A Victory for Sororities: Education Department Rules Sororities Are for Women Only

[PrettyBoy]

Originally Posted by PrettyBoy

Should have never even been a thing or a debate/argument in the first place. Never should have even been on the books for discussion. Smh.

The same holds true for fraternities. Every space has a purpose. Sororities exist for women. Fraternities exist for men. If we erase that line, we erase the meaning behind both. Saying a biological female is a “brother” because a group decided to go along with a trend doesn’t make it true, it makes it dishonest. And I won’t play along with dishonesty.

Brotherhood is a bond built on shared male identity, physically, emotionally, and developmentally. A biological female, no matter how she identifies, can’t embody that experience. Fraternities have meaning because of that structure. Diluting it in the name of inclusivity isn’t progress, it’s identity theft.

That said, fraternities and sororities are built on complementary, not interchangeable, identities. Again, brotherhood is for men. Sisterhood is for women. If we erase that distinction, we lose what makes Greek life meaningful. Inclusion shouldn’t come at the cost of structure, truth, or tradition.

[33girl]

Just as before, if there is a chapter who wants to admit a transgender woman, or a fraternity chapter that wants to admit a transgender man, they will find a way to do so.

[PrettyBoy]

It’s definitely coming, no doubt. Chapters can vote however they want to, but if they abandon biological truth, they’re abandoning the very foundation of what these organizations stand for. My personal conviction? I will not extend brotherhood where manhood isn’t present. The grip and love are earned through shared identity not cultural revision.

Changing the language doesn’t change the truth. And I will not participate in something that strips away what our Founders clearly intended. She will get no grip, no bond, no acknowledgment from me. Period.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Just as before, if there is a chapter who wants to admit a transgender woman, or a fraternity chapter that wants to admit a transgender man, they will find a way to do so.

Absolutely.

I remember back when I was advising my chapter, this exact issue came up as we had some trans kids going through recruitment. Our guys weren't really concerned about anything other than whether those individuals were of high enough character to belong.

--it was a proud moment.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Absolutely.

I remember back when I was advising my chapter, this exact issue came up as we had some trans kids going through recruitment. Our guys weren't really concerned about anything other than whether those individuals were of high enough character to belong.

--it was a proud moment.

It is basically a question as to which Nationals are willing to pull a charter over a chapter admitting someone who is trans of the gender of the GLO. Some are, some aren't.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by naraht

It is basically a question as to which Nationals are willing to pull a charter over a chapter admitting someone who is trans of the gender of the GLO. Some are, some aren't.

The hq really doesn't have to know.

[naraht]

Originally Posted by 33girl

The hq really doesn't have to know.

And... we're back to the 1960s, where national fraternities went looking through the yearbook photos of their chapters...

[Cheerio]

Originally Posted by naraht

And... we're back to the 1960s, where national fraternities went looking through the yearbook photos of their chapters...

Not trying to be funny, but what does this mean?

I also recall that some universities omitted yearbooks during the 60s and 70s due to lack of student interest.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by 33girl

The hq really doesn't have to know.

Nor is there any compelling reason for them to draw a line in the sand.