My sorority specifically states that we do not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation (among many other things).

It is good to see the number of posters who support GLBTQ's in their organizations.

The only thing I will say is the best thing is to get to the point where if someone asks the questions if you allow Gays in your org, you are able to look or type with an incredulous expression--"a that's a silly question, or course we do" answer and leave it at that. When you start giving examples it starts sounding as if are trying to convince yourself--sorta like the "are you racist" question that people answer with "no I am not, my next door neighbors are Black and they have been to my home". ;)

I know of no HQ or IHQ that is saying that you have to take gay members. The nondiscriminatory clauses just mean that ideally, being gay should not be a factor for or against a member or PNM. That being said, there are chapters that would hold it against someone and some that will not.

And, go right ahead believing that there are no gay members in your chapter. There are. They aren't out publicly because either they aren't ready to be out, or they think that they just "Haven't met the right girl yet", or they know that many members of your chapter will not be accepting. You may even have a member or two who are out privately to a couple of the other members that they trust. It happens.

ETA: Sorry, the bold emphasis would not turn off. I tried. I really tried.

I get what you are saying, but come on. How do you know "there are" gays in his chapter? That's ridiculous. If you told me that to my face.......I'd argue with you to no end. I mean, are you not practically saying there are gay men in every chapter that none of us "know about yet"? I may be stereotyping and just going off common traits......but I don't find it that difficult to spot a gay man or a guy that is extremely confused with his sexuality. To me, they stick out like a sore thumb.

And then there are guys who aren't confused at all and just don't want or need for you to know.

And to take it a step farther, why should any of us need to know?

Someone's sexual orientation is his or her business, not mine.

I guess I can respond to you and Delt.

That's a tough subject. I would want to know if a gay man were in my fraternity. Simple as that. I'm perfectly comfortable saying that I wouldn't want to live with one, especially in my room at the fraternity house. I don't agree with it, and I think it would be a bad situation. Other's most definitely feel the same way. If I was living with a guy who hid it from me and then I found out about it later, or walked in on him and some dude.........we would be having a serious problem. People are free to make their own decisions about their sexuality, none of my business. I am extremely against it and overall pretty much disgusted by it, but it's still their choice. In a fraternity/fraternity house setting, I think they should let people know.

You're back! I'm so glad, I missed you!

I have a sister who I highly suspect is gay. But it really never was an issue - hey, your sex life is your business, not mine. She is a whole person, not her sexual orientation. Were she to tell me she is gay, it really wouldn't make any difference to how I feel about her. The vows we took bind us as sisters - she is my sister, no matter who she loves romantically.
Back to the original question - Gamma Phi Beta has never had discriminatory membership clauses. I don't see any need to add to what has worked for us for 130+ years. Every chapter is free to select members as long as they meet our membership standards - none of which concern sexuality.

i would be upset if a brother was gay and didn't tell anyone. Being open is cool, but there are not supposed to be secrets between brothers.

Well, the ones that you notice stick out like sore thumbs.

But how would you know whether there are substantial numbers of gay men in your state who can "pass"? Unless they come out to you -- and based on what you've said, they would have to be crazy to come out to you -- how would you ever know? Only those of us they come out to privately realize just how prevalent they are, even in the most conservative churches, towns, and schools.

I won't go so far as to say that there are definitely gay men in your chapter, because I don't know how big your chapter is or whether you are so openly hostile that private gay men choose to stay away. But I feel very comfortable saying that you know gay men who you do not know are gay. The more traditional your social circle is, the more certain I am of that.

Well, I certainly hope that my close friends would trust me enough to tell me. I understand why it might take time, but I need my friends to have faith in me in order to have a true and deep friendship.
________
GLASS BUBBLERS

Maybe, but in the real world there are always secrets between brothers, sisters, siblings, married couples, parents and children, etc.

I think a persons sexual orientation is important to the person and his or her partner (or potential partner) and nobody else.

We had a gay Brother who I was not aware him being gay until after he had graduated. I was an Alum of course.

But he was one of the hardest working Brothers in the Chapter. We still stay in touch as he is still my Fraternal Brother amd a good friend.

You know, I just really have to disagree with you. I may know of some people that might be, but they aren't people that I would consider close. Close friends, ( quite a few of them) I don't have a doubt in my mind.

.........and I do know gay men who.........are gay. Haha.

I just find it hard to believe that you wouldn't be the least bit irritated if you lived with a guy who didn't tell you he was gay...........and then you had to find out about it randomly.

Maybe you would, but it seems like you wouldn't have a problem with it.

Why? You can't catch it by breathing the same air. And if you didn't know, then he obviously was not displaying the "behaviors" you find disgusting.

Yes......but If I walked in to my room and he was banging his friend Chuck.....he would be displaying the "behaviors I find disgusting."

....and yes, I know I can't catch gay. But I could catch a glimpse of him being gay relatively close to my parameter, which wouldn't fly. Sorry, I have a dislike of all things gay for several reason. I would have a major problem with a roommate who hid something like that from me and the other men in the house.

I understand what you are saying, but your statement was if you didn't know and heard it somewhere else. That would imply, to me, that he wouldn't be banging Chuck in your room. He would be discreet enough that you had to hear it elsewhere. That's the point I was addressing.

Very honestly, I would hope that you wouldn't walk in on a hetero roommate banging Charlene. In both cases those are inappropriate behaviors regardless.

^^I had a friend in college whose roommate used to have sex with his girlfriend while he was in the room. Blech! That is disgusting behavior regardless of the gender of the partner.

I mean.....shit happens when you're 19 and it's 3am.... and your boo is lookin right....



You gotta listen for your roommate breathing patterns.... if he snores, screw some more!

Not near as bad. Not even within the same realm actually.

I always find this debate interesting. If some fraternities want to welcome gay members into their organization, by all means, they should feel comfortable doing so. However, I think many are reluctant to do this, and I think that is understandable for a couple of reasons:

1) A lot of fraternities value Christian ideals. Many see homosexuality as immoral, and may be hesitant to endorse that lifestyle. Of course, some will likely see such an objection as hypocritical, considering other practices that are common in fraternities. That being said, tolerating or even encouraging some morally questionable activities isn't a persuasive reason to accept or encourage other objectionable activities.

2) Inviting someone into your fraternity usually leads to significant and extended contact with that person. In my opinion, doing so requires more than the level of "tolerance" that is often trumpeted in the workplace or other organizations. Many or most of these people will live together, take trips together, and experience social lives that are intertwined. A lot of guys get uncomfortable around overt homosexual activity. In my opinion this is usually natural, and not indicative of any conscious intolerance.

-I have a problem with the idea that fraternities are expected to be places of diversity. Fraternities, at least the ones I was around, did not intend to be microcosms of society. They were places for like-minded people to join together to pursue common interests and goals. If you like a potential member overall, then take him. However, I don't think fraternities should necessarily abide by the reasoning that they should take a potential member because they like him in every aspect except for his homosexuality. One's sexual orientation may be a big deal to an organization, and I don't have a problem with it being a deal breaker (nor do I have a problem with religion or ideology being one).

Why not? Beacuse you can get off watching them?

Hey, try to tone down the bitch attitude. That would be great. Evidently you have a problem with me having a problem with living with a gay man who hid from me the fact that he likes to pack fudge.......which I highly disagree with and don't approve of.

To answer your question.......no......pretty much because I am a strait, non-homosexual, woman loving male. I wouldn't care if I walked in on my roommate wearing out a hot sorostitute in my dorm room. I'd leave and give him a five later, when he's done. Voyeurism isn't really my thing.

Nicely put, Shinerbock.

Agree.

right, but if we never talk about who we are dating, or whatever....i mean yeah, there are secrets from brothers but in order to be brothers you have to share some secrets

I was reading this thread and it reminded me of one of my good friends who was a PIKE at FSU in the 80's. Ever since I've known him, I knew he was gay and we've talked about whether his homosexuality was an issue in college.

According to him, none of his brothers knew he was gay. They thought he was just a little different because his family was from Charleston.

To this day, that still cracks me up...:D

It's a darn good reason to drop the hypocritical charade that you are in some sense a "Christian" organization.
________

I see... so because we tolerate some immoral acts, we should tolerate all immoral acts.

Or at least that was what he said up there. Your little jab is unresponsive.

Bitch attitude? Actually I think I have been rather nice. I just forgot to put the laughing icon after the sentence.

I do immoral things on a daily basis. That does not mean I'm going to open myself to other immoral things just because I'm already tainted.

I guess I just don't buy into the idea that sinners shouldn't oppose sin.

Some people view certain things as "more" immoral than others. I'm not saying there is a hierarchy of immoral activity, but that very well may be the argument in refusing to accept homosexuals into an organization. I don't think its a great argument, but I don't agree that the morality argument is simply a cover for hating gay people. It would also be wrong to ignore those groups who truly strive to abide by their principles, as not all fraternities are involved in rampant substance abuse and promiscuity.

I think accepting a homosexual into your fraternity is an endorsement of their lifestyle, or at least it ought to be. In my mind, if you knowingly accept a drug user, you're stamping your letters as approval on that person. I think the same is true in this case. This isn't a club that meets once a week and talks about how we're going to be farmers in the future. This isn't about tolerance, it should be about brotherhood. I completely understand people who have a problem forming that bond with a person who lives a life they don't agree with. I know plenty of people who didn't join a particular group because of the activities they're involved in. I don't see why it should be any different when it comes to the groups deciding who they want to invite in.

By "overt" activity I meant that which isn't hidden and which is involved with living a homosexual lifestyle. I'm not referring exclusively to explicit sexual activity, but just the everyday aspects that are unique to a homosexual lifestyle.

I have no idea what my national fraternity says about inclusion. We let in who we want to based on our own set of factors. My fraternity is not inclusive of all people, and I'm perfectly fine with that. I have no need to make excuses for the lack of such a clause.

I'm not trying to stir the pot, I promise.

I think it's fair to say that all chapters "let in" who they want based on the degree to which a potential member fits into that chapter. And I think it's also fair to say that we (in the Greek community) are perfectly fine with that.

I'm not trying to say that every group should let in anyone who wants to be part of said group. But when someone says that their group doesn't include a group of people because their behavior is considered immoral, it just smacks of hypocrisy. Especially when, as you pointed out, some groups often participate in less-than-moral activities.

I think perhaps I mostly disagree with your belief that accepting someone into a group means endorsing that person's behavior. There were women in my chapter who had had an abortion. But I don't think it's accurate to say that our chapter was endorsing abortion. While each group is represented by the individuals within it, it isn't fair to say that every person in every group maintains and practices the same principles.

This debate brings to mind the questions often associated with teaching values--who's value do we teach? If we teach yours, are others given a voice? In this case, which fraternity member/members values do we follow?? Some groups do value inclusion, or at the very least, diversity--isn't that ok?

I also think that anyone who says there are no gays in their group just doesn't know. With approximately ten percent of the college going population identfying themselves as GLBT, more than likely many groups have at least one member who is gay, possibly someone who does not know yet or does not "live out." For those opposed to having gay members, are we to turn our backs on these people later, people who we pledged brother/sisterhood to, if they chose to live as they really are?

I just don't understand the reasoning behind the alternative. I'm a sinner, I have immoral moments. If acknowledging this and still turning away from other immoral activity is hypocritical, then yeah, I guess I'm a hypocrite. If a fraternity presents itself to the world as a Christian organization and condemns homosexuality, all while fostering an environment that condones or promotes drug use and promiscuity, then yes, I think that is a hypocritical stance. That being said, I don't think the solution is to abandon all standards because some have been breached. Is it wrong to tolerate some immoral activities more than others? Probably, yes. Is the solution to become an equal-opportunity acceptor of immoral activity? I don't think so.

My chapter, and many who would probably hesitate to admit homosexual members, doesn't consist of a plethora of people from all walks of life who harbor a variety of distinct viewpoints. Sure, even within a room of white republicans there is diversity, but our mission is not simply to replicate the world outside. We're there because we share common goals, opinions and interests. I'm not sure that the abortion comparison is a good one. While I think abortion is immoral, I don't think a girl who had one is continually living in immorality. Sure, remnants will linger, but it is obviously possible to move on from that. However, to some people, homosexuality would be viewed as an ongoing lifestyle, not simply one immoral decision or lapse in judgment.

My friend just started wearing headphones...to drown out the spanking noises.

I think this is one of those things that women and men see different. For most women I know, the thought of their roommate getting it on, while they are in the room, is gross. Dudes seem to take it a little more in stride, and then talk about their roommate after the fact. :p:)

Chapters and nationals struggle with this every day. It's been that way for a long long long long time. This is just something else added onto the pile.

Sure, I imagine in lots of groups there are people masking their lifestyle. However, I think the idea that there is a homosexual in every group is rather ridiculous. You can't simply transpose a statistic like that onto these groups. Not all colleges are the same. Some self-selection will keep homosexuals from going to certain schools, through rush, and to certain fraternities.

I absolutely believe this happens, but at every school, in almost every chapter? I find that highly unlikely.

Funk that. Where on earth is the out resident lesbo on here? Not bi. Not lesbian and flying below the radar. But totally OUT?...and hot.

I'm female and it totally depends on who the two people are...if I get totally grossed out or totally turned on.