amongst the student body to the attention of the administration and faculty, who may be able to help address the problem, according to Yamagishi.
Monroe said she questions the ability of administrative intervention to prevent hazing.
Although it is important for the administration to be aware of the issue, its response will probably include “committees, subcommittees and a ton of ineffective bureaucracy,” Ben Ludlow ’12, vice president of Chi Gamma Epsilon fraternity and Interfraternity Council secretary, said.
While hazing is an important issue that needs to be addressed, Ludlow said he hopes the administration will proceed with caution when acting on “sensationalist and currently uncorroborated allegations.”
Any lasting change that may come from the conversation surrounding hazing will have to contend with the fact that Lohse has ostracized himself from mainstream Dartmouth culture, according to Rebecca Rothfeld ’14, who is unaffiliated. Attempts to reflect on the implications of Lohse’s allegations and the effect of hazing on the Dartmouth community may be dismissed because of the author’s reputation, she said.
“Basically, if you read the reactions online, everyone is ignoring the content of his article and just saying, ‘Whatever man, Lohse isn’t a sweet bro,’” she said.
Different types of hazing exist for different purposes, not all of which are harmful, Monroe said. Activities that test a pledge’s loyalty to a fraternity can foster deep bonds among members, but such bonds are more difficult to discern in sororities, where hazing is almost nonexistent, according to Monroe. The difficulty lies in distinguishing between activities that make pledge term valuable and those that merely test physical endurance or “play into an unhealthy power relationship,” she said.
The problem of hazing may prompt students to question the “structure of power and incentives” in the Greek system in general, Yamagishi said.
“We need to evaluate if this is the kind of community we want to leave for another generation of Dartmouth students,” she said.
Monroe said sweeping measures against the Greek system would not constitute a “smart” solution.
“I don’t think it’s a question of policies as much as a question of a change of mindset,” she said.
The prospect of hazing has raised anxiety among some freshmen considering the rush process next fall, Patrick Campbell ’15 said. While a number of his friends have debated what they would do in a variety of hazing scenarios or reconsidered their intention to rush altogether, Campbell said the campus discussion surrounding hazing has merely “reinforced” his decision not to participate in the recruitment process, he said.
Staff writers Gavin Huang, Leslie Ye and Madeline Zeiss contributed reporting to this article.
It’s not a question of whether or not Lohse was a “sweet bro” but rather is he a credible source? I suggest the answer is not.
It’s not the cocaine use itself. Doing coke is hardly a character reference, but plenty of substance abuse goes on among all students, Greeks and not. The way in which the strife over the cocaine went down, however, that it had to get to a point where a fellow SAE turned him in to the cops, that he then threatened that SAE and spit on him, that SAE suspended him, that the College gave him a lengthy suspension, all give rise to somoene who seems very disgruntled against both SAE and the College.
Disgruntled usually gives reason to be wary of a source but not to discount it altogether. Why am I proposing the latter? Because in an op-ed on October 6th, “Look Out For Eacher Other,” Lohse said, “ I was not ready for some of the ways I would be challenged sophomore year, but my friends from before rush and I supported each other, and so did the other 26 guys in my pledge class. Although we thought for a time that our house had changed us irrevocably, we were and are still pretty much the same, just wiser. Odds are, you won’t change as much as you think you will. That’s a good thing..If you elect to pledge, don’t fool yourself, like I did, into thinking that Greek life will alter you deeply, no matter what anyone tells you and no matter how rigorous the challenges you may face are — in real life or otherwise.”
This was written a mere four months ago. By Andrew Lohse. Where he says that Greek life won’t alter anyone deeply, that the people support each other, where he talks about rush, etc., and not a word about hazing. Not a cautionary note about joining the Greek system.
Clearly, SOMETHING happened between October and January, be it a personal epiphany or some further indignity on top of his SAE and College suspensions that drove him to write what he did, but without an explanation of exactly what changed his mind, he’s a worthless source. SAE may engage in the activities he described. But he’s not the guy to hang one’s hat on when trying to crack down on it.
By Anon on Jan 30 | 9:04 am
Lohse has adequately explained himself to other media sources that during the summer, a representative from SAE national confronted the chapter about their hazing practices and they promised to change their traditions and practices. They were scared that national was aware of what they were doing, which was all 100% true, and Lohse was encouraged that they were taking steps to change. This is when Lohse sent an email to April Thompson expressing satisfaction at the progress being made by SAE.
Similarly, in October there was discussion about positive pledge events that would be fun, rather than dehumanizing. Lohse thought that although he had suffered, there was hope that the new pledges would not be subjected to such degradation. Unfortunately, the SAE brothers lied about changing their practices and went on to do the same degrading things that happened to Lohse and his pledge brothers. I know SAE 14s who ate vomit and were exposed to disgusting situations and were psychologically tortured. That is why Lohse had a change of heart.
I know it is difficult to believe that at Dartmouth someone could be optimistic about a proposed plan and then have those hopes squashed when reality sets in and the old traditions remain. But it happens all the time and unfortunately it happened to Lohse. I believe him 100% because my SAE friends have told me what they went through and it matches Lohse’s descriptions perfectly.
By @Anon on Jan 30 | 10:31 am
People really need to just take Loshe out of the equation already. Yes, he’s not exactly reliable and he likely has ulterior motives, but that doesn’t deny the fact that most people on campus are 1 or 2 degrees away from someone who knows that Lohse’s allegations are true. Anyone who says otherwise is either really disconnected from the situation or lying.
That said, the question of whether the college should step in is one to which everyone should answer with a resounding “yes.” Those 45% who disagree that the college should step in should go read Dani Levin’s op-ed. Hazing affects everyone in one way or another, and it contributes to creating spaces where sexual assault are okay. Hell, if the college wants to combat sexual assault, they should take a look at a lot of houses' hazing practices, which in other contexts would be defined as sexual assault (that isn’t to say that all houses sexual assault their pledges or that it is the main thing that is going on, but it is probably something that happens frequently given the homophobic undertones and history of the greek system).
By Van Melikian on Jan 30 | 11:01 am
I agree with you Van that we shouldn’t bring Lohse into the argument at least insofar as we’re questioning the validity of his statements; whether we care to admit it or not, it’s pretty obvious hazing takes place on campus. (I suppose it might be debatable as to the extent but that’s not really the point.) But I think we have to look at Lohse when we’re addressing the problem itself because he embodies the problem. First he goes through the hazing rituals (Yes, drinking impairs judgment to make choices but then of course he made the choice to drink that much in the first place.) Then, after apparently realizing what he been ‘forced’ to do, he chose to remain in the house. And in remaining in the house he did not lead some internal movement to end hazing practices but joined in it himself with later pledges. And it’s only when he himself was thrown under the bus by his own house that he decided to get even and come out with this information.
So, what’s the point of this recap? It’s to suggest that this is a student problem. The problem with the D’s survey is that it’s asking the wrong questions. The immediate reaction to Lohse’s expose was that of ‘Why isn’t the administration doing anything about this?’ or ‘The administration should be ashamed of themselves’ but not even ‘SAE should be ashamed of themselves’. First students need to take responsibility for themselves. If you know a frat engages in hazing and you are opposed to hazing don’t join the house. Or after you realize that you were hazed, drop out. Too often we the excuse that the culture of assimilation on campus to too strong to overcome, but that’s all it is: an excuse. (And Van, obviously you and I know from experience that it can be overcome with a more reasoned outlook) Beyond this, we need to hold our peers accountable. In part this is because it’s not possible for the administration to step in in any meaningful way. You suggest that the admin ‘should take a look at a lot of houses’ hazing practices' but these practices are hardly public. There’s no way to eradicate hazing from a top-down approach. When frats are caught in the act, they obviously should be punished, but unless the college take radical and unpopular action (Which I know you would approve, but still), the problem we still be left in tact. So we, in our own houses, in the interfrat and panhell councils, in other student run organization must make hazing an issue that we want to address. Only a change in student’s mindset can bring about meaningful change without massive student backlash. It’s a difficult process but I think it’s not asking too much from us.
By Brian Giunta on Jan 30 | 11:54 am
I feel like we are about to rehash the conversation that we had last night, and that there is no need to do it over the internet. Point stands, houses need to be held more accountable for their actions when caught, and they aren’t because of money, and at the end of the day there is a negative externality from the frats that partially comes from hazing (read Dani’s op-ed if you haven’t already).
By Van Melikian on Jan 30 | 12:17 pm
The fact people take lohse’s accusations at face value while dismissing any othe account as false just feeds the fire. This is how rumor turns into quotable fact: people assume lohse is telling the truth and quote him and then others quote the quoters citing as if the quote is a known fact. On another note, maybe the reason why people keep “attacking the messenger” is because Andrew lohse has no credibility and is know to write things only to get attention. Furthermore he is not only the messenger but also the author of said message and therefore needs to be scrutinized as such.
By Anon14 on Jan 30 | 12:47 pm
Eating someone’s vomit is gross, but it’s not a threat to your health. Young Maasai men have to kill a lion with a spear to be accepted as warriors. That’s a threat to your health (and lion populations). Swimming in vomit is not.
I participated in gross things while pledging. If someone didn’t want to do something, they opted out and nobody gave them any trouble about it. It took some guts to say no, but everyone respected your decision. Parts of pledging sucked, but mostly it was a hell of a lot of fun; the best time I never want to have again.
Frat hazing was not a public health crisis 10 years ago when I was at Dartmouth; from what Lohse describes it’s not a threat to public health today either. Cocaine, on the other hand…
By ‘01 on Jan 30 | 1:35 pm
This whole thing could be put to rest by simply sending Lohse and those who deny what he says to be on the Maury Povich show for lie detector tests. But my gut tells me it is all true, and the thought of guilty frats getting away with this is disgusting.
By jenningsthurmond on Jan 30 | 3:21 pm
What kind of a conclusive survey takes 102 students' opinions on such a topic. The first sentence immediately removes all credibility of the survey. Was that 97% of 102? Can I get a number crunch on that??
“64 individuals—approximately 64%” of the survey. What a joke. I can’t believe this made the front page of the D.
Dartmouth distinguishes itself from the other Ivies in many ways, but one particularly noteworthy way is through its culture. My experiences in a fraternity here have fostered the best and most real friendships I have ever and will ever have. These conversations of hazing seem absolutely intrusive to a college culture rich in tradition—one that breeds practical, down to earth individuals and suppresses the rampant pretentiousness present at the other Ivy League Institutions. For this we can thank fraternities and sororities.
By Critic on Jan 30 | 4:46 pm