Hazing – is hazing, there is NO “mild” version of it – interpretation is in the “eye of the beholder”, NO ONE other than the recipient knows the impact and extent of harassment, abuse or humiliation. Real men have pride and self confidence; they do not need to haze anyone to feel important. College students pitch in a token of the cost of their education, taking advantage of the generosity of many, be it tax payers (note that at a minimum, tax exempt status as well as contributions to 501(c)(3) organizations COST all taxpayers), donors, etc. These benefactors deserve to have their expectations meet that their efforts are going to benefit society, not feed the immature fantasies of gangsters. There is NEVER a justification to hazing, yes, military drill sergeants do exhibit what appears to be hazing, but that is one of the rare cases, where the volunteer recipient understood what they were signing up for, and the reasons for the psychological testing. Guilt by association, the seniors that were denied their awards, have instead, either the guilt of their actions or the pride in knowing that their “association” was penalized and that they can have some redemption in having paid the price of their teammates indiscretions. There must be Zero tolerance for hazing, and only through strong action against perpetrators can an institution make a statement and maintain its pride. Bowdoin, IMO has done that.