Diversity in the SEC

[PersistentDST]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

If NPC chapters want more women of color, they should be encouraging more women of color to participate in recruitment. There are many, many, many ways this could be done. For example, the local alumnae panhellenics could reach out to high school affinity groups (black students union and so on) to include them in the pre-rush activities. You better believe, at the schools where recs are required, women of color are going to have a MUCH harder time finding them than do white women.



You should not assume that a single member of a group is authorized to speak for that entire group. That's pretty much the definition of tokenizing.

This is an interesting topic! (I've read most of the previous threads covering this.) At my suburban high school (in a college town) the Black students had a high percentage of NPHC mentors and advisors. When I got to college, I had absolutely no familiarity with the NPC recruitment system. Myself, and many of my black classmates (10% of our school system) knew plenty about the NPHC organizations, through our teachers, mentors, coaches and (in a few cases) parents. I think since NPHC organizations do have very active Alumnae/Alumni groups, the students could actively identify who was in an organization. My mentor, a member of Sigma Gamma Rho, volunteered as a track coach at my junior high and was my history teacher in high school, She also started an auxiliary group, in which participants did service. My bball coach is a member of Phi Beta Sigma who also is a motivational speaker. The local undergrad Delta chapter coached the step team at our high school (they also did community service.) We were never "recruited." When I became a Delta my SGRho mentor got me gifts and we celebrated! We had more of a familiar knowledge of basic history/cultures of the NPHC, because we watched it in action. It would've been a tough crowd of AKA, Delta, Zeta and SGRho interests asking why NPC groups don't have stepshows! (I kid...kind of .) You can only recruit the willing.

So with that, if NPC groups want "diversity," it takes a commitment to reach out to those who are not represented in their orgs. But I question how one could do so without looking like they just want these members to "diversify" their organizations. Or perhaps the concern should be less on recruitment and more on "inclusion" for those people of color who DO care to participate in NPC recruitment. (In regards to SEC schools, my midwest university has quite a few members of color in represented in NPC orgs, it's not a big deal to us, but we are a very liberal university.) Make sure that there is an opportunity for all interested ladies get a fair shot at all the houses on campus. I know that's easier said than done in many cases where Alumni control or personal biases can make equity difficult.

Just a few theories!

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

Yes...and what you look like you are doing is related to what you are actually doing. If you are a corporation, a college, etc., you want to attract the top talent wherever it may be. If some population isn't showing up in your pool, you're missing out on good students/workers/members. The same goes for GLOs. If that desire to find great young women is what is motivating the outreach of an NPC group (or the Panhellenic at a given school), they are much more likely to be successful. If the truth really is that you want dark faces to make your chapter photos look modern, then that truth will come out. But if the truth is that you think your members and the organization is missing out because of a too-narrow applicant pool, and you believe you have something valuable to offer all young women, then you may get somewhere with your outreach.

BINGO. If you want the best of the best in your organization, you should be looking for leaders and scholars and young women of high character everywhere you can find them.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

BINGO. If you want the best of the best in your organization, you should be looking for leaders and scholars and young women of high character everywhere you can find them.

I agree with you, though the economy of PNMs in these huge SEC recruitments is an abundant supply of leaders and scholars and young women of high character.

There really is no demand for increased numbers or qualifications -- if there was, GLOs might be motivated to cast a wider net. As it is, fish jump in their boats.

[PersistentDST]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

If the truth really is that you want dark faces to make your chapter photos look modern, then that truth will come out. But if the truth is that you think your members and the organization is missing out because of a too-narrow applicant pool, and you believe you have something valuable to offer all young women, then you may get somewhere with your outreach.

Honest question: How much time is spent recruiting high school ladies who may already fit the "too-narrow applicant pool?" Does alumni go to schools or HS orgs to connect with great candidates?

One thing I did (and do) like about the university I attended is the recruiting process is done a couple of weeks into school and offers students an opportunity to learn about ALL of the organizations. I notice quite a few universities start recruitment on move in day, which may not allow great ladies with a lack of knowledge about the process the opportunity to rush (in the fall at least.) I know the competitive schools have serious traditions when it comes to that.

[28StGreek]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

realizing that their own education is incomplete if they live in a white bubble.

Well then I am really glad that I feel my education is more complete

[amIblue?]

This thread has now tipped a hat to Jesus loves the little children AND Ebony & Ivory!

I don't have a point. Just saying.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by 28StGreek

Is that just your personal opinion or is that actually a widely held view by NPHC members? Regardless, I find that kind of attitude to be disturbing if you at the same time criticise the lack of diversity of other groups.

I stand to be corrected—I certainly could have missed it as this is a long thread—but I haven't seen DrPhil criticize NPC orgs for lack of diversity. I think she's made pretty clear she's not doing that.

What I have seen her question are the ideas that having a relatively small percentage of African American or other minority members = real diversity or that suggesting "they are just sisters/brothers and no one notices the color of their skin" = real diversity. I admit that I'm with her in thinking that attempts at "colorblindness" are in many ways the opposite of diversity, as they reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator instead of acknowledging what actually makes people diverse.

DrPhil can speak for herself—I have no doubt of that—but what she's been saying seems pretty clear to me: If groups prefer not to be diverse, that's fine. But if they want to be diverse, then they should dive in and work at really being diverse, including understanding why they aren't diverse already, not just be satisfied an appearance of diversity.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I stand to be corrected—I certainly could have missed it as this is a long thread—but I haven't seen DrPhil criticize NPC orgs for lack of diversity. I think she's made pretty clear she's not doing that.

You are correct. But, pretending I am criticizing NPC-NIC diversity is more fun than the real point being made.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

What I have seen her question are the ideas that having a relatively small percentage of African American or other minority members = real diversity or that suggesting "they are just sisters/brothers and no one notices the color of their skin" = real diversity. I admit that I'm with her in thinking that attempts at "colorblindness" are in many ways the opposite of diversity, as they reduce everyone to the lowest common denominator instead of acknowledging what actually makes people diverse.

DrPhil can speak for herself—I have no doubt of that—but what she's been saying seems pretty clear to me: If groups prefer not to be diverse, that's fine. But if they want to be diverse, then they should dive in and work at really being diverse, including understanding why they aren't diverse already, not just be satisfied an appearance of diversity.

Thanks, pal. You are now free to allow your eyes to glaze over. Your job of providing my Yacked Butt Cliff Notes is done.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Thanks, pal. You are now free to allow your eyes to glaze over. Your job of providing my Yacked Butt Cliff Notes is done.

Finally! What a relief—my eyes are so tired and ready to glaze over!

[28StGreek]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I stand to be corrected—I certainly could have missed it as this is a long thread—but I haven't seen DrPhil criticize NPC orgs for lack of diversity. I think she's made pretty clear she's not doing that.

I didn't say she was criticizing NPC organizations for lack of diversity.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

As I have also said a couple of times in this thread, my posts are not about diversity in the SEC but about a larger point that is often missed.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Some of you were discussing diversity in the SEC. Some of us were addressing a larger issue.

I took it from those statements to mean that this talk of diversity had gone beyond collegiate organizations and that that larger issue was ethnicity/racial/diversity in general.

Originally Posted by DrPhil

The notion of faux colorblindness and tokenism have made people (read: usually many white people) pretend that having a few nonwhites is a quick solution to a silent issue and therefore you (in general) can claim diversity based on a small percent of the total population.
...
As long as predominantly white organizations keep pretending that race is not intentionally and/or unintentionally part of their foundation and general makeup, there will be no diversity. That is fine if there is no diversity but you (in general) cannot then pretend that race is not part of your foundation and general makeup. Keep pretending your demographic makeup is mere coincidence, and keep pretending that whiteness is invisible and race neutral and only nonwhite organizations are founded or rooted in race and ethnicity, and you will keep running in circles regarding "diversity."

Is this not criticism of white groups in general? Please correct me if I had failed to comprehend your intended meaning.

[DrPhil]

28StGreek's posts are illustrations of what some of us are talking about. Are people seriously pretending as though you can have any type of GLO diversity if there are GLO members who believe acknowledging and celebrating group identities is synonymous with wars? Celebrating our similarities and differences is terrifying?

GLO members who need to (figuratively) take an Introduction to Social Dynamics course have no business pushing for racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity in their GLOs. I recommend (figuratively) taking the course first. I recommend observing the societal and world (this isn't just about the U.S.) environment in regards to race, ethnicity, and culture. After you do that, then act like you know something about racial and ethnic diversity and then push for racial and ethnic diversity in your GLOs.

Ignoring and avoiding those first steps is what makes this all about quick and easy fixes and tokenism.