Quote:
Originally posted by ASUADPi
It was mentioned that sororities (NPC) tend to be 'white' and not 'multicultural'. I have a thing to say about that. Sororities cannot control who goes through rush, it's that simple.
At ASU this fall rush, I was helping out 'backstage' so to speak for my sorority. I mostly saw white girls rushing. Now my sisters can't control that, no house can.
Now, ASU has a strong network of MCGLO's. There are sororities and fraternities for Hispanics, African Americans, etc...
Just because we have those doesn't stop girls from rushing. My sorority at ASU would actually be considered quite diverse. You can't walk onto our campus and be 'oh that girls a so and so', like you can on some other campuses (and yes that statement is true).
I realize that SL 3 has stirred up feelings when it comes to race, but this subject is and will probably always be very touchy. I understand that the GLO is a MCGLO, but it doesn't mean this thread now has become about race.
Agree with me, disagree with me, just respect my opinion.
Brianna
|
I totally understand and agree with your point--a lot of the time, NPC sororities (or any sorority for that matter) cannot control who goes through rush, and if only white girls go, that's all they are going to get. I also always appreciated and admired the NPC sororities on Maryland's campus that (IMO) were "cool" and "down to earth"--the ones that had all different kinds of girls, and you couldn't tell which sorority they were in just by looking at them. Unfortunately, there are a lot of "cookie cutter" sororities at Maryland, where you can tell EXACTLY what sorority a girl is in by looking at her. These sororities not only make ALL the sororities look bad (because people ususally assume they are all like this), but they are a big reason why mostly only white girls go through rush--because they know they wouldn't fit in at houses like this.
Quote:
Originally posted by Sistermadly
That's why I said in my post "I understand where it comes from". It doesn't matter (IMO) where it started - it matters that it's still perpetuated. It's wrong - but when "white" people try to distance themselves from that, or try to lay claim to their own heritage, people pooh-pooh it as whining, or right wing rhetoric.
|
I'm not sure if you were referring to me when you said "people pooh-pooh it as whining," because I CERTAINLY don't think it's whining when people try to connect with their culture and are proud of their Italian, German, etc. heritage. Actually, I think its great when people know where they come from and are proud of this. What I DO think is whining are the people in this forum who have said that African-Americans don't get lumped together, why should white people. My point was that African-Americans certainly ARE lumped together, no matter their background. But, to put extra emphasis on the positive, I think its great when people still have ties or create new ties to their cultures--I think you can get a lot of understanding and a broader perspective of the world when you learn about a culture or country outside of the US.
Quote:
Originally posted by Sistermadly
My thing is - labels suck. Period. But if we're going to use labels to identify people, at least let them be historically and culturally significant.
|
It's true, labels suck, but unfortunately, this country is obsessed with labels, and everywhere you turn they are asking us to fill in a bubble and lump ourselves into one category. Can you imagine a bubble sheet listing every European country so that white people wouldn't be put in one category? LOL that thing would be pretty long. At least we are saving trees but not being so specific.
I'm totally for people identifying as Italian-American, etc, but from the govt's perspective its a little unrealistic. But, if you want a more historically and culturally significant label, maybe people should start using caucasian or European-American more often (but then again, what about the white people from Russia that actually live in Asia? lol. I guess caucasian would be the more inclusive of the two). I think the reason people still use "white" and "black" a lot is that its just a lot shorter and quicker than using European-American and African-American.
I wasn't trying to start a race war in here, I just wanted to add my $19.90
Now that I am back, I will comment on something else that has been brought up in this forum--LGLOs and BGLOs appearing on Sorority Life. I can speak from the perspective of LGLOs, and I also have a lot of friends in BGLOs so I know their perspective is pretty similar to ours. Our intake processes (or pledging), and sometimes even our rush, are traditionally kept VERY secret. For the most part, we do not let the outside world see how we choose our members or what potential members have to do during our intake process. Discretion if VERY KEY to LGLOs and BGLOs, and having your whole intake process on national tv is anything but discrete. Another reason why LGLOs and BGLOs will not appear on SL is because hazing laws are so incredibly strict these days, and ANYTHING you do at ALL can be considered hazing, so showing your process on tv could cause major problems for an org if outsiders considered what you do to be hazing. I'm not saying I'm pro-beating or anything like that. But traditionally, LGLOs and BGLOs DO make their candidates EARN their letters. This has been a key part of our organizations for many years, and many outsiders looking in would not understand our processes at all and lump it all together as hazing. So, although it would be really interesting to see an LGLO or BGLO on SL, no one wants to be the one to expose their secrets or get accused of hazing, so it will most likely never happen.