I, and many NPCers and IFCers, think that you all also have national reputations and stereotypes. :)

Oh, I'm not saying NPC members always just LOOOOVE all the other groups - but it is an unwritten understanding that you don't badmouth another group. Maybe that's what you mean by trying too hard to play nice. I like to think it is just politeness. When the chips are down, we are all NPC. It's kinda like your family - you may talk about your cousin, but God help the outsider who does. And some NPC groups do have more of a bond with some other groups - Syracuse Triad, Monmouth Duo, Longwood Four, Macon Magnolias - that may approximate what has been said about the D9 closeness.
Pming is just that - PRIVATE messaging. It's true we don't want to say anything that might make our GLO look bad, but I think it fair to say that most of us have no problem letting our true feelings be known. The understanding seems to be you just don't air your dirty laundry. But when an issue arises like the Delta Zeta incident at DePauw there will be a discussion that will include criticism.
IFC-type orgs are TOTALLY different (as you know). They bash each other right and left, on-line, on-campus, you name it. I can't tell you the whys and wherefores.
I think that those of us who have had more of a national look at our orgs may recognize that there are some general stereotypes out there, but we fight them because the fact is that every chapter is TOTALLY different. (And let's not even discuss the regional bias that some have!:D)

You were speaking on what you noticed about NPHC orgs on GC and I was commenting on what I noticed about NPC and IFC orgs on GC.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to embark on this discussion but your play-it-safe public service announcement can also be applied to NPHC org members on and off of GC (as you noted with the "closeness"). When members get along, they get along. When they don't, they don't. When members feel the need to keep certain topics within the NPHC, they do so. When they feel it's a topic that can be discussed openly, they do so.

I hope you were able to get some stuff off of your chest.

Nothing to get off my chest - just following up on my original question, which was directly linked to the thread topic. I didn't understand why other D9 orgs would object to Michelle's initiation, and if they wouldn't, why she might not accept because she doesn't wish to be exclusive to AKA.
You made an observation about NPC, and just as my question elicited the pov of D9 members, I assumed you were interested in NPC pov, and weren't just being argumentative.

eta - I guess there is really nothing more to say until Michelle decides - have she or her spokespeople indicated when that might be?

OK. :)

I was responding to your comments about the NPHC dynamics on GC as relative to those of the NPC on GC. Nothing to be argumentative about. But I also wasn't interested in the "NPC pov." My opinions of my observations hasn't changed.

Do tell? I'm unaware of them. How are Thetas different than Kappas?

They aren't different? :( That sucks for them.

To get into specifics is a waste of time. Suffice it to say that all of our organizations have things that they are best known for, including stereotypes of members. The stereotypes are intended to be true in many instances but not in every instance. Just like the "reputations" and stereotypes of NPHC orgs that have nothing to do with our history and programs.

And I think the number of organization in the NPC is too big and so rarely present on any one campus that national reputations based on anything other than Saturday Night Live skits are pretty hard to come by.

Rather than worrying about listing them all, how about you describe any national NPC reps?

NPHC, NPC, and IFCers say it "depends on campus" or "depends on the region" for our organizations' stereotypes and it does to a great extent. But the truth of the matter is that if people are more familiar with the "pretty girl" Tri-Delt chapters and hear their friends talk about the "pretty girl" Tri-Delt chapters at their schools, those who don't fit that stereotype will be considered the exception that defy the rule but not that overturn the rule. :)

Were you thinking of something different when you talk about "national stereotypes?" It doesn't require a consensus but it does require that a lot of people are aware of them. Many people are aware of the stereotypes of certain NPC and IFC orgs across campuses, which makes it "national," as far as I'm concerned.


ETA: http://www.collegeotr.com/university...ogy_kappa_1860
The last paragraph. It's not the most detailed explanation but this author was hinting at something. Whoever this author is, he/she can't be the only one who sees that it's more than just campus rivalries or stereotypes in some instances.

So, you are offering Kappas are rich, brunette girls who lately are tending to be Jewish who have rivalries with Tri Delt for the hot girls? Okay then.

I believe I'm not the author of that.

You wanted a discussion of the stereotypes and I remembered what I had always been told about Tri-Delts at various campuses. Then I found a link that addresses an author's take on the Kappas and the Tri-Delts on that campus. Then I directed you to the last paragraph where the author hinted at national stereotypes. Debate your opinion of the stereotypes and their national existences with the author. Or yourself. But remember that your opinion of the stereotypes themselves was never the point.

For clarity's sake:

SWTX, the word is actually "jonin'." Not "joining." ;)

But the stereotype you referred to makes very little sense to anyone not on that campus. You found a link to a person asserting that there must be a national issue, but not actually evidence of one.

Anyway, it's my opinion that you have no idea what you are talking about with this. I wonder if you even know any Tri Deltas or Kappas in real life.

You've claimed that NPHCers think NPCers have national reputations. You can't provide any evidence of what they are, but apparently that's doesn't keep people from having them. Okay.

take for instance the pikes......everywhere i go, every one seems to have the same exact view point on pikes.....at least where i've traveled. i'm not to keen on the sororities.....but i bet between greeks, NPC, IFC, and other national predominantly white organizations have stereotypes about the type of people they have.



oh yea......



THREAD WAR!!!!!

;)

Yes.

Don't make UGAalum have to unleash her "opinion" on you. :p

i'd rather have you unleash th.......

nevermind, wrong thread.

What's a thread war?

And I'm maybe a little with you on stereotypes about Pikes, but the NPCs not so much. And of course the Howard Pikes may throw it off a little.

ETA: to kind of take it back to sort of the point, what membership could John McCain be offered that would be comparable to AKA for Mrs. Obama?

howard pikes are the exceptions. and take for instance kappa alpha order, the types of events (from what i've seen advertised on GC) seem to be pretty indicative on what they're about nationally. some organizations have them, some might not. but to say all of them have no national rep isn't always true.

Oh so the concept of national stereotypes resonates for the Pikes but not for NPC orgs? Convenient. He wasn't even detailed in the stereotype of the Pikes that he had heard. Maybe he was going to say they were stereotyped as wearing tutus and furry pink hats.

The Howard Pikes might not throw it off that much. But if they did, that's why they are STEREOTYPES. They aren't meant to apply 100%.

Okay, and I'll even go with SAE seeming similar to KA.

NPC?

ETA: I think a stereotype exists for PKA as athletes, perhaps a little eager for a fight.

my experience with NPC sororites is very limited to a couple cuties from undergrad. but if some fraternities have them, some sororities will to have them as well.

That would make sense, huh?

Or the NPC sororities were last in the stereotype line and the supply ran out. :(

Yeah, maybe, but I think the thing is that with NPCs it varies a lot from campus to campus and all groups sort of aspire to similar things. You might find that at every campus there are eight sorority stereotypes, but the NPC groups that embody each don't overlap that much beyond the campus or especially regional level.

I really do think that some of the issue is that there are so many NPCs and IFCs. Very few people are going to have even met more than one member of some groups.

But if there are only four or five groups nationally, the reputations for a particular group are going to overlap with what's thought about them on other campuses a lot more, if only as a function of the math. And if you have a well-known common history, the reputation may overlap and be more consistent even more that just math would predict.

ETA: Maybe we could think of nine NPC and IFC groups with national reputations, but when you get to ten, nobody can remember what it is that they are supposed to assume about the group. Heck, even Iota Phi Theta may seem a little fuzzy on my stereotype-meter.

whew....end discussion.

Which was so different from this




how?

Because "generally" and "maybe" are both so absolute?

Well if you were just talking about "generally" and "maybe" then what the hell were you trying to debate with me when I said "I, and many NPCers and IFCers, think that you all also have national reputations and stereotypes?"

If you weren't speaking in absolutes, which I wasn't either, just reiterate that and keep it moving. :rolleyes: Instead, you spent time asking questions as if you had never heard of NPC stereotypes.

Because I still don't fundamentally believe you. :)

About the existence of NPC stereotypes? Shut up.

That.

And that they don't approach the significance of those of NPHC groups. [Eta: or should this be said as that I don't believe that they do approach. . . ]

Be honest, would we even have a thread with more than one post if Cindy McCain had been offered honorary membership in an NPC group? (theoretically, of course, since since she's already a member of one). Or if Pike offered one to John McCain?

It's the well-known prestige of the group and it's national clearly formed identity and, dare I say it, status that partially makes the Michelle Obama AKA story newsworthy*.

If it were one of 26 NPC groups, would it have even registered with non-members which one it was? Or even if we want to say there are 5 or 10 NPCs that have more prestige and status than the others, would it have mattered which one of those it was?

* I think all Divine 9 groups have status, prestige, and identity, but that it might mean something to people that Michelle Obama would select AKA as her one group, versus a different group in a way that is quite different than people saying "Oh, John McCain picked Phi Delta Theta." Her agreeing to AKA says something about her as well as the group.

ETA: I realize saying that Michelle Obama picked AKA is a little weird, but honesty, if she has approached the grad chapter of any of the others, would they have said no?

Ok? :confused:

I've edited it to explain that I don't believe the reputations, if they exist at all have the same significance.

Which was kind of the point of the claim in the first place in terms of being in this thread.

ETA: I'm getting really sleepy. I'll have to read tomorrow to see if it even makes sense to me.

Yes. Especially if 1) McCain's understanding of the honorary membership was in question and 2) if NPHCers went on a tangent like the NPCers went on in this thread.

I know that you've confused me so good luck. ;)

ETA: We were typing past each other. I was never comparing the NPHC stereotypes' significance to that of the NPC and IFC stereotypes. I was saying NPC and IFC stereotypes exist at the national level. That clarification didn't take your quote out of its context. I don't know why the NPHC-NPC comparison began in this thread, anyway.

Maybe, but I don't think anyone would pay much attention to which group it was.

Are you really prepared to say that you think the identities of the NPC groups are as clearly fixed in the public mind as the NPHC groups? Really?

Oh, nevermind, then.

And now we're here. Night night.

Public mind:

A. the majority, which is majority white and nonGreek, and barely knows "black history" not to mention about the existence or stereotypes of NPHC orgs
B. Greeks who are familiar with the NPHC and the stereotypes (which isn't the case for most white Greeks)
C. All Greeks
D. members of NPHC and nonNPHC BGLO members
E. the black community

Which one?

B, D certainly. Probably many of E, and more of C than you probably realize. There are also some of A who pay any attention to groups while they are on campus.

But random white people who didn't go to a campus with NPHC groups or didn't go to college, or who don't live near or work with more than one NPHC alum, maybe not many.

But if you work someplace with more than on NPHC represented you can learn the reputations and stereotypes pretty quickly because people will always fill you in about someone else's org, so in metropolitan areas, it may be more than you'd think. Now, who knows if any of the info is accurate, but it's the stereotypes.

I think she's talking about some combination of B, C, D, and E.

I'm going to bite on this one, somewhat against my better judgment.

I agree with both of you to some extent. Lately there has been some drama on GC regarding NPCers and national "tiers." It is definitely accurate to say that on *SOME LEVEL* people have national ideas of NPC groups.

For example:
- AEPhi and SDT, ON THE WHOLE, often tend to be Jewish (NOT ALWAYS! But OFTEN!). There are a few other examples of this.
- There are some groups, maybe 5-10 as UGAalum mentioned, that people knowledgeable about NPCs might acknowledge to be more "prestigious" - but mostly because they are larger organizations and at more schools or at more prestigious schools. UGAalum has given a great example with Kappa and Theta. They are of similar size and tend to be at most major universities. But what is different about them? Their philanthropies. Their initiation ceremonies. But as a member of another organization that's often compared to Kappa and Theta (Pi Phi), can I really encapsulate any significant national stereotype differences between them? Or between them and my own org? No.
-There are a few NPCs that were formerly educationally based and part of the AES governing organization and joined the NPC at a later date in the 1950s. There are some things that these groups have in common. Members of the former AES groups can give a lot better explanation of this than I can. But again, can I encapsulate what makes all these groups different from one another? No.
-There are a few instances in which a sorority "cracks" the national awareness. The major example of this would be "Delta Delta Delta, can I help ya, help ya, help ya?" But what does this really say about Tri-Delt? That they have a stereotype of being ditzy nationally? OK, maybe for people who only know that skit, but not for anyone who really knows about NPC.

So basically, I think that it may be possible to stereotype groups of NPC sororities - more prestigious ones, ones founded to serve minority religious groups, former AES groups. Some of these stereotypes make GCers uncomfortable and it's not really considered kosher to talk about them. But really distinguishing stereotypes between the sororities in each general grouping? Much harder or impossible to do. Unless you're examining their philanthropies, history, ritual, which I don't consider "stereotypes." And I also think that each NPCs' history is much less likely to be known to members of other NPC orgs than would be the case in NPHC. Educated D9ers tend to know a lot about the founding of all the orgs in their council. Not the case for NPCers, sometimes even very well-versed ones. Partially due to numbers (more to learn for NPCers), partially due to cultural reasons (role of D9 in the black community), partially due to philosophy (more camaraderie between D9ers).

/hijack

The same can be said about any stereotype. You know those who fit the stereotype (stereotypes come from somewhere--but I really think that SNL skit was based on a general "sorority girl" stereotype and Delta Delta Delta was used because it rhymed) but given a real familiarity with the group, you know that the stereotype doesn't always fit unless there are formal or informal guidelines to uphold it.

Thanks for your interesting input in the rest of your post, too!