“Earlier this week a list of complaints about TKE initiation were brought to the attention of the men of Tau Kappa Epsilon, the administration and The Pioneer. The specific allegations are largely unfounded and falsified.”

Saying that “the specific charges” are “falsified” is tantamount to saying that the bringer of the charges has lied about them, that they are fabrications. There is the weasily modifier “largely,” but I believe that a fair reading of the letter is that TKE denies all material parts of the allegations. To the extent that it is less than a complete denial, it is barely so and suggests only that some trivial components of the charges not worth enumerating might be true.

That so called “statement of fact” has the effect of an indirect attack on Mr. Hart’s character for honesty. If you deny the veracity of someone’s statement, you are essentially saying that they have lied.

If TKE members want to risk being struck by lightening by asserting that Mr. Hart’s complaints regarding repetitive cleaning of parts of the house for hours, accompanied by verbal abuse, sleep deprivation (the degree of which can be argued), and communal cold showers with naked or near naked pledges, are materially false, then that rests with their consciences. If they are denying some other complaints that were made are in fact false, then they should be specific and not issue what is in effect a blanket denial. Perhaps a clarifying letter is in order.

If it is not clear by now, I am more offended by the blanket denial of all charges than the substance of the charges themselves. While pledges have a right to rely on Whitman’s policies in undergoing initiation, and a fraternity’s violation of those rules is a breach of trust, one can argue in good faith about the severity of the reported violations, the benefit of going through the entire initiation process, and therefore the good faith of TKE members conducting the initiation. I don’t agree with the process, but reasonable minds can differ.

On the other hand, falsely accusing a whistleblower of lying is an injustice in my opinion. Injustice angers me, so I will admit that bias. I wish that more people shared that bias with me. While this injustice pales in comparison to other injustices in the world, that fact offers no reason to ignore the one at hand.

A part of my job is to represent an employer in appeals from the firing of employees. The employee conduct that typically seals the termination is dishonesty in trying to evade responsibility for the original charges. Outside the Whitman bubble, people lose their livelihoods if caught in lies about their conduct. Admitting wrongdoing with true contrition has actually lessened penalties to save a few jobs. Real world consequences are another reason why I take such evasions occuring in the Whitman bubble very seriously.

If no one should dare voice an opinion about a matter with which they have no personal involvement, then no one should weigh in on death row inmates in Texas unless you are related to the inmates, their victims, or the attorneys and court staff involved in the prosecution. The requirement of personal experience to hold or voice an opinion would certainly narrow the range of political causes one could advocate for or against.

I am not sure why it is so important to avoid controversy on a liberal arts college campus filled with intelligent young adults and a carring faculty and administration. Dynamic and controversial events are what can truly provide teachable moments if people do not lose control of their emotions.

Socrates would not be welcome on your forum? I suppose the Athenians did sentence him to death – precedent for the current Greek chorus advocating silence perhaps? Socrates’ fate does show that there are risks associated with being a gadfly.

I am confident that the Greek system at Whitman is strong enough to weather criticism. I also suspect that Mr. Hart is too or he would not have had the fortitude to come forward in the first place. If people act in good faith, more communication tends to solve problems better than less.

I have been educated by other posters about TKE’s role on campus and the value of the initiation process for those who complete it. That information prompted me to acknowledge those points and modulate my criticism, though not abandon it, in subsequent posts. In short, I respectfully disagree.

While this has served as an interesting forum for students and parents to discuss personal ideologies, social politics and opinions, none of this is relevant to the specific issue. Proving that boys are immature or that frats are patriarchal does not matter in this context. It has already been established that the majority of respondants have never been a TKE nor have they ever gone through TKE initiation and as such have no background to be discussing an event of supposed hazing.

I would also like to discourage any discussion of “frats” or “sororities” in general. This story is about the 2010 TKE initiation and is not pertinent to any other Greek group. Let’s limit any drama by allowing the administration to handle this accusation of hazing in a manner that is appropriate and reasonable.

I agree with what others have said when they called into question your level of familiarity with what’s going on here. Your words demonstrate a concern for your child (fair and admirable to say the least), but your accusations fail to hold much weight in my mind because, well, you really don’t know what has happened from both sides of the story, and your facts are grounded in an overt bias against and even “anger” towards the “perpetrating” party.

Certainly, some young people have better judgment and greater native intelligence than some older people will ever have, and some older people frequently exercise very poor judgment as shown by our politicians and moneyed elites, but generally people mature with age and experience. No doubt exceptions to the general rule abound. Perhaps every single member of TKE personifies the exception, but I doubt it.

I do not doubt that the young men of TKE are generally talented, intelligent, and well-meaning. Youth has many virtues and the young men of TKE probably exemplify most of them. Nonetheless, experience and maturity are virtues rarely associated with youth, and the TKE members on campus are unquestionably very young – from 18 to 22 years old for the most part.

The young and brilliant consistently undervalue experience which is why they often do not heed their parents’ advice and disdain authority, such as Washington state laws and Whitman policies and those who would enforce them. They honestly believe that they know better because they are present and others are observing from afar. They sincerely believe that the rules should not apply to them because they “know what they are doing” and conceive of themselves as responsible and intelligent people.

Experience in life is an advantage most of the time. Typically, adults want their legal affairs handled by experienced attorneys, their medical care handled by experienced physicians, etc. Veteran guile often remains unappreciated until possessed. Would you rather fly with a new pilot just out of flight school or with Captain Sullenberger? Most people would choose Sully because of his wealth of experience.

Obviously, inexperienced young men and women are not necessarily bad people, just inexperienced. They typically intend no malice and err from carelessness or lack of judgment. The general hope of parents in sending their progeny to college is that with age, knowledge, experience, and exposure to caring adults who may become mentors, the young will mature and reach their potential in adulthood. College is meant to be a time of intellectual and personal growth at a formative period of life.

There are studies about brain development that indicate that the parts of the brain that influence judgment develop last – sometimes not until the mid-twenties. Auto insurance rates for teenage boys and young men in their early twenties is higher than that for older drivers because statistics show the former group has more accidents, despite superior reflexes, vision, etc. They lack experience which influences their judgment. Having once been a young man, this observation applied to me as well, so it is not intended to insult anyone.

Unfortunately, when young men are given discretion to abuse other young men, even for a purpose that the vast majority of people believe will ultimately prove beneficial, experience suggests to most adults that casualties are inevitable. The risk involved in hazing applies to the Greek system generally, not the particular young men at the Whitman chapter of TKE. However, in this instance, a news article has singled TKE out for initiation practices that violate Whitman policy. The article illustrates the fact that some percentage of fraternity members will cross lines related to hazing, just as some young men will drive irresponsibly.

When people exercise poor judgment, they put others at risk. Rather than relying entirely on the judgment of the young when they arrive at college, free of parental constraints often for the first time, adults put policies in place that young men and women are required to follow, or face consequences for their defiance. The reasons for the rules pertaining to hazing are obvious, or at least they are to most adults with some experience in the world. Whether the existing rules go too far in interfering with the cathartic experience sought by TKE initiates can perhaps be debated, but not the need for some rules to protect pledges from abusive hazing.

Thus, when I refer to “frat boys,” I am referring to those who lack the judgment to follow the rules set in place by adults to prevent the overzealous among them from harming their peers, whether or not anyone has truly been harmed yet. I am also referring to those who might be inclined to value the status of their house over their own personal integrity when it comes to addressing the veracity of the charges leveled against TKE. For me, the derogatory connotation of the term “frat boy” relates to immaturity and irresponsibility, which are not necessarily permanent character flaws and often a product of youth that may be outgrown.

Regardless of GPA, charitable works, social presence on campus and the many other undisputed good deeds of the TKE fraternity, breaking Whitman policy and Washington law regarding hazing is, in my view, immature and irresponsible, and so is casting false aspersions on those who have come forward to complain about it. TKE may do wonderful things on campus and their members may be the brightest lights on campus, but that does not immunize them from criticism for breaking the rules and then dissembling in response to the revelation.

The only reason I have specifically referred to Mr. DeVine, whom I do not know but suspect is, in most respects, a fine fellow, is that he signed the letter on behalf of TKE categorically denying the allegations by Mr. Hart. Further, Mr. DeVine was quoted to the effect that the stress of initiation is no worse than the stress of the first day of class at Whitman, which seems quite a stretch. Mr. DeVine’s statements certainly cannot be reconciled with those of Mr. Hart, so one of them is lying.

I view Mr. Hart as the victim here, not TKE. TKE faces censure or sanction because of the conduct of its members, not because of Mr. Hart’s report of it unless Mr. Hart has falsified his report.

For the reasons I have expressed before, I find it very difficult to believe Mr. Hart would come forward with a completely fabricated report, and seriously doubt the veracity of TKE’s flat denial of all of the allegations printed in “The Pioneer.” My suspicion is greatly heightened by the defense of abusive tactics for the cathartic experience that will follow, if initiation is completed, posted by current or former members of TKE.

Therefore, I view TKE’s position on the allegations as an unprincipled attack on the character of the victim, a tactic which angers me. I find the various posts congratulating TKE on its supposed “restraint” in responding to the allegations to be misguided and disturbing.

In any event, I do apologize to Mr. DeVine for my typo in a previous post that misspelled his name. I suspect that he has found himself unexpectedly in a difficult position and hope that he will find the right way to extricate himself and TKE from it.

I approved CP’s comment because it does not attack a specific person, nor does it attack a group of people. CP’s comment presents facts and uses those to build an argument. If there are logical fallacies or reductive assertions in that argument, I urge you to discuss those, keeping in mind that criticism of an argument can be done in such a way that is does not insult the person who made that argument.

Attacking someone’s argument – their words as written, rather than their characters – is not a personal attack. It is criticism. It is the same thing your professors do when they hand you back a paper with comments on it; the only difference in this case is that this criticism may concern an issue you care about personally. A personal attack, however, involves threats against a person’s life or, less severely, disparaging comments about one’s character. Comments like these have been held in moderation, and trust me: there are ones attacking Hart, Bachhuber and DeVine equally, calling them liars, cowards and worse. It seems that anger knows no social affiliation.

The Whitman administration has an anti-hazing policy, and it has SOLE responsibility for determining what hazing is and whether it occurs. If the college (or the State of Washington) decides that something is hazing — even if you think it isn’t — it is. Period.

If the College or the State say it’s hazing, It’s hazing — even if 998 out of 1000 people who experienced it thought it was bond- and character building. If you do it anyway, you’re violating the policy and are subject to the consequences.

Don’t confuse having an opinion with the reality of the hazing policy and how incidence of hazing is determined. If you have concerns about the how the policy is interpreted, seek clarification. If you disagree with the policy, try to get it changed it through proper channels.

My use of gendered language is only ‘reckless’ to those who have refused to acknowledge this as an issue that is intimately tied to gender and masculinity, instead confining it to a discussion of whether it should be labeled ‘hazing’ or whether it is a problem that individuals may have experienced ‘anxiety’ during initiation.

Thanks for playing, though.

For me, this is the core of the argument. This is a chance to either examine the way things are currently done and make some changes, or decide that two people are just collateral damage in the situation. I hope the TKEs choose the former.

Thanks to everyone who’s trying to make this a productive discussion.

Useless categories of gender are useless. The previous poster’s reckless use of gendered language does as much to advance the violence that underwrites the law of the father as getting drunk at a frat party.

Gender is not something you find in your pants. Your experience as a woman proves nothing other than the need to adopt a queer temporality.

“And just to improve your arguments:
FACT: ‘Fraternity’ is derived from the Latin word ‘Frater,’ meaning ‘brother’.
FACT: A ‘brother’ is a man or boy in relation to other sons and daughters of his parents.
FACT: ‘Patriarchal’ refers to an organization controlled by men.
CONCLUSION: Of course a fraternity will be patriarchal!”

I’m not sure why you feel the need to point this out to me. I understand the definition of the word patriarchal. And yes, it is one of the main reasons why I am critical of the Greek system (as I am critical of most things in U.S. society, which are generally run by men, white folks, the upper class, or some combination of the three, and as a result have a tendency to ostracize and ignore the experiences, voices, and needs of minority groups). This includes organizations which I very much believe in and choose to participate in. Just because I believe in something, or see it as a positive thing for me and hopefully others, it does not make it ‘perfect’ or exempt from criticism, nor does it make it exempt from accountability toward others who may have different opinions or experiences. I am not singling out the TKEs just because they are a fraternity, I expect all people and groups of people to be critically conscious about and accountable for their beliefs and actions.

I used the term patriarchal not because I wanted to point out that a fraternity is composed of men, but because there are many arguments out there in the world (not just in my mind) about the nature of patriarchy and patriarchal structures in societal as a whole, and the implications of that both for male-identified, female-identified, and gender non-conforming folks. A patriarchal institution does not simply mean that it is run by men, but that privileges a societal ideal of masculinity, and in doing so it oppresses and dominates women and gender non-conforming people.

For me, the structure of initiation in the fraternities is both indicative of and a mechanism of reinforcing male privilege in society. I’m not going to argue with you or anyone about this, because I understand that there are some people in the world (male, female, or otherwise) who do not believe that such a thing as male privilege exists. It is not my job to try to convince those people that it is a very real experience for the rest of us. There are plenty of facts to support the existence of male privilege in society, and therefore on college campuses, and with the Greek system, and people can choose to accept or reject those facts as significant.

People have said it’s not hazing because “you can just leave, and these people did”, but no one has the option of opting out of initiation but still participating in Greek life. The consequence of failing to submit and accept the ‘norms’ of Greek life, is that you don’t get to be a part of the club. There is no other way in. Obviously this is not just a ‘personal issue that Dan had with initiation’, because otherwise it would be theoretically okay for him to not participate in initiation, but still become a TKE. The fact that initiation occurs through hyper-masculine performances of intimidation, aggression, and eventual forced submission says something about the nature of the ‘bonds’ created within a fraternity, and also about the relationship that initiated members will have with the rest of the campus, particularly with non-male folks on campus.

You are completely right that I don’t know about the experience of being in a fraternity, or how great it is to be a TKE. I’m sure it is great for most of their members, otherwise they wouldn’t be so committed to its survival, and defensive of it in cases like this where a harsh criticism is put out for public debate. But anyway, I do have my own experiences as a woman in a society dominated by men and masculine privilege, and also as a female college student on a campus where a large portion of the social life revolves around women (mostly under the age of 21, who have limited access to alcohol through other means) going into the men’s frat houses and getting inebriated with the alcohol the men provide them, for free. Many people see this as a common, unproblematic occurance. Other people feel extremely uncomfortable and vulnerable in a situation like this (and the typical retort: “don’t go to frat parties” is an unsatisfying response, because there is at the same time so much social pressure to go to frat parties, get drunk, hook up, etc.)

So, I do have my own experiences with frat houses and TKE, they are just not the same experiences that male members of TKEs have had with frat houses and the TKEs. Funny how life work: different individuals each have our own, different, sometimes contradictory experiences. And I do believe that all are equally valid. No one is criticizing the TKEs or the Greek system for seeking out friendships and community. I do the same thing in my own life, and I fully support that aspect of the Greek system.

But when someone speaks up and says: the way you are going about doing things is harmful and oppressive to me and others in our community, the organizing group has the choice to take note and try to make changes, or to deny that any harm has been done, and claim that everything should stay the way it is now. I am hopeful that the TKEs, other fraternities, and other organizations on Whitman campus that are dominated by men and masculine privilege (and I am stating a fact here, not making an accusation) can be grateful to the people who spoke up and use their constructive criticisms as a learning opportunity, but from what I have seen so far that is not looking like it will be the case. So it goes…?

Over the course of the last 36 hours since The Pioneer first published this article, comments have come pouring into the website. While this has in most ways been very fantastic, spurring a thoughtful and interesting debate on both positive and negative feelings towards the Greek system, The Pioneer, this article, Whitman’s policies, and towards many other things, it has also spurred the worst in some individuals.

We will be the first to admit that The Pioneer has been caught somewhat unprepared not only for the sheer amount of comments submitted, but also for the content and the quality of those comments. We are students; we are learning. We do not claim at any point to know the right policy in dealing with the comments on such a divisive article. For this reason, comments were temporarily suspended earlier this afternoon to give us a chance to assess our comment policy and decide how to deal with offensive and inappropriate comments while remaining objective.

Effective immediately, no comments will be accepted without a valid email address. You may be contacted by a Pioneer staff member to verify your identity. This change in policy will be added to our Code of Ethics which already explicitly detailed the objective guidelines by which we approve comments.

Furthermore, we will be amending the policies which banned “targeting” Whitman Pioneer staff members or Whitman community members, as the intentions of those rules as written were unclear. The specific amended policy will now read:

A comment is unacceptable if it:
— targets or otherwise singles out an individual or group of individuals who are the subjects of an article, a Whitman Pioneer staff member or a Whitman community member for a personal attack. A personal attack is that which maliciously targets the character of or signifies an intent to harm an individual or group of individuals.

Currently, we have received over 110 comments on this article alone, of which 61 have, as of this moment, been approved. Some of those comments not approved have been blatantly offensive; others have actively threatened individuals in this article or staff members on The Pioneer, including Dan Hart, Daniel Bachhuber and David DeVine. No comments have been censored because of any bias that some believe The Pioneer has in this, or any other, matter. The Pioneer strives at all times to provide the most fair and unbiased reporting of all issues. We have no interest in censoring comments for any reason other than those objective measures explicitly spelled out in our Code of Ethics.

This is the official policy of The Pioneer as decided and enforced by the Editors-in-Chief. Any concerns with this policy or problems over comments that have not been approved should be directed to editors@whitmanpioneer.com.

We actively encourage these comments to continue to be posted. It is your right to agree or disagree with any part of this article, with the administration’s policies, with other people’s beliefs, or with anything else. The Pioneer wishes to provide a space here for these opinions to be expressed in an appropriate, secure and above all respectful manner. We encourage you to think about your comments before you post. Think about the fact that Dan Hart, Daniel Bachhuber, David DeVine and others are current or former Whitman Students. Think about how the Greek system is a valued part of the Whitman experience for many people. Think about how it would feel if someone who disagreed with you threatened physical harm against you.

Think about what a Whitman education means to you. Think about what you are writing before you post.

Thank you for keeping this discussion civil and thoughtful as we go forward.

-Derek Thurber and Molly Smith
—
Editors-in-Chief, Whitman Pioneer

Please read.

Hopefully Barbera Maxwell and the Whitman Administration will wade deep into the treacherous darkness of fraternity initiation to swiftly bring the hammer of justice to bear upon those cruel enough to force human beings to shower together in their underpants.

But are the people who complete initiation those who don’t consider the tasks degrading, or those who are willing to do the tasks despite their degrading nature? Either way, I don’t think it’s a question that should have to be asked. There must be better ways of creating group bonds aside from conducting trials of willingness.

Take down CP’s personal attacks on the character of the TKE president. How does the comment that Frat boys “lack frontal cortex development” add to the discussion? This comment is clearly in the same realm as the disgusting attacks on Hart’s character–remove it as well.

If you cannot commit to moderating this discussion constantly, it should not be up.

However, pouring filth in an area just so a pledge can clean it up, and then dirtying it again so the pledge has to clean it again, and repeating that multiple times while subjecting the pledge to verbal abuse, is inappropriate hazing which can verge on torture, depending on how often it recurs. Indeed, the movie “Cool Hand Luke” shows how that technique can be used to torture someone.

That tactic does not teach pledges how to keep the house in order, it teaches them to blindly follow authority. More perversely, it teaches them to turn a blind eye to rule breaking by those in power in order to achieve the goal of acceptance into the fraternity, hardly a positive message. I doubt Whitman wants its students to learn a message of obedience to power however poorly exercised.

I further doubt anyone objects to subjecting a pledge to cold showers. However, a group shower shared between half dressed or naked pledges as alleged in the article is not the same thing. It is an obvious invasion of privacy and personal space with sexual overtones, and unlikely to fulfill the accepted purpose of a shower – to become clean.

Keeping pledges dirty, cold, and sleep deprived is bound to increase their odds of becoming sick as their immune systems are depressed and their exposure to bacteria and viruses is increased. Moreover, this is another form of blind obediance to authority that should hardly be encouraged.

Sleep deprivation is unquestionably a form of torture. I assume that pledges continue to have academic responsibilities, including papers or exams during “hell week.” I also assume that some pledges may be athletes who have games or practices for their teams during “hell week.” Depriving students and student athletes of sleep that might effect their performance in class or on the field should be unacceptable to the college. The decision on how much sleep pledges should have during hell week should not be left to the “judgment” of fraternities.

Whitman costs a lot of money to attend, and I assume that the faculty and administration consider every week of every semester to be valuable. To have a week of a student’s life during a semester either completely wasted, or significantly degraded, because of sleep deprivation imposed on pledges by fraternity members is an appalling waste of limited academic and athletic time, and the student’s money (or college’s money if the student is on scholarship).

Assigning numbers to pledges rather than using a name is a classic strategy of dehumanization calculated to allow more abusive conduct to occur. It is far easier to abuse No. 1875 than your buddy, Joe. Role playing as abusers and the abused in order to gain admittance to a social society is anachronistic and perverse.

Nonetheless, if TKE believes that an abusive right of passage is important to the process of joining TKE, then they should spell out what abuse is in store for their pledges before the process begins, as should all fraternities and sororities. To balance the hardship with the benefit, TKE can also state their reasons why they believe their pledges should go through their more strenuous right of passage. If such openness were required, then fraternities and sororities could be held accountable should they deviate in any substantial way from the program they outline to new pledges.

Whether a deviation from the program outlined is substantial need not be spelled out precisely, but left subject to a “reasonableness” standard as applied by the appropriate trier of fact. Clearly, the fraternities or sororities should understand that they are at risk if they treat pledges worse than they advertise because deviating from established protocol would nullify the informed consent to hazing.

Informed consent by pledges to such abuse would giveTKE a solid defense to its critics. While the argument of close bonding through humiliation by one’s peers seems like a hard sell, prior posts suggest that some people believe that is what occurs. Perhaps pledges will flock to the toughest initiation to prove their mettle. On the other hand, informed consent might negatively impact TKE’s recruiting for new members when presumably intelligent pledges (they are at Whitman after all) can see the path to TKE and compare it to less abusive fraternities on campus.

Thus, clarity about the process would solve the problem in two ways. First, pledges who choose to accept clearly delineated hazing cannot complain if they voluntarily and knowingly submit themselves to it. Second, fraternities with onerous hazing practices may not compete well in the market for new pledges. If not, then they are likely to modify their practices to keep membership levels up.

Allowing unsupervised youth on power trips to abuse younger students in secret, and in ways that would be completely unacceptable in any context other than rushing for the Greek system, with social pressure to conform on the side of the fraternities, seems like a very bad idea. The analogy to Abu Graib is not that far fetched, as those were also young people in positions of power who used sleep deprivation and nudity to humiliate and torture those numbered persons in their charge. No one was watching them closely either.

As to the argument that bright young men of Whitman would not go too far, the bright young men of a fraternity at Columbia were recently arrested for selling heroin. A sense of entitlement, freedom, and power can lead young men and women very far astray.

The allegations against TKE are a black eye to the college. The college markets itself as a bastion of intellectual rigor and learning, not as a clone of Animal House. While the latter environment may appeal to some, it is inconsistent with the message and branding of the college.

I suspect that the majority of parents currently considering the expense of Whitman, and competitive alternatives to it, would not be impressed with TKE’s hazing, or its president’s response to the article. With kudos to The Pioneer staff and to Mr. Hart, however, they may be impressed by the article exposing the problem and a measured administrative response to it.

Someone suggested that TKE was already on probation. If so, Mr. Hart’s revelations must be taken very seriously. As I suggested above, TKE ought to be able to mitigate the administrative response if they admit the conduct and take responsibility for their actions. If they do not, and the actions are proven, then the fraternity and its leadership should face very severe consequences for both the violations and the efforts to conceal them.

Indie guy checking in here. I’d like to point out that the Whitman student community is NOT currently talking about the proposed changes to class scheduling (7-10pm could now be prime time for distribution and core major requirement classes, don’tcha know. For majors that, like theatre, require student involvement during the evening, it would be crippling) because we’re talking about someone getting pissed off and walking out of TKE initiation less than 24 hours in. That’s not a news story, it’s a story that goes around a freshman dorm for 10 minutes before people get tired of it.

There are occurrences in all four houses that occur during initiation that could be considered “hazing” if you look at it in just the right way and maybe squint a little bit. That’s because “hazing” is an extraordinarily flexible word, one that can mean something acceptable or something unacceptable depending on the level of intensity you’re talking about. Making the pledge class clean the house for a week could be considered “hazing,” and so could beating you with a ping pong paddle, but they’re not the same thing. What matters is that they (the four frats) have found a level of intensity that works for them, and makes sure that all of them (initiated and uninitiated brothers) have a fun experience that they can look back on and be happy they did. Dan clearly didn’t agree with what the TKE house was doing, but at least he was only there for 16 hours before he figured it out and left (and given that TKE initiation starts in the late evening, he was probably only awake for 6). That’s how these things go. TKE isn’t hurting for brothers who want to sign up initiate with them. (though this article js a pretty good example of how Marginally Rational Whitman Groupthink Biases start. Which would take some of the heat off Beta, I guess).

Alums and Parents, I urge you not to worry about this. We feel less important if we don’t argue over some BS every once in a while.

I have seen too many posts that relate this article to incidents occurring in the real world. Acts that have gained national attention due to their depravity and hate. Do Whitties really have such a need to feel a part of this that they are trying to make their own national incident? Do Whitties truly believe that an unjust and awful system has been brewing right beneath their and the faculties noses; a dreadful secret that they just now are unearthing? Child please. The levels of ignorance on this issue are astounding.

This really is a problem of our society. There is sense of entitlement that too many have come to embrace. Whitman students are probably worse than many others. All our life many of us have been raised in sheltered, rich, and pampered circumstances. Is being told to clean a dirty kitchen, or being yelled at really such a shock to our systems that it can gravitate us to neutering an entire system? It is this reactionary response that I am sure many of you would decry as a downfall of the political right. Is the word “hazing” going to be used in the same way that “deathpanels” were used? Some of you trying to compare the actions in the TKE house to real world events maybe you need to look at yourself and compare what you are doing to real world events as well.

It could be argued that the TKE house is the most successful fraternity on campus. Has anyone thought why this is? Could it maybe be because they have the most “intense” initiation, and why would this cause their members to be so devoted to their house? “It is because they are being brainwashed!” I’m sure some of you would respond, to which I would go back to my ignorance point. You really think once the process is over initiates can’t look back and see what was done to them and make a conscious decision if it was a good or a bad thing? Everyone who gets into Whitman is on pretty equal mental footing, believing that as a non-Greek your ability to decide what is best for the Greek system is essentially the same as the History department looking at the Economics department and saying, “You aren’t doing a good enough job at getting your students the proper education, let us show you how.” Basically the exclusivity of the organization is what makes it close knit. No one is going to value something that is given for free as much as something that has to be earned, and if someone feels like they have put forth more to earn something they will value it more. Is at most 5 days of “hate” (put in quotes because that is the perception, not the fact) worth decades of love and brotherhood? Looks like easy math to me, even for you History majors…

The main problem with TKE right now is that they are too open. They want too many people to be a part of their group, and while this does create for a fairly diverse group, it can create situations where the processes that lead up to initiation are insufficient to prepare the pledge for the process. The reason why these 2 pledges didn’t go through the process was because they weren’t prepared to make a sacrifice to become part of a community. A pledge has to enter the process knowing that it is going to be tough, and also know that it is something he wants. Initiation is not something that comes up and someone says, “I guess I can fit that in my schedule.” To use a different example: you couldn’t take a non-athlete at the beginning to the basketball season and put them on the team and expect them not to quit. It takes time, preparation, and a specific mental attitude to go through 2 a days. The same is true for Initiation. The fault is not in the actual event of initiation, but in events that come beforehand that stress what it means to enter into “the Bond.” TKE needs to do a better job of stressing these events to weed out (for lack of a better term) those that don’t want to make the commitment because joining TKE should never be about maintaining a clique of friends, it is about joining something bigger than that and truly expanding your experiences to things that maybe you wouldn’t do if you weren’t part of something bigger. Joining any Greek organization puts more stress on the things Whitman promotes, like diversity and life experiences, when it could be much easier to get lost in academic work and lose out on what could be a eye opening college experience.

As sincere as your concerns may be, perhaps nothing could make your argument less compelling than reducing TKE initiation to a mindless power trip by teenage apes with underdeveloped prefrontal cortexes. If you peruse the comments preceding yours (or asked around the Whitman community), you’ll find that the TKEs are not the club-wielding knuckle-draggers your glib appraisal makes them out to be. Rather, they are the occupants of the Dean’s list, they are the current and previous two ASWC presidents, they are class senators; more often than not, they are the people who the Whitman community is most proud to call their best. I suggest you pay campus a visit and familiarize yourself with the people on it, particularly the TKEs, before you make big sweeping statements about things with which you aren’t very familiar.

Do not misundersand me when I use the word “positive.” One can be unhappy or frustrated with their current experience, but that same experience can be positive so long as benefits that person in the end – by imparting wisdom, developing bonds, or providing understanding and the like. The central question here is if the ends justify the means. And if you have not experienced TKE initiation, as a whole, then you are in no way qualified to reflect on its virtues – and this goes for Dan Bachhuber and Dan Hardt as well – sorry.

While they certainly were exposed to trials they saw as flawed, demeaning, negative, mean, cruel, etc. They also missed out on the culmination of initiation; the series of events that unites the pledge class to themselves and to the house as a whole. I have never in my life felt such senses of commitment, connection, belongingness, community, brotherhood and sheer joy than the moment when my initiation was complete. It was surreal. I had endured and defeated the most difficult task of my young life, and I was about to celebrate my and my pledge class’ success with the group of men strong enough to test me in a ways I could never have fathomed.

I say strong because initiation requires intense commitment by the active members. To those who wish to simplify, and view as negative the initiation practices of TKE, are doing a disservice to themselves. Take a second to look at the men you denigrate: they are your PEERS!! They are your WHITMAN classmates, teammates, group and club mates, ASWC representatives, and so on. Intelligent men. Compassionate men. They are men of character. Initiation is a carefully organized and executed series of events, orchestrated as it is to draw out intense emotions not often seen in our monotonous daily lives. It is unfortunate that those who walk out on initiation believe those emotions are categorically wrong.

For what is connection without disconnect? Harmony without chaos? Love without hatred? For many in the Whitman community, suffering the indignity of inhumanity is an unknown feeling. For that we are fortunate, yet also handicapped. Like an immunization – where one is exposed to non-lethal doses of viruses in order to develop antibodies – a small taste of powerlessness is all that’s needed for one to develop a vehement hatred for those perpetrating gross governmental overreaches a la Nazi Germany and Abu Ghraib, as well as an intense connection to those unfortunate souls bear the brunt of violent, unjust, force. And that is all initiates experience – a loss of power. At no point is the safety of any pledge during initiation in question. That is clear.

So ask yourself again: what is hazing? Is hazing an action? Is it an effect? Is it an experience? The definition of hazing is quite vague, intentionally, and it hinges on intent. I can say with complete confidence again that initiation is executed by the active members of TKE with the utmost respect, esteem, and love for the pledge class. We’ve all experience initiation, and we know it is hard. We truly want each entering pledge to finish, because we know they can, and it saddens us every time someone leaves. It is made absolutely clear to the pledge class by the Hegemons’ that TKE initiation will not be easy. If it were easy or predictable, it would be entirely meaningless.

Again, initiation is a heavily considered art; the TKE house pours over minutiae unlike any over group I have ever belonged to – and a process as involved, difficult, constructive, and draining as initiation is no exception. Again, trust your peers as fellow rational, compassionate, capable, adults who mean only to foster positive growth in their organization, the Whitman community, and the world at large. Case in point – how well has the TKE house held its tongue through this!! Solid work gentlemen.

Rest assured, Dan and Dan, and others before and after them may find initiation to downright wrong, and their opinion needs to be considered like any others. However, the TKEs at Whitman now and in the past know initiation to be a supremely positive formative experience, even if they do not say so to the Pioneer.

That said, I will clarify one thing for you. David DeVine’s (it was really mature of you to call him DeVile) letter may be construed as defensive but the fact of the matter is that TKE does not want to become engrossed in the mud slinging that has developed out of this. They don’t feel a need to justify a ‘broken system’ because the truth is there is nothing wrong with initiation. Harts claims were exaggerated or false and DeVine said so. What I can’t understand is how people can see his denial as incriminating. What happened to our conception of innocent until proven guilty?

Honestly we need to give the guys some credit. TKE has been very open towards working with the administration. Yes they tried to keep this news from going public, but not out of fear of repercussions, it was done because one individual’s private issues are best resolved Privately. All that this ‘Article’ ‘Exposes’ is a desire to drag a respectable and outstanding group of men through the mud.

Greek members: the Pio didn’t do anything wrong by reporting this article. The purpose of the campus newspaper is to report on newsworthy events in the campus community–and as the bounty of comments on this article shows, this is certainly one of those.

Here’s my suggestion to you all who are still on campus: don’t carry this debate out over the Pio website, email, listservs, or whatever. The people involved in this story are, after all, your friends, peers, and colleagues. Unlike us alums, you have the opportunity to talk to them in person, a far more valuable experience than shouting from behind the shroud of a keyboard and screen.

Indies, talk to your Greek friends to see why their experience is so positive. Greek organizations are not homogenous, and you will find every possible perspective and personality in each house. Greek members, talk to non-Greek students to find out what their problems with the Greek system are. Many Indie students have legitimate concerns about the perceived “cliquish” nature of Greek organizations. Both perspectives have their merit, and should be considered.

Minor crises like this can be an opportunity for the community as a whole to come together and understand each other better. Use it as an opportunity to get to know each other better, not divide each other further.

Are there not more effective team building experiences that do not require humiliation, sleep loss, and wastefulness? I feel like some initiation routines are designed to inflate what it means to be a member: because you have put forth the time, effort, and potentially humiliation for initiation, you are less likely to leave the fraternity. Perhaps this assists bonding and creates loyalty. Perhaps it just discourages the idea of leaving a fraternity once joined.

Mr. DeVine’s failue to embrace the need for such hazing tends to undercut the arguments of those who praise the usefulness of such conduct, or who minimize it in comparison to public universities. He is certainly not standing behind it or fighting for the right to submit future Whitties to similar torment. Surely, the majority of the Whitman community does not want Whitman fraternities or sororities behaving like the worst of those at other institutions.

Of course, there remains the question of whether the conduct actually occurred. One complaint of hazing might be a disgruntled student unhappy with college life generally. However, a second independent and corroborating complaint by an unrelated student makes Mr. DeVine’s outright denial seem very questionable. I cannot think of any plausible reason for Mr. Hart to fabricate his accusations, while Mr. DeVile’s reasons for fabricating a denial are obvious.

Therefore, with two essentially identical complaints over the last few years, I fear that Mr. DeVine’s denial is a deception that speaks poorly of him, and of TKE since he is their president. Sadly, there is something quite presidential in lying about misconduct occuring during one’s term.

Frat boys cannot be trusted to haze in a “responsible manner” because, well, they are boys who lack frontal cortex development. The college has rules constraining hazing for a good reason; i.e., safety. What sort of bad things can happen when hazing by aggressive teenagers goes too far? Injury, illness, and death have occurred from excessive hazing across the country. At a minimum, a fight could easily start if a pledge strenuously objects to the sleep deprivation and humilation heeped upon him during “hell week.”

Excessive hazing is an abuse of power. How is it consistent with the values of Whitman for older students to submit younger ones to abuse, humiliation, and intimidation? How is it consistent with the ideals of a liberal arts education to encourage blind obedience to an abusive hierarchy?

Fraternities do not bond through combat like the military, or through pulling together for a common goal like a sports team or a debate team. Bonding through artificially imposed hardships carried out by peers rather than an enemy or an opponent is a strange concept, and seems to be merely an excuse for boys and girls to behave badly. Bonding through good works would seem a much more laudible approach than bonding through sadism, or through petty harassment.

If TKE cannot follow the sensible college rules, the fraternity should face significant consequences. On the other hand, those fraternities and sororities that follow the rules should not be tarnished by the aberrant conduct of TKE.

As a parent, I appreciate the article for exposing a potential problem. I hope that the administration will take the appropriate steps to rein TKE in and to avoid such hazing in the future.

One easy step would be to state explicitly that the conduct of the ilk described by the whistleblowers violates school policy, and that penalties will be imposed for any violations of that type reported from this year’s initiation or reported in future years. Although, as pointed out above, Mr. DeVine already appears to know that the conduct alleged is inappropriate, Whitman should not leave any doubt or ambiguity as to whether the conduct complained of will be tolerated by the administration.