a much needed break...back to the topic!
 

Well, as far as I can see, James, thanks so much for dropping your knowledge...it's about time we stopped picking on neicy...well, most of us anyways...thanks also for trying to bring back a respectable tone to the thread..highly appreciated on this end.
As for christina houston, it's too bad the situation that we are all in. Even M Twilley. None of us will ever know what was said or not said but voted upon in her bid meetings. The main difference between the two women clearly is the acceptability factor. We may not liek to admit it, but it is harder to accept someone who is diffrent in a way you haven't been exposed to. You can't understand a lot about the person and who they are when you can't understand why they talk the way they do, or look the way they do.
Being a lighter skinned sistah who has grown up with the white kids, and is in a local sorority that is more closesly linked with WGLOs than with BGLOs, I must say a few things. I have experienced the need to "fit in". My hair is longish (passed shoulders) and I speak in a very proper tone...until I get around my black friends. Any of us who have had to be in different circles know what it is to adjust. There are nearly two separate worlds that I must answer to...even though I am not mixed. We live in a white world, therefore adjustment for black who wish to excel is mandatory. And that is where a lot of whites fail to relate. I am forced to adjust to whites unless I attend a HBC, or want to be "the black girl" in social situation rather than Ariane, who I actually am. Whites don't have this issue of fitting in. Unless you put yourself into a black environment...blacks don't get to "choose".
Christina is merely more easily adjustable to than M Twilley. Like I said we'll never know why christina is in, and Twilley is out, but we do know who fits in more easily. I only hope that christina is strong enough to represent. When issues of the "n" word, or any other degrading phrases occur, she is able to stand up and correct the situation. That is what we all need to break the barriers. Let it begin with the one who is only slightly "different" so she can widen the bridges into the un-integrated WGLOs.
Many black women don't consider WGLOs because we think that's not our place, but speaking as a happy member of my org, I probably would feel most happy in an NPC rather than a BGLOs (ifwe were allowed to charter on my campus) due to similarity in practices. And I would hope that my skin color would not have to be a huge issue. By the same token I realize my selection criteria would include factors such as has this org had any blacks? mexicans who are visibly mexican? etc.
bascially, christina houston is helping out future Twilley's...as long as she is not forced to lose herself in the process.

one last thing...there have been a lot of use of "they" and "them" on this site amongst those defending AL...did anyone else pick up on that? Just a clue to the degree of separation, and the currently irreconcilable differences present:p

also-:( if I have happened to offend anyone with my blunt use of white and black, or anything of the sort, I apologize. My blunt tone has come from years of debating racial situations.

greek love:cool:
ariane

Re: a much needed break...back to the topic!
 

You really hit on a lot of valid points with this part of your post. I belive it is something that people of color have always had to deal with in order to succeed in this world since the beginning of time :D. Being "situation savy" :p is something I believe that we grow up learning and continue to practice well into adulthood.

Seriously though, I honestly think that the reason why a lot of AfAm women do not pursue HWGLO's is because usually they have heard, experienced, interacted or seen a member of a HBGLO since they were young (due to the fact that membership is a LIFETIME committment, so being active in a sorority never stops or slows down after college). many do not experience or see HWGLO's until their freshmen year in college, which is at that point, you have to make a decision to Rush or forget about sorority life(since MOST HWGLOs prefer freshmen - or at least that is what I have gathered from convo's on GC. I know that it doesn't apply to all, just most). Also, I think it is simply just a matter of being comfortable around people that are similiar to you (these simliarities extend FAR beyond just race).

hmm
 

It just seems to me that it's as if certain people push for "integration" and somehow ignore some of the purposes of a black fraternity or sorority.

-Rudey
--Next eliminate all single sex houses. Follow that by eliminating the greek system to better integrate the student body.

Re: hmm
 

Rudey,

I agree. It seems like the admin at Bama not only doesn't understand the differences between NPC and NPHC membership selection, but I get an undercurrent of them thinking, well, once we integrate we can get rid of those pesky NPHC groups. Maybe that is putting too ominous a spin on it, but there are so many things they just don't seem to get, one of them being that NPHC groups are a desired (to say the least! :) ) choice for many people - not (in their opinion, as I perceive) someplace people go because they can't go NPC or NIC.

Thanks for clearing that up.
I can understand her not having an interest... what I'm wondering is why they didn't harass her like I've heard another black girl was. Just off the top of my head.


Whooooa 33Girl, for real? I wasn't even checking the ulterior motive angle... think admin at UA still have much to learn about what NPHC groups are about and the ethnic pride behind them? Why am I not surprised? :rolleyes:

Something else just occurred to me. What about the 'other' peoples at UA? When these women are starting the Multicultural organization, is it aimed at multicultural people, or inviting people of all cultures? OR both? That sounds like a sillier question than it is. I think. It's late. Just wanted to put my $.02 out there...

I'd have to say that multicultural orgs are designed to provide a place for people regardless of ethnic, cultural, financial, societal origin. I fear in my own org that if we get too diverse, or have a an overwhelming majority of minorities that we will come off as the sorority for multicultural women, which tends to disclude whites. Often it seems that white wome don't neccesarily see themselves as diverse and so would not see a place for them in a diverse org. It's unfortunate. Personally I think that the objective is to provide a place for anyone.
Also, as far as HBGLOs v. WGLOs, I think they are TOTALLY different, and not to be compared really as far as which is better, or more real, or anything to that affect. The systems operate totally differently, the sisterhood is regarded differently, the practices are different, really, the main similarity is greek letters and a fraternal bond.
I agree with honey that oftne black women are raised knowing of black orgs and aren't introduced to others until they are on campus...and it creates a definite need for adjustment, for like I said, it's different practice. But, I must say I feel it is a judgement call based upon preference of practice, as well as alumni connections. A lot of people seek black orgs (I plan to pledge as a graduate/alumni in or before law school) for the connections in the work force between black people. I would feel ecstatic as a black man to be able to say bill cosby is my brother and to be able to contact that man and seek his professional aod/advice/counsel, same if the great martin luther king jr were still livng, what an honor it would be as an omega brother to call himy brother and go to him with political/inspirational support. There is a certain level of honr associated with belonging to a black org, esp amidst the older orgs (DST, AKA, etc).
As for white orgs I am at a loss of expansive knowledge, but teh perception I have gotten is that they are a source of sisterly bond foremost, and a social atmosphere as an undergrad.
What do you all think of that?
Is it a disgrace for a black woman to pass up HBGLOs for white ones?
Does/ could the further integration of MCGLOs wipe out the original need for HBGLOs?
food for thought!

(I promise I will try and post shorter messages!) :D

a quick addendum- although i wish to pledge HBGLO as a grad, as an undergrad if given the chance to go national (depending on campus of course) i feel i would appreciate the undergrad experiance of a WGLO...esp if i got to experiance chartering a national and creating a national chapter out of my local, i would most definitely go WGLO...not just for my non-black sisters, but also for my perception of undergrad programs/practices of WGLOs and BGLOs...
hm.:confused:

I don't think MCGLO's will ever diminish the need for HBGLO's for the simple fact that they are both built on two different, but important foundations. HBGLO's foundation was built on the betterment of our communities, as well as society as a whole. MCGLO's were built on the foundation of having a diverse (ethnically speaking) membership.

Good question though...;)

I actually find the term "WGLO" offensive. It's been used on this thread and others. We are not racially exclusive! Hell my chapter goes out of its way to recruit minorities and even international students! We actually WANT people of diverse backgrounds.

I'd say the majority of those which people are calling WGLO do the same thing. I'm not saying that some do not have racist (and in my opinion wrong and stupid) practices of denying membership to minorities but geez don't lump us in the same group please!

KTSNAKE,

I don't know about others, but I choose to use the term "WGLO or HWGLO" to talk about orgs that were originally founded by and for Caucacians(sp). This also applies to BGLO/HGBLO, etc. This term does not imply that these orgs memberships are currently 100% white, black, or anything. :)

ALPHAXIDIVA,

Can you expand further as to what you mean by this statement:
but also for my perception of undergrad programs/practices of WGLOs and BGLOs... ;)

Gracias....

Since language has no implicit meaning, to some it may give off that message. The correct term is NPC for sororites and NIC for fraternities. WGLO I simply find to be both inaccurate and offensive.

I would also take issue with your statement that they were founded "for Caucasians". My organization was founded for ideals, not for a certain race. Due to the segregated makeup of the higher education system in 1869 though, yes we only had white folks. It did take us 100 years to let blacks in but we had asian, hispanic, etc members up to that point.

However, ever since 1969 when Sigma Nu officially became desegregated the term WGLO has not applied. I'd thank you not to use it as I don't think it accurately describes any group nowadays.

I think the problem with using "WGLO" and "HBGLO" is this - why are we saying the NPHC groups are HISTORICALLY black, but that the NPC/NIC groups ARE white? Yes, historically many of the NPHC, NPC and NIC groups were racially exclusive, but none of them are any longer.

As to which is more diverse today, it depends on what campus you attend.

I can see your point in reference to using WGLO, but I have to disagree with you on the use of HWGLO. The term HWGLO (Historically white )or HBGLO (historically blackare non-offensive terms simply becasue they state the fact that HISTORICALLY, that is what the membership of these orgs consisted of.

I do not use NPC or NIC to describe HWGLOs, because there are a few HBGLOs are are members of these councils (For example, KAY and FOCG).

To settle this debate with you, in speaking TO YOU I will not use the term.

There are historically African American groups that are members of NIC, but there are no historically African American groups in the NPC.

Thank you for the specifics, Fuzzie.

I still stand by my statement, however.