Removal of religious/racial requirements?
 

From what I have been able to tell in the 1940s, at least have of the fraternities in the National Interfraternity Confernence had some level of racial or religious requirements for membership written into their bylaws. I'm interested in finding out about these requirements and when they were removed (the last changes were, I think, in the 1960s).

I'm interested in both the NIC and NPC, I'd be suprised if any of the NPHC fraternities and sororities had them. (Though in practice, I'd be surprised if they had any non-negro members by WWII simply because of who would have been interested).

If you know for your own fraternity or sorority, speak up, or any reference work on the subject...

Thank You
Randolph Finder

Re: Removal of religious/racial requirements?
 

There have been some previous posts on this subject. I remember one from awhile ago started by Geekypenguin.

There is a big difference between the 1940s and today isnt there!

Times have changed many times over.

Not really sure why this was even brought up.

History is what it is, History=The Past.

Research
 

Because I'm doing research on this and thought that asking brothers and sisters might know their history best.

I believe in viewing History both good and bad. Good that they no longer exist, bad that they once did.

Randolph Finder

Re: Research
 

What is the goal of your research? For what purpose?

Research of any kind via a message board isn't really the best/most reputable evidence. It's a lot of hearsay and conjecture with no real proof to back things up.

Re: Re: Removal of religious/racial requirements?
 

This took me FOREVER to find, but I found it.

http://www.greekchat.com/gcforums/sh...=&pagenumber=1

Incidentally, I don't think I ever got an answer to my original question.

We are not an NIC fraternity, and I frankly don't know whether there was ever a race or religion clause in our governing documents. FWIW, though, I do know that our first chapter at an HBCU -- Zeta Iota at Howard University (still active today, I believe) -- was chartered in 1952.

Re: Re: Re: Removal of religious/racial requirements?
 

Thank You. And I even contributed to it.

Also as for why I'm doing it. This is both for personal reasons and, if appropriate, I may turn it into a Wikipedia article. I would be much drier than most of the writeups I've seen on the web, with the primary data being when the *written* policies change.

I'd bump the original article, but the thread hi-jack got a little hot.

Randy

Re: Re: Research
 

He may not be looking to GC as a definitive word, but merely as a stepping stone. In the thread GP started, there were references to articles and books that would provide documented evidence of what's what. I doubt anyone (except maybe Alexandra Robbins ;)) would cite GC as any solid evidence.

the clause
 

my two previous replies were expunged by the less than scholarly. E-mail me privately for names, places. As a field rep
from '57 to '60 I participated in many rushes and saw Beta, TKE,
DU and others take good men who would have gone somewhere
else had those outfits not had "the clause."
Thousands of pages have been written on this topic but inept so-
called researchers apparently cannot find them.
Now ethnicity and culture interests are back and a few at Howard
are leading the pack. GO PIKE!

let's not get all too puffed up....
 

Before us who had no clauses get all too puffed up, let us remind
you that we certainly had bigoted chapters who refused to bid a
minority. I recall in '56 the KU chapter got their panties all in a wad over Warrensburg having an Arab (I gave him my rack). He
was a charmer, and now a multi-millionaire. But generally, the
chapters were gracious, I am pleased to say.
Today, if we had the clause or a gentleman's agreement, perhaps
we would be right at home at Howard (GO Pike!) TKE founder
Clarence Mayer told me by the time all the restrictive-type things
came up we had already initiated a Japanese at IL Wesleyan
and a Jew at Illinois....so, we weren't necessarily entitled to beat
our chests...while this kinda punctured my balloon, I was certainly
proud to hit the road for the Fraternity and not have to ask if a
man was Jewish or whatever....(sermonette) during the 50s.
It is too bad that we have taken a step backward with these old
wounds, and we have lost a modicum of dignity and discretion.
So long as you let us old bastards rave on and on, you might find
that within our harangues that there is something of substance.

Phi Sigma Epsilon, which became part of us in 1985, established the following rules in 1930:

- There would never be a racial or national origin clause at either the national or local level.
- There would be no religious test.

Phi Sigma Kappa itself had no specific clause in the constitution regarding the "race question." However, chapters were urged to consider men who would be accepted by every chapter in the country. So--it was an extremely vague area. In 1952, the Beford Resolution was passed at a Convention which basically stated that the traditions of the Fraternity would be continued--which meant that african-americans would be strongly discouraged from joining. Chapters who did would probably be suspended. At least one chapter renounced its affiliation and became local over the decision. In 1956, it was repealed with a great deal of support. While some southern chapters were upset over the repeal, the overall majority never gave it a second thought. Today, our chapter stands largest in terms of membership on the most diverse campus in the country. We are extremely diverse, and it's all part of the fun.

So, neither organization really had anything in the actual bylaws--just some short-lived items in the standing rules and an overall tradition that followed that of most other fraternities and universities in general.

As for Omega Psi Phi, it deleted any reference to race, color,etc. from its Ritual and Constitution in 1949.

(It interests me that the NIC is often spoken of as if it was solely the domain of historically white groups, when two of the historically black fraternities(Kappa Alpha Psi and Iota Phi Theta) are also members of the NIC, and there are Latino- and Asian-based groups in the NIC also.)

As an aside Wolfman, it interests me that the NIC is discussed in reference with any group. What have they done for us lately except take dues money and set up interfraternal cruises?

The NIC as an entity is fairly worthless in my humble opinion. As for them representing predominantly white organizations, I don't think their stated purpose has anything to do with advancing the interests of a particular race or culture -- just greek life in general. That's something that we can all sign onto..

If only they'd do the job they're paid to do...

The point I was making was about nomenclature and the perception of the groups in it, not any racial aspect to the NIC itself. I don't know too much about the inner workings of the NIC; I do know that that, evidently, groups have had a love-hate relationship with it, given that some groups have from time to time left its fold and attempted to found alternatives bodies or just go it alone.