Diversity in the SEC

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

They absolutely needed each other, but you can't ignore that most early NPC orgs were exclusively white and Protestant. It didn't happen in a vacuum.

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

Perhaps, but as a member of the majority, why does it bother you so much?

[DGTess]

Perhaps, but as a member of the majority, why does it bother you so much?

Hole. Lee. Chit. Is the majority not to be "bothered" by injustice? That's a helluva way to dialog, discuss, and learn.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Right. But someone who is in a historically black group can come on here and say she loves it the way it was specifically founded and doesn't want it to change and no one bats an eyelash. If some of us in the early NPC groups that were historically white and Protestant said that we love it that way and don't want it to change we would be be hounded mercilessly.

There is a huge double standard here.

You are missing the point and assuming a double standard.

It is taking pages for some of you to stop pretending that predominantly white GLOs had no consideration of race and ethnicity in their founding and membership dynamics over the years.

Delta is proud of the role of race and ethnicity in Delta's founding (despite being at a 99% Black school), overall membership dynamics, and programmatic thrust. We do not pretend that race was invisible in the early 1900s and is invisible in 2013.

In addition to what Low C Sharp said, when more NPC and IFC get to the point of acknowledging the role of race and ethnicity (if so desired), say whatever you will about race and ethnicity. I'm not mad at you. I'm also not someone who was ever concerned about diversity in the NPC and IFC.

[nyapbp]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

People are trying to force 21st century issues on the founding of groups in the mid to late 1800s. No, these women were not seeking to be racially inclusive. They were trying to survive personally and academically in a hostile environment. No, it was not all roses and perfect. I've read "Bound by a Mighty Vow" and from the early days groups have struggled to decide who to allow in and not (like those uncouth Midwestern girls). But to add race to the founding of the groups and early years isn't really relevant.

These were my thoughts and then they popped up on the screeen. Thank you TriDeltaSallie.

It is now; we are here. Debating about what, why, or how people did things in the late 1800s and early 1900s is a moot point. None of us is privy to any of that. We can surmise, we can ascribe, but we just do not know. We can get on with ourt lives and make the best of the situation in front of us. Wringing our hands about something over which we have no part and no control is, in my opinion, pointless.

That said, I remember having to counsel a chapter when an African American pledge was catching fire from the NPHC groups for joining an NPC group. As I recall she ended up leaving school. I admire and respect the NPHC groups, but I realize that membership in one of the organizations is closed to me. The choice would never be mine.

[amIblue?]

Hate to burst your bubble, Nyapbp, but I have met white NPHC members.

[nyapbp]

Originally Posted by amIblue?

Hate to burst your bubble, Nyapbp, but I have met white NPHC members.

Yes, I know there have been a few, Eleanor Roosevelt for one. But the NPHC Alumnae chapters in my area do not have white members in them.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by nyapbp

Yes, I know there have been a few, Eleanor Roosevelt for one. But the NPHC Alumnae chapters in my area do not have white members in them.

Please do not cite her as the white NPHCer. LOL. Her membership was different.

Those alumnae chapters do not have white members because all whites who attend chapter service events are rejected? All whites who attend membership informationals are rejected? All white applicants are rejected? Please explain.

It is probably that they do not have white (beyond maybe a couple white people) interest in programs and membership. Many BGLOs tend not to recruit and many BGLOs tend to see no overwhelming need to pursue racial and ethnic diversity.

ETA: Delta has a relative small amount of white Sorors around the world. I only recall meeting a couple white Sorors over the years. There was only an issue if the white Sorors tried too hard to "be down." Not every white Soror attempts this but I shall explain. Trying to speak Black English or excessive slang with a "Black accent" does not go over well with some of us. Trying to reference hip hop or songs by Black artists that some of us don't even listen to can also be annoying. Some of us find that annoying because as Blacks many of us do not sit around talking about "Black song and dance" 24/7. Blacks don't all listen to certain songs and dance. And we have a rich history of African diaspora intellectuals and Black intellectuals whose brains spanned beyond dancing, slang, and music. I met one white Soror many years ago who thought she could nonstop speak slang and discuss rap or R&B among Black women with terminal degrees and very successful careers. It was insulting and quite hilarious. That white Soror learned over the years to just relax, be herself, and let her coolness, hard work, and respect for the Sisterhood shape the outcome. She also learned that Blackness includes brains and we know about far more than we are stereotyped as knowing. We are not ignoring that she is a white woman who is our Soror. There is no reason to ignore that. We simply do not use that as a negative.

If SEC wants more diversity, they should think about these types of things.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by nyapbp

These were my thoughts and then they popped up on the screeen. Thank you TriDeltaSallie.

It is now; we are here. Debating about what, why, or how people did things in the late 1800s and early 1900s is a moot point. None of us is privy to any of that. We can surmise, we can ascribe, but we just do not know. We can get on with out lives and make the best of the situation in front of us. Wringing our hands about something over which we have no part and no control is, in my opinion, pointless.

No, you are not going to dismiss the discourse as irrelevant. The past shapes the present and the future. Historians (among other disciplines) and laypersons know this and they apply it to many topics (gender inequality, government extremism, etc). It is only in topics of race and ethnicity that many people wish to close doors and silence the past.

Originally Posted by nyapbp

That said, I remember having to counsel a chapter when an African American pledge was catching fire from the NPHC groups for joining an NPC group. As I recall she ended up leaving school. I admire and respect the NPHC groups, but I realize that membership in one of the organizations is closed to me. The choice would never be mine.

None of the doors are officially closed to you. NPHC sororities also place emphasis on alumnae chapters. If you cared enough, and have not become a member at the undergrad level because the undergraduate chapter rejected you for some reason, you could apply at the alumnae level. It may not be successful but that lack of success may or may not be because you are nonBlack. There are members who would respect you as long as you work hard like other aspirants and applicants and as long as you prove that you understand the historical and present day significance of being in a BGLO. Given your "let go of the past" intro to your post, you may not understand this and therefore may not be prepared for BGLO membership.

[Hartofsec]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

What DBB said.

NPC groups started consciously, deliberately keeping out the undesired categories very early. Witness the founding of AOII. Perhaps more importantly, they continued to do so until very recently. This is what makes "They're just sisters" problematic. History still matters, as any SEC student will tell you when we're talking about other kinds of institutional history. Celebrating Founders' Day when the Founders would likely have resigned rather than share membership with people like you is a problem. Sisterhood with alumnae who joined an explicitly segregated organization is a problem. It's a problem that many folks can deal with, but denying it doesn't make it go away. "They're just sisters" denies that facet of nonwhite (and non-Protestant) experience.

You learn what clichés are by listening and watching, especially to people whose experience is different from you.

The institutional history of my alma mater, where racial segregation/discrimination is concerned, is about as negatively high-profile as it possibly could be. The governor's doorway stand to block AA students from entering is well-known. Certainly it would be possible to have women in one's alum group (and everywhere else) whose thinking is a reflection of that period.

So in society's current tier of evolution with racial diversity, what should SEC NPC chapters be striving to say or do that would not be considered "cliché?"

(question not directed to you specifically, but to all)

[TriDeltaSallie]

Here's another example that left me dumbfounded.

I found an interesting article online about why more middle class AA don't choose to homeschool. It was written by an AA woman who left a very good law job, downsized her home substantially, etc. so she could homeschool her children. She explained a number of cultural reasons within the AA community that impact why AA women are not inclined to homeschool. It was an interesting post and made me realize issues faced by AA homeschoolers that I hadn't considered before. So I shared it on FB with the comment that I found it really interesting.

An AA homeschooling mom was annoyed that I shared the post because it was a judgmental article and what good does it do to introduce race into the topic of homeschooling?

Are you kidding me?

I learn something helpful and share it. Now I'm the bad guy for doing so. But if I met an AA homeschooling mom who was facing these issues and wasn't aware of them, then I'm a privileged white person who doesn't care about the challenges women face in the AA community.

That's just one example of why whites feel damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by carnation

I seriously doubt that any NPC group was founded with an eye to keeping blacks out. I'm betting it never crossed their minds They probably just wanted to be friends.

Except for the part where many NPC groups had explicit WASP clauses not allowing Jews, blacks, etc., right? It never crossed their minds, except when they created those membership standards?

Originally Posted by Hartofsec

Could you give me the Cliffs Notes for your "sandbox" post too?

I guess there is also great irony and cliché in your dodge.

It's a serious question -- what should NPC chapters be striving to say or do that wouldn't be considered "cliché?"

If NPC chapters want more women of color, they should be encouraging more women of color to participate in recruitment. There are many, many, many ways this could be done. For example, the local alumnae panhellenics could reach out to high school affinity groups (black students union and so on) to include them in the pre-rush activities. You better believe, at the schools where recs are required, women of color are going to have a MUCH harder time finding them than do white women.

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

Here's another example that left me dumbfounded.

An AA homeschooling mom was annoyed that I shared the post because it was a judgmental article and what good does it do to introduce race into the topic of homeschooling?

Are you kidding me?

You should not assume that a single member of a group is authorized to speak for that entire group. That's pretty much the definition of tokenizing.

[TriDeltaSallie]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

You should not assume that a single member of a group is authorized to speak for that entire group. That's pretty much the definition of tokenizing.

And this is where I give up. If you can't see the point I'm making, then there's nothing left to say.

Have a great day!

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by TriDeltaSallie

And this is where I give up. If you can't see the point I'm making, then there's nothing left to say.

Have a great day!

I get your point. It is SO HARD to be a white woman, and you are going to flounce.

[DrPhil]

Wow. Just wow.

These discussions are not about tutorials for white people. Not every nonwhite person is going to like what you say and do. No one is obligated to be receptive and welcoming to white people. Racial and ethnic minorities (in general) are accustomed to that. Whites (in general) are not accustomed to that and feel entitled to getting unwarranted smiles and tutorials. Perhaps silently observing would work when all else fails. The need to figuratively shout your presence and flounce is the same race cliche and white privilege all over again.

Going to a Black woman with an article you read tends to only work if you and that person have discussed the topic and have established such a relationship. Otherwise it is the same routine all over again of whites thinking thy are awesome enough to teach and save nonwhites. The same goes for certain men coming to me with an article on women and if I were to go to a LGBT person with an article I read if I don't already have that relationship with the person. My powerful non-LGBT identity can be construed as attempting to teach and save as opposed to simply discussing a topic.