SAE hires director of diversity
 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/tasneemnashr...ive#.xod9wPJmq

Let's hope all the news outlets so quick to report the problems with SAE will do a follow up on the active steps they are taking to resolve them.

"Canty, who is currently a doctoral candidate at DePaul University, has been both personally and professionally involved in Greek life. As a sister of Zeta Phi Beta at North Carolina State University, she was awarded Sorority Woman of the Year in 2007 and has since served in roles managing Greek life at Syracuse University and DePaul University."

I'm very surprised that there were no available and qualified student affairs professionals who were members of SAE to take this position.

I'm betting it was a deliberate decision to hire someone outside SAE for the role. Part of the need (or at least the need as perceived by the public) for this role is to help SAE think more critically and objectively about how their traditions, operations, and policies work in a world where respecting diversity is more And more important all the time.

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not...

Hiring a diversity director *after* making national new for racist songs is pretty much the opposite of "proactive."

Only two types of chapters will be irritated that their national dues are paying for this position: those who have a problem with diversity, and those who don't have a problem with diversity.

I agree with your theory. I'm just disappointed that this hire was not internal.

I am not being sarcastic. SAE is a very large organization and it wouldn't surprise me that there were members who were qualified for this position.

I'm sorry, everything doesn't need to be cured by a magical black woman*. Every SAE member isn't a racist white guy and I'm just wondering whether they exhausted every avenue before turning to the outside.

Unfortunately, going outside of the membership to fill positions and create programs is depressingly common nowadays. This happens to be a very fraught and very extreme case.

I also think they would have been better served by hiring someone older. If the racism within the fraternity as a whole really is so prevalent as to create this position, they need someone who will be able to make a dent with alumni as well.

There are actually two issues, here, in internal vs. external and white guy vs. not white guy, and in both cases, it seems the former may have more credibility with members, but the optics of it may be worse for outside observers.

Which is to say...there are down sides to any combination...at least from the perspectives that can be espoused by people with no actual insight into the candidates and hiring process (i.e. us).

White guy member: they aren't really interested in change
Non-white guy member: they are tokenizing and putting the responsibility for diversity on their non-white members.
White guy non-member: they aren't even interested in diverse hiring
Non-white guy non-member: magical negro

Ultimately, I hope they chose the person who will affect the most change, and that it works out well for both SAE and Ms. Canty.

I debated about posting this at all, as I was pretty sure that there would be those who would nitpick and be unhappy, no matter what SAE did. They truly are in a no-win situation. If they did nothing, they would be criticized for that. If they hired someone from within, they would be criticized for that. If they hired someone from without, they would be criticized for that.
I will admit I did not anticipate their director being criticized for being too young. But, I'm sure had they hired someone who was an older person, they would have been criticized for that, also.

Sometimes, I hate being right.

eta - While changing the hearts and minds of alumni is a noble aspiration, the fact is that it is the actives over which SAE HQ has the most sway with, and ultimately, it is where the most positive change can occur. After all, it is where the problems were discovered. Alumni may or may not be involved with their fraternity; actives have no choice, if they wish to remain active. Also, I agree "proactive" was the wrong word; I meant "active" .

I don't have a problem with who was hired. I do have a problem with jackasses who misrepresent my letters by acting in a manner entirely contradictory to the Ritual they purport to hold so sacred. If they actually paid attention to the Ritual beyond knowing the "secrets" and actually gave a shit about what it contains, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

SAE's Ritual, from 1856 to the present, has never had any room for racism or discrimination of any kind (at least apart from the obvious gender qualification, it being a men-only organization and all). The kind of ignorance and b.s. we get on grainy camera phone footage of menchildren on a bus on their way to a function that no doubt involved underage drinking, repeating something no genuine SAE would ever say, much less celebrate, is why SAE has an erroneous reputation of having a long history of racism. It would be more correct to say we have a long history of admitting to membership those who were and are unfit to wear our badge or our letters.

Same Assholes Everywhere, apparently.

I don't know if they "exhausted every avenue," but I have several friends in student affairs who are active SAE alumni. I can ask if they even were interested (most are leaning towards the deanery track).

Here, here, SAEAlumnus! It's sad to me that instead of addressing their recruitment methods and programming to better select and train their members to be gentlemen, they've hired someone to "fix" diversity. Hmm...hope it works....

SAE, like most orgs., had discriminatory policies up through the 20th century. It's not helpful to ignore that, even if it wasn't officially part of your ritual. Improving diversity (and maintaining relevance in the 21st century) is not just a matter of selecting guys who aren't racist, we also have to acknowledge the history of the Greek system and understand why certain groups wouldn't be comfortable with it, etc.

What do you think her role will entail? I would expect it to involve recruiting and programming, no?

Maybe I wasn't clear in my post, but that's the point I was trying to make. This is an EXTREMELY visible hire, and virtually every candidate is certain to have downsides, so I hope they not only chose a great director, but give her the authority and resources to affect change.

Well, unless they figure out a way to initiate her, she won't be able to participate in membership selection and ritual and, thus, will have to rely on the veracity of others to determine if that is being presented properly. Seems to me they are saying there was no one in SAE qualified....sad, n'est-ce pas?