No, I don't, and they are probably the single all-male chapter that I'm most curious about. In many ways Delta has been the "flagship" of the all-male chapters, (Yes, they have OPA on campus rather than GSS, but I don't think that matters much). I'm convinced that if the brothers at Delta had deliberately organized the all-male chapters after Nationals, they probably could have pulled off getting most to leave with them into a separate organization. The fact that Clemson went co-ed didn't surprise me much, Former APO National President McKenzie is loved by that chapter and my belief is that he could have convinced them.

I would like any information that you have on any of them. I only know of three organizations for men that came out of Alpha Phi Omega efforts. One is Phi Rho Eta (greek for Frank Reed Horton's initials?) originally out of SIU-Carbondale, thereis Theta Beta Phi which came out of a failed extension effort at University of Maryland Eastern Shore, and now Alpha Delta at Maine-Orono. (And the Theta Xi chapter at SLU)


Sincerely
Randy
(National History and Archives cmte.)

*sigh*
 

:(I guess I wish that these folks had said they'd decided to disaffiliate with Alpha Phi Omega and start their own fraternity, rather than say they've changed names. I can call myself by a different name, but it doesn't change who I am.

To be fair, the clarification came from the 'adults' (and I use that term loosely!) on the Board, but the decision to affirm the BOD's move was passed by the voting body of Alpha Phi Omega, the National Convention. (Which, is made up of over 90% student voting delegates)

By doing what has been done, they have broken the first sentence of our Oath: "...to exemplify the principles and to advance the organization of Alpha Phi Omega..." There is no advancement of the organization here. It is a blatant attempt to discredit what was affirmed by their fellow students.

I just feel sad.

I'm hoping that they ARE saying that in real life, and that this newspaper article was just spectacularly poorly written. They never did quote a member saying "we changed our name" - those were the author of the article's words.

Yes, they were formed in the early 90's when Zeta Nu was having membership problems. As I understand, they were told that in order to come off of suspension, they had to come back co-ed. Those who were ok being co-ed stayed, those who didn't left and formed Phi Rho Eta. Zeta Nu eventually lost their charter a few years later for hazing. This is all second hand info though, from an alum of my chapter who was regional membership chair during this timeframe. I keep meaning to read the file in the archives at the Nat'l Office to corroborate.

Thank you for the additional information.

Randy

Back in 1976 a large group of chapters attempted to form a new national fraternity. Several chapters signed on, our chapter was invited in earnest to join them. I have seen the letters of correspondence and the invitation letter from these chapters personally, its been in alumni's possestion and I've only seen it once. (cant remember the national name or the chapters off the top of my head). We almost left. But national Alpha Phi Omega promissed us (to our face) they would never force us to change our membership policies. We stayed in Alpha Phi Omega based off this promiss, and thirty years later in the living memory of our alumni they went back upon it.

thats all I have, I wish I had access to these letters myself

You do realize that thirty years is a long time, right?

And that circumstances change?

And that tough decisions often have to be made to ensure the strength of the fraternity?

Alpha Phi Omega is not a 'they'. It's an 'us'. WE are all Alpha Phi Omega.

I was refering to the national office in 'they'

I am Alpha Phi Omega, we are Alpha Phi Omega, Almost everyone posting is a brother ect ect...

yes 30 years is a long time however the legal context of title nine has not significantly changed and Alpha Phi Omega nationally is coed, has not seen any legal action in this right nor proabably will it. the all male chapters of alpha phi omega stood by alpha phi omega (nationally) in its time of crisis back in 1976, now it should be time for alpha phi omega to stand by us. I find the lack of commitment to long established chapters, fraternity leaders in their respective section and region and brothers in leadership, friendship and service to be quite disturbing.

What has the national office done that hasn't been in direct support of chapters?

Oh? That's still showing an unwarrented 'us vs. them' attitude.

The National Office had nothing to do with the recent move to have all chapters go co-ed. The National Office are our employees, several of whom, btw, are Brothers also.

The move to have all chapters go co-ed was made by our National Board of Directors, all Brothers ELECTED by the voting delegates (mainly actives) to lead our Fraternity. Right or wrong, they did so because of the issues involved with still having all-male chapters.

The Legislative Session of the National Convention in 2006 had the power to either stop such effort, or approve it. They approved it. The voting delegates are comprised mainly of active students, not alumni. So while you might not like it, your Brothers agreed with the move. The Legislative Session is and was the proper forum for addressing the issue.

So, stop blaming some mythical 'them'. It wasn't the National Office. It wasn't the alumni. WE, Alpha Phi Omega, decided to have all chapters go co-ed.

Furthermore, WE, Alpha Phi Omega, has bent over backwards to help and assist those chapters go co-ed. They weren't demanded to go co-ed overnight. There was no 'lack of commitement' to those chapters. Regional and Section leadership have been working with them to help them out. In fact, I believe it's been over 3 years since that decision was first made.


While I don't agree with how things have happened, nor fully agree with the justification of doing so, I frankly get sick and tired of this kind of attitude being displayed by Brothers.

>>>

For emphasis.

There's a difference between the National Board of Directors (composed of elected and appointed officials, all of whom are volunteers, all of whom are brothers) and the people who are employed at the National Office (who are paid, since it is a job, and who may or may not be brothers).