Hazing: Time to leave the old ways behind?
The latest hazing incident that resulted in the death of Horacio Castillo III, a neophyte of the Aegis Juris Fraternity, brings to light malpractices that govern fraternal organizations. In spite of the passage of the Anti-Hazing Act of 1995, also known as Republic Act No. 8049, hazing continues to persist.
What motivates the young to join fraternal organizations? The reasons vary from individual to individual. But before we delve further, let us first review the value of fraternities in schools and universities.
Fraternal organizations, or frats, play a great role in school activities, from social interaction to cultural dynamics and even student governance. In many schools, leading members of these frats hold top positions in the student council, school publications, Corps of Cadets, and other legitimate extra-curricular activities. Through the years, it has become a training ground for leadership. It is not surprising that many of the alumni from various frats occupy distinguished and responsible positions in the professional fields.
Is it right to assume then that their membership in fraternities and sororities is a big factor in their success?
Membership in fraternities include undergoing initiation rites that practice physical abuse and maltreatment, wherein neophytes are subjected to various punishments to test their mettle. Some of these neophytes are more stable under pressure, while some can easily succumb to the excesses conducted on their mind and body, and can result in irreparable damage and even death. All alumni of these frats and sororities have gone through and survived this process. Can we then conclude that the process has strengthened their character and developed their leadership qualities?
On the contrary, maltreatment is a manifestation of fractured leadership. One can only surmise the values projected by the frat members, as evidenced during the ongoing Senate hearings. The interest of the fraternity is paramount, held above social values and communal mores to the extent that they resort to dishonesty, lying, fabrication of facts, making up alibis and finding scapegoats, just to protect the name of the fraternity. This is cowardice, and display of misguided values, which speak volumes about the leadership of the fraternity itself.
This negative exercise of leadership has contributed to the tendency of frat members to use the “brod mentality” for fund-raising activities, influence-peddling in government positions, facilitating behest loans from financial institutions, and even election-related fraudulent activities.
Young neophytes are made to see these acts that are possible because of the brod mentality as compelling reasons for them to join. They are made to believe that in this alumni network, there is access to power, reputation, distinction, professional connections, security and protection. On the social side, there are also advantages that a member can enjoy inside the campus, including social status, power, competitive spirit, goodwill and even increased attractiveness to the opposite sex. The myth and mystic of fraternal organizations have relied heavily on these selling points, rightly or wrongly.
And then there is the initiation process, that rite of passage that separates the worthy from the lesser beings on campus. A time-honored practice, sacred and secret, or so it was.
Let us examine the internal factors of the act of hazing. In all incidents, absolute obedience is demanded from the receiver of punishment, even if the order is against his/her will. Unquestioned obedience in its extreme state encourages the master to practice a wide latitude of abuse which, if not controlled, may result in severe injury and even death.
A study on obedience by Milgram, a psychologist in an experiment participated by psychiatrist, college students, middle class adults revealed the following:
What breeds obedience?
• Victims’ distance — the victim’s proximity to a master giving orders acted with greatest obedience. All initiations are done face-to-face with neophytes. Hence, all orders emanating from the master are complied with unequivocally.
• Closeness and legitimacy of the authority. If the one making an order or command is close physically, compliance to orders increase. Whether the order is legitimate or illegitimate, the authority intimidates the receiver of an order, who then hence blindly obeys. Most fraternal organizations are conducted in fraternity or sorority houses, isolated, off-limits to non-frat men, without supervision from disinterested parties. They are held in seclusion and isolation.
• Institutional authority — the prestige of the authority wields social power. Most fraternities and sororities have developed institutional goodwill and reputation and count respected professionals among its alumni. The power that they project commits prospective members blindly. Obedience brings about acceptance to a closed group whether the nature of an order or command is legal or illegal, moral or immoral. Compliance is demanded. It facilities acceptance and believing as well as acting in accord with social pressure. (Social Psychology by David G. Myers. pp 196-206)
Excessive orders that countenance coercion and other irrational conduct lead to maltreatment. It is borne about due to the aggressive behavior of perpetrators that eventually becomes the norm rather than the exception. Aggressive behavior even becomes uncontrolled if there is loose supervision and control. Maltreatment creates only negative effects both on the perpetrators and the receiver, and does not contribute in any way to the positive development of the individual.
By its nature and intention, maltreatment inflicts physical and mental harm which demeans and degrades the individual, and causes damaging effects, such as indignity, oppression, deprivation. Maltreatment has been the cause of many abuses and even deaths. Such results are unconscionable in a civilized society and becomes more horrible and insensitive if distinguished alumni countenance such practices and accept no responsibility.
The Philippine Military Academy (PMA) has had its share of hazing incidents in the past, and with due honesty, the damage to the institution and the cadets has been very deplorable and depressing. It may also be a reason why there are isolated lapses in the exercise of leadership in the military and police service. The PMA and AFP have conducted extensive research on hazing and concluded that maltreatment and bullying have no place in leadership training that prepares cadets for officership. It does not create a value-added factor to the leadership and character development as an officer and gentlemen of the finest order.
In fact, the PMA has adopted a positive leadership role-modelling that is founded on the basic philosophy that subordinates respond out of respect rather than fear; emphasizing leadership that is the group-centered rather than self-centered.
With such role-modelling, superiors help their subordinates to succeed. This general principle reinforces good behavior, creates momentum in a positive direction, and will eventually render maltreatment obsolete. The no-maltreatment policy has gotten the unequivocal support of all PMA alumni, associates and stakeholders.
At the University of the Philippines (UP), an organization called the UP Barkada, composed of alumni from legitimate fraternities and sororities and other student organizations, act as a channel of interaction between students and alumni. It is a social club that fosters camaraderie among its members through sports activities, like golf, seminars and symposiums. It helps and facilitate issues relating to inter-fraternity and sorority conflicts.
As alumni, they act as guardians to their brods and sisters.
Such efforts are key to encouraging all organizations to comply with the Anti-Hazing Law, as well as develop a stronger foundation for cooperation within and among the different student organizations.
Legislative measures will not eradicate hazing; it is as old as the fraternities and sororities. It is borne out of human nature to achieve power, to be competitive, to establish a host of social network. You cannot legislate human behavior. The best that can be done is control through education, close supervision, and molding future leaders devoid of a mind-set of maltreatment, vengeance, and egotism.
Is that really possible?
It seems like a tall order but with divine intervention and collective action, there will be no more tragic losses, and no more desperate cover-ups. It is time now to let the old ways go, hazing has no place in the society of the future.
The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines or the M.A.P.
Lt. Gen. Jaime S. de los Santos (Ret) is a member of the M.A.P. National Issues Committee, former Superintendent of the Philippine Military Academy (PMA), National Commander, UP Vanguard Fraternity, and Professorial Lecturer of Management (part-time) at UP Diliman.