Diversity in the SEC
 

We've had various threads on this topic over the years. And in a year where it finally has appeared in the SEC, it seems no one has mentioned it. So I thought I would toss it out and see what everyone has to say.

So far, from online pictures, it appears that UGA, MS State and Kentucky have some AA NMs this year. Bid Day is today for LSU and others are coming soon. I, for one, am glad to see it. At UAB where I advised for 30 years, we've had AA members for a number of years - in fraternities and sororities.

Your thoughts....

Are we talking about "diversity" or are we talking about African American participation?

^^this^^ There have been many non-European members for years. But specifically regarding African American participation, we have true inclusion when people are celebrating the great members they pledged. Period. Not "We have great new members and oh yeah, we pledged a black girl, too." I think the greater progress is that the race is not mentioned and the new sisters are celebrated.

Well, I am going to back Titchou up. In the South, having AA participation in NPC groups is a recent occurrence. Period. I noticed a few African American new members at even the more sought after chapters at the SEC schools. We can taunt them for being backwards, but progress starts somewhere. I hope this signals a change that is lasting...however you want to label it.

I can remember some AA members in the SEC as far back as the eighties. Seems like we're more aware of it now because we have all the social media through which people post Bid Day pictures.

To address Sen's question: I am assuming that Titchou is saying "diversity" = racial diversity.

To the question overall - please realize that there are non AA in NPHC orgs as well.

Joining a GLO of one's choice may not always be about race. It can also be about how a person chooses to align with a certain culture.

We assume that race = culture, but that is not necessarily true.

Another point is that not all persons in this country who have "black" skin are African Americans. There are many persons of African descent, such as Jamaicans, Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, and Colombians, who traditionally do not consider themselves as African Americans. And just about every African that I've met absolutely do not consider themselves as African Americans.

So, while you may see a Black female in a NPC pledge class, that Black female may not see her cultural identity in alignment with historical African American identity, i.e., NPHC sororities.

Best post I ever SAW on the subject!

KKG at Arkansas has definitely pledged African Americans, as far back as 2000. Nothing new for them.

Having a relative few (which is why nonwhites always have and always will be a minority in such organizations) nonwhites in SEC is not automatically "diversity." The notion of faux colorblindness and tokenism have made people (read: usually many white people) pretend that having a few nonwhites is a quick solution to a silent issue and therefore you (in general) can claim diversity based on a small percent of the total population.

On that note, whether you (in general) want diversity and plan to address the diversity if it ever exists (read: avoid the "you're my brother, we don't see race..." lies) is completely up to you. On another note, if you want to persist with the "only a few nonwhites" in organizations, that is also up to you.

I, for instance, do not want DST to be racially diverse. I intentionally joined an historically and predominantly Black, African American, and African diaspora GLO. That is how I want it to remain and that is how it will remain. That is not a bad thing. I am just making a point to highlight how catch words like "diversity" must be unpacked to see what is really going on beyond the cool catch phrases and catch words.

As long as predominantly white organizations keep pretending that race is not intentionally and/or unintentionally part of their foundation and general makeup, there will be no diversity. That is fine if there is no diversity but you (in general) cannot then pretend that race is not part of your foundation and general makeup. Keep pretending your demographic makeup is mere coincidence, and keep pretending that whiteness is invisible and race neutral and only nonwhite organizations are founded or rooted in race and ethnicity, and you will keep running in circles regarding "diversity."

Any black women--or any women at all, for that matter--are in their sororities (NPC or whatever else) because they are wanted. I can not even imagine someone telling a bunch of women, "Okay, we're looking bad at this school or in this sorority because we're all white. We MUST pledge a black woman." Can you imagine how that would go over? Can anyone imagine any threat in the world that could make them pledge a woman they didn't want?

Nope, if they're there, they were wanted for themselves.

With over one hundred years and hundreds of thousands of members, let us not pretend that all sororities and fraternities only have members who were (1) wanted and (2) wanted for their individual awesomeness regardless of demographics.

Some of us know of chapters that were forced to initiate people and chapters that chose people based on what some would consider superficial reasons.

Furthermore, "wanted for themselves" can include race, ethnicity, and culture. My awesomeness includes being a Black woman. I am not a transparent robot void of culture and group identity. Therefore, "wanted for themselves" and what this means to different people is one reason why diversity is complex. People want to boast about not caring and pretend as though you just accidentally have diversity. You wake up one day and say "wow, we suddenly and randomly have a bunch of nonwhite people...it wasn't even somewhat intentional...we never noticed our PNMs and members were changing in demographics...wow....."

It's very, very difficult for women to get into most GLOs at all the universities I've worked with. A woman might have fabulous grades, scores, activities, and looks and still get released and no one will really know why. It's going on as I speak right now at various schools and we're all openmouthed at who's getting released--PNMs with sitting sisters, daughters of Alum Club presidents, you name it.

That's why I think that the idea of going into some sorority's selection meeting and saying, "OK, ladies, we're looking racist here and you have to take a black woman--here are the names of the 3 who are rushing, pick one and we're going to force 2 other sororities to do the same." An alum can't even go in and order the members to be sure and take 8 girls from Mountain Brook High School or take X amount of pageant winners or anything I can think of. And if some member gets up and tries to do the same about a stranger when they're in the middle of pitched battles about women they already know and love...nope.

They have to love the girl for herself.

If only human interactions, cultural capital, and social capital always work as they do in our member guidelines and pledge manuals. :)

I imagine that forced pledging in the NPC would work about as well as it would with any GLO-- a college president, say, comes stomping into a DST meeting and says, "OK, ladies, I just made an NPC group pledge a black woman and I expect you to return the favor to me and pledge a white one. Here are 3 names, pick one."

Can you imagine how thrilled both groups would be? :)

I think there's truth in what both DrPhil and carnation are saying. Yes, the sororities have to like the girl or she's not getting a bid, but I still think there's some of that look at how cool and diverse we are because we have a black sister. Just my humble opinion.