Exactly.
One point for those saying "Martin is a p ussy, and it works well for the military":
The military hazing takes place ONLY while on duty and on military property.
Any military personnel continuing the hazing off duty or in a civilian setting is going to have his ass handed him by the command.
I haven't called Martin weak (I believe he is a true victim of bullying and likely criminal activity), but I will comment on the military aspect of your post as you appear to be operating under a misunderstanding of military life.
Hazing is defined as "the imposition of strenuous, often humiliating, tasks as part of a program of rigorous physical training and initiation" or "harass[ing] by banter, ridicule, or criticism" The military, for the most part since the early 1990s and the airborne pinning incident that hit the news, has curtailed any and all traditions that qualify as
hazing under its definition.
But do the subjects of those traditions still have to buy initiators drinks off duty and off base? Yes. Are they referred to with derogatory terms, like 'candidate' or 'selectee' or 'initiate' or whatever other term may be thrown around? Yes. Is that hazing? It sure sounds like it under the hazing discussion here, given the focus on buying dinners in this NFL discussion.
I don't know if you have spent time in the military (I have), but if you have not I suspect those who have possess a very different view of the past and present military culture. Is being called a 'plebe' hazing at the Naval Academy? Do you believe that doesn't continue off military grounds and outside the presence of controlled, military activities? It does. Are the officers going to court-martial soldiers or sailors for hurtful or demeaning words, or acts like these? No.
Most of military boot camp life qualifies as hazing under one or both of the definitions above. Most ROTC and service academy life, in the first year, is the same. Not all of those experiences are restricted to formal military activities, military grounds and/or working hours, as you appear to believe. The line the military has to walk in approving activities now is when do formal traditions become problematic? When do these acts, serving to build comradery, actually divide and damage components of that team? As for informal, unsanctioned acts that may qualify as hazing through tradition, if there isn't violence, fraternization or racial slurs, I wouldn't count on command intervention.
Deus astutely pointed out in another thread that these traditions become problems when the participants "go too far." I would agree. The problem is in defining when "too far" is reached for traditions most would view as silly or inexplicable because they have no context in which to understand the tradition itself. Are silly haircuts okay? Is carrying shoulder pads okay? Who says so, you? In the abstract, both are demeaning and degrading. Who draws the line on these traditions - the general public, with no clue as to the life, lifestyle or temperament of the participants, or some other governing body (ie., the NFLPA)?