I went to a large state university with a large and strong Fraternity tradition, and in 1975-76 joined one of the three “jewish” fraternities on campus (not everyone in the frat was jewish, but many were). My impression was that on the hazing scale, we were probably on the wimpy side compared to all the other frats. I don’t think that most people in our frat would have tolerated that sort of thing too much, but that’s part of why I really liked the people in the frat (many were like me!). So my experiences were probablty not the norm for most frats (and I don’t have any firsthand knowledge of any other frats).
Each pledge was assigned a Big Brother, and as part of the Initiation ceremony, the little brother would present his big brother with a personalized “paddle”. Making the paddle for his big brother was one of the requirements for being initiated into the frat. Most pledges would make very fancy and decorative paddles highlighting some personal aspect of the big brother. I still have both the paddles from my two little brothers all these years later. The “tradition” was that as the paddle was presented, the Big Brother would give the little brother a “smack” on the rear with the paddle.
I do not consider this hazing, however. For one thing, this happened after the pledge had been initiated (although very shortly after, at the celebration dinner). Second, this was always optional, regardless of how it was presented. For the most part the big brother/little brother were good friends and in sync, so if this was something the little brother was not comfortable with, the big brother would give just a light tap, to satisfy the tradition. Others saw it as a display of their manhood, and would get the hardest blow the big brother could muster. In fact, they rarely used their actual paddle, for fear the work of art would break, and would use a plain standby paddle instead. But because I think no one ever really got hit that didn’t “agree” to it, I don’t think this would qualify as hazing.
We were never required to do any of that “stupid” stuff like answering phones with a silly speech (although the pledges did have to answer the house phone when it rang), or carry objects around campus or wear silly clothes around campus. The things we had to do were in the category that RealityChuck describes as “useful” or educational.
The closest thing to hazing (that some other frats would accuse us of) were really more peer pressure than forced upon the pledges. In this way I think the frat was very clever (perhaps as a result of the many pre-law and law students and lawyer alumni) in that the things that could maybe be considered hazing were never forced upon the pledges as a condition of membership, but rather were “suggested” in such a way that the unity of the pledge class was questioned in certain situations and there was always some hotshot macho pledge who could be counted on to show off, as it were, and the rest of the pledge class would “voluntarily” follow in the effort to show the pledge class was unified. I am being a little oblique in an effort not to reveal any “frat secrets,” but what happened to me and my pledge class that at the time I totally thought was unforced and spontanious I saw repeated year after year to the other pledge classes, and I see a clever psychological manipulation to get the pledge class to “haze themselves” as it were. Still, no one was forced to do anything; and the incident I’m purposely not describing I still would think was tame compared to most other frats.
Of course, this was 25 years ago, before the flood of lawsuits and campus intolerance has changed the face of student life at all universities, but there’s my experiences for you.