DSTCHAOS
Your signature-wonderful song...

True indeed, hence this discussion is about race and class. Courtesy of Elephant Walk. But that doesn't negate the fact that across contexts in this society wealthy people are more likely to be white and poor people are disproportionately nonwhite.

You don't have to playfully use "whities" when pleading to us for understanding. If the nonwhites that you speak to are to hear you, they can do so without that reference. BTW, you still have white privilege. It just doesn't benefit you in that specific instance, which pales in comparison to the many more socially significant instances that it will benefit you.

I love it. It just popped in my head yesterday and won't leave.

Alphagam, I sincerely hope you weren't trying to imply that I am a racist.

Also, congrats on bringing up Bush, I'm sure its tough for you bleeding heart MTV told me to liberals to go 5 minutes without bringing him into a conversation. The reason Bush got elected President is because most people voted for him. Twice. (Timeout here for the dems to make some smartass-yet-banal-stolen-from-Bill-Maher-comment). As much as people would like to believe otherwise, people who benefit from who they know are generally pretty well qualified. Try logic. Lets see, if they're surrounded by bright and wealthy people who are well educated, theres a strong chance they'll benefit from the same circumstances. Its not like the people helped out by this are street corner junkies who just happen to know Karl Rove. The fact is, if you're intelligent, well off, and not socially inept, you're more than likely going to meet people along the way who can help you out.

This is where I think you might be surprise to know what is was like to be the average white person. While it might be easier in many circumstance to be white than to be black, I think it's a mistake to conclude that the area of social significant instances is really as expansive as you imagine.

I think the value of being well connected cannot be underestimated, but just being white alone probably doesn't really work the magic that you think it does.

When you throw in the things we choose to project about ourselves culturally, ie, trashy whore like Paris Hilton VS. really rich rap star, white "culture" may seem to be privileged. But I don't think that privilege is as pronounced for the average person.

Shinerbock, I probably wasn't discriminating among you, Elephant Walk, and Macallan as much as I should have been. I have no idea if you are racist or not, but it seemed to me that the three of you were basically saying you couldn't include black members and be a top chapter. That seemed racist to me, but I'll take your word if you want to claim otherwise. I didn't mention Bush, but maybe that part wasn't addressed to me.

I don't think anything is wrong with a black man/woman going directly to the NPHC without even looking at the IFC/NPC and the same thing goes for a white man/woman not even looking at the NPHC. What I have a problem with is if a NPHC/IFC/NPC GLO denied someone based on the same reasons your founders would have denied a man/woman over 100 years ago. If an interest is denied based on grades or whatever reason it may be that's fine, but to deny a human being based on color alone, that's insane and makes no sense whatsoever. No disrespect to your organization or any of the NPC or IFC groups, b/c I have looked at your organizations history as well as the rest of them, just to expand my mind, but I think if your founders were still living maybe a few would have changed with the times which I highly doubt, but for the most part what I'm trying to say is your founders as well as the rest of the NPC/IFC groups would still for sure deny a man/woman based on color.

I think many of the NPC or IFC founders were pathetically blind to the full equality of Black people. I don't think they thought about the inclusions of people of different races at all. They went with what they were familiar with, which was other white people. It would be interesting to know how many groups ever addressed the race of members before they published non-discrimination statements. I think most founders took it for granted that the members would be white so much that they didn't even mention race. Most probably attended segregated institutions, so the possibility of Black members didn't occure to them.

Today, I think the majority of members of NPC and IFC groups are/would be proud to have Black members. The problem is that a few people who are concerned with being elitist tell themselves that it's better not to have Black members at all than it is to take people who aren't a "perfect fit." The fact that being Black is the only thing keeping a pnm from being a perfect fit never crosses their minds. The problem is magnified because other members and other groups aren't brave enough to deviate from what the elites do.

This is a little ridiculous/overboard. You can't blame recruitment decisions in today's time on our founding fathers. Lets take my fraternity, SAE....we were the only fraternity founded in the ante-bellum South....370 of our original 400 members fought for the Confederates. Our 8 founding fathers were from very upperclass families and were all officers for the Confederates.....hell, one of them is believed to have been the very first casualty. Blacks were slaves at the time, save a small number of them, do you honestly think there would have been any reason for an original SAE to consider a black man for membership?? No, absolutely not. They didn't "take anything for granted"....they operated according to how the lifestyle was at the time. You can say the same thing about Kappa Alpha....their spiritual founding father was ROBERT E. LEE....i'm sure black men post Civil War were just jumping at the oppurtunity to join.

Can you not, atleast, open yourself to the fact that a great majority of blacks at large Southern institutions have absolutely nothing in common with large, white, top fraternities??

I will straight up tell you that we could not have black members and be a top chapter. There is no possible way. In majority white campuses (especially Southern), blacks would scare away the girls. Look at the bottom tier at the campus. The (in my opinion) worst chapters on campus include blacks Sigma Nu, Sig Ep, and Pike. That is third tier. Every one of them has one to two black members. There are no blacks in the 2nd tier and above. Therefore, I will tell you as a studied fact/opinion that there is no way a black person could be taken and continue being a top tier fraternity.

Uh, if you re-read my comments, I think you'll see that your reading in some stuff that isn't there. What's the difference between taking something for granted and operating according to how your lifestyle is?

In either case, I wish founders had been more forwards thinking, but they weren't.

Yes, I'm open to the possiblity that the great majority of people in general have nothing in common with large, white, top fraternities, and Black students would fall into that too.

Are you telling me that there's not a single guy on your campus who attending high school with one of you, took advanced classes, has college educated parents, is affluent, and with the one exception of all the clubs he and his family haven't been invited to join simply because they aren't white, is pretty much like you all? Or are you looking at membership in the most exclusive clubs, rather than character, as your primary membership criterion?

I'm worried about your saying "scare away the girls" because that seems to founded on the most primitive form of racism, but on some level I understand what you are saying. I don't agree that the outcome of a top group accepting a black member would be the outcome you describe, but I think that you have accurately described the thought processes of many groups.

i am in no way a cheerleader for pi kappa alpha at fsu, however, you are gravely mistaken when you say that pike is not a top chapter at fsu. they have the athletes, the movers and shakers, the faces, have the most members, have the alumni support, the largest house, have the largest pledge class,etc. i believe that they won a top award at the fraternity's most recent convention. in my estimation, that qualifies them as a top chapter.

That really depresses me. At my school, it seems that all of the IFC fraternities have at least a few black members.

There isn't a large black community on my campus, but from the black men I've known, they just felt more comfortable joining a multicultural or historically black fraternity. Like, they didn't even consider trying to rush IFC. I don't think that SDSU is a racist school at all, and most of the IFC members would be totally cool with a black member and treat them like any other rush candidate.

Having the most pledges, or the biggest house doesn't make you a top chapter on a campus in any way....and winning awards from your Nationals doesn't either.

You also live in California.

Are you kidding me with the racist thing? Shit...are we know labeling schools as "racist" because their IFC fraternities don't have blacks??