Omega Phi Alpha is pretty much the same as Gamma Sigma Sigma. We are open to both males and females, but almost all of our sisters are female. One of our chapters does have a male sister; however, it's very very uncommon.

It is relevant to all organizations that are supported by or recognized by an educational institution that receives federal funding.

Simply put, the Department of Education can withhold federal funds (including loans to eligible students and grants) from any educational institution that supports or recognizes any organization that discriminates in membership selection on the basis of sex. Thus, schools have a very real incentive to deny recognition to single-sex organizations.

Among the limited exceptions to this requirement are "social fraternities and sororities." So, a school can recognize "social fraternities and sororities" without endangering the ability to receive federal funds under Title IX. Professional, honorary and service GLOs, on the other hand, were pretty much forced by Title IX to go co-ed.

As far as NPHC orgs go, my understanding is that they traditionally refer to themselves as service organizations. But it appears that they also meet the Department of Education's criteria for "social" fraternities and sororities, even if they would not usually refer to themselves as "social."

You are correct. We are 501(c)(7) orgs.

That is a tax classification, though. It has little if anything to do with whether the Dept of Education would consider a fraternity or sorority to be "social" within the meaning of Title IX.

Wellll - actually, social fraternities/sororities are exempt if they are also exempt from taxes under "section 501(a) of title 26" and if the active membership consists of students of a college/university.

Not quite. What Title IX and the Dept of Ed regs say is that the non-discrimination provisions of Title IX do not apply "to the membership practices of social fraternities and sororities which are exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, the active membership of which consists primarily of students in attendance at institutions of higher education." 34 CFR 106.14(a) (which pretty much tracks the language of 20 USCS Sec. 1681(6)(A)).

But this doesn't mean that simpy being exempt from taxation under section 501 = being exempt from the requirements of Title IX. I'm quite willing to bet that all professional, honorary and service GLOs have section 501 tax-exemption as well.

What it means is that a GLO will be exempt from the membership requirements of Title IX if it is exempt from taxation under section 501 and is social in character. Otherwise, the provision could simply leave out the word "social." So, there has to be a determination that a GLO is "social." For the latter question, the Dept of Education looks to the nature, character and purpose of the organization to determine whether the organization is social or professional, service, honorary, etc.

That was the case when my Fraternity asked the Dept, back in the 80's, to agree with us that we are a social rather than professional fraternity and could therefore remain single-sex. If I remember correctly, the letter agreeing that we are social and exempt from the membership requirements of Title IX doesn't even mention tax exempt status under section 501, but instead focuses solely on the nature and purpose of the Fraternity.

I know it is a tax classification, and that classification is given to organizations whose primary purpose is social. Thus I suspect that the Dept. of Ed. does consider the tax classification in determining exemptions. And I was merely confirming your thought that although we say we are service organizations, in the eyes of the IRS we are social organizations. Jeez.

Which is why I said "social fraternities/sororities are exempt."

R.I.F. isn't it? :D

Quite!

Ladygreek (and preciousjeni),

Sorry if I'm coming across as beating a dead horse or being obtuse. (And yes, preciousjeni, I did miss the "social" in your post. Sorry.) I was just trying to respond to the question about what Title IX had to do with GLOs and avoid confusion.

So, to beat the dead horse just a little longer so as to avoid a little more confusion, 501(c)(7) is not limited to organizations whose primary purpose is social; it is for "Clubs organized for pleasure, recreation, and other nonprofitable purposes." In the one instance with which I'm familiar, the Department of Education did not consider tax classification at all in determining exemption from Title IX; it looked exclusively at documents, statements and activities of the GLO to determine whether the GLO is exempt from Title IX.

And ladygreek, I realized you were confirming my statement about how NPHC orgs view themselves vs how the IRS views them, and I should have acknowledged that. Sorry. But I've run into too many Greeks, on GC and elsewhere, who think that their tax exempt status is what exempts them from Title IX as well. One just has to look at the thread on whether a member of a co-ed fraternity should be president of a campus IFC (or more to the point, whether a school should require a co-ed fraternity to be a member of the IFC) to see that not doing anything to threaten single-sex is an issue for some people/groups. That's why I responded as I did.

I promise I'll shut up now. ;)

Don't ya love how wonderful communication is across the internet, MysticCat81? I'm glad we're pretty much squared away!

Some days, there really isn't enough caffiene available! Count me glad, too.

Comparison of 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4), (6) and (7) Status


Social activities must be insubstantial

Social activity may be anything less than "primary"

Social activity may be anything less than "primary"

Social activity must be primary; other activities must be less than primary

This is from a comparison chart. It was laid out in columns. the last column being 501(c)(7). So the bold above applies to that classification.

And this is what bothered me the most about your posts. With only being familiar with one instance you have managed to generally denigrate everyone else's opinions and knowledge.

Many Omega Phi Alpha ladies have dual membership in NPC and NPHC sororities - and we can, because we are a service sorority. If we were affiliated with a national organization, it would be along with professional fraternities and sororities such as AKPsi (the co-ed business frat), etc. - things that do not disqualify you for membership in other organizations.

Even though some social fraternities and sororities are more service-based than others (I don't want to point any fingers here, so I won't), they are still not purely service fraternities/sororities.

On a sidenote, does anyone know - since APO went coed, are there any all-male service fraternities?

What chapter is that, just out of curiousity?

I don't believe there are any that are all-male or all-female.

Sorry, that was bad wording on my part ... more majority male than APO. Like with APO, at least from my experience and understanding, things seem to be pretty even, whereas with the sororities, they are almost entirely female. My question is whether there are any predominantly male service fraternities now that APO is not?

No, because APO has always been the only Service Fraternity. There are no others.

Also realize that due to Title IX, non-co-ed college groups are pretty much non-existant. Socials were exempted, btw.

There are no other service fraternities; however, there are one or two chapters of APO that have chosen not to go co-ed. For example, the APO chapter at Auburn is all-male...but that's okay, because OPA has a chapter there too. :)

Psi Chapter in Corpus Christi. They pledged a guy this semester; I haven't heard any updates on him though, I've just seen pictures.

Iota Chapter (when it still existed) pledged a male as well, although I don't know if he was ever initiated.

Clemson's chapter is also all-male. I believe they have a chapter of Gamma Sigma Sigma, though.

It should probably also be mentioned that four of the people in our new Georgia Southern colony are male...

There are several APO chapters that decided to remain all-male. At last count, there were about a dozen or so (one is at an all-male school). However, recent decisions will soon change that.

..."recent decisions?" (I'm curious.)

Due to issues of having all-male chapters within a co-ed organization (some groups don't want to work with us because of it, there are also apparently legal issues as well), APO's National Board has decided that all chapters must be open to all students at their schools. This has been announced within the Fraternity.

I also think they have an ESA chapter too...

I know that FAMU's APO chapter is still all male (I think)

In APO or OPA?:confused:

OPA. All four males have been assigned alumnae bigs. All of the girls have bigs in Chi or Nu chapters.

It should be noted that not only does Southern have an APO chapter, but they also have a GSS...which is surprising. I mean, it's possible that GSS attracts a different crowd than a brand-new OPA colony, but...guys in OPA when there's an APO chapter handy?

It's my understanding that at Texas A&M Corpus Christi, there is no APO, so I can understand the guy pledge there...hmm...

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with males in OPA, it's just a new concept for me, coming from a school where there's both a co-ed APO chapter and an OPA chapter.


(Ha ha, talk about derailing a topic...)

Awwww, my RL little brother at GSU could one day be my OPA sister :) Wonder if he'd go for it?

Interesting...

I'll PM both of ya'll...

As a Gamma Sig (and a District Director), I find this convo interesting too.

To clear it up, we do have a Gamma Sig Chapter (Epsilon Beta) at Clemson. The APO chapter (Gamma Lambda) is all-male.

We also have Gamma Sig at Georgia Southern (Eta Alpha). They colonized in 2003 and chartered in 2005. I too think it'll be interesting to see how it'll all play out with OPA establishing themselves there as well--and that's all I'm gonna say on that.

I only know of one other school like Georgia Southern and that's Western Kentucky...there's both GSS and OPA there, and they do attract different members.

How large is your GSS chapter at WKU? Our chapter there is ~80 sisters strong (our largest chapter by far). I was wondering how well the two co-exist on the same campus.

I wouldn't be too sure about that.

Based on the way how those decisions came about and the methods used to do so, the power for that decision to stick is debatable (and reversible) at best and permanently dividing the org at worst.

I'm not sure how many members they have, but I am guessing it's less than 15...but again, not real sure.

I'd like to know that myself, how well they get along.

It seems like if there can be multiple social sororities on one campus and they get along, then there's no reason that GSS and OPA can't co-exist alright ... I think the fact that they have not one, but two excellent service sororities on their campus is a real compliment to their school :D

At Carolina, there is APO, OPA and ESA. All three were able to recruit sucessfully. I don't know if GSS is on the campus (I graduated almost five years ago.)

All three social greeks just pretty much did their own thing. When OPA was established at Carolina, some of the APO members thought we were taking away people who could have been members of APO.:( The whole time I was there, we never worked with them. This is no offense to those in APO, I do have love for ya'll! :D But that was the attitude at the college I was at.

No GSS at Carolina...yet :)

I don't think it would be a prob if there were more than 1 service sorority were on campus, it's just another option for someone. Everybody can't be Gamma Sigs :p Just kidding.

And it's like that at some campuses in which there are both GSS and APO. Sometimes they work together and sometimes they don't. And both groups have no problems recruiting.

We kinda go through phases with APO here at Tech. Sometimes we're chill, and sometimes we're tense. One of our OPA pledges right now is actually a brother in APO. She wasn't pleased with their chapter's service program, but she's still an active brother there too.

And one of our girls disassociated and went to APO for social reasons. She wasn't honest with us when she left about why she was doing it, which was upsetting.

Some APO's are totally cool with us. Others think that because APO is co-ed, that OPA serves no purpose and should just merge with them...they don't understand that nowadays, we're two very different organizations.