Hazing has been around for a long time. The first account of a hazing incident was in 387 BC (Nuwer xxvii).Since its early appearances, leaders and activists have been trying to regulate, manage, and abolish hazing. In fact, Justinian attempted to end the harassment of first year students (Nuwer xxv). As long as hazing has been around there still is not one specific definition of hazing. There are commonalities in all of the definitions, yet when asked, people have many ideas of what activities are considered hazing behavior. According to Hoover’s study, hazing is, “any humiliating or dangerous activity expected of you to join a group, regardless of your willingness to participate (5).” Hazing is almost always associated with initiation and
…show more content…
To be successful the players have to be able to take a hit and withstand loss. In families, certain sports are regaled as tradition, the ability to play passed down through generations. A team is like a family, however since birth is not an option, to gain entry into the family worth has to be proved. Despite the entirely negative publicity of hazing in the media, many participants think of hazing as, “team tradition, a way to connect (Kowalski and Waldron, Crossing the Line 297).” A football player look says, “[Hazing] Makes a football player a football player, you know something no one else has gone through (298).” People that have gone through rough times together tend to be closer to each other after the problem is over. A rugby player Laura believes, “….But I think their main goal is to create team unity and closeness between players after you get through the initiation stage (298).” After, struggling through proving themselves, the members of a team would have amazing chemistry. In a study conducted by Kowalski and Waldron many athletes mentioned that their coaches would just turn a blind eye to hazing and others mentioned that their coaches would put up with hazing in a “monitored environment” (Looking the Other 94). A few of the athletes revealed that their coaches had a “Proactive stance against hazing” which included no tolerance and punishment for hazing
To be successful the players have to be able to take a hit and withstand loss. In families, certain sports are regaled as tradition, the ability to play passed down through generations. A team is like a family, however since birth is not an option, to gain entry into the family worth has to be proved. Despite the entirely negative publicity of hazing in the media, many participants think of hazing as, “team tradition, a way to connect (Kowalski and Waldron, Crossing the Line 297).” A football player look says, “[Hazing] Makes a football player a football player, you know something no one else has gone through (298).” People that have gone through rough times together tend to be closer to each other after the problem is over. A rugby player Laura believes, “….But I think their main goal is to create team unity and closeness between players after you get through the initiation stage (298).” After, struggling through proving themselves, the members of a team would have amazing chemistry. In a study conducted by Kowalski and Waldron many athletes mentioned that their coaches would just turn a blind eye to hazing and others mentioned that their coaches would put up with hazing in a “monitored environment” (Looking the Other 94). A few of the athletes revealed that their coaches had a “Proactive stance against hazing” which included no tolerance and punishment for hazing