Probation for Discrimination against Gays

[DrPhil]

Als463, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say you agree with Dubai but also ask how it was known this was discriminatory. The members expressed their intolerance which is used as evidence that aspirant was denied on the basis of sexual orientation.

Sure, the aspirant could have been denied for other reasons and the members could have been expressing their ignorance as an unnecessary supplement. For instance, if a GLO denied an aspirant for good reason but after-the-fact posted on Facebook about the aspirant being a "morbidly obese bitch". If morbid obesity is a protected status and the chapter is accused of discrimination, the chapter would risk exposing member selection info to prove the aspirant was rejected for reasons that don't include morbid obesity. The chapter should shut up next time.

[als463]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Als463, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say you agree with Dubai but also ask how it was known this was discriminatory. The members expressed their intolerance which is used as evidence that aspirant was denied on the basis of sexual orientation.

Sure, the aspirant could have been denied for other reasons and the members could have been expressing their ignorance as an unnecessary supplement. For instance, if a GLO denied an aspirant for good reason but after-the-fact posted on Facebook about the aspirant being a "morbidly obese bitch". If morbid obesity is a protected status and the chapter is accused of discrimination, the chapter would risk exposing member selection info to prove the aspirant was rejected for reasons that don't include morbid obesity. The chapter should shut up next time.

I'm sorry if it appears I am contradicting myself. I have two main points.

(A.) Membership selection should be private. Why would someone be stupid enough to talk about it? Kind of like trying to discriminate against me for getting married recently assuming I may be ready to have children, why would someone outright say that? It's just stupid. If you are going to be a jerk---keep your jerk ideas to yourself. Right? I'm not saying people should discriminate based on sexual orientation, color of skin, religious beliefs, etc. What I am saying is that if you keep your mouth shut about your reasons (as you really should---whatever your reasons may be since membership selection should be private) then you don't have to worry about letting the world know you are a bigot and that you simply chose not to extend a bid because of said bigotry.

(B.) Though I am not saying anyone should discriminate based on sexual orientation, and I hope this point is coming across, I am asking how they knew that's the real reason. Maybe it was. I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm simply asking how they knew for a fact. The reason I say this is because, unfortunately, using homophobic slurs tends to be the norm in some circles. Fraternities are full of many respectable men. I get that and I would never debate that. There are some groups who take on the "alpha male" attitude where using homophobic slurs to degrade someone is acceptable in their social circle. I'm sure these young men made some hateful statements as sometimes college kids can, at times, not think before they speak. Was this their reason, the real reason, they chose not to extend a bid? What if, and this is just a hypothetical, the guy going out for membership, wasn't what they were looking for (bad attitude, bad grades, socially awkward, etc.)?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by als463

I'm sorry if it appears I am contradicting myself. I have two main points.

(A.) Membership selection should be private. Why would someone be stupid enough to talk about it? Kind of like trying to discriminate against me for getting married recently assuming I may be ready to have children, why would someone outright say that? It's just stupid. If you are going to be a jerk---keep your jerk ideas to yourself. Right? I'm not saying people should discriminate based on sexual orientation, color of skin, religious beliefs, etc. What I am saying is that if you keep your mouth shut about your reasons (as you really should---whatever your reasons may be since membership selection should be private) then you don't have to worry about letting the world know you are a bigot and that you simply chose not to extend a bid because of said bigotry.

There has never been a shortage of stupid people out there. Social media can just make them easier to spot.

(B.) Though I am not saying anyone should discriminate based on sexual orientation, and I hope this point is coming across, I am asking how they knew that's the real reason. Maybe it was. I'm not saying it wasn't. I'm simply asking how they knew for a fact.

We can't say for sure, but presumably it was because of the messages that the rejected aspirant provided the University to back up his claim of discrimination. So far as I know, no one has reported the actual content of those messages, though googling did turn up a little additional information about them. Per Fox 45 in Baltimore:

Even with experiences such as working with First Lady Michelle Obama and having leadership roles on campus, Stewart says members of the fraternity hinted that because of his sexual orientation, his membership was highly unlikely.

Stewart soon got wind of a set of messages he claims were about him---how he obtained them, he did not share. It's what he believes is an online give and take about his membership.

The messages are full of derogatory language, appearing to indicate Stewart would not be admitted. One message says in part, "give him the perception of a fair and equal opportunity."

So the best we can say is that the disciplinary committee of students, faculty and staff that did see the messages found that the chapter had violated the University's no-discrimination policy.

[als463]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

There has never been a shortage of stupid people out there. Social media can just make them easier to spot.

We can't say for sure, but presumably it was because of the messages that the rejected aspirant provided the University to back up his claim of discrimination. So far as I know, no one has reported the actual content of those messages, though googling did turn up a little additional information about them. Per Fox 45 in Baltimore:
So the best we can say is that the disciplinary committee of students, faculty and staff that did see the messages found that the chapter had violated the University's no-discrimination policy.

Your first statement, so true. I actually laughed and wondered if there was anything I did really stupid in the past that I should be thankful social media wasn't really as big when I was younger. Thanks for providing the information. That was my question. Just as I don't condone people breaking and entering into someone's home, I would say, "Wow. Don't be so stupid as to do it while people are there." Clearly, I don't agree with it but, there are really stupid criminals out there. The same goes for really stupid choices people make that they post on social media. Thanks for the information.