Él es mío. ¡Lucha! ¡Lucha!


Solamente embromando...;) quizá...:cool:

:eek:Pues, es una lucha, porque él PERTENECE a mí!!!!:D Shid, Digala la verdad.;)

ETA: This is starting to sound like an episode of Jerry Springer, LOL.

Since it's in Spanish and all...

okay okay, i don't want to start anything, because I'm just going on here to learn more about orgs and become more open minded and aware of the greek community outside of my schools. I am in a Latin-based org, although a lot of the things we do nowadays are geared towards the empowerment of the Universal Woman, not just Latinas. One of our sayings is "Latin by tradition, not by definition" which I believe encompasses who we are.

I have had conversations and do know sisters who would like Latin to be dropped from our name (personally, i love it and would never want something that the founding mothers incorporated for a reason to be changed unless there is a really important reason) because of the fact that people do perceive us as being latina-exclusive. I've met people who have joined other orgs, and have told me that if they had known we were inclusive, they would have looked into us. I guess I'm asking if a lot of other LGLOs also have had problems trying to educate the public that they aren't exclusive? It isn't because we are focused solely on latin programming, over half of my sisters in my chapter speak a language other than spanish or english, and we have put on programming that isn't catered just towards latinas. ah well, I can only hope as the younger generation are more educated about minority greeks that they'll take the time to learn more about them...

and can i say that the younger generation do come in with more knowledge than we did about greek life? I'm amazed....lol...it just shows how quickly these last few decades of serving our community, especially our minority youth, can increase our exposure.

What would be important enough to change something that your Founding Mothers put in place. What was the reason your Founding Mothers created a Latina sorority, and what was the reason they placed "Latina" within the name of the organization?

These are rhetorical questions that I don't expect you to answer here, but questions that should be asked when considering such a drastic change.

You're confusing me here because you assign LTA as an LGLO and a minority GLO within the same paragraph. And in another thread you "informed" me that LTA isn't exclusive to Latinas. So what is it, is LTA an LGLO, is it a minority GLO (I'm working on the definition of Minority GLO that I'm familiar with, and that is one that caters to or is mainly encompassed of minority people), is it open to and geared toward all women?

what, okay, i guess because latinos are taking over america, they should not be considered "minority" anymore. i'm using the word minority in a general sense to relate it to other orgs that also cater to some minority (be it a general minority, a specific minority like asians or blacks) minority does not equal multicultural or else I would have used that specific term.

i just said above that it was inclusive not exclusive. how much clearer can that get

from our national website:
Diversity

Lambda Theta Alpha is not an exclusive group of women. Although our roots are Latin, we have sisters from various cultures, nationalities and races including Caribbean, Caucasian, African American, European, Central and South American, Asian, Middle Eastern, and many more. We are an organization that fights for the empowerment of all women, regardless of their race, color, creed or religion. Latinos as a whole are multicultural and came about through the fusion of three cultures: the Spanish, the Indigenous people dwelling in Latin America and the Africans.

Your posts aren't "proving" what you think they are.

That national website quote is just acknowledging that "Latin" isn't a "race" but is rather a fusion of different cultures, nationalities, races, colors, creeds, and religions. Everyone should know this already.

It doesn't negate the Latin roots or that you all are a Latin Sorority. So I really don't get why you're all over this board trying to refute something that isn't really refutable.

And Latinos are not "taking over America." They are still a minority group both in size and influence because they aren't even close to the population and power of whites and have only surpassed blacks in population size over the past 2 or so years.

I would never ever want to negate the latin roots of my organization, so please do not think that because I am a non-latina, that I would want to do that.

that quote was also about "all women" so unless "all women" are latinas, then I don't see why I didn't prove my point.

yes, i know latinos are not taking over america, but ch2tf was insinuating being both minorities and latinos is a no-no, and that they are mutually exclusive of each other, (she says, and I quote "

You're confusing me here because you assign LTA as an LGLO and a minority GLO within the same paragraph.....So what is it, is LTA an LGLO, is it a minority GLO ")

all i was saying is that if you wanted to get technical, then no, Latinos are not minorities if you look at the fact that there are more latinos than anyone else, or call asians minorities since, technically, one out of every four people on this planet is chinese/indian...

I didn't know you were a non-latina until after I typed that. I was going based on your posts. :)

I believe you are taking that out of context. My sorority fights for the rights and advancements of all women in many instances because we are an intersection of black and women when it comes to many experiences and issues. That by no means reduces the black in "black college educated women who have committed ourselves to public service."

More than that, the quote continues to reference how "Latina" encompasses various races, cultures, and hues. It references that before and after the "all women." So "all women" seems to be within that context and they see "all women" as paying respect to the diversity of "Latina."

I believe Ch2ft was asking you whether you all primarily target the needs of Latinos, non-Latino minorities, or all women.

But, yes, Latinos are minorities. Technically and otherwise.

I guess my question is why do you have to assume that it is one or the other? We are both about furthering the latino community and uplifting the universal woman since the beginning, and when someone just focuses on one aspect, that is what has been bugging me.

You can be about the latino community and uplifting the universal woman.

But as my post said, the "universal woman" part does not negate or reduce the "latino community" part. Your organization's founding mothers are who they are and your founding purpose is what it is. Even with the "inclusionary" language.

However, your sorority is technically considered a LGLO and is a member of the NALFO.

I have never disputed that. please read my posts again. And it is not technically considered an LGLO, it is one. So, when I say "minority greek" I was referring to all greeks that are not mainstream.

Exactly and that's why I don't see what your posts are supposed to be accomplishing. You say "read my posts again" but that's not necessary. Your posts seem to be attempting to clarify, or even dispute, something that doesn't need clarity. Maybe that's the "2006" in you. ;)

It is a "minority greek organization" but it is a LGLO and not a MCGLO. That's another distinction that matters (to a lot of people).

yeah, i guess. but i have never stated we are an MCGLO. I came on this thread to ask about perceptions of exclusivity, and ended up having to defend the fact that when I refer to "minority greeks" that it isn't exclusive of LGLO. :p just a bunch of miscommunication and differing experience with greek life to perceive things differently.

The miscommunication and misunderstanding are on your part. :p

But enjoy catching up on these GC threads so you'll get a feel of how we have an understanding that often surpasses different regions, experiences, and perceptions.