http://www.stophazing.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/hazing_in_view_web1.pdf

There is a higher incidence rate in male respondents of the students, but the problem seems to be pervasive between the genders, and much more correlated with type of organization you join. There is a 61% incidence rate in males and 52% in females. Varsity sports and greek life having very high incidence rates (>70%), and academic clubs and honor societies having low incidence rates (<30%).

It's hard to draw a line between hazing that is harmful and hazing that isn't. In this study, positive effects were more often cited than negative ones. We can't draw much in conclusions from that because even with a smaller incident rate of negative events, they can more than make up for the positives. And if for some people it's only negative that can be enough to justify reform.

More students perceive positive rather than negative outcomes of hazing. NATIONAL STUDY OF STUDENT HAZING Allan/Madden 27 The survey provided a list of potential results of participation in hazing behaviors and asked students to indicate if they had experienced any of these. The list included 4 positive and 16 negative outcomes of hazing. The positive results of hazing were more often cited by students than the negative results. For example, 31% of the time students said they felt like more a part of the group while they felt stressed 11% of the time. Tables 16 and 17 provide more information about students reports of positive and negative effects of hazing. During interviews, numerous students justified hazing practices based on their perception that it promotes bond or group unity. However, the survey results indicate that the majority (two-thirds) of respondents do not cite this as an outcome of their hazing experiences. Similarly, hazing is often rationalized by saying it promotes “a sense of accomplishment.” However, the data reveal that more the three-fourths of the respondents do not identify “sense of accomplishment” as an outcome of their hazing experiences.

Later though, we get information as such:

Of those who labeled their experiences as hazing (after reading the survey definition), 95% said they did not report the events to campus officials. When provided with a list of reasons for not reporting hazing, 37% said they did not want to get their team or group in trouble, but even more (54%) chose “other” as their response

The given responses under other are mostly some form of nothing wrong happened.

Here is the list of what they defined as hazing for the survey:

?Attend a skit night or roast where other members are humiliated
?Sing or chant by yourself or with a few select team members in a public situation that is not related to the event, game, or practice
?Wear clothing that is embarrassing and not part of the uniform
?Be yelled, screamed, or cursed at by other team/organization members
?Get a tattoo or pierce a body part
?Act as a personal servant to other members
?Associate with specific people and not others
?Deprive yourself of sleep
?Be awakened at night by other members
?Make prank phone calls or harass others
?Be tied up, taped, or confined to small spaces
?Be transported to and dropped off in an unfamiliar location
?Endure harsh weather without the proper clothing
?Drink large amounts of a non-alcoholic beverage such as water
?Participate in a drinking game
?Drink large amounts of alcohol to the point of passing out or getting sick
?Watch live sex acts
?Perform sex acts with same gender

Many of these things can be done in minor ways that are not particularly harmful, and any of them could be done in very harmful ways. Additionally many fear backlash for reporting hazing, of the 95% who did not report hazing many stated: "I was afraid of negative consequences to me as a individual from other team or group members", "I might be hurt by team or group members if they learned I had reported it", or "I was afraid other members of the team or group would find out I reported it and I would be an outsider" as reasons for not reporting it.

In the perceived negative results of hazing, we can see some small but significant percentages feeling seriously negative consequences such as not wanting to live anymore (1%), incur physical injuries (2%), or need to visit health center, doctor, or counselor (2%).

Taking what I know and have seen before and reading this study, I think that often times hazing is not a problem, but there are many cases of it where there are. With just this general information I can not say what should be allowed for hazing and what should not be. I think that this issue is not particularly gendered, but does see a wide range in incidence rate between types of organizations.

I know colleges usually have a "no hazing" policy, but of course it persists. I think a study looking into different types of hazing and levels of extremeness and which have the best outcomes could be used to alternatively have a detailed account of things that are "allowed hazing". I don't see an easy way to get rid of it altogether, and assuming positive hazing rituals exist, those should be promoted and allowed while banning others instead of colleges having a blanket ban. I imagine this would help the issue, similar to safe sex promotion being better than abstinence only.