The Instigator
Con (against)
The Contender
Pro (for)

should hazing be allowed in fraternities

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Whistle has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/20/2017 Category: People
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 1,957 times Debate No: 106026
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)




hazing in fraternities should not be allowed. What hazing does is it manipulates people who are desperate to get in fraternities and tricks them into doing life threatening things. Hazing has killed many people and should not be allowed.


First off, I have to conclude that your motivations stem from a hatred of fraternities rather than any concern about hazing. Frat boys have worked diligently to foster and earn that hatred. If you wanted to end fraternities on college campuses I would support that. But I cannot abide an attack on the traditions of hazing if it is simply out of misplaced animosity.

Hazing, to one degree or another, exist in sororities, street gangs, sports teams, military units, religious sects and traditional cultures across the world. It is not about manipulating desperate people, you are thinking of religion. Hazing is a Right of Passage, an initiation, a way to make and reinforce bonds and a sense of belonging. The reason so many groups do some form of hazing is because it is in the interest of the group to nurture a sense that belonging to the group is special and had to be earned.

People don't feel the same sense of loyalty when membership involves nothing more than joining. Add some competition, humiliation, challenges and a chance to earn the respect of the members of that group, now you are looking at some Esprit de Corps.

The college campus today is populated by students who were raised in a world where everyone gets a trophy, They have been coddled in mind, body and spirit. Their playtime was scheduled and supervised, they have been robbed of the independence and exploration afforded previous generations. They weren't allowed, or required, to get dangerous jobs, play with dangerous toys or wander out of the protective vision of a carefully screened adult.

Now more than ever, young people on campus need a chance to go beyond their comfort and safety zones, they need to prove to themselves and peers that they can face a challenge with no guarantee of success. They need to be able to want something and take risks to get it. College campuses today need more hazing not less.

To be clear, hazing doesn't have to be reckless or immoral, ideally it isn't. Rather than ban fraternities from hazing pledges/initiates, why not set up some guidelines that limit particularly stupid activities.
Debate Round No. 1


Lets take a close look at my opponents arguments and I will show that they are invalid. My opponent stated that hazing is not manipulation. But it is true that 9 of 10 people being hazed don't know they are being hazed. This is manipulation. If you can convince someone that they are not doing something dangerous when they are doing something clearly dangerous that is manipulation. The comment about religion manipulating desperate people is not true and I would love to argue that but that is a whole different debate. But back to hazing. If you were to come up with a challenging, risk free way to be initiated into a fraternity, that would be a better option than manipulating them to do life threatening things.
The other argument my opponent mentioned was that hazing establishes loyalty within a fraternity. My opponent said that without hazing, fraternity members don't feel that same sense of loyalty. Let me start out by saying that there are better ways to make the fraternity members feel loyalty without having them do life threatening things.
Many hazing ideas involve excessive beverages, being beat up, being humiliated, being held under water for a long time, and many others. These are cruel things that result in serious injuries or death.
A reason hazing should not be allowed is because there have been over 60 deaths in the last 5 years. These deaths have come from too much of a beverage, getting beat up, or drowned. Even some of the ideas that don't seem so bad such as exercises have caused severe injury. Hazing should not be allowed because it has resulted in death.
Another reason hazing should not be allowed is because it has a long term affect on people who have been hazed. This is a good reason why hazing should not be allowed. Even if it doesn't kill the person, it has negative long term affects on you. These are such as insomnia, depression, anxiety, illness, loss of self control, lower grades, and PTSD. These are horrible effects that can last the rest of your life.
In conclusion hazing should not be allowed. It has killed people, and has had many negative affects afterward.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.