I know that no one has said that y'all associate all whites with homosexuality. What I'm saying is that the title of the thread insinuates that whites and homosexuals are groups that are bottom-of-the-barrel. Also, some whites have major problems with homosexuals in their organizations, others don't, so no one should generalize and say that homosexuality is more acceptable in HWGLOs. It varies.

In this and other discussions on whites in BGLOS, some BGLO members have said that they don't want whites in their orgs. Now what would happen if a similar discussion started about blacks in HWGLOs and even one person said they didn't want them? There would be such a hue and cry about racism...and rightfully so. I don't believe in exclusion.

Also, I am not "hurt". I'm hurt.

Carnation, if someone from a white glo says they do not want blacks in, what social/ historical basis do they base it on? Is it because of racism from blacks that the white orgs were founded? Are the white orgs priding themselves on combating racism and oppression? Or would the peron from the white org be speaking out of fear/ignorance/ and blatant racism? You see, the black glo's and the white glo's exist in different socio-historical contexts. What this means is that the orgs. operate differently and their actions take on different meanings in society. When a black person in a black glo talks about apprehension or conflict with whites in the orgs., it is not out of ignorance and racism, but out of an astute knowledge of the orgs'. history and purpose as well as the history of black people in America that is characterized by racism perpetrated and perpetuated by white people, and sustatined today by racists social structures. So institutions like black glo's, the black church, NAACP, Urban league, etc. are always conscious of the ever present threat of racism. That threat is represented by every white person (whether they claim to be or are actually "racist" or not)that we see. To sum up, Blacks in white glo's and whites in black glo's represent two different socio-historical and present day realities. That is why this thread is vital to the livelihood of our continued development in the black glo's.
P.S. When I put hurt in quotes, I was not trying to belittle your pain, I was merely quoting your exact word. I guess that is just the academic in me.:)
Blackwatch!!!!!

you struck the nail on the head.
 

First; welcome bruh.

Secondly, that's pretty much what I was sayin'-or why I said it. Good point.

Carnation,

I'm not understanding how the title (or nature) of this thread implies that whites and homosexuals are bottom-of-the-barrel members ???:confused:

Also, thanks for stating your "racial creditentials" but that was really unnecessary. Due to the fact that these are public boards, if someone in a WGLO are offended by statements made by individual members, such as "I don't want whites in my org", then that WGLO member has every right to respond. If WGLO members feels that they must be "PC" in their response, then that's their perogative. If they choose not to start " a hue and cry about racism" then once again, that is that member's perogative. But please don't play games like BGLO members are always boo-hooing racism at certain threads or comments. If BGLO members are able to substantiate their claims or statements and some WGLO members can't, then who's fault is that? Who is really the one "boo-hooing"?

Exclusion is not right due to the coloe of someone's skin. But to quote Blackwatch "if someone from a white glo says they do not want blacks in, what social/ historical basis do they base it on? Is it because of racism from blacks that the white orgs were founded? Are the white orgs priding themselves on combating racism and oppression? Or would the peron from the white org be speaking out of fear/ignorance/ and blatant racism? You see, the black glo's and the white glo's exist in different socio-historical contexts. What this means is that the orgs. operate differently and their actions take on different meanings in society. When a black person in a black glo talks about apprehension or conflict with whites in the orgs., it is not out of ignorance and racism, but out of an astute knowledge of the orgs'. history and purpose as well as the history of black people in America that is characterized by racism perpetrated and perpetuated by white people, and sustatined today by racists social structures. So institutions like black glo's, the black church, NAACP, Urban league, etc. are always conscious of the ever present threat of racism. That threat is represented by every white person (whether they claim to be or are actually "racist" or not)that we see. To sum up, Blacks in white glo's and whites in black glo's represent two different socio-historical and present day realities. That is why this thread is vital to the livelihood of our continued development in the black glo's. "

Honeykiss,

I'm not "boohooing". One thing I've observed, due to my racial heritage, is that racism extends both ways. It's no more acceptable for blacks to bash and/or exclude whites that it is for whites to do the same to blacks.

Furthermore, many NPC sororities began due to the extreme sexual discrimination of the day--which certainly still exists today. It is rampant in my field. Nevertheless, you won't see me man-bashing on GC.

This thread has been widely discussed between many of the non-AA members of GC in pms for weeks and many had stated that they couldn't believe that anyone would post something so offensive that non-AAs would be sure to see. I've received several emails since I finally posted that said, "Way to go! You beat me to it!"

I just don't think any of us ought to be hurting anyone else. Blackwatch's response was sufficient to help us semi-understand but then people had to start up again. I won't be visiting this thread again but I wanted y'all to know that the longtime HWGLO members wouldn't diss y'all..please don't do it to us.

It aint our fault...We were given this world (We didn't make it)
 

AA's mistrust of whites is nothing new, nor should it be shocking to white people. If it is, they need to wake up. Blacks deal with exclusion and the negative effects of racism everyday. These issues exist because of some whites treatment and view of Blacks. If whites don't want us in their organization (which I hope you do realize many of them don't) then thats there thing...they have their reasons. We have our own organizations and don't need theirs. If a black person joined an organization dedicated to the advancement of white people SPECIFICALLY, wouldn't a white person wonder? I would. Most of our orgs were founded for the advancement of Black SPECIFICALLY, and all mankind coincidentally. It makes SENSE that AAs would question a white persons intentions and they would be NAIVE not too. Pro-Black doesn't mean Anti-White...I have nothing against "good" white people. But (in my view) it is NECESSARY that my org be focused and remain focused on the advancement of Black people. It is quite logical to assume that an influx of Whites infiltrating Alpha could threaten that focus.

As far as homos, I DO clasify them in the same category as pedaphiles. I think their homosexual behavior degrades the image of our orgs. I don't want to be associated with their negative behavior....that's just my opinion...which I have a right to.

I would love for white people, who have a problem with my views (or any other person who posted on this) to express their feelings. That would make for a intersting, positive,and productive discussion on this issue which involves THEM too....

the Valdosta chapter of the NAACP has a white woman as president. Becoming president....is this voted upon? Just curious.

Time I stepped in
 

Greetings All,

ALL BGLOs were founded on principals to help the community first our people and all others as well. If we fight for equality it is against our principals to intentionally keep whites and gays out of the orgs. How can we fight for equality and keep others out because of race?
However on a personal note I do not support homosexuality but I will not discriminate against others because of thier race but I will question as I would do anyone else why do you want to be an Alpha and what do you know about Alpha that makes you think you can relate to it.

For example not every blackman should be an Alpha, Kappa, Que, Sigma or Iota. Because they are not in line with the ideals of these orgs as MOST WHITE MEN do not have the principals that Alpha needs but there are some out there. Only 5% of black men are in HBGLO. So it is no diffrent for white men only those truly interested will make the effort. And not all will be accepted. This is the way it will be and always be.

Sphinxpoet

Exactly........
 

This just proves that the few nays in this thread aren't representative of the entire AA population and that we aren't racist as some would like to think. :rolleyes:

Well then I have to say that the people who PM'd you are COWARDS. If they dont have the strength of their convictions to actually come on this board and discuss this instead of hiding behind you - who I absolutely respect for saying something, even if I don't agree with what you said- then they are NOT EVEN WORTH OUR CONTEMPLATION. Straight up.

And I think that Blackwatch answered you as well as can be. Our founders intended for us to serve the black community FIRST. If a white person is down with that purpose I have no problems - I had a hand in making a "white" Soror on our yard as a matter of fact. But BGLO's have to ALWAYS keep that in mind so it is a valid question to ask.

We want people in our org's who are about service, not about stepping or calling, or social activities. We need to know that a potential Soror or Frater understands our priorities. Even I on some levels wonder if white people can POSSIBLY comprehend it- that to be pro-black is not to be anti-white, that to want our people to advance must be our first priority because we have come so far and have so much farther to go.

Well I have to pat you on the back for challenging assumptions and I hope that you have some understanding of why they are raised.

Disclaimer: The stated opinions on GC ARE NOT the official position of any BGLO - - - Nor do such opinions represent the intent of its membership. Please consult each organization's national office regarding policy issues. ;)

Pretty much.

Re: Time I stepped in
 

I think this is a great post, Sphinxpoet. Very well said.

Re: IMAGE is IMPORTANT
 

Okay - I just have a few things I'd like to point out from your post (with all due respect to your right to free speech, yada yada yada)

Originally posted by APhiAce
Everyone has their own moral values. For many, homosexuality is immoral and negative. I see it as such, and Anti-Alpha. If I saw a sweet brother tryning to get in, I'd vote him down because I see gayness as negative. Some would ask me to check myself in the mirror...I know I sin and do negative anti-Alpha things in my life. But if I displayed these sins publicly, I would have gotten voted down too!

(You have the right to have your own moral values) Okay - so are you saying that you actually have SEEN homosexuals publicly displaying their "sin" -- or that its okay for you to sin because you are behind closed doors? As far as I know, the homosexuals that I am friends with have never gone so far as to hold hands in public, much less to do their business on the lawn of the quad. I'm just wondering what the difference in sin is -- is it only sin when its public?

Just cause you're a fag doesn't mean that you can't do positive work in the frat.

Do you really think using the term "fag" doesn't imply discrimination?? Would you tolerate a gay man using the *n* word when he says "Just because you're a *n* doesn't mean that you can't do positive work in society" I personally don't agree to name-calling based on color, sexual preference, creed, religion, etc. etc. If you don't like someone's sexual preference, then state that -- but don't resort to the name calling.

I can't judge anybody. But we DO judge people when making membership selections and are EXPECTED to. ALPHA doesn't seek negativity.

I don't know of any GLO (red and yellow black and white) that seeks negativity. And yes, we all must judge people for selection. But that doesn't mean that any of us should overstep the boundaries of the criteria that our founders set for us. AXO has always had 5 membership criteria on which PMN's are judged. Its right there on our national website, and we tell each and every woman what these criteria are. None of them would EVER include race, sexual preference, creed, religion, etc. Not since they were established has there been a derivation of these criteria.

As far as Whites in the frat....I don't get it. I think it's suspect. Not all white people are bad, but BGLOs aren't just Fraternal Organizations.

Mighty "black" of you to say -- thanks for letting us all know that not all of us are bad....

I didn't realize that BGLO's aren't "JUST" fraternal orgs? And to think that all along, I was only serving AXO because it was just a fraternal thing to me with no deeper meaning.


We don't plan programs for white people, or target white people for our service. If they so happen to get served...cool. We're trying to save our own. I feel white people may try and DILLUTE our focus and try and use our resources to help "EVERYBODY". We as black folks need our resources dedicated SOLELY TO US! Its human nature to look after your own. If I was in a white organization, I would be thinking of how to use their resources to help my people. I find it hard to imagine that a white person would exclude their OWN people to help ours. I don't want our programs dilluted.
A white person has to have that understanding. If they are willing to submit to serving mostly Blacks, (when using frat time/resources)...then fine...you can join. But don't come in my org trying to "whitewash" it and waste the little resources we have "spreading the love". It sounds prejudice (not racist) but thats REAL. That is my only concern w/white folks in the frat.

And I guess this is where I can say proudly that YES - AXO is promoting non-discrimination. We serve Victims of Domestic Violence. Not - WHITE Victims of Domestic Violence. And not BLACK Victims of Domestic Violence. Victims - period. When we take food, clothing, and supplies to the shelter, we see people of all colors. (To refer to an earlier post of mine from way back when...) We do serve MOSTLY black people....BLACK AND BLUE from bruises that is. When I take the hand of a woman who has been hit so much that she is blind in one eye, then I care not that that hand is white or black...only that she is someone in need. "MY" people means to me any person who is in need. I will not overlook a black woman to give help to a white woman simply because of color. I would not be part of an organization which would tell me WHO I can and cannot help based upon color. If your org wants to support a reading program for black children in a government subsidized housing development -- great. Go for it! But if you were teaching a group of black kids to read and a white kid showed up, would you turn him away -- because wouldn't this be "diluting" your program?? I would hope not. And yes, it does sound racist and prejudiced when you say that you don't want to help anyone other than "your" people. Actually, it just sounds rather sad -- I would hope that someone would help you in your time of need because you NEED someone or something - not because of the color of your skin.

So flame me, PM me, (don't email me - because I have so much spam from the V's I never check it), whatever -- but think about the words you use when you describe others. And think about how you would feel if you were the one being described.