Racial Conflict

[Minerva's Girl]

shinerbock, point well taken. Most people gravitate toward others like themselves because 1) when navigating daily life, it's just easier and 2) we all enjoy the validation we receive spiritually and emotionally (especially when we are young.) The biggest problem occurs when "the fraternity" thinks that a university, the US Government or a Company (often one that does business with public institutions) is an extension of it's frat house. Often when the members of the organizations grow up, they continue to promote their friends, frat brothers etc. for positions of power and have the audicity to say (or wonder why) they don't know any people that aren't like them. Hence the remedy. . . affirmative action. It's dishonest to say that it doesn't happen and that when other people speak to it they are practicing "reverse racism".

When we are young, such things are considered "kids just having fun." When we go out into the real world, it has a much more serious affect. Generations of people don't receive educations and then don't have access to job opportunities. Then economic hardship follows and the cycle continues. If you adhere to the "traditional American values" of opportunity and equality for all, then start now. The principles we practice when we are young are the ones we typically take into adulthood.

[Elephant Walk]

been watching wealthy white families act like trash for much of my life.

I've been watching wealthy black families act like trash for much of my life....they're called rappers. Ever seen master p and flavor flav?

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

I just don't understand why people view it as a problem. Everyone excludes. Black people often segregate themselves, and I fail to see anything wrong with that. They often have more in common with other black people, and share common interests and goals. I just think its stupid to go out of your way to achieve diversity. Once again diversity =/= mixed races. You can have plenty of diversity in an all white or all black group. If your group wants to have a lot of different cultures and view points in it, go for it, enjoy. As for my fraternity, the reason we joined a fraternity is to be around people with common interests. If I wanted to be in a multi-cultural environment with a host of viewpoints, ideologies and faiths, I'd have joined....THE WORLD.

Everyone excludes to an extent because much of it is segregation by choice. However, all segregation by race and class in this society is not by choice. What that exclusion and segregation entails is what the discussion should really be about.

Common interests, well generally speaking people don't give people of other races the benefit of the doubt when it comes to common interests. For instance, I find that many white people think that having something in common with a black person means having to listen to a certain type of music or say things like "some of my best friends are black" or "to me you're not black...I don't see color." They fail to see that there are black people in different social classes and with different interests who you can have fun with without having to feel cautious over the interaction. But these blacks are still very in tune with their racial identity and don't want others to gloss over it or make a caricature out of it just to be friends with them.

Don't just tolerate me, try to understand me and I will give you the same respect.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by PrettyBoy

Drolefille, you make great points, but one of the books I was reading was only written about 4 years ago. That's very current. I live in the northeast, and my parents were both born and raised in the south, so I know how it is. Elephantwalk is right. Racism is still happening in these organizations. Think about it, all of their founders would have never let anyone black in there organizations, and I know that when most of these organizations were founded a lot of African American weren't attending these schools because they weren't allowed to. But if they were allowed to attend your founders as well as the rest of them would have never allowed this to happen, based on one simple thing. The color of someones skin. How ridiculous is that. It's still happening. I think that's great that it doesn't happen as much where you pledged at, but I still think most of them still exclude blacks. I went to a historically black college and there were a few whites that attended and one of the guys wanted to join my frat. Everyone liked him, and we couldn't think of any reason to cut him. It was his senior year so he decided not to, but we didn't look at his color. Our founders would have turned over in their graves if we excluded him based on his color. He would have made a great addition to Kappa.

Unfortunately many of our founders were rascist, passively if not actively. However I think we feel that if they were alive today, they would have changed along with society. The women we pledge and initiate uphold our values no matter their color. I guess I just take issue with the word "most" when I can't see that being the case.

Out of curiousity, what do you think of a self segregated Greek system? One where there aren't any racial restrictions, but the black students go specifically to NPHC groups and never even look at NPC/IFC and the white students only consider NPC/IFC. Do you feel like somewthing is going wrong there or that something is going right? (This is just a question not somepoint I'm making, I'm curious)

Sometimes I think the perception is that "they" (being the outsider to whichever group) wouldn't be accepted, so they never try. But I don't know.

[PrettyBoy]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Unfortunately many of our founders were rascist, passively if not actively. However I think we feel that if they were alive today, they would have changed along with society. The women we pledge and initiate uphold our values no matter their color. I guess I just take issue with the word "most" when I can't see that being the case.

Out of curiousity, what do you think of a self segregated Greek system? One where there aren't any racial restrictions, but the black students go specifically to NPHC groups and never even look at NPC/IFC and the white students only consider NPC/IFC. Do you feel like somewthing is going wrong there or that something is going right? (This is just a question not somepoint I'm making, I'm curious)

Sometimes I think the perception is that "they" (being the outsider to whichever group) wouldn't be accepted, so they never try. But I don't know.

I don't think anything is wrong with a black man/woman going directly to the NPHC without even looking at the IFC/NPC and the same thing goes for a white man/woman not even looking at the NPHC. What I have a problem with is if a NPHC/IFC/NPC GLO denied someone based on the same reasons your founders would have denied a man/woman over 100 years ago. If an interest is denied based on grades or whatever reason it may be that's fine, but to deny a human being based on color alone, that's insane and makes no sense whatsoever. No disrespect to your organization or any of the NPC or IFC groups, b/c I have looked at your organizations history as well as the rest of them, just to expand my mind, but I think if your founders were still living maybe a few would have changed with the times which I highly doubt, but for the most part what I'm trying to say is your founders as well as the rest of the NPC/IFC groups would still for sure deny a man/woman based on color.

[UGAalum94]

I think many of the NPC or IFC founders were pathetically blind to the full equality of Black people. I don't think they thought about the inclusions of people of different races at all. They went with what they were familiar with, which was other white people. It would be interesting to know how many groups ever addressed the race of members before they published non-discrimination statements. I think most founders took it for granted that the members would be white so much that they didn't even mention race. Most probably attended segregated institutions, so the possibility of Black members didn't occure to them.

Today, I think the majority of members of NPC and IFC groups are/would be proud to have Black members. The problem is that a few people who are concerned with being elitist tell themselves that it's better not to have Black members at all than it is to take people who aren't a "perfect fit." The fact that being Black is the only thing keeping a pnm from being a perfect fit never crosses their minds. The problem is magnified because other members and other groups aren't brave enough to deviate from what the elites do.

[macallan25]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

I think many of the NPC or IFC founders were pathetically blind to the full equality of Black people. I don't think they thought about the inclusions of people of different races at all. They went with what they were familiar with, which was other white people. It would be interesting to know how many groups ever addressed the race of members before they published non-discrimination statements. I think most founders took it for granted that the members would be white so much that they didn't even mention race. Most probably attended segregated institutions, so the possibility of Black members didn't occure to them.

This is a little ridiculous/overboard. You can't blame recruitment decisions in today's time on our founding fathers. Lets take my fraternity, SAE....we were the only fraternity founded in the ante-bellum South....370 of our original 400 members fought for the Confederates. Our 8 founding fathers were from very upperclass families and were all officers for the Confederates.....hell, one of them is believed to have been the very first casualty. Blacks were slaves at the time, save a small number of them, do you honestly think there would have been any reason for an original SAE to consider a black man for membership?? No, absolutely not. They didn't "take anything for granted"....they operated according to how the lifestyle was at the time. You can say the same thing about Kappa Alpha....their spiritual founding father was ROBERT E. LEE....i'm sure black men post Civil War were just jumping at the oppurtunity to join.

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Today, I think the majority of members of NPC and IFC groups are/would be proud to have Black members. The problem is that a few people who are concerned with being elitist tell themselves that it's better not to have Black members at all than it is to take people who aren't a "perfect fit." The fact that being Black is the only thing keeping a pnm from being a perfect fit never crosses their minds. The problem is magnified because other members and other groups aren't brave enough to deviate from what the elites do.

Can you not, atleast, open yourself to the fact that a great majority of blacks at large Southern institutions have absolutely nothing in common with large, white, top fraternities??

[Elephant Walk]

Shinerbock, I probably wasn't discriminating among you, Elephant Walk, and Macallan as much as I should have been. I have no idea if you are racist or not, but it seemed to me that the three of you were basically saying you couldn't include black members and be a top chapter. That seemed racist to me, but I'll take your word if you want to claim otherwise. I didn't mention Bush, but maybe that part wasn't addressed to me.

I will straight up tell you that we could not have black members and be a top chapter. There is no possible way. In majority white campuses (especially Southern), blacks would scare away the girls. Look at the bottom tier at the campus. The (in my opinion) worst chapters on campus include blacks Sigma Nu, Sig Ep, and Pike. That is third tier. Every one of them has one to two black members. There are no blacks in the 2nd tier and above. Therefore, I will tell you as a studied fact/opinion that there is no way a black person could be taken and continue being a top tier fraternity.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by macallan25

This is a little ridiculous/overboard. You can't blame recruitment decisions in today's time on our founding fathers. Lets take my fraternity, SAE....we were the only fraternity founded in the ante-bellum South....370 of our original 400 members fought for the Confederates. Our 8 founding fathers were from very upperclass families and were all officers for the Confederates.....hell, one of them is believed to have been the very first casualty. Blacks were slaves at the time, save a small number of them, do you honestly think there would have been any reason for an original SAE to consider a black man for membership?? No, absolutely not. They didn't "take anything for granted"....they operated according to how the lifestyle was at the time. You can say the same thing about Kappa Alpha....their spiritual founding father was ROBERT E. LEE....i'm sure black men post Civil War were just jumping at the oppurtunity to join.



Can you not, atleast, open yourself to the fact that a great majority of blacks at large Southern institutions have absolutely nothing in common with large, white, top fraternities??

Uh, if you re-read my comments, I think you'll see that your reading in some stuff that isn't there. What's the difference between taking something for granted and operating according to how your lifestyle is?

In either case, I wish founders had been more forwards thinking, but they weren't.

Yes, I'm open to the possiblity that the great majority of people in general have nothing in common with large, white, top fraternities, and Black students would fall into that too.

Are you telling me that there's not a single guy on your campus who attending high school with one of you, took advanced classes, has college educated parents, is affluent, and with the one exception of all the clubs he and his family haven't been invited to join simply because they aren't white, is pretty much like you all? Or are you looking at membership in the most exclusive clubs, rather than character, as your primary membership criterion?