Can National Shut Down a Chapter Because of it's Racial Breakdown?

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by PANTHERTEKE

You are aware that there are some NIC fraternities founded as early as the late 1800s that never had a discriminatory clause, right?

And although I don't technically agree with AST[rest of username, sorry too lazy to check back], you do show a lot of negative bias towards NIC/NPC organizations in almost all your posts dealing with it.

Which I could care less about... but there is not denying you have a problem with, particularly, non-Whites joining NIC/NPC organizations.

Whether or not there are clauses in these organization is not the point I was making and missing it, totally.

I harbor no ill-will toward NIC/NPC as I speak to several members on a constant, consistent daily basis. That is YOUR perception, you are taking it too personally and CHOOSE to have that view of me, which is unfortunate because that is not who I am with what I do. And I can attempt to justify (LOL) my thoughts to you on this medium until I am "pink and green" (LOL ) in the face, but that is a prejudice on your part and you need to take ownership of projecting your opinions upon me...

As far as non-Caucasians joining NIC/NPC organizations, um no, I don't have a problem with that. If that is there thing, more power to them. What I have a problem with is someone who joins these organizations and then wonders why there are no other [insert your favorite ethnic/sex/race/etc here] and the debasement of NPHC organization we all have discussed ad nauseum here. I personally think that discussion is stupid, silly, juvenile and asinine. Then, the minute my Sorority is included in the discussion, my personal opinion is the thread must be squashed. Because really, we as members of GLO's have way too many other issues to deal with than why does AKA's wear pink vs. green on some days and don't talk to Delta Gamma Sorority, Inc. .

Originally Posted by Taualumna

Would you apply this to organizations that historically banned women from joining? If so, then that's A LOT of universities! Or is it different when it comes to sexism?

Just wondering.

I think that's an apples vs. oranges question and I cannot and frankly, don't care to comment beyond what do you do when said organization decide to go to a "tittie bar"? LOL...

[Chan815]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I harbor no ill-will toward NIC/NPC as I speak to several members on a constant, consistent daily basis. That is YOUR perception, you are taking it too personally and CHOOSE to have that view of me, which is unfortunate because that is not who I am with what I do.

Then can you explain this post to me? Because from what I inferred it seems that your trash-talking NPC/NIC GLO's...

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

General question overall: Why would someone WANT (meaning truly desire) to be a part of group that has historically had institutionalized racism and bigotry as a part of its chapters... I'd be scared to attend a picnic and BBQ... What kind of "games" would they play?

At least with an NPHC org, someone will be playing dominoes or Bid Whist or spades and there might be an egg toss or potato sack race. But nothing involving hurting other people simply because they are of a different creed, race, ethnic group, whatever... I mean, I truly dislike egg tosses because I always get the crashed egg... LOL...

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by Chan815

Then can you explain this post to me? Because from what I inferred it seems that your trash-talking NPC/NIC GLO's...

I don't understand the OP... Are there quotas to NIC/NPC for representation? like NIC/NPC has to have "affirmative action" programs--LOL. Rather than asking that question, I chose an inside joke that I guess DSTChaos got... Meaning that that kind of question can be searched on GC and it sounds silly to me.

Why would a kid who is from {insert your favorite group here} have a problem joining any NIC/NPC chapter on his/her respective campus if the chapter shows a favorable vote?

If that is the case, then with the example of wanting only "redheads" in the chapter, well, I can bleach my hair and naturally, I will look like "Bozo the Clown", so do I still get to join? LOL.

I think anyone's membership should NOT be based solely on looks. Not everyone is a supermodel or athlete. However, charisma and diplomacy are attributes that can be honed and developed. If that is the kind of membership you want walking into the door and hit the ground running, then I think transparency and full disclosure are in place and a fair expectation.

I was a former Graduate Advisor for my Sorority's undergraduate chapter and I have taught several undergraduate courses. I know how to best relay information to PNM in a tactful way to get the best results...

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I chose an inside joke that I guess DSTChaos got...

I got it but we always have to remember our larger audience.

[Achilles87]

33girl has paraphrased my issue the best.

The issue is not whether or not a redheaded organization is good or bad. The issue is that my chapter has an interpretation of what it means to be members of a redheaded organization that espouses redheaded beliefs. We believe this can be accomplished (maybe even more effectively) while still initiating blondes and brunettes. National seems to think that, except for the occasional blonde who just really wishes they were a redhead or who just really loves redheaded culture (and they think 1 initiate a year on our campus would be a high estimate of the frequency), you cannot be a redheaded organization unless you are 100% redhead. I bet with any one of you, unless you have some sort of ritualistic response to a question along the lines of "what do your organization's ideals mean to you" that if you asked that question to 10 of your members, you would get 10 different answers. Is that a reason to kick us out? I refuse to leave or be forced out of my organization. I have poured too much of my life into it and gotten so much in return that to throw it all away would disgust me.

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by Achilles87

33girl has paraphrased my issue the best.

The issue is not whether or not a redheaded organization is good or bad. The issue is that my chapter has an interpretation of what it means to be members of a redheaded organization that espouses redheaded beliefs. We believe this can be accomplished (maybe even more effectively) while still initiating blondes and brunettes. National seems to think that, except for the occasional blonde who just really wishes they were a redhead or who just really loves redheaded culture (and they think 1 initiate a year on our campus would be a high estimate of the frequency), you cannot be a redheaded organization unless you are 100% redhead. I bet with any one of you, unless you have some sort of ritualistic response to a question along the lines of "what do your organization's ideals mean to you" that if you asked that question to 10 of your members, you would get 10 different answers. Is that a reason to kick us out? I refuse to leave or be forced out of my organization. I have poured too much of my life into it and gotten so much in return that to throw it all away would disgust me.

If I gave you this advice already, please forgive me.

Know your ritual, constitution, bylaws, standing rules, and rules of order to perfection.

They can only do to your chapter what you all allow them to do to your chapter.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by Achilles87

National seems to think that, except for the occasional blonde who just really wishes they were a redhead or who just really loves redheaded culture

To me, this sounds really condescending (OMG I'm not a redhead but redheads are sooooo cool! Damn my parents for being blonde and popping me out blonde!) and I can't imagine why your national would want you to take people like this.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by Achilles87

33girl has paraphrased my issue the best.

The issue is not whether or not a redheaded organization is good or bad. The issue is that my chapter has an interpretation of what it means to be members of a redheaded organization that espouses redheaded beliefs. We believe this can be accomplished (maybe even more effectively) while still initiating blondes and brunettes. National seems to think that, except for the occasional blonde who just really wishes they were a redhead or who just really loves redheaded culture (and they think 1 initiate a year on our campus would be a high estimate of the frequency), you cannot be a redheaded organization unless you are 100% redhead. I bet with any one of you, unless you have some sort of ritualistic response to a question along the lines of "what do your organization's ideals mean to you" that if you asked that question to 10 of your members, you would get 10 different answers. Is that a reason to kick us out? I refuse to leave or be forced out of my organization. I have poured too much of my life into it and gotten so much in return that to throw it all away would disgust me.

I agree with what has been said before. The only thing national can do to you is what you let them do. If you still embody the rituals and values of your organization, they had reason to kick you out. And honestly if they still kick you out, that just proves that they aren't the kind of organization you want to be part of. Like I mentioned before there are local orgs that have been founded because of these same issues. My own org has gained a couple of chapters because of this as well. I understand your desire to remain part of this orginazation you gave so much to. But if they don't want you, why should you wish to be included with them.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I got it but we always have to remember our larger audience.

I forgot that "ONLY" part... I guess you were the only one that got it. And some folks have a "following"--and it's not me, 'cuz I ain't got nobuddy... LOL.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I forgot that "ONLY" part... I guess you were the only one that got it. And some folks have a "following"--and it's not me, 'cuz I ain't got nobuddy... LOL.

LOL. I don't know what having a "following" means.

What I mean by "audience" is that some posts are an acquired taste. You have to switch it up if you want to avoid having to explain your post.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

LOL. I don't know what having a "following" means.

What I mean by "audience" is that some posts are an acquired taste. You have to switch it up if you want to avoid having to explain your post.

At this time, avoiding post explanations, what can I say? Folks will think what the want to think about me no matter what I write. Call it "visual/tactile mis-reading" or whatever...

[PANTHERTEKE]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Whether or not there are clauses in these organization is not the point I was making and missing it, totally.

That whole thing was brought up because you kept saying "why would someone want to join an organization that originally barred people like them?"

Maybe you're missing the point.

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I harbor no ill-will toward NIC/NPC as I speak to several members on a constant, consistent daily basis. That is YOUR perception, you are taking it too personally and CHOOSE to have that view of me, which is unfortunate because that is not who I am with what I do. And I can attempt to justify (LOL) my thoughts to you on this medium until I am "pink and green" (LOL ) in the face, but that is a prejudice on your part and you need to take ownership of projecting your opinions upon me...

That's fine. I don't have a prejudice toward you, but my opinion stands.

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

As far as non-Caucasians joining NIC/NPC organizations, um no, I don't have a problem with that. If that is there thing, more power to them.

Ok, if you say so lol.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by PANTHERTEKE

That whole thing was brought up because you kept saying "why would someone want to join an organization that originally barred people like them?"

Maybe you're missing the point.



That's fine. I don't have a prejudice toward you, but my opinion stands.



Ok, if you say so lol.

So your point is what, here? Let's wrap this up before I have to take my Vici..

[PANTHERTEKE]

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

So your point is what, here? Let's wrap this up before I have to take my Vici..

I was simply responding to what you had written.

[AKA_Monet]

Originally Posted by PANTHERTEKE

I was simply responding to what you had written.

When you decide to post what I wrote to its entirety without taking clauses out of context as standalone run-on sentences, then we have a civilized discourse rather than a personal attack.

Outside of that, what else can be said? Like it was said before, "sharing"...

Do you need a "warm fuzzy", sweetheart?

Bless your heart.