GreekChat.com Forums - A Victory for Sororities: Education Department Rules Sororities Are for Women Only

GreekChat.com Forums (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/index.php)

- Chit Chat (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/forumdisplay.php?f=185)

- - A Victory for Sororities: Education Department Rules Sororities Are for Women Only (https://greekchat.com/gcforums/showthread.php?t=248932)

The issue I had with the KKG case was nationals should NEVER force a chapter to either take or not take a pnm.

Too many people are willing to simplify biology to fit their ideologies, ignoring the complex nature of sex and gender. I trust my sisters, and I fully embrace any transwoman who comes into our sisterhood. Unlike most negative commenters, I know and love transpeople and have no interest in becoming the genitalia police. Masculine-looking ciswomen have been assaulted by the genitalia police; maybe people should worry less about other people who are just trying to use the bathroom.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2513552)

The issue I had with the KKG case was nationals should NEVER force a chapter to either take or not take a pnm.

The most ironic part of this whole deal is that KKG (like all NPC sororities) most likely at one school or another has ALREADY had transgender members who had great grades and extracurriculars and were happily welcomed by the chapter without the voting being manipulative. Why they chose this hill to die on, I do not know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zach (Post 2513547)

I read the comments on here and I agree and disagree. For me, as a public school teacher, my priority is fostering a safe, respectful environment for every student. If a student requests a preferred name or pronoun, I honor that to uphold our district’s nondiscrimination policy. At the same time, my role is to teach academic standards and facilitate healthy development which means I don’t engage in medical or identity counseling. I strive to be consistent and transparent. I treat every student with dignity while maintaining the factual integrity of the curriculum. In doing so, we balance compassion with clarity, ensuring no child feels marginalized or misled.

All I’m saying is that kids are still developing, and it’s not my place to push identity, it’s my job to teach, listen, and guide. I don’t debate biology, and at the same time, I don’t shame anyone either. I just try to be honest and consistent while giving kids room to grow without confusion or pressure.

Would you be opposed to a transgender chick joining Phi Beta Sigma?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2513552)

Call me dumb but wtf is a ciswoman?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513460)

I forgot to leave my opinion on the matter. I won’t get into the details PB posted LOL! because I don’t know what he knows, but I’ll just say this: I cosign with honeychile, CG, and PB - you got people identifying as animals now. Therefore, if a grown man tells me he’s a cat, I’m not buying kibble or building dude a scratching post. Same with gender. Those who disagree with me, believe what you want, but if you ain’t got ovaries or you can’t produce sperm, biology already told the truth.

Ya know what? If someone walks into my clinic insisting they’re a Labrador, I’m not affirming that, I’m preparing a stool sample kit and asking when their last heartworm test was. And don’t tell me you’re a dog and then get squeamish when I reach for the gel and thermometer. You don’t get to cosplay biology and then tap out when biology answers back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513556)

Call me dumb but wtf is a ciswoman?

Oh you mean… woman. The original. Factory settings. No assembly required. That’s just what they call us now so a man in eyeliner can feel included.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 33girl (Post 2513553)

And why in Wyoming?

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 2513560)

Oh you mean… woman. The original. Factory settings. No assembly required. That’s just what they call us now so a man in eyeliner can feel included.

What? You lost me. I’m asking what a ciswoman is. That’s what I meant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 2513560)

Actually, the term is based in science and isn't simply what "they" (educated, non-bigoted people, I guess) call "us". https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/hi...ientific-roots

What defines your sex? Genitalia? Hormones? Chromosomes? Guess what - there are myriad ways those can present, meaning that the idea that there are 2 sexes, easily determined and immutable, is biologically wrong. https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...y-simplistic1/

This breaks down the issues nicely - https://www.boredpanda.com/biologica...witter-thread/

Stating that people are "identifying as animals" is fallacious and insulting. I know the pain and heartache my trans friends and family have gone through. They don't deserve the contempt and insults of transphobes and TERFs. Let people decide for themselves how to live their lives, especially if it doesn't affect yours. Trust chapters to decide for themselves which women of whatever ilk they wish to extend a bid to, and take all that energy and put it towards something positive.

ETA - I'm not interested in any ignorant/bigoted replies; I've heard them all before, and they tend to want to ignore the scientific/medical complications inherent in discussing sex and gender. The similarity between them and the discussions NPC sororities had about admitting women of color is striking. I said my piece and won't be following or replying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513564)

What? You lost me. I’m asking what a ciswoman is. That’s what I meant.

“Ciswoman” just means… woman. Born female, still female, no special edits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2513565)

I appreciate that you care about your friends and family, nobody’s denying they’ve faced real pain. But the truth is, compassion and clarity are not enemies.

First, let’s talk about this “cis” label. It was coined to make a normal, biologically rooted woman sound like a variation of her own category. It didn’t come from real biological need, it came from a social ideology that says womanhood is just a feeling. Biology says otherwise.

Second, you linked articles that throw out edge cases, yes, a tiny percentage of people are born intersex. But that doesn’t erase the reality that over 99% of humans are clearly male or female based on chromosomes. Exceptions don’t rewrite the rule, they prove it. And using disorders of sexual development to justify the erasure of sex categories is a stretch, not science.

And comparing this to people being denied bids because of race is a false equivalence. Skin color never changes your sex. You can’t hormone-shot your way into different chromosomes. Race and sex aren’t interchangeable puzzle pieces. Comparing this to race is a rhetorical cheap shot because it hijacks real, historic injustice to protect a completely different ideology. It’s literally just a shade. It was contrived by human made hierarchies, not biology itself. But male and female? That’s baked into your DNA. You can’t surgically “pass” your chromosomes. So race and sex are not twins, they’re not even cousins. People love that comparison because it feels righteous, but it’s just emotional blackmail. If your ideology can’t stand on facts without borrowing race trauma for pity points, it’s not truth, it’s marketing.

Also, about the “identifying as animals” thingie, that wasn’t an insult. It’s reality. There are people who now claim to be animals, or furries. I work in vet med, and I see this trend up close. When you blur lines endlessly, you can’t be shocked when the confusion spreads. I didn’t create that, I just refuse to pretend it’s normal.

Nobody wants to feel insulted. But when you demand that everyone else agree reality is negotiable, don’t be shocked when people who love truth don’t comply. I’m not here to be hateful, I’m just not here to lie.

So sure, let people live as they choose. But freedom to choose your lifestyle does not mean you get to rewrite biological facts for everyone else, or force them to pretend biology is flexible when it isn’t.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle (Post 2513565)

Wtf are you talking about? So let me get this straight. You’re out here comparing black women to “exceptions” in biology? For real? You act like being black is some medical anomaly that complicates the blueprint. Black people aren’t biological curveballs, we’re normal human beings with normal chromosomes and normal reproductive parts with more melanin. Race never made anyone’s sex ambiguous. So using blackness as a stand in for rare intersex conditions is not only ignorant as f*ck, it’s borderline offensive. Do you even hear yourself?

I knew race was going to come out. I just knew somebody was going to pull it out of their ass as a comparison. If anybody is the bigot, you are. For real.

Yeah, I agree with the last part of your post. Don’t come back.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek (Post 2513566)

“Ciswoman” just means… woman. Born female, still female, no special edits.

I appreciate that you care about your friends and family, nobody’s denying they’ve faced real pain. But the truth is, compassion and clarity are not enemies.

First, let’s talk about this “cis” label. It was coined to make a normal, biologically rooted woman sound like a variation of her own category. It didn’t come from real biological need, it came from a social ideology that says womanhood is just a feeling. Biology says otherwise.

Second, you linked articles that throw out edge cases, yes, a tiny percentage of people are born intersex. But that doesn’t erase the reality that over 99% of humans are clearly male or female based on chromosomes. Exceptions don’t rewrite the rule, they prove it. And using disorders of sexual development to justify the erasure of sex categories is a stretch, not science.

And comparing this to people being denied bids because of race is a false equivalence. Skin color never changes your sex. You can’t hormone-shot your way into different chromosomes. Race and sex aren’t interchangeable puzzle pieces. Comparing this to race is a rhetorical cheap shot because it hijacks real, historic injustice to protect a completely different ideology. It’s literally just a shade. It was contrived by human made hierarchies, not biology itself. But male and female? That’s baked into your DNA. You can’t surgically “pass” your chromosomes. So race and sex are not twins, they’re not even cousins. People love that comparison because it feels righteous, but it’s just emotional blackmail. If your ideology can’t stand on facts without borrowing race trauma for pity points, it’s not truth, it’s marketing.

Also, about the “identifying as animals” thingie, that wasn’t an insult. It’s reality. There are people who now claim to be animals, or furries. I work in vet med, and I see this trend up close. When you blur lines endlessly, you can’t be shocked when the confusion spreads. I didn’t create that, I just refuse to pretend it’s normal.

Nobody wants to feel insulted. But when you demand that everyone else agree reality is negotiable, don’t be shocked when people who love truth don’t comply. I’m not here to be hateful, I’m just not here to lie.

So sure, let people live as they choose. But freedom to choose your lifestyle does not mean you get to rewrite biological facts for everyone else, or force them to pretend biology is flexible when it isn’t.

This! On 🔥

CG, I forgot to ask you what you mean by “marketing”. What’s that got to do with anything?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513556)

Would you be opposed to a transgender chick joining Phi Beta Sigma?

Initially, no. Because none of this was possible or even a thought in 1914, so I can only abide by our Founders original rules. If that was a thing back then, maybe it’d have been different. If we did allow it, although I’d initially be opposed to it, I’d eventually accept the person as a member and keep it moving.

But I couldn’t see myself dating a former dude tho. That, I would never do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cranberry (Post 2513562)

And why in Wyoming?

I've wondered the same thing! It's puzzling for sure!

Could it have been due to the murder( 2 decades ago) in Laramie of Matthew Shepard, a young gay man who was murdered and tied to a post in a field? That case got a lot of attention worldwide.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513568)

People throwing around “ignorant” or even worse… “bigoted” when they themselves are cherry picking feel-good snippets off the internet instead of real biology is peak irony. You can’t throw those words around while comparing chromosomes to skin pigment like they’re the same thing. That’s not science, that’s confusion with a certificate, lol. And then, having links doesn’t make her argument valid if the logic is rotten. Her post is so transparently shaky that it’s funny she thinks it’s a checkmate. :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phrozen Sands (Post 2513571)

CG, I forgot to ask you what you mean by “marketing”. What’s that got to do with anything?

So, if your belief system can’t stand on its own facts, logic, or biology, and instead needs guilt trips, hashtags, or race comparisons to make people agree, then you’re not defending a fact. People will wrap a weak biological argument in guilt or fear like, “If you disagree, you’re a bigot” kind of thing. And because no one wants to be labeled a “bigot” they comply. Now you’re scared to say 2 + 2 = 4 because you’ll be called hateful.

So, basically you’re packaging confusion in emotional wrapping paper so people will “buy” it, not because it’s real, but because it feels too costly to reject.

Selling an idea with flashy slogans, pity stories, or fear of being labeled. Using buzzwords like “cis” or “gender spectrum” to make the idea sound scientific, when it’s really social branding. So “terms” like “cis” weren’t invented by biologists to describe reproductive function. They were coined to make “trans” sound normal and to reframe the conversation. If that makes sense.

And for the record? Talking about whether black women deserved bids in sororities was really dumb to begin with. They’re women — same chromosomes, same biology. And more melanin is because of basic geography. Real science. Race differences like skin tone are just evolutionary adaptations to sun exposure, not different species or different biological sexes. So comparing that to crossing sex categories is nonsense. Honestly? It should’ve never been an “agenda item.” Ever. It was ignorance then, and using it to prop up gender confusion now is still ignorance, just repackaged.

As a note, cis and trans as prefixes viewed as opposites goes back centuries as a concept in Chemistry. (for example) two Carbons linked by a double bond one of which has a Hydrogen and a Chlorine and the other a Hydrogen and a Fluorine exist in two forms. Cis, where the Chlorine and Flourine are on the same side of the carbon bond and trans where they are across from each other.