IT'S TIME TO STOP STUDENT HAZING RITUALS
Public attention in the US has been on student hazing in the last few weeks. Reading about the horrors of the induction ceremonies is blood-curdling.
Even more blood-curdling is that in Hong Kong similar rituals are carried out, but many people treat them as just part of university orientation camp activities.
Although our hazing US cousins are more violent, at least there it is an issue of debate and controversy, with activist groups for and against the rite. In Hong Kong, our 'cream of the crop' - university students - succumb to such acts under coercion without anyone ever seriously making an issue of it.
Sure, newspapers have criticised the moral standards of our university students regarding the profane slogans of Chinese University orientation. Sure, our hazing parties do not involve alcohol and jumping on broken glass.
But the scary part is precisely that hazing in our universities has less noticeable effects, which gradually come to light as years go by. There are no cuts and bruises, no intensive-care patients or dead bodies to raise the alarm.
Yet it goes on every year at dormitories such as Hong Kong University's St John's College, usually in August. In fact, the practices of silent treatment, no-toilet visits unless with an appointed chaperone, and the 'public forum' at which people are put alone in the catbird seat are this college's annual induction rituals.
Perhaps little is heard about these rituals because of the implicit 'silence' clause, which all inductees have to oblige. They are not allowed to mention any of their experiences at camp, or they will be criticised on their 'democracy wall'.
Later, participants often recount the experience with horror, talking of low self-esteem and hospital visits.
Yet such talk is actually forbidden. What's with the secrecy? Is it because the organisers know that they have gone too far with this 'tradition'?
The psychological effect of Nazi-type punishments such as 'no talking for one week', 'no eye contact with any other freshies', putting you on the stand and irrationally criticising you from head to toe ('why is your nose tilted up and not normal?', 'you think you come from a good secondary school and are superior?', 'participate in all dorm activities or we will knock your crotch against the railings') do indeed force comradeship and obedience, but they also cause deep psychological trauma. It is undoubtedly sadistic abuse.
Young people in Hong Kong tend to seek approval from their counterparts, and students who participate in hazing events are looking for even the tiniest scrap of it from their peers, even at the cost of their safety and dignity.
It is a cultural problem that, if unchecked, will lead to yet another generation of people who find themselves at the mercy of their environment. Such experiences give rise to followers, not leaders.
There has never been enough focus on the issue to produce a formal investigation. Hong Kong should pay more attention to the issue of hazing. Although some might say it is not serious enough to be dangerous, even as a borderline practice it deserves greater awareness.
Training to be tough is one thing. Torture is another.
O. K. LAU, Lam Tin