"That's so college."
What a phrase—it recalls stories of all that's good and wild about college: all nighters, crappy light beer and sexilings.
Oh. And a not so innocuous pastime called hazing.
Unfortunately for college administrators all over the world, hazing is a problem that refuses to go away; it's always lurking just around the corner. It's a persistent issue despite all the countermeasures colleges raise against it.
As Bowdoin students know all too well given recent events, instances of hazing often bring disgruntling punitive measures.
And as many other schools, friends and family members know, hazing practices have also caused much dishonor and grief beyond the vacating of a conference hockey championship.
Hazing, it seems, is the bastard child of the college experience. It arises from what is best about college: the creative camaraderie of students.
However, hazing's wild nature and its potential for catastrophe have colleges, students and legislators running scared all over the country.
There is no question that to many, the term "hazing" justifiably evokes terror or tragedy.
Awful incidents all over the United States have provoked the legislation of hazing-specific statutes in many states. Infamous among these is "Matt's Law," introduced after the death of a student, Matthew Carrington, at Chico State University in California.
In the wake of Bowdoin's recent hazing scandal, I think it prudent to delve a bit more into these illicit rites of passage. To begin with, I think the impetus behind hazing frequently comes from a good place.
Initiation rituals are a means by which students establish a tight social fabric within any organization. These kinds of rituals, events or parties follow the footsteps of all members, anonymous or legendary, who have passed through previously.
Rituals build an organizational mythology that is integral to making membership of a club or sports team a profoundly awesome commitment.
To a large extent, I think participating in long-standing and mysterious traditions elicits a reverence for an organization that is truly meaningful.
Moreover, when initiation events aren't emotionally or psychologically detrimental, I think that affection built between younger members can't help but manifest itself as genuine friendship.
Now, while a traditionalist like me can find a lot of good in hazing rituals, there is no question that the damaging and potentially fatal consequences of these activities warrants administrative vigilance. There is nothing healthy or productive about an environment where reckless older students exert pressure on younger ones to do things that are stupid and cruel.
On the other hand, I think it terribly unwise for us to utter the funereal benediction for all activities that allow campus organizations to create an exciting mystique.
An undeniably important aspect of the liberal arts education is its emphasis on individual leadership and creativity, and there is nowhere better for us to practice those skills than in our participation in campus organizations.
So, in the wake of Bowdoin's unfortunate decision to vacate a NESCAC championship (about which I know very few details and therefore will not comment), I think we should reevaluate what activities we cannot afford to have on campus.
In so doing, however, I think we must also look at what sort of activities and creative spirit we cannot afford to live without.
Looking at the hazing section of the student handbook, one finds a thoughtful and compassionate policy.
It warns against hazing activities as "a form of victimization" that "physically or psychologically humiliates, degrades, abuses or endangers." Agreed. Such activities are awful and should not be permitted under any circumstances.
However, our handbook goes on to qualify an illicit activity at the College as one where you should ask yourself, "how you would feel if the activity was photographed and appeared in the Orient or on Facebook, YouTube or local TV. If [it] would unsettle you, then the activity probably constitutes hazing."
I find this an unsuitable metric for outlawing something at the College. As students, we should not be expected to live lives that necessarily pass the test of public scrutiny.
Moreover, I don't think that the College raises this as an issue when monitoring conduct in many other situations, such as social house parties. Organizational initiation activities should not be held to a significantly higher standard.
The student handbook itself states: "At Bowdoin, we value traditions, rituals, and rites of passage because they remind community members of their connections to one another and to the past and future of the College; they can build important bonds between groups and individuals."
That means giving some freedom to Bowdoin students to strengthen existing traditions and create new ones. It means allowing for student groups to bond over activities other than just "community service projects, movie nights [and] ropes course training," as the handbook suggests.
All of this must happen without any abuse and physical or emotional endangerment.
For the College to offer strong values that will help to develop great statesmen and thinkers, it needs to happen.