Uninformed of the finer points of fraternity protocol, I attended my first Interfraternity Council meeting last October to recruit participants for the MLK Day of Service. I was cordially welcomed and received a positive response to my pitch for volunteers — a relief, and frankly, a pleasant surprise. It was not until the following day that I realized what I had done, the horrible transgression of which I had been guilty. While encouraging brothers to participate in MLK Day, I said "frat." Twice!

Though I did not realize it at the time, the word "frat," according to some greeks, implies a place to party on Friday night, while "fraternity" refers to a brotherhood committed to friendship, scholarship, and service. Recognizing that this is an admirable distinction, and one that I am more than eager to respect, I was initially ready to admit to my mistake. But after some thought, it occurred to me that I should not be expected to make the distinction between "frat" and "fraternity" if many fraternities themselves cannot make this distinction.

I want to make it clear that I do not wish to generally criticize fraternities. They are reputable organizations that serve important functions for Penn State. We have the greek system to thank for consistently raising large sums of money for Interfraternity/Panhellenic Dance Marathon and other philanthropies, and for providing career networking, academic support, and lasting friendships for members. Some fraternities, however, blacken these noble activities by engaging in a dangerous, unproductive, and illegal practice — hazing.

As we approach that infamous time of the semester when would -be brothers must begin their journey through keg stands, initiation rituals, "Bolt," (where pledges must elude fraternity brothers or face unpleasant consequences) and ultimately "Hell Week," it seems an appropriate time for fraternities to take a closer look at their pledging programs.

Because of the 1987 Pennsylvania House bill forbidding hazing, details of specific practices rarely are known outside the brotherhood. Still there are those that cannot keep quiet. Most of us can attest to hearing a pledge complain about being "encouraged" to drink, being "asked" to dive into a dumpster, or being "supervised" at the house (without sufficient food or sleep) for the duration of "Hell Week."

Though fraternities might say that pledges are never forced to do anything, many times the new recruits are manipulated by peer pressure and power. For some, this can be a deadly combination. At New York's Alfred University, Chuck Stevens and two other pledges allegedly were locked in the trunk of a car, given a pint of Jack Daniels, a six-pack of beer, and a quart of wine and told to consume it all by the time the car stopped. Later, the pledges were allegedly coerced to drink even more at the fraternity house until many passed out. When Chuck passed out, he was carried upstairs and left on a mattress where he stopped breathing soon afterward.

When pledges are locked in the basement and instructed to finish four cases of beer (another frequent pledge war story that I've heard), danger is imminent. It is these practices that fraternities need to reevaluate before it is too late.

Beyond the danger posed by hazing, fraternities should also reconsider its merit. If the purpose of hazing is to build brotherhood and weed out the uncommitted (and not simply to have a good time laughing at drunken pledges), there are many other options. Encourage pledges to get involved in campus events or in planning canning trips, challenge them to create their own service project and see it through as a group, require submission of a thorough application and hold high academic standards or foster unity through team-building exercises.

I recognize that fraternities do promote service and academics, but why not make these the focus, instead of the afterthought, of the pledging process? Pledges would still feel a sense of accomplishment and unity, and they would have done some worthwhile work in the meantime.

Put simply by the IFC Web page, "hazing in any form does not belong in a fraternity that bases itself on friendship, respect, and brotherhood." I agree.

I do not claim to understand every fraternity on campus, and I grant that there are many brothers and fraternities that do superior work for our college and community. These I will willingly call fraternities.

It is the groups that insist on ritual hazing, on subjecting pledges to harm, humiliation, and torment, that create the "frat" image.

It is time for these fraternities to live up to their name.