36. Sam Fulwood III, "ATangle over Biases about Hair:' Los Angeles Times, No-vember 20, 1998.

37. Ibid.38. Ibid.39. Baker, "Spike Lee and the-Commerce of Culture:' 168.

16"In the Fell Clutch of Circumstance"Pledging and the Black Greek ExperienceGregory S. Parks and Tamara 1. Brown

Despite their long history of civic involvement, community service, and phi-lanthropy, what most people know about black Greek-letter organizations(BGLOs) is limited to two areas: stepping and pledging, particularly thosementally and physically violent aspects of the latter known as hazing. Withoutquestion, pledging has become a contentious issue for both BGLO membersand nonmembers alike. In this chapter, we set out to shed light on this topic byfirst tracing the history of pledging in general and within BGLOs in particular.Next, we highlight the long-standing concern about, and opposition to, pledg-ing, particularly its more violent aspects. We then turn our attention to thevarious factors that undergird and propel pledging. Finally, we conclude byproviding what we believe are some necessary remedies for the current state ofpledging and hazing within BGLOs, some of which depart markedly from whathas been proposed by others.

Pledging, like other aspects of BGLO history and tradition, has multiple ori-gins. As noted by other authors in this volume-most notably Gloria Dickinson,Carol Branch, and Sandra Posey-various elements of the pledge process haveties to African antiquity. Given their thorough treatment of this topic, we willnot reiterate that history here. However, other historical aspects of the pledgeprocess can be traced, at least in part, to European roots and traditions that areunique to BGLO culture. These aspects are the focus of this section.

Hank Nuwer provides a detailed account of pledging and its early, Euro-pean origins, noting that the hazing component has existed for centuries.!According to Plato, founder of the Academt in 387 B.C., the "savagery" of young

boys was likened to "acts of ferocious beasts." During that period, halso an issue in other centers oflearning, such asAthens, Berytus, andIn the sixth century, Byzantine emperor Justinian I outlawed the prahazing among first-year law students, but by the twelfth century, h ,,'rooted firmly in the halls of European academe. During the Middle Agjing was a common occurrence among male university students, who sa'Y!'selves as possessed of a culture of honor. Members of such a cult,compelled not only to perform acts of kindness to repay good done t,but also to reciprocate for the bad done to them.

It was not until the thirteenth century that the term universityuse. Prior to that time, learning institutions in many parts of Europ.termed stadium generale.3 The balance of power at these early institutionS'in the hands of student guilds, which were called universities. Once s"allowed teachers to determine which candidates would gain admittan 'teaching profession through licensure, the balance of power shifted. Ed:;,formed their own guilds, and learning institutions came under churcli',nance and professional administration, further eroding student power.',

After the rise of universities in western Europe, academic instifsought to raise institutional standards and prevent charlatans fromthemselves off as scholars. They took on some of the practices ofdemanding evidence of scholarship before deeming a prospective teachfied. Consequently, these budding scholars endured years of trainingoften subjected to hazing by their superiors. Between the thirteenthteenth centuries, boys who attended these institutions of learning also'submit to hazing, but at the hands of older students. As older studen,tinely hazed newcomers, the practice became ritualized, and as scholar~\'from one school to the next, they took these rituals with them. 1;

During the Middle Ages, hazing became a way to teach new stud,pecking order and institutional customs.4 Students were humiliated ali,to be submissive. At Avignon (France), first-year students were "hiwooden object:' while a book pr frying pan was used on those at the:

1sity of Aix (France). In the fourteenth century, first-year students at .versity of Heidelberg (Germany) were forced to don caps with yellOccasionally, the caps were fitted with horns and animal ears, which wsawed or pulled off. Older students were also known to extort mOD,;younger students during this period.

In medieval England, younger students were often used for sportolder male counterparts. Around Christmas at Merton (United Kin .

mmo~ for new students to entertain older students by telling jokes org maxIms. If the newcomer refused or failed to sufficiently entertain,

r more of the older students would scratch his chin hard enough to makeleed.sAt prestigious English schools, the practice of "fagging" was insti-

~whereby younger students were required to act as servants to older stu-• on the cricket field and in residence halls.6 The "fag:' or servant, wased to fetch tea and food for his "master" and submitted to a kick or a

,rap if he dawdled or failed to obey an order.7 While fagging was evolvinggland, pennalism was developing in Germany during the 1400s.Pennals,

;,'edbecause they carried pen cases for use during lectures, were freshmen)man universities. Pennalism grew out of the notion that freshmen were

. . ed and untutored, and under that system, freshmen had to wear odd" g and were subjected to extortion, coarse jokes, and physical abuse. 8

;'uropean students or their tutors likelybrought fagging to the New World,,~m:ly as 1657,new students at Harvard were bedeviled by acts of servi-"slDlilar to European fagging.9 By the eighteenth century, such acts had; ,e an integral part of first-year Harvard students' lives.They had to wear,.ehats while speaking to seniors, and those who refused were forced to. Freshmen were required to run errands for seniors, except during study

';s and after 9:00 P.M., and they were required to purchase sports equip-t for upperclassmen. Fagging was discontinued at Harvard in 1798 but. ed a part of institutional life at other schools, such as Yale,until the lateeenth century. 10 In addition to fagging, class fights, also known as "battle

. :' revealed a much more violent aspect of hazing. During such scraps,year students and upperclassmen fought over such things as banners andAt some universities, deaths resulted from these activities. II

y the mid-1800s, hazing, so much a part of university life already, wasrated into fraternity and sorority culture. Around this time, a probation-,eriod for prospective members was also added. Early on, prospectivepers were initiated immediately after selection. However, as one member. ~aIDma D~1tawrote in 1849, "There must be something held back-

;", g that will operate as a powerful motive in inducing those initiated,,~e to their VOWS."12 In addition to fagging, pennalism, battle royals, andtion, other factors informed white college students' notions of how they

in go about bringing members into their fraternal groups. 13 Some were.of the secret societies to which their parents belonged. They liked "what:'eardfrom their fathers about 'riding the goat: 'walking the burning sands:ther high-jinx of the town's elite when gathered in the local temple of

some Ancient, Mystical,and Fraternal Order."14Additionally,some of theous activities associated with hazing were borrowed from the militarYl',might be traced to veterans returning from war and entering universitr1.

In addition to hazing, other methods were introduced by which p "tive members were brought into college fraternities and sororities. One' ,ticular was rushing,16 which may have taken its name frOin compencounters between freshmen and sophomores at the turn of the tw,century called rushes. Alternatively, it may have developed from a slang"for courting a girl by heaping numerous and insistent favors upon her.',fraternal groups, rush became a process by which prospective member"wooed and courted.

What should be clear from this brief history is that white instituti,higher learning have been confronted with the issue of student hazing foo"turies. However, it was not until the twentieth century that this practi'tended its reach to include students at historically black collegesand univ(HBCUs) as well. Upperclassmen at Lincoln University subjected frespaddlings almost nightly, from the beginning of the academic yearholidays. Freshmen were called "dogs" and were made to roll pencils winoses, clean sophomores' rooms, and write insulting letters to their 0

friends. Before the major football game at Thanksgiving, freshmen weretogether and had their heads shaved bald.17Around 1920 at Howardsity, freshman were called "paenies" and were required to don "paenieBy 1924, freshman hazing at Howard was expressly "tabooed" Howeuniversity-wide existence of hazing made it easy for fraternal groups t ",the practice. 19

From its earliest days, fear and secrecy played an integral role in',lection process of new BGLO members at white institutions and at .•,In 1913, members of Alpha Phi Alpha at the University of Pittsburprospective members a letter that opened with: "Victim! Beware!Beware!"2~A review of early Howard University yearbooks illustrpoint as well, with frightful irv-agesprefacing the fraternity and soro >tions. By the 1920s, it was evident that pledging was an arduous end1925 account of "Hell Week" appeared in Howard's student news'revealed that probates21 sang the praises of their respective grou!marching around campus in "odd attire."22At Lincoln, a student f,witnessing "men beaten until portions of their bodies were raw as fresteak."23A poem that was featured in a 1941 issue of the Fisk Herfurther insight into probate activities:

The once in a lifetime, The week in Hades, A trip without sleep,That's probation!Midnight excursion to here, to there, Everywhere!That's probation!Victims on pro battered and beaten, pilloried and paddled,That's probationJ24

• Over the years, BGW pledging evolved and was refined. In the 1910s and'ly 1920s,pledge clubs emerged. Their goals varied from campus to campus'd over time. In some instances, their members were required to sponsort jects,learn parliamentary procedure and group ideals, demonstrate schol-" ip, and perform service. Pledges of one group might compete in athleticnts against pledges of other groups. In 1919,the Scroller Club was foundedhio State for pledges of Kappa Alpha Psi.25This was followed by the found-of the Pyramid Club in Philadelphia for Delta SigmaTheta pledges in 1920,26Sphinx Club at Howard for Alpha Phi Alpha pledges in 1921,27and the Ivy

'llbat Wilberforce for pledges of Alpha Kappa Alpha in 1922.28 At Howard"versity, the 1920s and 1930s brought the creation of the Lampodas Club{pledgesof Omega Psi Phi and the Archonian Club for pledges of Zeta Phi

.29 This period also saw the emergence of the Crescent Club for pledges of'. BetaSigma and the Aurora Cub for pledges of Sigma Gamma Rho.

From their inception, BGLOssought the "cream of the crop" to fill their. In particular, they sought students who excelled academically and were

lved in extracurricular activities as a way to enhance the prestige of theiranizations. Not surprisingly, then, rushing of undergraduate men by fra-,'ties at institutions such as Howard during the 1930sand 1940screated anfof excitement. Men were invited to "smokers:' and during these informaletings, fraternity men set out to capture the interest of as many men asible. The smoker format typically consisted of a speech by members onhistory of the organization and a list of the chapter's accomplishments.

. ty members who were also members of the fraternity spoke about theanization's national strivings and contributions toward uplifting the race..• ormal reception typically followed. It is speculated that there was a similar

dure for sororities.(Early on, pledge activities at institutions such as Clark included eating, together, attending chapel and university functions together, and dress-alike.30 Walter Kimbrough provid~s an excellent account of other aspectse pledge process that were added over the years, based on his review of

HBCU yearbooks,3l In the 1920s,pledges were given descriptors, such as "bar-barians" (Delta Sigma Theta, Sigma Gamma Rho). By the 1950s and into the1960s, this practice really took hold, with pledges being described as "apes"(Alpha Phi Alpha), "dogs" (Alpha Phi Alpha, Omega Psi Phi, Phi Beta Sigma),"plugs," and "worms" (Alpha Kappa Alpha). In the 1930s, distinctions weremade between pledges and members by the designations "little brother" or"little sister" and "big brother" or "big sister."Bythe 1940s,pledges began car-rying objects that had significance to their respective organizations (e.g., lampsfor Lampodas, ducks for Pyramids, ivyplants for Ivies). The concept of "cross-ing the burning sands" emerged during this period aswell. In the 1950s,pledgesbegan dressing alike. Men wore nearly identical suits, ties, and hats. In someinstances, they wore tuxedos, capes, top hats, and turbans and eve~ carriedwalking canes. Women wore matching skirt and blouse combinations. It wasduring this period that the concept of a "line" emerged as a descriptor of thepledge club. Pledges lined up according to height order, either from shortest totallest or viceversa.Additionally, this period sawthe use of collectiveline names.For example, the 1964 Sphinx Club at Howard was called the "Magnificent30." Pledges during the 1950s also began greeting their big brothers and bigsisters with pronouncements such as: "Southern playalistic, realistic, check itout and peep the statistics. Coming straight from Charlotte, NC, supreme deanin the place to be. Product of the real HU, a diabolical duce, not simply a two.Iceman, two cold, two cold. Disciple of the black and old gold scroll-repre~senting ... don't you know. If you didn't know before, yo, now you knoW!"32

By the 1960s, male pledges were having their heads shaved clean or intoMohawks, and both male and female pledges began using lavalieres (known aslavs in some places), wooden objects cut into shapes of significance to a pledge'srespective organization. For example, a Delta pledge might have a lavaliere inthe shape of a pyramid. It was worn about the neck and, in some cases, waspainted or decorated with the pledge's line number. The lavaliere was an ob-ject to be protected at all costs. If it was lost or taken by a big brother or bigsister, the pledge was technically no longer pledging the fraternity or sorority.By the 1960s,pledges were given individual line numbers and line names.33

Quite similar to their white counterparts, BGLOs were exposed to aconfluence of factors that affected the development of the pledge process.Adultsecret societies, pennalism, fagging, and the like all contributed to how BGLOmembers constructed what we now understand to be pledging. Added to thiswere military influences. African American GIs returning from World War IIor the Korean War may have brought military practices back to college cam-

puses with them. 34Activities such as walking in line and dressing alike mayhave been part of their contribution to the evolution of pledging.35The "grit:'consisting of a contorted and stern facewith an out-thrust lower lip, head up,and gaze forward or slightly up, suggests a military influence. This mask ofintensity, emotionlessness, and coolness under pressure resembles a stance dem-onstrated by military recruits when being reviewed by a superior officer.36

Contrary to what many believe, resistance to the more violent aspects of pledg-ing dates back to the early days ofBGLOs. Andre McKenzie's analysis of blackfraternities at HBCUs between the 1920s and 1960s highlights that fraternityofficials,university administrators, and students alike argued against the prac-tice of brutal hazing.37In a 1938 issue of Omega Psi Phi's Oracle, one memberwrites, "the time for brutal initiations has passed. I said that ten years ago.They thought I was crazy.Now the papers have taken it Up."38Nine years later,at Alpha Phi Alpha's 1947 General Convention, actions were taken to elimi-nate initiation brutality.39During this era, Lincoln University instituted a "no-hitting" law,and members of the faculty executive committee at FiskUniversitysuspellded probation activities due to brutality.40University yearbooks andnewspapers were also capturing the more brutal aspects of fraternal life. By thetime the civil rights movement took hold in the 1960s, many aspects of thepledge process seemed wholly out of line with its principles. In Delta SigmaTheta, concerns about the pledge process brought about a change in its ad-ministration by former national president Jeanne 1. Noble, who served from1958 to 1963. However, by the early 1970s, complaints about abuses withinDelta Sigma Theta were more numerous.41 Importantly, Delta Sigma Thetawas not alone in this regard; other National Pan-Hellenic Council (NPHC)groups also faced growing reports of hazing incidents.

Between 1970 and 1979, among the many hazing incidents was one atBradley University, where an Alpha Phi Alpha pledge claimed to have beenbeaten with fists and paddles, necessitating treatment for acute kidney failure.At the University of Florida, eighteen Omega Psi Phi pledges reported thatthey were violently hazed, ultimately resulting in a one-year suspension of thechapter. At North Carolina Central University and the University of Pennsyl-vania, two Omega Psi Phi pledges died. Between 1980 and 1989, the numberof reported incidents seemed to be on the rise. In his book on hazing within

BGLOs, Ricky Jones highlights five Alpha Phi Alpha hazing incidents, eightKappa Alpha Psi incidents, ten Omega Psi Phi incidents, and two Phi BetaSigma incidents that also occurred during this period.42

During the 1980s,significant changes took place in the BGLOpledge pro-cess. One change was in the duration of the process. In some places, pledginghad lasted anywhere from one semester to a full academic year. Over time, it .was whittled down to between eight and twelve weeks for BGLOs, and in the1980s, it became a six-week process. In 1984, Delta Sigma Theta adopted theconcept of "membership intake" to describe pledging. In 1985,Omega Psi Phichanged its process to reflect a distancing from the brutality traditionally as-sociated with pledging. Alpha Phi Alpha instituted a risk management pro-gram in 1986, and Phi Beta Sigma banned pleaging in 1987. Despite theseefforts, pledging persisted, along with its more brutal aspects. Many members,particularly undergraduates, did not approve of these steps and instituted "un-derground" pledging as a means to extend the pledge process. Undergroundpledging had two components: pre-pledging and post-pledging. Pre-pledgingprovided members the opportunity to spend additional time with pledgespriorto nationally sanctioned pledge activities. Post-pledging was a way for pro-spective members to complete the official, truncate~ pledge process and thenresume pledge status after initiation. This allowed the organizations to avoidany suspicions of hazing by university officials and fraternity or sorority lead-ers. It allowed the pledges to reap the benefits, as they sawthem, of being pledgedmembers of their respective organizations. Thus, efforts to curb hazing.mayhave ultimately served to drive pledging underground and make it less con-trollable.43 In October 1989, on the campus of Morehouse College, an AlphaPhi Alpha pledge named Joel Harris died as the result of an underground, pre-pledge session.44

Perhaps Harris' death brought pledging opposition to its boiling point, orat least it made those who disapproved of pledging more vocal, for in February1990, the leaders of all the BGLOs acted collectively to officially ban pledg-ing.45 The new process, formally called the membership intake process (MIP),was designed to do away with all vestiges of the old pledge process, includingwalking in line, greeting big brothers and big sisters, and dressing alike. Theduration of the process changed as well. Rather than lasting sixweeks, the MIPwould provide an "intensive" education period of only a few days. Proponentsof pledging-largely undergraduate members-were outraged and voiced theirconcerns at their respective national conventions.46

Despite the radical change in the BGW pledge process, there has actually

been an increase in hazing incidents and reports of hazing incidents since thishistoric decision, according to information provided by Walter Kimbrough,Ricky Jones, and Hank Nuwer.47 According to their collective asse~sment, si~ce1990 there have been six reported hazing incidents for Npha PhI Alpha, mnefor Phi Beta Sigma, ten for Omega Psi Phi, nineteen for Kappa Alpha Psi, twofor Zeta Phi Beta, three for Delta Sigma Theta, and six for Alpha Kappa Alpha.One of the most recent and widely publifized incidents occurred in,Septem-ber 2002 at California State University in Los Angeles, where hazing resultedin the deaths of Kristin High and Kenitha Saafir, two Alpha Kappa Alphapledges. At Southern Methodist University in 2003, Alpha Phi Alpha pledgeBraylon Curry went into a coma after suffering pulmonary ed~ma from ~xcesswater consumption during hazing. This horrific trend underhes the attItudesof many pledging opponents. For example, although Paula Giddings, in ~erbook In Search of Sisterhood, acknowledges the positive aspects of pledgmg(e.g., bonding and understanding one's own strengt~s.and weaknesses), shealso points out that "there were excesses,the mean-spmtedness, even the rev-elation of the sadistic side of human nature, that are inevitable by-products ofthe pledge period:' She goes on to reveal that a hazing incident during herpledge process "cast a shadow over [her] whole sorority experience;' which isone reason why she ceased to be active in Delta Sigma Theta for se;er~ y:ars.

48

Pledging opposition rests on multiple foundations, one of whIChISSImplya moral objection to the physical or psychological assault of another humanbeing, which is often a component of the pledge process. Pledging activitieshave occasionally put pledges in the hospital with ruptured eardrums, rup-tured spleens, broken bones, and severe bruises, and some ~ledges have suf-fered from various psychological problems as a result of pledgmg. Worse, somepledges have died. Others oppose pledging because man! o~ its.proponentshave little cultural competence when it comes to the practIce. It ISspeculatedthat there is an inverse relationship between cultural competence and the haz-ing aspects of pledging (i.e., as one's cultural competence ?ecr~ases, the morelikely one is to haze). Additionally, some proponents pos~,~O?ICala~gu~e~ts,such as "it happened to me, so it should happen to them, It ISfun, or It ISameans to exert power over others:'so These arguments do not justify the prac-tice or the risk of physical and psychological harm that can result.

Despite these objections to pledging, the overarching reasons for the ac-tions taken against it seem to be the negative publicity, the strained relation-ships with host institutions, and the high costs of the litigation that often resultswhen hazing occurs. A number of legal scholars have noted a trend toward

litigation and the far-reaching liability ramifications for individual BGLOmembers; university administrators; local chapters; local, regional, and na-tionalleadership; national organizations; and universities. Depending on anumber of factors, a hazing-related injury or death leaves a plaintiff with achoice of potential defendants.51

In the 1989 incident that led to the death of Joel Harris, Alpha Phi Alphaand Morehouse College settled the case for approximately $500,000 each. TheHarris family also sued each member of the chapter to the tune of $13 million.The chapter members settled out of court for the maximum value of theirrespective parents' homeowners' insurance policies.52 In 1997, Omega Psi Philost a civil suit stemming from a 1994hazing incident at Indiana University, anincident that cost the fraternity $774,000;it also settled out of court for $375,000in the Joseph Snell (University of Maryland) case.53 In 1997, Kappa Alpha Psiagreed to settle a wrongful death suit and pay $2.25 million in the MichaelDavis (Southeast Missouri State University) case.54 In 1999, Omega Psi Phiwas again sued for $931,428 in the Shawn Blackston (University of Louisville)case. The fraternity lost the case and ultimately sued its own me~bers whowere involved in the hazing incident. 55 In the 2002 death of Kristin High andKenitha Saafir,High's family has filed a $100 million wrongful death suit againstAlpha Kappa Alpha's national organization, its Far West regional chapter, andits Sigma chapter.56 In addition to civil action, criminal litigation is the newfront on which hazing is fought. Hazers can be charged with simple assault,battery, kidnapping, false imprisonment, manslaughter, or murder. Criminalliability can even be extended to individuals who assist or encourage hazing orwho aid and abet or assist in the crime. 57 For example, fiveAlpha Kappa Alphaalumni members at the University of North Texas received a probated sen-tence of ninety days in jail for a 1993hazing incident. 58 Also,a suit is still pend-ing for a 1999Delta Sigma Theta hazing incident at Western Illinois University.

Understandably, prospective members who have been injured and theparents of pledges who were injured or killed have lobbied for more stringenthazing laws. Of the fifty states; only Alaska, Hawaii, Montana, New Mexico,South Dakota, and Wyoming do not have antihazing laws.59

Despite intense opposition to pledging among both members and nonmem-bers, the practice persists and shows no sign of ceasing in the near future. There-

fore, one must wonder why this phenomenon continues unabated. Certainly,there are trivial and simplistic explanations for pledging, such as membersperpetuating the process simply because it happened to them. In such inst~~es,there is often a profound poverty of understanding about the cultural sIgmfi-cance of the process. As previously noted, there appears to be an inverse rela-tionship between cultural competence and incidents of hazing. Hence, hazingbegets hazing.60 Intuitively, another likel~xplanation is that a significant num-ber of BGLO members condone the practice, either actively or passively, andthat group officials have yet to propose a suitable alternative.61 However, re-search looking at both internal (psychological) and external (sociological)mechanisms provides a clearer understanding of why some BGLO members,both alumni and undergraduates, pledge others and why others allow them-selvesto be pledged.

In her 2003dissertation on hazing practices within black fraternities, TeresaSaxton discovered that several themes underlie the persistence of pledging:belonging, bonding, proving manhood, self-esteem an~ self-con~dence, r~-spect, and tradition. The study's participants felt that theIr respectIve fraterm-ties were reminiscent of filial ties or early adolescent friendships, which gavethem a sense of belonging. Pledging was believed to foster bonding amongpledges, in that they were forced to overcome adversity together, learn ab~utone another, and take care of one another. Pledging was also seen as fosterIngbonds between pledges and big brothers, in that the two groups were requiredto get to know each other, and pledging provided an o~portunity for s~are~experiences. The study's participants believed that pledgIng prepared an IndI-vidual for future obstacles, which was linked to proving one's manhood. Theability to overcome obstacles during pledging also served to enhance mem-bers' self-esteem and confidence. Respect was perceived to be created' whenpledged members traveled and encountered members of the same organiza-tion, who might ask, "Where were you made?" or "Where did you pledge?" Theimplication is that the member has indeed pledged, and being able to indicatewhere one pledged (i.e., was "made" or "went over") or to respond to a chal-lenge with information learned while pledging engenders respect betwe~nmembers. In addition, although many members of the campus commumtymay not be interested in pledging a fraternal group, they are believed to re-spect individuals who have the ability and wherewithal to endure a pledgeprocess. With regard to tradition, members saw pledging as a way to keep alivewhat was perceived to be a continuity of organizational practice.62

Other researchers have also found that these factors come into play. With

regard to feelings of belonging, in his book Black Haze, Jones notes that inaddition to brotherly relationships within BGLOs, other fictive relationshipsare played out during the pledge process. He writes that pledging is reflectiveof father-son relationships in which powerful father figures (members) pro-vide a standard to which sons (pledges) should aspire. Tension arises betweenthe father and son until it reaches a climax. Upon completion of the pledgeprocess, the father embraces the son, and the two ultimately become one inbrotherhood.63 Not surprisingly, some male pledges refer to their dean ofpledges as "dad" or "pop; and some deans of pledges refer to their male pledgesas "son" or "sun." This is a particularly powerful phenomenon for black males,considering the high percentage who grow up with no connection to theirfathers. What is problematic, according to Jones, is that unlike typical rites ofpassage, which are carried out by community elders, BGW pledging ofteninvolves boys teaching other boys how to be men.

Many of these themes were also evident in John Anthony Williams's find-ings on perceptions of the no-pledge MIP among BGLO undergraduates:

1. The no-pledge policy was enacted too quickly without allowing un-dergraduates the opportunity to have input.

2. The national organization's definition(s) of hazing were too broadand did not allow for traditional activities which the undergraduates didnot consider hazing (i.e., walking in line, practicing steps, history sessions,dressing alike, speaking in unison, etc.).

3. Not enough time was allowed to properly teach the history and tra-ditions of the organizations to the new initiates.

4. Bonding opportunities were lost under the no-pledge policy.5. Conunitment to the chapter and the national organization's goals

are jeopardized when membership is based on financial ability instead ofloyalty and commitment to the organization.

6. The policy promotes disunity in the chapter ranks between pledgedmembers and non-pledged members; some non-pledged members feelleft out of a common "bonding" experience.

7. The issue of gaining "respect" by pledging is important enough forundergraduates to risk sanctions by engaging in underground or illicitpledging.64 .

though the MIP has been in effect for fifteen years, attitudes about pledgingamong BGLO undergraduates have not significantly changed over time.

Probably the most common explanation for pledging is that it brings aboutbonding, that it facilitates brotherhood and sisterhood among members. Thisis arguably the most essential element of any fraternal group"':"'-hence the namesfraternity (brotherhood) and sorority (sisterhood). Pamela Reese argues thatelements of organizational culture, suchlaS shared attitudes, values, beliefs, andcustoms, work to propel pledging. Specifically, she notes that the stories mem-bers tell about their organizations and their entrance into them highlight theirattitudes, values, and beliefs. She notes that these organizational stories serveas narratives that become charged with significance. Not only do these storiesserve to highlight personal values, but they also transmit these values and mayimpel prospective members to have similar experiences in order to have simi-lar stories to share.65 E. H. Schein contends, "Through stories, parables, andother forms of oral or written history, an organization can communicate itsideology and basic assumptions--especially to newcomers, who need to knowwhat is important not only in abstract terms, but by means of concrete ex-amples that can be emulated."66 This can be both good and bad. Violence en-dured during the pledge process is often the central theme of such stories.Simply advising older members to stop telling the stories fails to acknowledgesomething very important-that what happened in these stories is often whatbonds them to one another and possibly to the fraternity.

In 1999, while one of the authors was conducting research on white mem-bers of Alpha Phi Alpha, statements by numerous interviewees highlighted theimportance of pledging as a means of fostering brotherhood. Many intervieweesreported that when they initially expressed an interest in joining the fraternity,members and prospective members alike were resistant. This was, in their opin-ion, solely because they were white. Through their respective pledge processes,they were able to work through their differences, bond, and forge lifelong rela-tionships. Similarly, during the spring semester of 1997, one of the authorshad a conversation with a Muslim member of Alpha Phi Alpha in Washington,D.C. He indicated that although his undergraduate chapter and pledge linewere composed largely of Christian men, pledging provided a vehicle throughwhich they could understand and appreciate their differences. Contrastingly,Avril Weathers discovered that the bond created by pledging is not always per-manent. Weathers interviewed one member of Delta Sigma Theta who reportedthat her relationship with her line sisters, though initially very close, became.

strained years later once they found out that she was a lesbian.67This suggeststhat issues of diverse background are best ~orked out during the pledge pro-cess, not years later.

There are numerous explanations for why pledging precipitates bonding.In part, it has to do with the group experience of pain or discomfort. YehudiCohen writes that the ordeal experienced in the ritual process-what AlanMorinis defines as "the direct sensory experience of pain"68-serves to bondindividuals to one another.69Experiencing pain and isolation "with a groupnot only serve[s] to cushion the shock but also produce[s] an exceptionallystrong bond for initiates:'7o He goes on to suggest that the ordeal creates anenvironment in which initiates bond even to those who are initiating them.Pain, both psychological and physical, is seemingly such an integral part of theBGLOpledge process that it should be wholly endured and experienced with-out resistance. For example, a pledge who is paddled should not spontane-ously cry out or move his or her body from the assumed paddling position.Moreover, despite the rigors of the process, pledges are expected to assume agrit during their sessions. They also memorize and internalize poems such asSir William Ernest Henley's "Invictus" ("I have not winced nor cried aloud"),Rudyard Kipling's "If" ("If you can fill the unforgiving minute with sixty sec-onds worth of distance run"), and "Testof a Man" (''Aman when driven againstthe wall still stands erect and takes the blows of fate") by an unknown author.Each poem highlights the embracing of pain as part of human development.Morinis lends credence to the belief that endurance of pain is integral to ritesof passage by arguing that it is not uncommon for initiates to be forbidden toexpress emotion or physically react while undergoing the ordeal.71

The secrecy that surrounds pledging also fosters bonding. According toWeathers, secrecy is important because it is a mechanism that separates thosewithin the organization from those outside of it.72As pledges move along thecontinuum of secrecy and secret knowledge, they also move along a continuumof internal, organizational inclusion. Therefore, as pledges gain more secretknowledge, they move further from being nonmembers and closer to beingfull-fledged brothers or sisters. Thus, secrecy increases internal cohesion anddefines group boundaries. BGLO pledges are often restricted in their interac-tions with individuals who are not members of the group they aspire to join.Simultaneously, because they are not yet members of the chosen group, theyfind themselves in what Arnold van Gennep describes as the transition periodof the ritual process.73As such, secrecyprovides for strong in-group-out-groupdynamics. Although not specifically dealing with the concept of secrecy,a 1997

article in Black Issues in Higher Education highlights the in-group-out-groupphenomenon well:"The boys go to the bathroom. Earpressed to the door, I heartheir violent whispers. They won't quit now, and they won't let Three [the thirdpledge] fail-their hardships have made them brothers; a clan united against us.We are the obstacles they must overcome:'74Thus, pledging creates a situation inwhich the pledges become the in-group and the big brothers or sisters becomean out-group. The big brothers or sisters"are an obstacle that the pledges mustovercome to earn the right to be calledbrother or sister.Given such dynamics, itis not surprising that pledging serves to reconstruct an individual's social iden-tity, such that he or she becomes strongly bonded with the in-group.75

Pledging also provides a source of institutional continuity. For one thing,it fosters bonding, in that it "brings in new members whom the old memberssee as being culturally like them."76Thus, the older members feel as thoughthey can connect with and relate to the new members. Also,pledging providescontinuity across regions. For example, a pledged member of Phi Beta Sigmafrom New York can presumably meet a member from California and have analmost instantaneous connection because of the shared pledge experience. Partof this, particularly among younger BGLOmembers, is largelybecause of theirpresumably common knowledge of organizational secrets. However, this con-cept is questionable owing to the lack of uniformity in pledge processes.Whereas a member of Sigma Gamma Rho from one chapter may know thebroad sorority history, a member from another chapter may know largely herown chapter's history. Also, in terms of history, there is no guarantee that allmembers have been taught the same information.

The concept of proving manhood has also been given some attention. Hereagain, Jones has done some excellent scholarship in outlining societal notionsof what constitutes manhood for black men and how their social and politicalmarginalization aids in promoting their search for alternative arenas wherethey can be regarded as men.77One way of accomplishing this, especiallywithinintraracial contexts, is to be physically dominant or to demonstrate the abilityto withstand physical abuse.78Hence we find black men, regardless of theireconomic background, who participate in BGLO pledge processes. Suchmarginalization and pressure to live up to a masculine ideal likely account forthe higher rate of physical hazing incidents in black fraternities than in blacksororities or white fraternities and sororities. Because there is such a strongneed for this rite of passage-providing a transition from adolescence to adult-hood and from prospective membership to full-fledged membership-ban-ning pledging outright is likely counterproductive. The reliance on pledging

for the aforementioned benefits that accrue from it impels members and pro-spective members alike to create pledging in its absence.79

Added to this is the concept of self-respect or self-esteem. Pledge pro-cesses can create monumental hurdles for both the individual and the pledgeline to overcome within a short time. These hurdles can come in the form ofintrapersonal as well as interpersonal dynamics. As such, overcoming thesehurdles seemingly provides pledged members with an increased sense of self-worth. Pledges feel that they have done what many either cannot do or do notwant to do. In many instances, pledges have accomplished something that theymay have initially thought was impossible.

As a theme, respect has been explored by others, and it seems to have atrickle-down effect. Despite BGLO officials' protestations against pledging, ithas been argued that these same officials do not respect members who do notpledge.80 Even if this is not true, the mere perception that it is true has conse-quences-namely, prospective members desiring to pledge. This perception,combined with the advent of the MIP, has created a two-tier system withinBGLOs.The top tier consists of individuals who have pledged, and the bottomtier consists of those who have taken the MIP route to membership. This dis-tinction is most evident among younger members. Those who pledge oftenknow far more about their respective organizations, as well as poems, songs,and other information associated with the pledge process. Often, this infor-mation is as detailed as knowing the contents of a specific page in theorganization's history book, locations of various chapters of the organization,and the Greek alphabet. Those who do not pledge are either not privy to thisinformation or do not seek to learn it after becoming a member. Additionally,there is a qualitative distinction in the information that pledges learn. For in-stance, a pledged BGLOmember might be able to recite a poem, song, or phraselearned on line with a degree of intensity and proficiency that is typically ac-quired only while pledging. It goes beyond mere memorization; there is aninternalization of the meaning of the piece-understanding extends to an ex-perientiallevel. Due to these factors, nonpledged members often stick out likesore thumbs among pledged members and may not be respected, because ofthese differences. Because of the emphasis on pledging among some BGLOmembers, in many circles, members who pledge but are not initiated (ghostmembers) are often more respected than members who are initiated but donot pledge.

Added to these themes are two others: commitment, and the process ofbreaking down and building up. Pledging proponents contend that pledging

strengthens the ties between the individual and the organization. Pledgingopponents use anecdotal evidence of BGLOmembers who are not financiallyactive to undermine this argument. For example, they posit that BGLO mem-bers who have not paid dues to their respective national organizations or localchapters, typically alumni, are not committed to the organizations. Opponentsalso try to undermine the commitment argument by citing BGLO memberswho do not participate in the various ciyic, community service, and philan-thropic activities. They argue that a BGLO member who mayor may not befinancially active but who is not involved in implementing the organization'snational programs is not committed. However, this may be using an overlynarrow definition of commitment, impairing the ability to see where the com-mitment actually lies. For pledged members, commitment to the organizationcan best be understood as a series of concentric circles, with the pledge line atthe center and the national organization as the outermost circle. To them, fra-ternity or sorority does not start with a corporate office in a distant city orwith an abstract notion of fraternity or sorority. To them, the fraternal idea isbest understood as tangible relationships, starting with line brothers or sisters.For them, that is where their primary commitment lies. This does not meanthat pledging does not commit members to the broader organization. In fact,Stephen Sweet's work on symbolic interaction suggests otherwise. Symbolicinteraction theory undermines the concept of enduring personality traits andasserts that the self, the core identity of the person, is malleable and can beshaped and reshaped. He goes on to write that, through symbolic interactions,the self is socially constructed, and fraternal groups reconstruct the materialself of pledges through the use of pledge pins, manuals, books, and other pledgeparaphernalia. In turn, such identity reconstruction enhances the degree towhich the fraternal group becomes part of the pledge's identity.8l

Additional research suggests that individuals who undergo severe initia-tion perceive the group to which they are initiated as more attractive than dothose who undergo mild or no initiation. It is speculated that severe initiationfosters greater attraction because of cognitive dissonance. Cognitive dissonancetheory, in this instance, posits that no matter how appealing a group is to anindividual, it usually has some drawbacks. If the individual undergoes an un-pleasant initiation in order to join the group, that unpleasant experience is instriking contrast to the reality of the drawbacks of the group. This "strikingcontrast" is the dissonance, which can be reduced in two ways.The individualcan convince himself or herself that the initiation was not as bad as it reallywas, or he or she can exaggerate the positive aspects of the group. The more

severe the initiation is, the more difficult it becomes for the individual to con-vince himself or herself that it was not particularly bad. Therefore, the initiatetends to reduce dissonance by overestimating the virtues of the group.82Thus,it is reasonable to conclude that pledging serves, in some way,to commit mem-bers to the organization at multiple levels.

As previously noted, Sweet's work on hazing and symbolic interactiontheory suggests that pledging serves as a mechanism for identity reconstruc-tion. Numerous psychological processes are put in place throughout the pledgeprocess, which can alter the way individuals look at themselves, the group (theirline, chapter members, national fraternal body), and others. Much of this trans-formation occurs through what many BGLOmembers would describe asbreak-ing down and building up. Through this process, various aspects of a pledgecan be deconstructed and reconstructed to serve the group's purpose. It canonly be hoped that the purpose is lofty and that it is carried to fruition. Forinstance, a person who is socially anxious, selfish, and a poor manager of timemight be transformed to some degree during pledging. For example, a soror-ity pledge may be required to perform skits for big sisters; take up slack for herline sisters; and effectivelyjuggle classes,apart-time job, and pledging. Throughthe pledge process, she may thus become more socially at ease, more giving,and a better time manager. This is not to say that pledging can change person-ality. Victor Turner argues that the process merely serves to divest pledges ofcertain social qualities and prepare them for investiture with new ones. Hegoes on to note, however, that pain is not necessary to produce this end.83

Given all these factors, it is understandable why some BGLO membersendorse pledging. It is also understandable why many aspiring members seekto be pledged. However, some find it peculiar that once pledges are immersedin the process and experience its brutality, they do not extricate themselvesfrom it (i.e., drop line). Just as desires for belonging, bonding, proving oneself,enhancing self-esteem and self-confidence, earning respect, and continuingtradition all playa part in individuals' eagerness to experience a BGLOpledgeprocess, they also playa role in their decisions to see that process through tothe end. Even more, once pledges' social and material selvesantreconstructedso that they are emotionally and psychologically wedded to the organizationand other pledges, dropping out becomes more difficult. In essence, pledgesmay feel as though they are losing a significant part of themselves by quit-ting.54 To an outsider, the notion that such processes can take place in a matterof days or weeks seems inconceivable. The fact that they can and do speaks tothe tremendous impact that pledging can have on a person. Barry Staw's re-

view of the scientific research on compliance reveals that, in addition to notwanting to risk losing aspects of the newly constructed self, an individual willjustify previous behavior by perceptually biasing behavioral outcomes. In short,since the individual cannot change his or her condition, the person alters hisor her attitude about it to reduce negative feelings stemming from his or herown behavior. Three conditions are necessary for this to occur: the behavior inwhich the individual engages is not easily changed or is irrevocable, the indi-vidual takes some ownership in' the behavior, and the individual has antici-pated the possibility of negative consequences.85 In reference to the BGLOpledge process, becoming a pledge is not easilyalterable without consequences.The pledge often feelspartially responsible for his or her predicament, since itis usually a choice to participate, and there is at least some degree of awarenessthat pledging is an arduous endeavor when that choice is made.

Clearly, personal attitudes and beliefs as well as societal messages undergirdand propel BGLO pledging. Moreover, there seems to be some currency tothese attitudes, beliefs, and messages beyond BGLO members simply actingon them. We already see the truth in the arguments of pledging opponents.That is, it goes without saying that injury and death of aspiring members orlitigating these organizations out of existence is something to be avoided. Buthow do we go about addressing the issues of pledging and hazing if there issome measure of validity to the arguments of pledging proponents? For ex-ample, if a goal of BGLOs is to bring about brotherly and sisterly bonds, howdo we reconcile the fact that pledging may foster such bonds with the fact thatbrutalizing pledges is fundamentally counter to brotherhood and sisterhood?It becomes imperative to be able to explore, recognize, and disentangle theseissues so that we do not throw the baby (pledging) out with the bath water(hazing). Just as it would be unwise to ignore the threats that hazing poses tothe viability of BGWs, it would also be unwise to ignore the ways in whichpledging has made and continues to make BGLOsviable as fraternal entities.

The approach advocated so far has been the MIP,which bans all pledgingactivities, even those that are not physically or psychologically harmful. Theidea behind this strategy is that pledging and hazing, though different, are tooinextricably linked to separate them. Thus, the only thing that can be done isto eliminate the entire process, both the good and the bad, and levy stiff pen-

alties-financial and legal penalties, and the possibility of permanent loss ofBGLO membership--to ensure compliance. However, what is clear, especiallyfrom the statistics provided by Kimbrough, Jones, and Nuwer, is that this hasnot worked. The MIP has not put an end to hazing; rather, it has forced pledg-ing underground. It has also distanced proponents and opponents of pledgingand cut off dialogue between them. This is most evident in the relationshipsbetween undergraduate and alumni members.86

Another proposed method of remedying the problem of hazing is to elimi-nate undergraduate BGLO chapters. However, this is a self-destructive propo-sition, since a large number of BGLO members are undergraduates, and theseorganizations were initially founded by and for undergraduate students. Addedto this is the naive assumption that undergraduates are the only ones involvedin pledging. The reality is that a considerable number of alumni members notonly endorse pledging but also participate in the pledging of prospective mem-bers. There are also prospective alumni members who activelyseek to be pledgedeven after they have been initiated (i.e.,post -pledged). Clearly,the MIP coupledwith stiff penalties for individuals involved in hazing activities is not workingeither. It has merely forced pledging underground, thus serving, at some level,to distance proponents and opponents of pledging.

It appears that the best way for these groups of well-educated AfricanAmericans to resolve this dilemma is a multistep process, with the first stepbeing open and honest dialogue among members. In a 1994 article, MichaelGordon, executive director of the NPHC at the time and a member of KappaAlpha Psi,was cited asbeing dissatisfied with the levelof dialogue among BGLOmembers about hazing. He went so far as to describe the problem as "a hugewall of silence:'87A decade has passed since he voiced those concerns, and thewall remains. One might argue that there is a climate of fear within BGLOsthat prevents proponents of pledging from gaining a platform from which toargue for a process that is more substantial than that offered by the MIP. Fewmembers are willing to risk the possibility that they or their chapters will beinvestigated, suspended, and possibly expelled for aggressively lobbying forsubstantial changes in the MIP. If open and honest dialogue is to take place, wemust remove this climate of fear, which serves to silence thoughtful discussion(and behavior) rather than promote it.

We must also guard against black-white thinking, or the tendency to viewissues in terms of extremes. This type of thinking is illustrated by an MIP ver-sus all-out-brutality dichotomy-that is, framing the issue as a choice betweenthe MIP and hazing in its most violent form. The assumption seems to be that

if one speaks against the MIP as it currently exists, one must be advocatingbrutality. Although painting the issue with such broad strokes clearly conveysthe seriousness of the topic and the strong emotions surrounding it, it doesnot foster the development of solutions. Advocating for pledging does not nec-essarily mean that one advocates for brutality. More likely,such an advocate isin favor of a rite of passage that fosters a sense of belonging, bonding withmembers, self-respect, commitment, and so forth. Those who engage in black-white thinking miss this important point. There is a large gray area betweenthe MIP (which many members describe as simply signing on the dottedline) and beating somebody until he or she is dead. It will certainly be achallenge to focus on that gray area, but that is exactly what we need to do ifwe are to make progress. Refraining from black-white thinking will not onlyhelp us focus on that gray area but also foster productive conversations aboutit.

Another barrier to effectivedialogue is that many proponents of pledgingeither have weak arguments for continuing the practice or are underinformedabout its cultural significance and the sociological and psychological mecha-nisms that make it valuable. Pledging oppo~ents do not need such strong ar-guments; they have deaths, injuries, public-relations dilemmas, and lawsuitsto argue their case.Yet,as explained in other chapters in this volume, the rootsof pledging as a rite of passage run very deep and can be traced to Africantribal practices and even the ancient Greeks. And, as explained in this chapter,the psychological benefits derived from rites of passage like pledging have beenwell documented. The problem is that many proponents of pledging are igno-rant of this information, and their ignorance means that they cannot generatealternatives to the MIP that capitalize on the rich history and psychologicalsignificance of pledging as a rite of passage but eliminate the negative (hazing)aspects. Thus, they cannot meaningfully participate in the sort of dialogue weare advocating.

In addition to open and honest dialogue among members, BGLOs couldbenefit from an intense and unbiased self-study. Many undergraduate mem-bers feel disconnected from national organizations, a feeling that they no doubtcarry with them when they graduate and must decide whether to remain fi-nancially committed and join alumni chapters. It is likely that national orga-nizations feel disconnected from their chapters and frustrated by their inabilityto connect with and control their members who pledge and haze. Moreover,the lack of communication within organizations, especially about hazing, mayhave damaged preexisting fraternal bonds. Thus, it is possible that we now

have organizations that are out of touch with themselves, especially regardingthe issue of pledging and hazing. Among other things, a survey of undergraduateand alumni members, as well as active and inactive members, could revealwhat members' pledge processes or MIPs were like and how they influencedfeelings of belonging, bonding to brothers or sisters, self-esteem, and commit-ment to the organization in both abstract and real terms. Information fromsuch a study would be helpful in determining how to structure a new pledgeprocess that is legal and moral and enhances the aforementioned qualities.Hard data and not mere speculation could provide BGLOswith many answersas they seek a solution to the issue of hazing.

Whatever that new process will be, one thing is certain: simply signing onthe dotted line or instituting an intense courselike process will not yield themaximum short-term and long-term effects. There will likely need to be anexperiential component, not to be read as hazing. The stories that pledgedmembers share suggest this. Without fail, these members' stories do not focuson any substantive information they learned while pledging; rather, they focusalmost exclusively on the pledge experience itself. Weathers argues that "theblack sorority is organized to produce public service and to reproduce a meansfor the production of that service."88This may be true of the black fraternity aswell. If so, the goal of pledging is not just to foster sisterhood or brotherhoodbut to produce public servants committed to uplifting the race and those whoare oppressed, exploited, and disenfranchised. With this in mind, steps shouldbe taken to create a pledge process that commits individuals to the organiza-tion and to one another. Additionally, a pledge process should fully orient pro-spective members to their future roles as public servants and leaders. A processwith both didactic and experiential components would better meet this chal-lenge than one that is almost exclusivelydidactic (e.g., the MIP).

In thinking about what a revisedpledge processwould consistof,Weathers's89elaboration on the work of Pascale90and his seven steps of organizational so-cialization is helpful and can be summarized as follows:

1. Careful selection (of potential members).2. Humility-inducing experiences (teaching how to make a way out of

no way, and fostering bond~g).3. Organizational training (organizational structure, history, mission,

and values; teaching how to do public service work).4. Assessment of operations and rewards (abstract in relation to frater-

nal organizations, but the gist is that the results speak for themselves and

the reward is membership). (Although not mentioned by Weathers, onecould also assess how well step 3 is being handled.)

5. Adherence to transcendent values (formally, communicated via pub-lished material, ritual, and ceremony; informally, through the interpreta-tion of fraternal ideals).

6. Reinforcing folklore (providing legends and interpretations of mon u-mental events in organizational hist~ry that validate its culture and aims).

7. Consistent role models and traits (modeling for prospective mem-bers who they should strive to become).

In addition, BGLOscan ask what they want their members to be like and usethat to establish criteria for selection, as well as methods for shaping individu-als to meet that ideal. From our perspective, a pledge should learn the follow-ing things:

o Crash course in black history.o History of collegiatefraternities and sororities-including white, Latino,

Native American, Asian American, and each NPHC group.o Broad understanding of BGLOsin general, including their history, culture,

and contemporary issues.o History of the specificorganization,which goesbeyond rote memorization.o Biographical information on founders, general presidents, and prominent

leaders within the organization.o Significance of the organization's insignia and emblems.o History of the specific chapter.o Organizational structure of the fraternity or sorority.o Risk management.o Chapter officer responsibilities.o Tips for improving and maintaining individual and chapter scholarship.o Robert's Rules of Order.o Social etiquette.o Songs and poems relevant to the organization.• Greek alphabet.

Such didactics would serve pledges well in orienting them to BGLO lifeand are probably fairly easy to implement. In contrast, devising an experien-tial component would surely be challenging and must consider the views ofboth pledging proponents and opponents, antihazing laws, and what is ac-ceptable to university officials. The experiential component should also in-

volve cross-chapter activities, so that bonding is fostered not simply within aline or a chapter but across a larger fraternal unit. In sum, the task of creatinga new pledge process is sure to be a difficult one, given how polarized the par-ties are on this issue. However, it is with considerable optimism that we ob-serve these two sides as they seek to address the key issue for BGLOs, reaffirmtheir legacy, and craft a vision for the twenty-first century.

The quotation in the chapter title is from Sir William Ernest Henley's poem "Invictus;'a poem oft-memorized by BGLO pledges. The line connotes being placed in a difficultsituation. Here it is used to emphasize a difficult situation that BGLOs must resolve inorder to be viable in the twenty-first century.

1. Hank Nuwer, Wrongs of Passage: Fraternities, Sororities, Hazing, and BingeDrinking (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999).

2. The Academy was an informal school of philosophy.3. Nuwer, Wrongs of Passage.4. Ibid.5. Ibid.6. Ibid.7. Ibid.8. Frank Kershner Jr. "History of Greek Hazing," Bulletin of Interfraternity Re-

search and Advisory Cound~ May 1, 1978.9. Nuwer, Wrongs of Passage.

10. Ibid.11. Ibid.12. Clyde Saniford Johnson, Fraternities in Our Colleges (New York:National In-

terfraternity Foundation, 1972),277.13.Throughout this chapter the term fraternal is used to denote both fraternities

and sororities.14. Johnson, Fraternities in Our Colleges, 281. The claim that Freemasonry influ-

enced fraternity ritual is supported by Jack L. Anson and Robert F. Marchesani Jr.,eds., Baird's Manual of American College Fraternities (Indianapolis: Baird's ManualFoundation, 1991).

15. Johnson, Fraternities in Our Colleges, 281-82.16. Ibid.17.Andre McKenzie, "Fraters: Black Greek-Letter Fraternities at Four Historically

Black Colleges, 1920-1960" (PhD diss., Teachers College, Columbia University, 1986).18. Enopron, Howard University Yearbook, 1921.

19. McKenzie, "Fraters:'20. Charles Harris Wesley,The History of Alpha Phi Alpha: A Development in Col-

lege Life (Baltimore: Foundation Publishers, 2000), 87.21. Walter M. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101: The Culture, Customs, and Challenges

of Black Fraternities and Sororities (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press,2003). Kimbrough defines probate as synonymous with pledge. The term refers to theirstatus of being on probation and prohibited from interacting with anyone outside of•other pledges, big brothers or sisters, and faculty.

22. McKenzie, "Fraters," 20.23. Ibid., 19.24. Quoted in ibid., 21.25. William L. Crump, The Story of Kappa Alpha Psi: A History of the Beginning

and Development of a College Greek Letter Organization, 1911-1991 (Philadelphia: KappaAlpha Psi Fraternity, 1991).

26. Forcean Yearbook, Wilberforce University, 1924.27. Wesley, History of Alpha Phi Alpha. The 1924 issue of the Forcean gives the

date as 1916 but does not note where the Sphinx Club was founded.28. Forcean, 1924.29. The earliest account of the Lampodas Club was found in the Oracle, Omega

Psi Phi Fraternity, 1925. The earliest account of the Archonian Club was found in theBison, Howard University, 1930.

30. McKenzie, "Fraters:'31. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101.32. An Alpha Phi Alpha greeting for a dean of pledges during an underground,

post-pledge process in the 1990s.33. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101.34. Elizabeth C. Fine, Soulstepping: African American Step Shows (Urbana: Uni-

versity of Illinois Press, 2003).35. Ricky L. Jones, Black Haze: Violence, Sacrifice, and Manhood in Black Greek-

Letter Fraternities (Albany: State University of New York, 2004).36. Fine, Soulstepping.37. McKenzie, "Fraters:'38. M. Beaunorus Tolson, "Fraternities vs. Oblivion," Oracle (March 1938): 24.39. Wesley,History of Alpha Phi Alpha.40. McKenzie, "Fraters."41. Paula Giddings, In Search of Sisterhood: Delta Sigma Theta and the Challenge

of the Black Sorority Movement (New York:William Morrow, 1988).42. Jones, Black Haze.43. Teresa Mitchell Saxton, "The Hazing Practices of Black Fraternities Located

on White Campuses: The Interplay of Racism, Masculinity and Male Violence" (PhDdiss., University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2003).

44. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101. Walter M. Kimbrough, "The Membership In-take Movement of Historically Black Greek-Letter Organizations," NASPA Journal34, no. 3 (1997): 229-39, provides additional clarity about the issue of undergroundpledging.

45. Michelle N-K Collison, "8 Major Black Fraternities and Sororities Agree toEnd Practice of Pledging," Chronicle of Higher Education, February 28,1990, A31.

46. J. Blake, "Black Fraternities Feel Loss of Pledging Rite," Atlanta Constitution,October 8,1990, El, 4; John Anthony Williams Sr.,"Perceptions of a No-Pledge Policyfor New Member Intake by Undergraduate Members of Predorninandy Black Frater-nities and Sororities" (PhD diss., Kansas State University, 1992).

47. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101; Jones, Black Haze; Nuwer, Wrongs of Passage.48. Giddings, In Search of Sisterhood, 8-9.49. Cultural competence in this context is an understanding of why pledging is

done, its origins and history, and why it is important.50. Walter M. Kimbrough, "Why Pledging Died:' Sphinx (Spring 1994): 7,9.51. Eric A. Paine, "Recent Trends in Fraternity-Related Liability:' Journal of Law

and Education (Spring 1994): 191-210; Ben Gose, "Efforts to End Fraternity HazingHave Largely Failed, Critics Charge:' Chronicle of Higher Education, April 18, 1997,A37-38.

52. Kimbrough, Black Greek 101.53. Ibid.54. Ibid.55. Ibid.56. Cheo Hodari Coker, "A Pledge to Die;' Savoy (May 2003): 90-94,96-97.57. Douglas R. Richmond, "The Legal Implications of Fraternity Hazing:' NASPA

Journal 26, no 4 (Summer 1989): 300-7.58.A probated sentence is one that is not imposed at the time. Rather, the person

is placed on probation; if he or she violates the terms of probation, in almost everycase the original sentence is imposed.

59. http://www.stophazing.orgllaws.html.60. "Pledging a Brother, Not Intaking a 'Paper Brother:" Black Issues in Higher

Education, June 12, 1997,26-27.61. Jones, Black Haze.62. Saxton, "Hazing Practices of Black Fraternities."63. Jones, Black Haze.64. Williams, "Perceptions of a No-Pledge Policy:' 93-94.65. Pamela Reese, ''Addressing Hazing in Black Greek Organizations through an

Awareness of Organizational Culture:' Campus Activities Programming 26, no. 5 (De-cember 1993): 37-39.

66. E. H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992).

67.AvrilL'Mour Weathers, "Institutional Intent, Organizational Practice, and Entry. Experience into a Black Sorority" (PhD diss., Northwestern University, 2001).

68. Alan Morinis, "The Ritual Experience: Pain and the Transformation of Con-sciousness in Ordeals of Initiation," Ethos (1986): 151.

69. Yehudi Cohen, Transition from Childhood to Adolescence (Chicago: Aldine,1964).

70. Ibid., 112-13.71. Morinis, "Ritual Experience."72. Weathers, "Institutional Intent, Organizational Practice, and Entry Experi-

ence into a Black Sorority:'73. Arnold van Gennep, Rites of Passage (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

1960). Gennep describes the ritual process as having three stages: (1) separation fromthe initiate's previous life; (2) liminality, which is a transitional period; and (3) re-aggregation or reincorporation into the everyday scene.

74. "Pledging a Brother," 26.75. Stephen Sweet, "Understanding Fraternity Hazing: Insights from Symbolic

Interactionist Theory:' Journal of College Student Development 40, no. 4 (1999):355-63.

76. "Pledging a Brother:' 26.77. Although marginalization is also an issue for black women, it is different and

may be even more pronounced for black men.78. Jones, Black Haze.79. Edward Buder, "Initiations Revisited: Improving Students' Adjustment and

Persistence with Sanctioned Rites of Passage Rituals" (paper presented at the NorthCentral Association for Counselor Education and Supervision, Indianapolis, October11-14,1990).

80. "Pledging a Brother:'81. Sweet, "Understanding Fraternity Hazing:'82. Elliot Aronson and Judson Mills, "The Effect of Severity of Initiation on Lik-

ing for a Group:' Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 59 (1959): 177-81; HaroldB. Gerard and Grover C. Matthewson, "The Effects of Severity of Initiation on Likingfor a Group: A Replication:' Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 2 (1966): 278-87; Jacob E. Hautaluoma and Helene Spungin, "Effects of Initiation Severity and In-terest on Group Attitudes," Journal of Social Psychology 93 (1974): 245-59. Theoreticalsupport is provided by J. F.Kett, Rites of Passage (New York:Basic Books, 1977); Tho-mas A. Leemon, The Rites of Passage in Student Culture: A Study of the Dynamics ofTransition (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1972).

83. Victor Turner. The Ritual Process: Structure and Anti-structure (Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press, 1969).

84. Sweet, "Understanding Fraternity Hazing."85. Barry Staw, "Knee-deep in the Big Muddy: A Study of Escalating Commit-

ment to a Chosen Course of Action:' Organizational Behavior and Human Performance16 (1976): 355-63.

86. Paul Ruffins, "Frat-ricide: Are African American Fraternities Beating Them-selves to Death?" Black Issues in Higher Education (June 12, 1997): 18-25.

87. Quoted in Christopher Shea, "Wall of Silence: After Freshman Death, SomeFraternities Question Effectiveness of Anti-Hazing Effort:' Chronicle of Higher Educa-tion (June 22,1994): A25-26.

88. Weathers, "Institutional Intent, Organizational Practice, and Entry Experi-ence into a Black Sorority."

89. Ibid.90. R; T. Pascale, "The Paradox of Corporate Culture: Reconciling Ourselves to

Socialization:' California Management Review 27 (1985): 26-41.

FUTURE DIRECTIONSTamara 1. Brown, Clarenda M. Phillips, and Gregory S. Parks

Without question, black Greek-letter or~nizations (BGLOs) have made sub-stantial contributions to African American history and advancement. Foundedupon the principle of racial uplift, BGLOs, for nearly a century, have lent theircollective muscle to the fight for economic, educational, and social progressfor African Americans in the face of unimaginable racism, discrimination, andoppression. Yet for too long their collective stories have been untold, and theirsubstantial role in the leadership development and high scholasticism of someof this country's greatest inventors, scientists, and innovators has been un-known. It is our hope that this book, though far from an exhaustive account oftheir accomplishments, has pulled back the curtain on some of the monu-mental achievements of BGLOs, revealing how they have worked behind thescenes for years to fight for justice, equal access, and the liberation of Africansin the Americas and in Africa. We hope, too, that we have provided a hereto-fore absent understanding of the historical and social contexts that gave rise totheir existence, gave shape to their organizational structures and missions, andgave power to their individual and collective efforts to improve life and libertyfor African Americans in this country.

Yet, for all the good they have accomplished, BGLOs have not escaped thestructural racism in this country unscathed. Like other African American in-dividuals and institutions, they have struggled with the problems of elitism,colorism, and violence; with how to develop an identity that affirms their Af-rican heritage despite messages and images of a savage and uncivilized Africancontinent; and with many other problems endemic to having been formed ina racist U.S. society. At the risk of airing dirty laundry, or of putting our busi-ness out on "front street:' we have tried to provide an incisive and accurateportrayal of what is currently known about BGLOs, both the good and the notso good. Also, we have provided information on issues that continue to plagueBGLOs, particularly the controversy over hazing versus pledging. Such a bal-anced and scholarly treatment has previously been lacking in books aboutBGLOs. We hope that future authors will share our enthusiasm in this regard.

We hope, too, that we have succeeded in providing a bit of an insider'sview of BGLO culture. Although there is considerable curiosity about this

465