Diversity in the SEC

[TriDeltaSallie]

The early NPC groups started because women were despised members of most colleges and they were seeking friendships among the other women. Men thought the women were incapable of learning because they were too delicate and emotional.

The women stuck together for survival and made a society to enjoy. Societies based on mutual interests were very common back then.

People are trying to force 21st century issues on the founding of groups in the mid to late 1800s. No, these women were not seeking to be racially inclusive. They were trying to survive personally and academically in a hostile environment. No, it was not all roses and perfect. I've read "Bound by a Mighty Vow" and from the early days groups have struggled to decide who to allow in and not (like those uncouth Midwestern girls). But to add race to the founding of the groups and early years isn't really relevant.

[amIblue?]

They absolutely needed each other, but you can't ignore that most early NPC orgs were exclusively white and Protestant. It didn't happen in a vacuum.

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

They absolutely needed each other, but you can't ignore that most early NPC orgs were exclusively white and Protestant. It didn't happen in a vacuum.

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

Perhaps, but as a member of the majority, why does it bother you so much?

[DGTess]

Perhaps, but as a member of the majority, why does it bother you so much?

Hole. Lee. Chit. Is the majority not to be "bothered" by injustice? That's a helluva way to dialog, discuss, and learn.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by DGTess

Hole. Lee. Chit. Is the majority not to be "bothered" by injustice? That's a helluva way to dialog, discuss, and learn.

I'm not seeing any injustice. Please illuminate me about how hard it is to be white in America.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

You are missing the point and assuming a double standard.

It is taking pages for some of you to stop pretending that predominantly white GLOs had no consideration of race and ethnicity in their founding and membership dynamics over the years.

Delta is proud of the role of race and ethnicity in Delta's founding (despite being at a 99% Black school), overall membership dynamics, and programmatic thrust. We do not pretend that race was invisible in the early 1900s and is invisible in 2013.

In addition to what Low C Sharp said, when more NPC and IFC get to the point of acknowledging the role of race and ethnicity (if so desired), say whatever you will about race and ethnicity. I'm not mad at you. I'm also not someone who was ever concerned about diversity in the NPC and IFC.

[nyapbp]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

People are trying to force 21st century issues on the founding of groups in the mid to late 1800s. No, these women were not seeking to be racially inclusive. They were trying to survive personally and academically in a hostile environment. No, it was not all roses and perfect. I've read "Bound by a Mighty Vow" and from the early days groups have struggled to decide who to allow in and not (like those uncouth Midwestern girls). But to add race to the founding of the groups and early years isn't really relevant.

These were my thoughts and then they popped up on the screeen. Thank you TriDeltaSallie.

It is now; we are here. Debating about what, why, or how people did things in the late 1800s and early 1900s is a moot point. None of us is privy to any of that. We can surmise, we can ascribe, but we just do not know. We can get on with ourt lives and make the best of the situation in front of us. Wringing our hands about something over which we have no part and no control is, in my opinion, pointless.

That said, I remember having to counsel a chapter when an African American pledge was catching fire from the NPHC groups for joining an NPC group. As I recall she ended up leaving school. I admire and respect the NPHC groups, but I realize that membership in one of the organizations is closed to me. The choice would never be mine.

[amIblue?]

Hate to burst your bubble, Nyapbp, but I have met white NPHC members.

[nyapbp]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

Hate to burst your bubble, Nyapbp, but I have met white NPHC members.

Yes, I know there have been a few, Eleanor Roosevelt for one. But the NPHC Alumnae chapters in my area do not have white members in them.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by nyapbp

Yes, I know there have been a few, Eleanor Roosevelt for one. But the NPHC Alumnae chapters in my area do not have white members in them.

Please do not cite her as the white NPHCer. LOL. Her membership was different.

Those alumnae chapters do not have white members because all whites who attend chapter service events are rejected? All whites who attend membership informationals are rejected? All white applicants are rejected? Please explain.

It is probably that they do not have white (beyond maybe a couple white people) interest in programs and membership. Many BGLOs tend not to recruit and many BGLOs tend to see no overwhelming need to pursue racial and ethnic diversity.

ETA: Delta has a relative small amount of white Sorors around the world. I only recall meeting a couple white Sorors over the years. There was only an issue if the white Sorors tried too hard to "be down." Not every white Soror attempts this but I shall explain. Trying to speak Black English or excessive slang with a "Black accent" does not go over well with some of us. Trying to reference hip hop or songs by Black artists that some of us don't even listen to can also be annoying. Some of us find that annoying because as Blacks many of us do not sit around talking about "Black song and dance" 24/7. Blacks don't all listen to certain songs and dance. And we have a rich history of African diaspora intellectuals and Black intellectuals whose brains spanned beyond dancing, slang, and music. I met one white Soror many years ago who thought she could nonstop speak slang and discuss rap or R&B among Black women with terminal degrees and very successful careers. It was insulting and quite hilarious. That white Soror learned over the years to just relax, be herself, and let her coolness, hard work, and respect for the Sisterhood shape the outcome. She also learned that Blackness includes brains and we know about far more than we are stereotyped as knowing. We are not ignoring that she is a white woman who is our Soror. There is no reason to ignore that. We simply do not use that as a negative.

If SEC wants more diversity, they should think about these types of things.

[carnation]

This is all ridiculous. You aren't going to change most minds here and we aren't going to change yours so discussion seems pointless.

[HQWest]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Please do not cite her as the white NPHCer. LOL. Her membership was different.

Those alumnae chapters do not have white members because all whites who attend chapter service events are rejected? All whites who attend membership informationals are rejected? All white applicants are rejected? Please explain.

It is probably that they do not have white (beyond maybe a couple white people) interest in programs and membership. Many BGLOs tend not to recruit and many BGLOs tend to see no overwhelming need to pursue racial and ethnic diversity.

If SEC wants more diversity, they should think about these types of things.

Yes, BGLOs do not have open recruitment. Intake still goes by invitation only, making it much more difficult for first generation or out of state college students or a "friend of a friend" to apply. That does not mean they do not recruit. In my area, BGLO members and alumna start talking to young eligible women about opportunities in college and intake very early. I am not talking about mothers talking to their legacies, but active recruiting of talented high school women. I can appreciate their desire to mentor young women to strive to achieve and pursue graduate and professional programs, but they also actively discourage women from pursuing NPC or MCGLO membership (or D9 membership in groups other than their own).

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by HQWest

Yes, BGLOs do not have open recruitment. Intake still goes by invitation only, making it much more difficult for first generation or out of state college students or a "friend of a friend" to apply. That does not mean they do not recruit. In my area, BGLO members and alumna start talking to young eligible women about opportunities in college and intake very early. I am not talking about mothers talking to their legacies, but active recruiting of talented high school women. I can appreciate their desire to mentor young women to strive to achieve and pursue graduate and professional programs, but they also actively discourage women from pursuing NPC or MCGLO membership (or D9 membership in groups other than their own).

We do not exist in silence and with no outreach. We reach out to people which is also why we are so visible in the communities. When we say we do not recruit, we are saying that for a reason. That reason includes letting people know the difference between an informational and recruitment; and the difference between individuals and chapters talking to people versus what our official entities encourage. Our official entities do not encourage discouraging people from pursuing other GLOs or pushing people to be aspirants and applicants. Talking to people about our GLOs is not the same as pushing people one way or another. The information and decision must ultimately be up to the person. It has always been the case that some people and chapters do not realize that.

More importantly, your post was responding to a post about a white person who claims to really want to be in an NPHC sorority. Bring it back to the purpose behind my post.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Please do not cite her as the white NPHCer. LOL. Her membership was different.

If SEC wants more diversity, they should think about these types of things.

LOL. People claim Eleanor Roosevelt like she was setting it off on the yard.

There was a white Delta on GC for a while.

I don't think the SEC wants more diversity as a goal. I remember seeing black rushees at UF back in the early 90s. This was before the boom in attendance due to the National Championships and Bright Futures, but back then they were relegated to a few "bottom-tier" chapters. I suspected even then that they were more interested in being NPC than adding diversity to their chapters, LOL.