I read it through and at first I become defensive. Many of the hazing incidents went far beyond what I experienced as a pledge. There wasn't the same level of depravity described in the article, though some of it seemed true. The "drink until you boot" phenomenon was a standard part of pledge period. It wasn't a big part of my pledge period, because I had mono that spring and couldn't drink. When I ran into a former brother - whose job it was to make the pledges recite their "names", drinking until they vomited - he mostly remembered that I drank water instead of beer. He had assumed I had opted out of drinking because that was something you could do. He was surprised to find out I had a medical reason for not drinking.
There was indeed many gross things about pledging. Sink night - described in the article - is especially rough, or it was for me because I had mono and started shivering uncontrollably. I can remember Ernest Hemingway's grandson throwing up on me and thinking, "Oh, good, at least it's warm."
But the general atmosphere of pledging was of mostly verbal abuse combined with binge drinking. I don't remember any real acts of barbarity.
And so the article at first left me cold.
But then I remembered the conflicting feelings I had about my fraternity. While I had few conflicted feelings about the rugby club, my feelings about Dartmouth have always been conflicted. I bought into a lot of the fraternity sense of besieged entitlement. When I went to a banquet to honor last year's national championship rugby team, I was struck by how aggressively anti-college many of my contemporaries (all fraternity members) remain.