Wilbert E. Beran (wberan@WORLDNET.ATT.NET)
Tue, 4 Aug 1998 22:01:51 -0400
I have to agree with Donald Scruggs. Hazing is a one-sided game to
which the subject or subjects of the hazing are forced to submit for
the enjoyment of others. Whether or not they receive pleasure from
the hazing is not a factor. The hazing is imposed whether or not they
agree to it. In many cases, the hazed person may agree to it out of
fear of being considered "chicken", "different", "not a team player".
In other cases, the person may not agree, but is subjected to hazing
anyway. It has nothing to do with how fragile or unfragile a person
I suggest the proponents of hazing review the Scout Law - "Run the
Twelve" as described in a recent SCOUTING Magazine article. How can I
consider a person who wishes to haze me or my son of being
trustworthy, of being loyal, of being friendly, of being courteous, of
We human beings respond better to positive actions than to negative.
However, we have been trained, unwittingly, to focus on negative
actions and negative reinforcement. I get much better results from my
family, my coworkers, and even the boys in the Troop when I stress the
positive even in negative situations. In my book hazing doesn;t fit
Donald Scruggs wrote:
> Tom Lynch wrote:
> Bob Morehead wrote:
> > >
> > > The final point? Lighten up, people! Kids aren't that fragile, it's
> > > all in good fun and this IS supposed to be a game!
> > >
> > > YIS,
> > >
> > > Bob Morehead
> > Well said Bob. Another point to bring out, is that some where in a
> > young boy's life he has to learn to deal with this part of life. If he is
> > protected from it his entire through his entire youth, then he won't be able
> > to handle it when mom and dad aren't around.
> (IMHO) Tom Lynch
> > ASM Troop 135
> > Tehachapi, CA
> Above we find two opinions which express at least partial support
> for the idea that hazing is a positive force in building character. I
> find it neccesary to disagree. I WILL agree that children are not as
> fragile as some would have us believe. THAT is not the point. When we
> "set the example" that it is OK to entertain ourselves at the expense
> of others we severly damage the character of those we allow to conduct
> the hazing. The primary psychology in hazing is "we had to go through it
> so now we are going to enjoy dishing it out!" The scout that condones or
> participates in hazing of any kind has not developed his character in a
> manner that I would consider acceptable.
> To those who still believe that hazing is acceptable I would
> remind you that scouting is a safe haven and urge to find another outlet
> for you desires.
> Those recent posts which include the SPL and SM in singing with
> the scout who lost something show at least an understanding of the team
> concept involved. This is a step in the right direction.
> I recently attended summer camp next to a troop that used push-ups
> and demerits to discipline their troop. I saw one of their scouts do
> push-ups due to foul language. I also heard their adult leaders using
> language in front of the boys all week. The result of the demerits and
> push-ups? These well disciplined scouts, smoke-bombed the service
> threw canoes in the lake, dropped one of our tents, set off a car alarm
> bragged about most of this in their closing campfire skit.
> IMHO Hazing HAS NO PLACE in civilized society PERIOD.
> I believe we all believe in the same goal. We just follow different
> Yours In Scouting,
> Don Scruggs
> ScoutMaster Troop 214
> Patuxent District
> National Capital Area Council
> "I used to be a bear" WB 82-71
Wilbert E. Beran <firstname.lastname@example.org> Tampa, Florida
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City