Old South
 

I find this story interesting in so many different ways.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520116,00.html

Is it freedom of expression or is it insensitivity on the fraternities part? Thoughts?

Yes and yes. The fraternity is obviously free to hold the event as an expression of their free speech...buuuuut perhaps this was not the appropriate time/venue (stopping in front of the AKA event during an anniversary celebration) for that expression. I personally find it distasteful in general, but the 1st amendment provides it protection. If the campus was to ban them from parading, that is their privilege as an institution. I think that next time they should use a little more tact and forethought, and they owe the ladies of AKA and the campus a huge apology.

As PhoenixAzul says, the two options you give are not mutually exclusive.

I was interested that they were carrying the Confederate battle flag. If I recall correctly, KA bylaws prohibit display of that flag at any fraternity function.

Yes I agree that they are not mutually exclusive but does one right dwarf the other? Are they both equal? Is there a right to not be offended? If they had not displayed the battle flag would it have been acceptable?

Having the right to do or say something does not make it inherently acceptable.

I think there needs to be some care in using the word "right." What is meant? Constitutional right? Human Right? Oughtabe right? A "rights vs rights" analysis doesn't fit here anyway.

There is a right to free expression, without a doubt. There is no right not to be offended per se. But there is also not a right to speak without being criticized for what you said. Those who exercise their right to free expression must be prepared to accept the consequences of their expression.

What you have here is everyone exercising their right to free expression. The KA chapter did that with its parade, and the attire and flags were part of that. The AKA chapter and others are, in return, exercising their rights to free expression by criticising the chapter for stopping the ante-bellum themed parade in front of the AKA celebration. From the article:

"I don't believe these young folks were in any way trying to be racist," said Joyce Stallworth, an Alpha Kappa Alpha alumna who saw the April 29 parade in Tuscaloosa and is an associate education dean at Alabama. "But they were being insensitive. I don't think they understood the broader implications of what they were doing."

Note: There is no assertion that the chapter violated anyone else's rights. Instead, there are statements that the chapter did not exercise its right to free expression responsibly.

It is my understanding that KA has held these Old South events for many years. Had they held this function in a ballroom at the downtown Hilton would it have made a difference? What if they had held it at a private location and someone had objected who worked there? Is there a slippery slope?

I would also like to know if and/or why they paused at the AKA house. If that is true, it was truly in poor taste and they should apologize. I cannot imagine they would be that insensitive but I suppose it may be so.

According to The Crimson White:

According to a news release from the fraternity’s national administrative office, an investigation by the national and local KA officials found that the parade "stopped for a very short period of time" while picking up participants, who wore antebellum dresses from a nearby sorority house.

Fraternity officials will work to prevent another situation like it in the future, according to the release.

"We apologize for the interruption of the AKA event," said Will Vandervoort, president of the KA chapter. "We moved our trucks as soon as we could given the traffic and loading and unloading. We sincerely regret what happened."

As for your slippery slope question, I still think that misses the point. People have a right to express themselves freely. People have a right to criticize others' free expressions. Members of the community at large can hear both sides, consider contextual factors and form their own opinions. That collective community opinion might be to join in the criticism. Those criticized can then decide for themselves whether to pay attention to the criticism or not.

Welcome to the marketplace of ideas.

What I read in another article was that they stopped the floats to pick up girls (dressed as southern belles) at their sorority house that was located diagonally from the AKA house, and that they moved on when the girls were in the floats.

According to the article I read (I think it was in the UA newspaper - found on another website), the trucks were stopped when the AKA members came outside to take photographs and that was when they met each other, no verbal altercation occurred, and the trucks moved on after the girls were loaded in.

Sounds like an unfortunate coincidental meeting, if the trucks had been earlier to pick up the girls, they would have missed the AKA's picture taking.

I'll see if I can find the article and post it.

Mystic Cat - You beat me to it!!

The flags and uniforms weren't in and of themselves offensive, but there really was no need to even walk by the AKA house, especially during their celebration. I believe that a formal apology has been made so I don't really know what the school could/should do.

From what I read, it wasn't a case of "Hey, let's go by the AKA house!". The KAs were stopping to pick up their dates, and it just so happened they stopped near the AKA event.

Sounds to me like they really didn't do much wrong. They did the right thing by apologizing. Sounds like the KA's were a little unlucky in their timing and maybe, just maybe, the news corp is making a bigger deal of this then it should be. Wouldn't be the first time they have done so with Greeks.

I'd agree that they did the right thing by apologizing, and I assume that no offense was intended. But I don't think I'd say they did nothing wrong and were just unlucky in timing.

There's a reason that Kappa Alpha Order adopted this bylaw at its 2001 National Convention:

Display of the Confederate Battle Flag. The display of the Confederate Battle Flag shall be prohibited from any chapter house, lodge, or meeting place: a "display" shall mean a visible presence from the exterior of said property and from the common areas within. The Confederate Battle Flag shall not be displayed at any fraternity function or gathering, on or off property associated with Kappa Alpha Order. The Confederate Battle Flag shall not be associated with Kappa Alpha Order by any medium including, but not limited to, fabric pattern, printed material, painted or stenciled surfaces, or computer Web sites. The Confederate Battle Flag shall not be incorporated into the design of clothing or any other items bearing symbolism of Kappa Alpha Order.

Around the same time that this bylaw was adopted, an issue of the Kappa Alpha Journal (which used to be available on-line, but now I can't find it) had a very good cover story on the association between KA and the Conferderate Battle flag, historically and contemporeneously, along with a discussion of why KA would not want to be associated with the negative connotations the flag carries with so many people.

So at the least, it would seem that the chapter violated their own fraternity's bylaws and policies.

I say this as a Southerner with full Southern credientials: The reality is that in 2009, a group of intelligent college students really shouldn't be surprised that appearing in public wearing Confederate uniforms and carrying Confederate flags, as part of a party, will elicit a negative reaction from large segments of the community (including those who think it is disrespectful to the memory of Robt. E. Lee and all other Confederate soldiers).

It's not a matter of whether they have a right to do that. It's matter of which is more important to them: exercising that right or maintaining a positive reputation in the community. It seems to me that the fraternity as a whole has decided that reputation and public perception is more important.

What they did wrong was not thinking about the implications of their actions.

Which is pretty par for the course for many 18-22 year old men ;)

LOL. I remember all too well.

I personally like the idea that KA does this tradition. I know it must be a fun time for them, and probably something they look forward to! As other people have said it didn't seem as if the KA's were trying to upset the AKA's and as an AKA said in the article, they did NOTHING racist. I don't see why a "tradition" is becoming such a major ordeal. If people are so offended though, even after KA made a public apology, maybe what they should do is stop having a parade, but keep up with the rest of the tradition, such as UGA did. These guys (and their dates) are not trying to upset people, they are just trying to have a good time and celebrate tradition, as well as celebrate their founding fathers who may have fought in this war.

That's not what she said. She said they didn't think they were trying to be racist. There's a difference. Specifically, she said, "I don't think they understood the broader implications of what they were doing."

I agree that it sounds like a good time. But seriously, a gentleman doesn't just avoid trying to upset people. A gentleman avoids doing anything that he can reasonably anticipate will offend others, because a gentlemen considers the feelings of others to be as important as his own.

Sometimes traditions need to change or adapt. Nothing new there. Figure out how to have a good time, honor the best of your traditions, and avoid unnecessary offense, that's all.

Slavery was a tradition, too. Not all traditions are OK.

You all are giving these guys too little credit. I am pretty sure they knew exactly what they were doing.

Eh. The people who were actually there seem to think otherwise and to be giving them the benefit of the doubt -- at least they are quoted doing so. Absent anything indicating the contrary, I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, too.

This isn't true at all. I go to Alabama and was around when this actually happened. The aka house is located on soroity row and the ka's come down soroity row to pick up their dates who stand in front of their respective houses. The parade was so big this year that they couldn't move their trucks. This is an issue that the aka's blew WAY out of proportion. Nothing was said, it was just people at the wrong place and the wrong time.

Yes, they were picking up their dates. I'm with MC - the story as reported doesn't indicate any ill-will on the part of the KAs. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I was with you until you got to the bit about the AKAs blowing it "WAY out of proportion."

Another reminder about how far we have gotten in the Deep South of where I stand and what my organization means to people in this day and age...

More things change, the more they stay the same? IDK?

OR

Without struggle, there's no progress?

I don't see the issue of them dressing in confederate uniforms and southern belle gowns. If it's part of their history I see it as similar to people who reenact the war battles.

Idk the history of KA but it seems like the South and the Civil War is a part of their tradition.

Maybe next year the parade route can be reworked.

This is kind of how I thought of it. It reminded me of a Gone With the Wind theme party. But then that's always been one of my favorite books so perhaps I'm biased :D

I love Gone With the Wind as much as anyone, but let's be real -- it is a highly romanticized, lop-sided view of the ante-bellum and post-bellum South. Dressing up like Miss Scarlet or Ashley Wilkes is to Civil War Reenactment as, well, fiction is to history.

Look, I get and respect the KA Southern heritage thing, really I do. But there's a reason that KA has taken the position it has on the battle flag -- there are ways to celebrate that heritage that can at the same time respect the perspectives and feelings of others.

I'm being partly facetious when I say this (and then I'll try to be quiet on this subject :D), but WWRELD? -- What Would Robt. E. Lee Do? Based on what I've read about him, I'm guessing he'd think there are much better ways to celebrate Southern heritage.

KA HQ has made it quite clear that they do not allow their members to use the Battle flag. So the chapter should immediately cease doing so, and should not do it in the future. That issue has been decided by KA themselves, so it should be easily resolved.

C.S.A uniforms in and of themselves are not racist - I would argue that given that slavery was totally abolished in the states of the C.S.A. years before it was abolished in the four slave-holding states of the Union (a fun fact that many don't know or chose to ignore) that it makes more logical sense to be offended by Union blue. That said, if the men of KA had chosen to march on the AKA house in uniform for the purpose of disrupting their function then I could certainly understand AKA being upset. But from all the reporting I've read, it appears that it was a case of unfortunate timing. KA has apologized, and I would hope AKA would graciously accept it. The spokeswoman for AKA acknowledged that she did not believe the men were trying to be racist.

As to what to do next year, were I a KA advisor I would either try to schedule KA Old South on a weekend when AKA did not have a major event planned, or let AKA know when the Old South date pick-up would occur so they could schedule their events, or perhaps revamp the way date pick-up occurs. I am sure Robert E. Lee would wish for the gentlemen of KA to do all they can reasonably be expected to do to honour the sensibilities of the ladies of AKA.

eta - And I wish hoop skirts would come back into style. They hide a multitude of sins!

Not to turn this into a historical debate, I hope you see the logical problems with this argument...

I think we all understand that slavery was prevalent in the North, and that the abolitionists were disliked in areas of the North...but again, I think there are some issues with your statement. It seems more like you're making an overstatement to get across a point that the Union wasn't perfect (which, admittedly, it wasn't).

No overstatement - it's a fact. Since I'm speaking factually, I wouldn't say slavery was prevalent in the North (in the 1860s), nor that abolitionists were popular.

I was referring to the FACT that while slavery was outlawed by the Emancipation Proclamation in the unoccupied states of the C.S.A. it continued to be legal in the slave-owning states in the Union. After the War slavery was totally abolished by Consitutional Amendment. Given that historical fact, it is illogical to equate the uniform of the CSA with slavery. I understand the emotional response that some groups have, but my whole point is that it is not a logical one. It isn't about anybody being perfect - it is indeed about logic. I would be interested in what you regard as illogical in my statement that since slavery was outlawed in the CSA before the USA it would actually be more logically valid to argue that the Union Army uniform should be considered racist.

FWIW, I think the entire American culture north and south was racist in the sense we are discussing, and that it is ultimately detrimental to try and cast "good" and "bad" guys - the whole issue is far more complex than that, and I have found that those who buy into the whole "North was morally superior" mindset fail to recognize the larger societal issues raised by the idea that maybe the entire country had a problem, and not just the scrapegoat South.

An incident in Nashville
 

All of this makes me think back to the Sons of Confederate Veterans Ball I attended at their Reunion in Nashville a few years back. We had many gentlemen wearing CSA uniforms, and tons of belles. At the same hotel a black family was having a large family reunion. Some of the family members came into the lobby area where we were, and asked what was going on. I overheard one national officer explaining the purpose of the SCV to an interested man of about 30 - 40. We had a historical band play, and were dancing. Some of the younger reunion family members stuck their heads in, and we invited them to dance. It was quite a sight to see them doing the Virginia Reel with the costumed SCV participants!

I'm not saying that the ladies of AKA will ever feel like taking a turn around the dance floor with the gentlemen of KA - I will say that when you engage in a sincere dialogue with well-meaning people you will often discover that perceived animosity and stereotypes aren't necessarily the reality.

And that's all I've been trying to say.

I really will be quiet on this topic now. :o

I'm hoping to be quiet now, too. :)

I would be interested in knowing what the various posters think should happen now -

My issue with your logic was in saying that it makes more sense to be offended by Union blue. I should have just bolded that part of your statement when I responded to it. ETA: I also was probably a bit too direct in my comment - sorry if it came off rude.

I do agree, however, that there were issues with the entire culture at that time, and that it's wrong to romanticize one side or the other. There were problems in both the Union and the Confederacy, and it's useless and wrong to demonize either.

For what it's worth, I don't see all that much "North was morally superior" mindset in the North, and I've lived here my whole life. Most people I know up here will readily admit that the Union (and Lincoln for that matter) had some serious flaws during that time period.

I have an honest question and I might be stepping on a bees nest asking it. But the rebel flag in my mind (as a New Englander) is a rebel flag of the C.S.A.

It very well could be my general lack of Civil War knowledge but I've never fully understood how the Rebel Flag came to be a sign of slavery.

Somewhat similar and off the CSA topic but similar in ways. . . Every year in February there is a big reenactor/living historian conference held in the Chicago area. Time periods run Roman through VietNam. This year there was a booking goof up and one of the rooms we had reserved was also booked for a Bar Mitzvah (we were booked a year out, etc)! Anyway, there are a LOT of German reenactors that attend this convention and we had to do some smaller things on our part because one of the Bar Mitzvah guests was a Holocaust survivor. Needless to say, that was a situation where we didn't mingle and the hotel even put up a barricade so there would be no mingling on Saturday night at the ball. The German reenactors were fine with only wearing their tunics/jackets and caps while within the designated rooms so it was all good - we definitely did not want to cause distress to an 80 year old woman! Common sense does go a long way.

The mystery and crime writers' conference did enjoy mingling with us.

What you are thinking of as the 'Confederate Flag' is actually the battle flag of the Army of Northern Virginia. The Confederate States of America actually had three different national flags that were used over the course of the country's existence. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederate_flag

KSig, I spent about 1/3 of my childhood/teen years in New Jersey. Trust me when I say that the mindset of which I spoke was VERY evident. If I had a nickel for every time I heard "Well, at least we WON the war!" after being subjected to being insulted for merely being from the south I would be a very wealthy woman. It may be that as a southerner I was subjected to this, while you as a native born yankee were not. There have been more historians presenting more balanced views of the Late Unpleasantness since the 70s I think - perhaps things are better now. I hope so.

I'd still argue my logic is spot-on. If the primary premise is that 1.) Having slavery legal = racism, and the secondary premise is 2.)The Union had legal slavery, then a logical conclusion is that Union = Racism. You can plug in C.S.A. and get the same result - and my point is that no one would have had a problem with Upsilon Alpha (see what I did there? Union Army?!) coming past the AKA house in Union blue. (Although if you have read any of Sherman's very own reports in U.S. military records, you might think differently.) If I have unwittingly slipped into a logical fallacy please let me know which one. (Bear in mind I teach logic, so if you call my logic into question I am going to ask you to let me know exactly how it fails!)

Nanners - the Battle Flag (I prefer 3rd National myself) has been used by the KKK and other groups in racially-charged situations. That is one reason it has come to be associated with racism. I would point out, in the interest of fairness, that these same groups are also rather fond of the Stars and Stripes. As a proud southerner I am appalled any time any symbols of the C.S.A. are used by any racist groups. I consider it an insult to the memory of my ancestors.

Okay, family ribbing you is one thing. I'm talking complete strangers hearing my accent and ripping into me - :eek:. Or even worse, fellow students acting as though I was an extra from the set of "Deliverance". AOE, as long as you aren't indulging in the whole "Well, the way we do it up north was THIS way and it's the RIGHT way" thing then any stranger who gave you grief was rude and tacky, and there is nothing worse than being tacky. Shame on them. Let's collect our nickels and head east to Europe.

I think we can agree that stereotyping of ANY sort is almost guaranteed to end up being offensive - I try very hard not to lump all yankees together. Some of my best friends are yankees. There are yankees, and there are damn yankees.

I kid, I kid, :D.