When did BGLOs became apart of the NPHC

[abaici]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
What constitutes "regular"?

I wanted to comment on that. It's interesting that people are accusing others of prejudice yet fail to acknowledge their own. Labeling the NPC and NIC "regular" is very telling.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by kddani
Ummm... who said that you were? The post specifically asked about NPHC? Which i'm assuming you know what that is....

It looks like people have different interpretations of that post. It looks like the original poster is asking about the NPC but calling it the NPHC by mistake.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by abaici
I wanted to comment on that. It's interesting that people are accusing others of prejudice yet fail to acknowledge their own. Labeling the NPC and NIC "regular" is very telling.

Exactly. Those affiliations are seen as mainstream whereas the NPHC is a "specialized subsection." That happens in various aspects of this society.

I can understand the tendency to do that because non-LGLO and non-BGLOs outnumber the BGLOs and LGLOs and are older. That is one rationale.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by SapphireSphinx9
Also, saying "predominately white" for either the NPC or NIC is an incorrect assumption. Since in the orgs in NPC do not restrict membership to just white women. And at least 8 (that I personally know of - there may be more) fraternities that are in NIC are either African-American, Latino, or Asian based.

You are correct. The organization category isn't "predominantly white." If someone was to talk about membership racial demographics, "predominantly white" would be more accurate.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
Lose that understanding because it's wrong. They were formed in order to provide mutual support of each other in an era of open oppression, not because they couldn't get into the white ones.

Stop trying to stir crap up on the sly.

Actually, the history of BGLOs does include the exclusion of blacks from predominantly white GLOs which was a correlate of the open oppression of that time.

[starang21]

brains are so sexy.

[sigtau305]

Originally posted by Honeykiss1974
Neat. I learned something new today.

Ditto.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by starang21
brains are so sexy.

^^ Serial brainist. He is evil and must be stopped.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
Actually, the history of BGLOs does include the exclusion of blacks from predominantly white GLOs which was a correlate of the open oppression of that time.

Go to any campus today, and you will see people congregate with people similar to them. It has nothing to do with being excluded from the other groups or denied access. Do you think that it was really any different? Well except for the fact that racism was blatant and in your face, it isn't. The need for them to support each other was even stronger than it is today.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
Go to any campus today, and you will see people congregate with people similar to them. It has nothing to do with being excluded from the other groups or denied access. Do you think that it was really any different? Well except for the fact that racism was blatant and in your face, it isn't. The need for them to support each other was even stronger than it is today.

The foundings of BGLOs as a whole are partially rooted in being excluded from predominantly white GLOs. I urge you to do some extensive research about this.

Racial and ethnic minorities, when given the opportunity, often branch out to form affiliations and networks with non-racial and ethnic minorities. They maintain their group ties (which is why people congregate with those who look like them) but they also wish to take advantage of other opportunities. This is why the centrality and the influence of the Black Church, BGLOs, and orgs like the The Urban League have decreased over the years. People have more options now.

That is "racial and ethnic inequality 101."

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
The foundings of BGLOs as a whole are partially rooted in being excluded from predominantly white GLOs. I urge you to do some extensive research about this.

Racial and ethnic minorities, when given the opportunity, often branch out to form affiliations and networks with non-racial and ethnic minorities. They maintain their group ties (which is why people congregate with those who look like them) but they also wish to take advantage of other opportunities. This is why the centrality and the influence of the Black Church, BGLOs, and orgs like the The Urban League have decreased over the years. People have more options now.

That is "racial and ethnic inequality 101."

Bad assumption number two.

You're assuming that if afforded the opportunity to join a predominately White GLO, the organizations would not have existed. Highly doubtful. Given that people maintain their group ties even today where opportunies to join more mainstream organizations are readily available, I seriously doubt your premise. That's reality. Look at the number of organizations being formed today to address specific needs. Whether it's more Black, Latino, Multicultural, Gay and Lesbian or whatever, it's still about like minded people providing mutual support to each other and especially when outnumbered in a group.

Besides, the influence of the organizations you mentioned hasn't decreased due to other opportunities. It has decreased because they never changed their focus to adapt to the changing times. You can't use a 1960 message to address a 2005 audience. Update the message and make it more current and relevant and the influence will return.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
Bad assumption number two.

You're assuming that if afforded the opportunity to join a predominately White GLO, the organizations would not have existed. Highly doubtful. Given that people maintain their group ties even today where opportunies to join more mainstream organizations are readily available, I seriously doubt your premise. That's reality. Look at the number of organizations being formed today to address specific needs. Whether it's more Black, Latino, Multicultural, Gay and Lesbian or whatever, it's still about like minded people providing mutual support to each other and especially when outnumbered in a group.

Besides, the influence of the organizations you mentioned hasn't decreased due to other opportunities. It has decreased because they never changed their focus to adapt to the changing times. You can't use a 1960 message to address a 2005 audience. Update the message and make it more current and relevant and the influence will return.

You are attempting to debate a moot point.

Many of us have known for years that the general founding of BGLOs is rooted in exclusion from predominently white social institutions and networks (including but not limited to GLOs). Many of us also know that the general founding of BGLOs is ALSO rooted in a desire to have our own and address our needs.

See how the latter does not have to contradict the former?

I really do want you to do some extensive research on this topic, though. Research what happens when groups are given the opportunity to form heterogenous networks as well as maintain homogenous ties.

You already acknowledged that the message of these traditionally Black organizations hasn't changed with the times. ***BINGO!!!*** Blacks tend to have more opportunities (which includes what organizations we hypothetically have access to) than 30, 40, or 50 years ago which shapes how we view our social world, religion, and families.

Good luck.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
You are attempting to debate a moot point.

Many of us have known for years that the general founding of BGLOs is rooted in exclusion from predominently white social institutions and networks (including but not limited to GLOs). Many of us also know that the general founding of BGLOs is ALSO rooted in a desire to have our own and address our needs.

See how the latter does not have to contradict the former?

I really do want you to do some extensive research on this topic, though. Research what happens when groups are given the opportunity to form heterogenous networks as well as maintain homogenous ties.

Good luck.

Again you stay on a bad assumption. You assume that you are the only one that has done research. Then again, doing research can lead a person to form THEIR OWN opinions. See how that works? Try it.

Good luck.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
You assume that you are the only one that has done research.

I obviously am.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
I obviously am.

ROFL Have fun.