What I'm saying is if a hetrosexual walks into a room, they do not think that everyone in that room wants to get with them. (Well, unless they are delluded) Homosexual people do not go around trying to pick up people they know to be straight. (Again there might be delluded people out there) I realize that people have issues with gays. I have issues with Republicans but I would still give them a bid if the met membership critera.

I guess the world should just be a nicer place. :)

btw: correct me if i'm wrong but the gay fraternity does not allow dating of brothers. i believe most co-eds don't either. I could be wrong though

Technically, Sigma Phi epsilon chapters are not allowed to discriminate based on sexual preference. it is written in our national by-laws.

My chapters have had gay brothers in the past. Our past Alumni Corp. President is gay. Nobody cares one way or another.

So it was OK when you started dating your sisters?

-Rudey

Excuse me?

I know openly gay men in the overwhelming majority of our fraternities here. There are openly gay women in my organization (no actives as of right now, but we have several recent alums), and openly gay actives and alums of most sororities on campus here. The atmosphere on our campus is very LGBT friendly.

There were no openly gay members while I was there, but I have heard stories about members coming out only to the brotherhood during meetings. I think it is good that they felt comfortable doing that.

We don't traditionally have any problem with people being openly gay in our fraternity...however two of the guys rushing are apparently also dating and I find that a bit of an issue

wow, yeah, that's definitely problematic! Let us know what ends up happening, that's an interesting situation

It won't be too big of an issue unless you make it one. In APO, we've had straight pledges date each other for the duration of the process.

The bigger problem will be if a pledge is dating a brother. My APO chapter forbids it.

Just curious as to why that's a different situation?

The power dynamics are different. Two pledges don't have organizational power over one another; a pledge and a brother is more complicated.

But since hazing doesn't/isn't supposed to happen any more, how much "power" can a brother have over a pledge? If someone's an officer, are they not allowed to date a member, since one would have organizational power over another? I guess I just don't understand how it can be applied in some circumstances and not others? :confused: and i'm not trying to be too nebby or critical, i'm just curious.

As a general question, for co-ed organizations, when there are no dating rules, are they written into your national/international bylaws, or is a chapter by chapter basis?

Freshman year I rushed an honor fraternity with my boyfriend at the time. We didn't make a big deal out of the fact that we were dating, but we didn't hide it. He got a bid and I didn't (which in a way I found kinda funny because he barely met the minimum credentials). He didn't accept it. I can't complain, had I joined, I probably wouldn't have really liked it, and then I probably never would've rushed KD the following semester.

I guess that's also a problem when you're rushing a "couple" much like when there's a group of friends rushing together- kind of an all or none deal. If you give a bid to one but not the other, you run a strong risk that you'll get neither. Probably more likely in a couples situation than a friend situation.

Hazing may have stopped, but false allegations and misunderstandings are still a reality. Our rule maximizes the chapter's protection against complaints and litigation. We removed the risk.

Chapter officers are still brothers and equals. Pledges are seeking brotherhood. We eliminate situations in which a pledge feels entitled to membership because they hooked up with or were dating a member. It is not only a hazing issue but a sexual harassment prevention issue.

I'm sorry that I can't say more.

The president of my pledge class happened to be the husband of that semester's membership VP. I guess it is a good thing we don't have that rule in my chapter. :D

We definitely had couples in pledge classes, and a lot of the brothers dated each other.

When I was active, we had a couple openly gay brothers, and one who was closeted when he was active but came back to the 70th anniversary celebration out and proud. Nobody made a big deal about it. Of course the fact that my chapter is at a pretty GLBT-friendly campus might have something to do with that.

Well, spouses generally aren't covered under the dating rules, but I wonder if they would be counted as Legacies. I actually did something *worse* in that regard than brothers dating pledges. I dated a petitioner/pledge/brother (she was a Petitioner, but in the pledge class that didn't make the charter application) while I was the sectional staff (this section was DC & Maryland) representative to the Petitioning Group. After we started dating, the sectional chair changed what group I was representative to. There is now a no dating rule at the Region (DC,MD,VA, NC) level of staff to undergrads because of me.

It did end badly of course, we've been married for almost 10 years and have 3 children. :)

(APO - Petitioning Group = Other Greeks - Colony).