[dzrose93]

Originally posted by Alias23
"I don't take a discrimination claim at face value. I need proof of wrongdoing before I jeopardize the reputation of an organization -- something concrete that shows Twilley wasn't given a bid merely because of her race.

Were the girls rude to her? Twilley says no.

Did they ignore her at the rush parties, make her feel ill at ease while she was there, or do anything else to show that she was being set apart from the rest of the rushees? Twilley, again, says no.

If any of those things had happened, then I would be the first to say, "yes, race may have played a part." " -- dzrose

Now we're getting somewhere. My reference to you not answering my question dealt with your unwillingness to be specific. Now you've given somewhat specific examples of things that would cause you to consider that race MAY have played a factor in Twilley's denial of a bid (I interpret your response as saying that it would AT LEAST take the events you mentioned to consider that "race MAY have played a part" and to then investigate).

Alias, sorry for the delay in getting back to you. First, I just wanted to point out that I stated basically the same thing in a previous post to you. Here's what I said:

"It would be different if the girls in the houses had treated her terribly during Rush or showed any sign that they disliked Twilley because of her race. But, even in the article, Twilley comments on how sweet the girls were and how upbeat they were during the parties."

That was my original answer to your question about what kind of "evidence" I would need before making a decision concerning whether or not Twilley was discriminated against. I really just re-worded it a little in my last post, but if that re-wording clarified my point for you, then I'm glad I did it... I should have probably gotten a little more in-depth to begin with since it might have prevented the confusion. (I'm just bringing this up because I wanted to indicate that I haven't been consciously trying to side-step your questions.)

Originally posted by Alias23
The examples you have given do not surprise me, because they are some of the more obvious types of racist behavior (actually it's still hard to prove unless you have a witness because it's her word against theirs -- now what?). But what you must understand is that, these days, such acts are more rare because racists realize that they have to be more shrewd to get away with their discrimination. People who really are interested in keeping Blacks or another minority out of a group often don't do things as obvious as treat them rudely, ignore them, or make them feel uneasy because they know these things are cause for suspicion. Instead, those who engage in this type of behavior will give no indication whatsoever of their racist views or motives, and simply deny the person a membership/job/etc. because they don't want them there. These are the cases that African-Americans are dealing with most frequently -- the ones with no apparent "evidence." This is why we have to dig deeper and look at patterns of conduct and other things that give us an overall picture of whether or not someone is being discriminated against. This is when we apply the end-result rule to determine if the end-result is discriminatory rather than looking for only intent, because intent is often hard to prove given that racists are much smarter than they used to be. If we waited on something as obvious as the examples you gave to happen before we said, "yes, race MAY have played a part" as you stated, then most valid cases of racism would go uninvestigated.

You're absolutely right, Alias. It is sometimes very difficult to prove that racist discrimination is occuring, especially in the more "secretive" parts of society. And sororities, by their very nature, fall into that "secretive" category.

But, what everyone needs to remember is that it's also difficult sometimes to prove that racism ISN'T occuring - particularly in secret societies like Greek organizations. How can the sororities prove to Twilley that they didn't discriminate against her without compromising the standards upon which they were founded?

I know that some people believe that the easiest way would have been for Twilley to have been given a bid by an NPC sorority. But, what if racism really wasn't the reason for her exclusion? What if the girls had legitimate concerns about offering Twilley a bid for reasons other than her race? They shouldn't be forced to accept Twilley as a member of their organization just to prove that they aren't racist. So, what could the sororities do to prove their innocence in the discrimination claim? I simply don't know, and I'd honestly like to hear some people's suggestions.

The reason I find Twilley's case so difficult to pass judgement on is because the whole Rush process itself is so complicated. There are so many variables involved in matching rushees with sororities, and it's not a flawless operation. That's why I posted my little impromptu beginners' guide to "How the Rush Process Works" a little while ago in this thread. I'm trying to help people understand that it's very hard to discern, if not downright impossible, why each person has the Rush experience that they do. With all the rules and regulations NPC has set for Rush, it's very difficult for outsiders to determine why some girls end up at the house of their dreams while others end up somewhere they never expected, and still others end up nowhere at all. Rush is basically a game of chance -- the sorority members are all trying to second-guess one another to figure out who fits the best in their house and who would accept an invitation if it is given, while the rushees are trying to figure out which sororities liked them the best so that they'll know which groups to list on their invite cards. In the end, some of the results are good and some are not so good.

Originally posted by Alias23
"However, the only "evidence" that we have is Twilley's word that she "thinks" she was discriminated against. I'm not calling her a liar, I just feel that we should hear more of the story - from both sides - instead of taking her claim at face value.

Once again, I'm not saying that race WASN'T the reason for the cut. I'm just saying that people shouldn't automatically jump to that conclusion simply because one person says it is. That's all." -- dzrose

So you do think it is worth investigating (because earlier you inferred that there wasn't enough "evidence" to say "yes, race MAY have played a factor" and, thus, investigate)? If so, I'm glad you feel that way, but I thought before that you said it was your opinion that Twilley's denial of a bid was not based on race:

" The reason I made my comment (and I think Killarney made hers, although I won't speak for her on this), is because I feel that the whole Twilley incident was blown so far out of proportion. In talking to some people who have met Twilley, it became apparent that she quite possibly had an "agenda" to rushing - that she wanted to make some kind of statement as to how AA's are "treated" during NPC Rush at a Southern school. Through all of this, she made quite a name for herself, and in every article I've read, that Cherokee has been mentioned -- presumably to suggest that because she has a nice car, she should have been automatically granted entrance to an NPC sorority. " -- dzrose

That statement sounds very judgemental and made me believe that you were jumping to conclusions yourself before we had enough information.

I apologize for sounding judgemental. I guess I attribute my feelings to the fact that I've seen so many small sorority issues get turned into media nightmares, and it's a sore spot with me. Sometimes, things that occur during Rush are twisted by the media to portray sorority women in the worst possible light when, in actuality, there was no malice intended by the organizations at all.

I suppose the hype with Twilley's Rush experience simply rubbed me the wrong way. What started this entire dialogue was a comment I made about the type of car I drove when I went through Rush. I wasn't trying to flippantly dismiss Twilley's story -- I was simply frustrated by the fact that, in every article I've read, Twilley has been portrayed as the perfect potential member for an NPC sorority because of her family's status in the community and her material assets.

In reality, people outside of Greek Life have made a bigger deal about Twilley's financial status than an NPC organization would've ever done. And the stereotype that exists of NPC sorority women being spoiled little rich girls from affluent families just gets proliferated by articles like the one featuring Twilley and her Cherokee.

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure that there are some elitist chapters around who would be snobby enough to judge a rushee based on what her daddy does or what vehicle she drives. But those chapters are in the minority where NPC sororities are concerned, and they are certainly not representative of any of the chapters I've seen.

As far as my comment about Twilley having an "agenda": You're right, Alias. I did make an assumption, based on articles I've read and comments from fellow Greeks who have met Twilley personally, that Twilley had an agenda for rushing that second time. Perhaps it's an incorrect and unfair assumption to make and if it is, then I do apologize. But, if you think about it logically, it's not hard to see why people might form that impression.

After all, Twilley did voice her discrimination claim quite strenuously and publicly before going through Rush again. If she was seriously looking for a bid that second time around, she must have realized that calling her potential sisters racists wouldn't be the best way to win friends and influence people into inviting her to join their organizations. So you kind of have to wonder - if Twilley really just wanted to give Rush another shot and find out, on her own, if her first Rush ended poorly due to race issues or something else entirely, then why did she go public with her discrimination claim BEFORE her second Rush attempt? It's kind of like shooting yourself in the foot right before a big race. Do you see the point I'm trying to get across?

Originally posted by Alias23
"I'm all for investigating and reaching conclusions. As long as people remember that the conclusion part should come AFTER the investigation part. My point is that many people jump to conclusions and automatically believe that a racism claim is fact before checking to make absolutely sure that it is. The NPC sororities at Alabama should be "innocent until proven guilty", but some people believe them guilty and feel that they should prove their innocence. Doesn't seem very fair to me. " -- dzrose

I agree that it's unfair for people to jump to conclusions. I think you have the impression that I am one of those people, but in fact I have maintained throughout my posts that I just felt Twilley's experience should be investigated. You stated earlier that you think Twilley was wrong to "raise such a ruckus about it." I'm sorry if it bothers you when things like this hit the media, but please try and understand that it takes that type of action to draw enough attention to make sure that situations like this are investigated THOUROGHLY. Unfortunately, we can't stop people from jumping to conclusions one way or the other -- therein lies the problem. This is particularly true on an issue like racism, which touches people in an emotional way.

I do understand that it is sometimes necessary to get the media involved in order for a positive change to occur. However, I just have a problem with reporters taking every negative claim about Greeks as an indisputable fact, instead of taking the time to find out that there are many other possibilities for why something happened the way it did. In Twilley's case, I have yet to read an article that gives an NPC sorority's view on the Alabama Rush process. Not one article (that I've read anyway) took the time to mention the other reasons for why Twilley might not have received a bid. My little Beginner's Guide to Rush in this thread offered more detailed info than any news article I've seen and, to me, that's pretty sad. As a former journalist, I think it's pretty sloppy, not to mention biased, for a reporter to fail to report both sides of an issue equally -- and that goes for ANY issue, not just Greek related.

Originally posted by Alias23
"As far as already having minority members, first of all I have no proof of that other than what you're telling me, and secondly even if they did have minority members, that doesn't mean Twilley wasn't discriminated against. That's just like a White person who is accused of engaging in racist statements or conduct defending himself by saying "One of my friends is Black." If there are minority members at Alabama, that's something to consider, but we must look at the whole picture, which is why we must INVESTIGATE situations like this. Yes, we do have as you said, a difficult time proving those cases, but it has been done.

Thank you for answering my question. Now that you have, I think we will be able to understand each other better. I like working to understand people I disagree with rather than just dropping the subject because I feel both parties learn from it. I think the problem is we're miscommunicating a lot, though we may disagree a little. I appreciate your honesty, and anxiously await your reply to my comments.

I'll see if I can find the info on minorities at Alabama for you... I'll post a link for you if I can locate it online. Hopefully, I've cleared up any miscommunications, but please let me know if you have any questions. I certainly don't mind debating an issue... I just don't want to cause any hurt feelings or ill will, which is why I originally suggested we agree to disagree. However, I think we've both shown that we can "argue" diplomatically. Look forward to hearing your comments!