Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 February 2024 | Story Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee | Photo SUPPLIED
Munita Dunn-Coetzee
Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee is Director: Student Counselling and Development, Division of Student Affairs, University of the Free State.

Opinion Article by Dr Munita Dunn-Coetzee, Director: Student Counselling and Development, Division of Student Affairs, University of the Free State.

The discovery of two hidden rooms with disturbing images and materials at Wilgenhof Men’s Residence (Stellenbosch University) last month has rekindled conversations about hazing and hazing practices. Wilgenhof, with a manifesto emphasising it as a place of belonging where all are free to be themselves, is described as a ‘house of horrors’, as punishment was seemingly doled out to male students as determined by an informal disciplinary committee.

Hazing is an ancient, universal practice. In society, whether past or modern, the need to join a group is an aspect of humanity. Hazing in educational institutions tends to occur as part of the hidden curriculum and manifests in a cyclical nature, for example, at the beginning of an academic year. A number or practices are associated with joining groups – it may take the form of a rite of passage, a ceremony, hazing, or paying a fee. The goal of participating in hazing activities is to be admitted and accepted in the group. By participating, prospective members can also prove their commitment to the group. When people freely choose to undergo a difficult initiation, it often increases their commitment and group cohesion – they need to believe the price of membership was worth it. The whole point of hazing is to build solidarity between members of a group.

Successfully navigating intimate, reciprocal relationships

The cohort of students joining higher education in South Africa typically fall in the 18- to 25-year-old range, and thus within the developmental phase of emerging adulthood. Erik Erikson, a German American child psychoanalyst known for his theory on psychosocial development of human beings, emphasised that this stage of development is about successfully navigating intimate, reciprocal relationships with others. A developmental need at university is therefore to fit in, to belong to a group, and to be part of campus activities – it brings security and protection. Hazing, however traumatising or painful, fulfils a developmental need.

Research has shown that the length of time for young people to actually create a personal identity has increased to the mid-to-late 20s. Emerging adulthood in Western culture can therefore be a time of shifting identities. This brings about a continued risk of experimentation with unhealthy behaviour. They are no longer minors and are faced with two additional life challenges: increased adult responsibilities and decreased familial support. From the onset of puberty through age 25, the adolescent brain undergoes profound changes in structure and function. A core element in the journey to adulthood involves the attainment of autonomy – on an emotional and behavioural level – learning to make your own decisions and manage your own emotions. Another developmental need is thereby met through hazing practices. 

Psychological consequences of hazing

While a few hazing rituals may appear mildly risky, many rituals cross the line. It is believed that humans are psychologically wired to form social groups in response to a threat, and this is what makes hazing effective in creating group identity. Despite the fact that hazing is potentially fatal and emotionally damaging, it is also believed that new students should have the same hazing experience as their predecessors. The hazing culture is therefore reproduced and enforced.

The psychological consequences of hazing can be rife. The concept of hazing is built upon psychological manipulation, degradation, and humiliation. Negative consequences that might have lasting effects include sleep problems, difficulty forming relationships, difficulty trusting others, decreased self-esteem, depressive tendencies, anxiety, self-harming tendencies, as well as academic underperformance. Unfortunately, hazing can also consist of social isolation, forced exercise, excessive drinking, and activities with a sexual innuendo. This results in embarrassing, abusive, exploitative, and dangerous activities. 

A student who has experienced hazing might feel a loss of control and empowerment, feeling more like a victim than before the hazing. This may appear directly after the hazing or later. Students who might have experienced traumatic events prior to hazing are more at risk for negative psychological reactions to hazing. This also applies to students witnessing hazing. They may experience feelings of guilt and shame for not having intervened to assist the hazing victim. And ironically, those who initiate hazing are not horrible, malicious human beings. They may believe the actions are expected of them and that they are carrying on a tradition for their residence. Those who haze others may also experience some of the same psychological consequences. We need to also remember that these psychological consequences would be significantly exacerbated should a student pass away due to a hazing-related activity. 

Will you still send him?

The focus thus far has been on the student, but what about the student’s parents, caregivers, and support system? Within the South African education system, not all South Africans have access to higher education. As a student finishing Grade 12, your dream is to enter tertiary education and to become the one breaking the cycle of poverty. Despite claiming that a university is a welcoming community assisting students to optimise their potential, hazardous hazing activities – such as the current discourse on Wilgenhof’s ‘house of horrors’ – have far-reaching negative physical and psychological consequences for both parents and students. 

Joining any group or team should not mean sacrificing your psychological health and well-being. It should be optimising your sense of self and enriching you systemically. If your son has been accepted at Wilgenhof Men’s Residence for 2024, will you still send him?

News Archive

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture
2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept