And actually, Your point is well taken and proven as I am sure anyone with half a mind can attest to.

But I am sure this will light up the thread!:D

It depends on the minority group. When wealthy Hong Kongers moved to Vancouver (and Toronto) in droves, real estate prices went UP (and yes, people were complaining about that too). Many bought regular sized, post WWII homes, tore them down and replaced these houses with mini McMansions. The houses that they tore down would cost in 2006 Toronto terms, perhaps $300,000, but these mini McMansions would probably cost more than twice as much (perhaps even close to $1 M Canadian, depending on the area) These families also up the standards in schools (if the kids go public) as their kids often earn the highest grades and are in the advanced classes. They make up a good percentage of students in the private system too, especially at the more traditional schools.

Your values are not universal. I don't care about wealth, religion, class or ethnicity in my neighborhood selection. I do care about self-respect, responsibility, hard work and honesty in my neighbors. These values have more to do with personal outlook than anything else.

Jeni, that was a good post. I like it when people make posts easy for me to read and respond to. Yeah, I guess I am somewhat of an elitist. My response to this has always been that I don't think I'm inherently better than everyone, I just prefer my life to that of others. Also, I recognize that each person's GLO is important to them. Just because a multi cultural group has no value to me, doesn't mean it is without value to others. My problem arises from people who try to force their opinions on others. Of course, its fine here, this is a message board, and I enjoy the debate. But there is a strong push from society to diversify everything, and that annoys me. I don't want every fraternity to be like mine. What I do want is to be left to do as we please. I would also prefer people quit making continued statements about us that we are racists or ignorant, etc. Everyone has a right to do as they please, so long as it does not harm others. I only wish we could do as we please without the degrading social commentary. Note, this isn't directed towards anyone in specific.

For my purposes, the minorities I speak of are black people and hispanics. Also, Jeni, the values you listed are generally part of being "classy," at least in my mind. I would not want to live in a neighborhood of untrustworthy people, regardless of their wealth.

Again, you act like minorities themselves are the bad things. You are still in the freaking top 15 wealthiest counties in the country. What part of that seems like you've gotten the homeless bums living in the abandoned house next door?

Ok, plain and simple: if your county is so elite, which I believe than no non wealthy people of any color are going to be able to live there. So who are these "other" minorities moving in that apparently can afford it but are still low-income/crime lords?

If they can afford to live there, they're not "low class" they're just a different color of high class.
You'd probably have little problem with my family moving in (unless you're anti-Catholic) we're fine upstanding people. My siblings are all doing well in school and sports and don't get in trouble. But we're too "low class" to afford it. By your standards, a black couple who can afford to live there should be far above my parents. But I don't think your initial judgements would put them above my parents.

/I get the impression you're going to think I live in a cardboard box or something...

A person can travel the world and still not see very much of it. A rich person staying at the 5-star hotels and visiting all the touristy/clean/air-conditioned places (museums, ornate temples or mansions, department stores, malls, etc.)so as to avoid the unwashed masses isn't going to be able to get the real, authentic feel for that country that someone else would get by staying in a less touristy area (staying with a nice family, staying in a hostel, staying in a cheap hotel) and getting a feel of how people in that country really live...seeing the outdoor market they buy their food and clothes at, seeing their small/plain/humble house of worship, etc.

This isn't a personal attack on you. I really don't know you or the people you hang out with or how you guys travel. My point is that just because you grow up rich and can travel the world doesn't automatically make you worldly...just like how hanging out with people like yourself doesn't automatically make you narrow-minded. I think narrow-mindedness is when someone refuses to even listen and consider other points of view and if they consider people that are different from them to be lower than them and treat those people as if they were lower.

You're right, you can be be wealthy and well traveled, but still sheltered. However, in my situation and that of my friends, that really isn't the case. My favorite trips in America have been long and extended road trips, where we travel through incredibly various areas of all types. Likewise, I enjoy backpacking and fishing, so that has taken me off the beaten path.

Drole, well to be fair, the people who actually live in my county, the minorities I mean, are generally well off. The problem for me is that they have attracted other minorities, who come to shop, and hang out. That is where the crime and such has come from. Also, because of race-loyalty, there is very little outrage from the black community. Several black people have made statements like "Man Clayton county just go so bad, we had to get out." I understand that sentiment, but what they fail to recognize is that crime tends to follow them. We used to live in Clayton Co. as well, about 20 years ago, before it became a county with a minority majority. We moved because we didn't like the direction it was going. So we moved here, where everything was great for about 20 years, until those who had moved to Clayton decided to come here. I hope that made some sort of sense, if not, I'll clarify.

you know, i really do understand, but please look at how your attitude comes off. You don't like thugs and gangbangers and muggers. Cool. But I get the impression you mentally associate the wealthy black people with the thugs etc. All we ask is that you judge the character of the person, not the color of their skin.

Jeni, please note that I really don't care what people think of me. I prefer not to be miscast, but I can live with it. I'm also aware that I am not the most brilliant person on the planet. However, I have experienced a lot, and have a good idea what I enjoy and what I do not like. The facts that I don't like Miami or Detroit, and don't choose to go there, I don't believe are a disservice to myself. They are simply preferences. I generally take any chance I can to experience most everything I can. The things I avoid are generally things I've tried and did not like.

I don't judge the color of their skin. Do I associate crime with minorities? Sometimes, yes. Why? Because it is common. Not all profiling is inaccurate. I don't at all associate black wealthy people with thugs. The few black people I grew up around were well educated, and great people. Unfortunately, upon reaching high school, they decided it was time to "act black," and I lost touch with many of them. The valedictorian of my high school was a brilliant black girl, and I got along very well with her, and because she is someone I like to associate with, we remain friends. In other words, it is not skin color, it truly is character. However, even wealthy and intelligent black people often condone actions because of loyalty to race. While I understand sticking up for one another, it can also cause a rift in a community like mine.

LOL, that's the way that I feel about Atlanta.

haha, me too.

I would challenge you to take it a step further and say that multicultural groups are valuable because people like me find value in them. I would say that your fraternity is valuable because of your investment in it, even though I personally have no connection to it. I would also say this for any organization whose purpose is honorable, so I wouldn't include supremacist (of any color) orgs or any other org motivated by negative values.

You know, I agree with you. I'm seeing that "diversifying America" is really just a ploy to make us all the same. No one needs that. We can be individuals and we can prefer to be with others like us while still expressing the inherent value in people unlike us.

When I see this, I associate the comment with Southern bigotry. You're not talking about individuals whom you don't like for whatever reason. You're placing everyone into the same category. Why?

Sounds good to me! I know of many families living with incomes below the poverty line that consist of upstanding and generous individuals. Even though they have little, they would give you much if you were in need. I also know of devastatingly wealthy people who have such a heart for charitable giving that they make sacrifices in their personal desires so that others can reap the benefits. I would be pleased to live alongside either type of family.

I don't think it is southern bigotry at all, it just happens to be the minority groups I'm speaking of. I'm not painting the entire groups, those are simply the groups around here, at the center of my concern.

Also, I will refrain from calling anything valuable. Just because certain things are valuable to some people, does not mean I consider them valuable. The National Organization of Women is valuable to some, but I personally hate them and have no value for it. The Yankees are valuable to many, but I place no value at all on them.

It's weird and ironic, but with the exception of the things you've said about wealth/privilege/class, you come across kinda like the people living in rural Pennsylvania ("I'm not racist, but these minorities are moving in. They're bringing the crime from the city and lowering our property values." "I'm not racist. I have a couple neighbors who are black and they're fine. It's just that they've got friends coming here the city to hang out, and these friends make a lot of noise and cause trouble.")

Rural PA has some of the largest concentrations of KKK in the country. Many of these small rural towns in PA have been all white for many, many generations. A lot of the growing membership is due to limited economic opportunities in the rural areas and minorities are starting to move in. The minorities are seen as taking away these already limited number of jobs. And I think there's a lot of fear and resentment for this, as well as a want for a scapegoat for the economic problems of the area.

Well, if I sound like them, then so be it. Although, minorities are not taking our jobs.

So its only the non-wealthy Black people who you don't like cause they cause all the crimes? :confused:

Yeah.....sure....

Well I don't like poor people at all. However, you're somewhat correct, I don't think the wealthy professional black people are causing the crime, no.

If you think it is wrong to think that a majority of crimes are caused by lower class, poor minorities then you need a serious reality check. Atleast it is that way in the South. I can't speak for the rest of the country because I don't live there, and don't really care.

You missed my point...poor Black people aren't committing ALL the crime in the US.

So what about wealthy people that embezzle or commit fraud? Or are those not crimes?

Well thanks. Of course black people aren't committing all the crime. But crime is more common in heavily black areas. Everyone knows this, theres no dispute.

What about white collar crimes? I really don't see the relevance here. They're bad people, sure, but Ken Lay isn't stealing my car or doing a drive by in my neighborhood.

Maybe because Ken Lay is dead?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,202143,00.html

Yes I'm aware. My point is obviously that white collar crimes don't endanger my family.

Not all, but you should check some statistics, it will probably surprise you. Here is one for you:

Of the approximately 1,700,000 interracial crimes of violence involving blacks and whites, 90 percent are committed by blacks against whites. Blacks are 50 times more likely than whites to commit individual acts of interracial violence. They are up to 250 times more likely than whites to engage in multiple-offender or group interracial violence.

There are MANY more equally as shocking statistics out there, these things may not be pleasant to recognize but it's these pesky things we call facts.

I'd like to see the actual numbers, because the beauty of "statistics" is that they can be skewed to support whatever argument you want.

As for white collar crime not hurting anyone, I bet all those folks who lost their retirement funds due to Enron would disagree. On some level, crime hurts someone, even though it may not be you.

I'm not sure if you're trying to change the subject, but white collar crime has nothing to do with what we were talking about. I really could care less if I live close to someone who does insider trading. However, if theres a rapist or murderer in my neighborhood, I would.

Rapists and murders can be of all races and classes.

Are you people serious? Holy crap, really, of all races AND classes! Amazing. Of course they can be anything. But the FACT is that they're more common in certain areas, and by certain races and classes.

What the hell is wrong with you people. Take the damn bags off your heads and smell the coffee. Go to the US Department of Justice, a governmental agency that I really don't think you can refute. The statistics are compiled from arrests and convictions. The tables don't lie. The facts don't lie.

The source for my statement was taken from:
www.amren.com/colorofcrime/color.pdf
The New Century Foundation, 2717 Clarkes Landing, Oakton, VA 22124
Tel. (703) 716-0900, Fax. (703) 716-0932

If that is not convincing enough I can show a few more:

Characteristics of State Prison inmates.
"Based on current rates of first incarceration, an estimated 28% of black
males will enter State or Federal prison during their lifetime, compared to
16% of Hispanic males and 4.4% of white males."
source: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm

U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Homicide trends in the U.S.
Trends by race
-Blacks were 7 times more likely than whites to commit homicide in 1999
(25% Blacks, 4% Whites)
source: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

There is a ton more.

My point here is not to rub this in anyones face, I am validating shinerbocks posts on the subject. I share a similar view, my parents live in the "richest county in Texas". They moved here 8 years ago when most of the neighborhood was white, and crime was almost non-existent. The only crime to report was underage drinking by high school students.
Now that I come home from college everything has changed. I see minorities everywhere, my parents house value is dropping like lead because of it. I also notice the crime rate skyrocketed. My cousin just recently got mugged and held up by gunpoint, beat up, pistol whipped in his head, etc for his wallet. It was on his birthday and him and his gf were taking a walk in the park (July 4th). These kids ended up being 11th grade football players at the local high school apparently trying to emulate rap culture by being "gangsta". This type of thing NEVER happened when I went to school here, but now is getting to be very common.
-Minorities heard of the nice area.
-The rich ones started moving in.
-Produced the demand for affordable housing in the area for other minorities to follow.
-Apartment complexes start popping up.
-There goes the neighborhood.

Okay, what does crime statistics have to do with the fact that MCGLO's should have the right to exist or not? Nothing. It's just some BS that Shinerbock threw out there to justify his/her attitudes toward lower class minorities and poor folks. The reality is that most MCGLO's or BGLO's or AGLO's, etc are composed of members who are educated (or in the process of becoming educated) and professional. Folks who are either striving to be or have achieved some degree of upward mobility.

The fact of the matter is that in the U.S. race is a volatile issue (as demonstrated by this thread) and that minorities and mixed-raced or multiculturally minded people have to deal with close-minded idiots who want to argue about crime statistics rather than deal with the fact that their organizations often do not promote dialogue, cohension or interaction with people of color, etc. Whether it is an official policy or a form of dejure segregation, BGLO's, MCGLOs and other non-historically white GLO's came into existence b/c of an unwillingness for folks to deal with their racial prejudice and a sense of entitlement where any minority person that does join their organization is expected to assimilate such that they downplay their racial/cultural heritage in order to make other folks feel comfortable. I have plenty of friends and students of mine who are black and joined these groups and when confronted with some serious racial discrimination from members of their organization, they were told to just let it go. Now, I'm not saying that all historically white organizations allow for blatant discrimination to occur within their groups but let's be real - we have a long way to go in the area of race relations in this country to think that all people of color are going to be readily embraced by historically white GLOs. Discussions about race often make white folks uncomfortable b/c they have to face the reality (often unwillingly) of their unearned skin privilege. So, I sincerely doubt every historically white GLO has members who are mature enough and willing to find out why people of color are not willing to join their organizations.

Save the crime statistics drivel for a more appropriate topic. MCGLO's exist because America has a long way to go in the race relations department.

PhDiva

Explain to me your thoughts on my "unearned skin privelege." Seeing as how I am white, I would like to know why you feel I havent earned the right to well, be an affluent white person. I think you are pretty much full of shit on this point.

You say that people of color aren't "willing" to join our organizations like we are throwing bids at them and they are declining them. Rather ignorant if you ask me. You speak like MCGLOs being put into place is a bad thing? I don't see how. Its a good place for people of like minded culture and traditions to be together and form relationships.

I am sorry, but I just don't see, especially in the South, blacks and minorities lined up at prominent white top fraternites wanting to receive a bid. I mean, show me a black guy that likes Huey Lewis and the News, Steve Winwood, Texas Music, Widespread Panic, wearing loafers and croakies, and is educated in fine Scotch and cigars......and i'd probobly think he was pretty badass........I have yet to see it......anywhere......period.

Why do you feel that historically white, prominent chapters have to embrace minorities and diversify? It is their right to be selective.

Welcome to reality. Sometimes, in the course of conversation, new subjects come up. Get over it, its a message board.

Once again, we don't really discriminate on race. We don't feel black people will fit in our fraternity, so we don't actively recruit them. They're not banging down our door for a bid.

Also, my discrimination is based on how a person acts, not their skin color.

The statistics still may not tell the whole story. There's iniquity in who is being watched/targeted by law enforcement and also iniquity in the sentencing of white criminals and the sentencing of minority criminals.

African American Youth Are Treated Differently By the Juvenile Justice System
Drugs. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, among youths aged 12 to 17, the rate of current illicit drug use was 11.1 % among whites, and 9.3% among African Americans.[4] In a previous year, the same survey found that white youth aged 12 to17 are more than a third more likely to have sold drugs than African American youth.[5] The Monitoring the Future Survey of high school seniors shows that white students annually use cocaine at 4.6 times the rate of African Americans students, use crack cocaine at 1.5 times the rate of African Americans students, and use heroin at the same rate of African Americans students, and that white youth report annual use of marijuana at a rate 46% higher than African American youth.[6] However African American youth are arrested for drug offenses at about twice the rate (African American 314 per 100,000, white 175 per 100,000) times that of whites,[7] and African American youth represent nearly half (48%) of all the youth incarcerated for a drug offense in the juvenile justice system.[8]

Weapons. According to the Center on Disease Control’s annual Youth Risk Behavior Survey, in 2001 whites and African Americans reported similar rates of carrying a weapon (whites 17.9%, African Americans 15.2%), and similar rates of carrying a gun (whites 5.5%, and African Americans, 6.5%).[9] African American youth represent 32% of all weapons arrests, and were arrested for weapons offenses at a rate twice that of whites (69 per 100,000, versus 30 per 100,000).[10]

Assault. According to the Center on Disease Control’s annual Youth Risk Behavior Survey, African Americans report being in a physical fight at a similar rate (36.5%, versus 32.5% for whites), but were arrested for aggravated assault at a rate nearly three times that of whites (137 per 100,000, versus 48 per 100,000).

“The existence of much larger racial and ethnic differences in arrest rates than in self-reported violence is a matter of great concern. On the one hand, there is no reason to expect similar distributions, because these measures were designed to assess different aspects of violence. But if both measures are valid and reliable, the discrepancy suggests that the probability of being arrested for a violent offense varies with race/ethnicity.”—Youth Violent: A Report of the Surgeon General, January, 2001.[11]

Justice Policy Factsheet

Nothing I was just commenting on previous posts by jubulance(sp?) vs shinerbock.

I think MCGLO's have every right to exist. As long as traditional IFC orgs don't get pressured to become more multi-cultural and inclusive I don't see a problem.

I don't think GLOs should actively recruit for any group in particular. If ABC sorority has no nursing majors, because nursing majors tend to join nursing GLOs, then they shouldn't have to actively recruit them. However, if a nursing major goes through formal recruitment and shows interest, then ABC shouldn't automatically shut her out. ABC also shouldn't say that nurses don't like this or that nor should they say that nurses "won't fit in."

I am sure that there are minorities who like country music, who are classically trained in piano or violin or whatnot (actually, I've never heard of a middle class Asian who has NOT taken classical piano or violin.) that might feel more comfortable at a HWGLO than at minority/multicultural GLO.

Statistics on drug use are based on surveys which are FAR from accurate. I used to work for a company that compiled surveys of such a sort.

As far as the statistics on gun ownership, lots of older white men like to collect guns, go hunting, etc. I havent met too many black gun owners that go hunting, maybe thats just me though.

However, it comes across like you assume certain things about people based on their skin color and you already have judgement of them just by first look, so I don't see how you are not judging people based on their color.