Sprite Step-Off Update: ZTA and AKA to share 1st place

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by agzg

It's reaching me and I still don't give a damn. I'm only here for the trainwrecks.

this made me truly laugh out loud.

[SWTXBelle]

All of this discussion reminds me of some of the discussions regarding the "folk dance" part of the Olympic ice dancing competition. The Russians and their "aboriginal" dance were the most covered aspect, but there were several, um, interesting interpretations. Personally, I would have liked to see each country stick to an interpretation of their native dances - although that brings up the question of what qualifies as a "native folk dance".

So what is the determining factor that decides what is or is not an illicit appropriation of a cultural event, be it dancing or something else?

When should a group feel flattered, and when should they feel used or unvalued?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

All of this discussion reminds me of some of the discussions regarding the "folk dance" part of the Olympic ice dancing competition. The Russians and their "aboriginal" dance were the most covered aspect, but there were several, um, interesting interpretations. Personally, I would have liked to see each country stick to an interpretation of their native dances - although that brings up the question of what qualifies as a "native folk dance".

So what is the determining factor that decides what is or is not an illicit appropriation of a cultural event, be it dancing or something else?

When should a group feel flattered, and when should they feel used or unvalued?

I like how you tied this all together! You present some tough questions. It's almost a trial and error and you err on the side of caution. You want to be respectful but you don't want to tread so lightly that you are TOO politically correct. It can get so complicated that you almost don't want to be bothered with doing tributes--sometimes we can appreciate things without having to become a part of those things.

I commented about the aboriginal dance in the Olympic thread. I think the costumes received more criticism than the routine itself. Is that correct? I think tributes are good (when people acknowledge that they are taking something from somewhere else), but I think there can be a thin line between doing a tribute and bordering on mockery. The facial expressions and costumes for the Russian couple are a good example of that thin line.

Along those lines, there are things that I can get away with with my friends and acquaintances who are in other GLOs that I wouldn't necessarily be able to get away with with members of their GLOs who don't know me. So, I can understand why a BGLOer would think it's cool to teach some non-BGLOers on their campus some steps. I can also understand why some non-BGLOers would think to adopt these things on their own without knowing the informal (and formal, in some instances) protocol regarding it, and that can include finding steps and claiming them as their own. Not erring on the side of caution may not have mattered so much locally because they could "get away with it," but it mattered when the shows were seen by others. Things change with a wider and more diverse audience (read: more BGLOers who may be familiar with stepping, familiar with those particular steps, aren't easily impressed, don't know what ZTA is, and/or don't care about the dynamics at the ZTA's campus that lead to this.

It is also important to remember that, as with the Sprite step-off discussion, for all the person who are "offended" (for whatever reasons), there are people who aren't and don't see what the big deal is.

[IlovemyAKA]

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

Really. When I first heard unity stepshow I thought that the AKA's at the U. of Arkansas were sponsoring a unity stepshow where both NPHC and other greeks participated in together (stepping together)

My Alma mater held a unity show each year, and that's how it was presented. An NPHC frat & NPC sorority would step together and an NPHC sorority and NIC frat would step together. Each org would also incorporate something of their own. For example, Alphas may teach Alpha Taus a simple step, then the girls would incorporate a dance routine of their making.

[rhoyaltempest]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

To the bolded black point:
It is actually quite realistic for "our*" subcultures to be exposed to the culture at large without the expectation that the members of the culture at large will want to participate. Especially when "our" particular subculture has historically been demonized, disrespected, disregarded, and (attepted to be) discarded by many members of the culture at large. Its not like you see "mainstream" people trying to join in the black church and/or black religious traditions. There are far too many facets of "our" subculture that it would be realistic to expect mainstream folks not to want to participate in. One of the main indicators of their lack of desire to participate is the fact that they do not join D9 orgs en masse. Another is the fact that most often they do not come to the D9 and ask to be taught to step or any other part of D9 tradition and culture. There generally is no expectation that any subculture must contribute to the culture overall in order to survive. It is actually historically the opposite. Thats why your argument makes little sense to me.

To the bolded red point:
Im going to have to agree with Rhoyaltempest that you missed her point.
The American "melting pot" image is a farce. We're not culturally inclusive when and where it is most important. Our laws and our governing isnt culturally inclusive enough for us to even hint that we're a melting pot. Rhoyaltempest didnt suggest insulation of traditions or cultures. She wanted to know, quite validly, why people of a specific culture (D9 Greeks and realistically Black people) extend themselves to include others in a culture they seem to have little to no interest in.

Its like recruiting a pro baseball player to play pro soccer with the knowledge that he can never play for your soccer team. Yeah, he could do it, but its not his sport and he expressed absolutely NO interest in doing it. Why would you spend time trying to teach him soccer and make him interested? What value do you get out of it? Especially when him playing soccer (and not for your team) dilutes and misplaces the value of your team's players. By teaching him soccer you've now made your league a free for all that has lost its spirit and purpose. What was once a sport of love and high intangible value is now just another commercialized item up for sale.

*note: As I am not D9 my use of "our" refers to black culture overall (because I've pondered the same question as it pertains to black culture) and to the aspect of D9 orgs as they are a part of black culture.

Okay, I appreciate everyone's comments (especially the one above since he clearly gets what I'm asking) but only "deepimpact2" has given an answer to the question: "why is it that we (Black folks) feel the need to give away/share our traditions?" meaning why do we seek others out to teach and involve them in what we do almost exclusively?

For example, as an undergrad I attended 2 VERY predominately white colleges in PA. (5-6 hours a part; PA. is a big state) and in both cases, White greeks thought stepping was cool and some even attended the annual NPHC stepshow, but none of them (as far as I know and the Black campus community was small and tight) ever asked to be part of the stepshow or for anyone to teach them any steps. I am going to confidently assume that this is the case at most predominately white colleges where BGLO's exist. Most are fine admiring what we do from a distance. So why then, do we feel the need to introduce them to something that we are supposed to hold dear, especially when they are not greatly interested?

Deepimpact2 says it's because we (as in some of us) are showing off. What do you say?

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

Okay, I appreciate everyone's comments (especially the one above since he clearly gets what I'm asking) but only "deepimpact2" has given an answer to the question: "why is it that we (Black folks) feel the need to give away/share our traditions?" meaning why do we seek others out to teach and involve them in what we do almost exclusively?

For example, as an undergrad I attended 2 VERY predominately white colleges in PA. (5-6 hours a part; PA. is a big state) and in both cases, White greeks thought stepping was cool and some even attended the annual NPHC stepshow, but none of them (as far as I know and the Black campus community was small and tight) ever asked to be part of the stepshow or for anyone to teach them any steps. I am going to confidently assume that this is the case at most predominately white colleges where BGLO's exist. Most are fine admiring what we do from a distance. So why then, do we feel the need to introduce them to something that we are supposed to hold dear, especially when they are not greatly interested?

Deepimpact2 says it's because we (as in some of us) are showing off. What do you say?

Don't nobody gotta answer your question. I'll answer it in BGLO and stepping terms because that's all I have patience for right now.

From my experiences, I think it's more along the lines of "some of my bestfriends are AKAs, Deltas, etc." That creates a level of comfort that makes some people want to get off the sidelines and participate themselves. That level of comfort is reciprocated and is matched with the need to show off by teaching something. "I'm so damn skilled that I can teach NPCers how to do the damn thang."

Rant/

The bottom line isn't that different than when BGLO sororities are taught BGLO frat steps. You express interest in something with the potential to learn so you go to your friends or acquaintances to see if they will teach you. (it has also worked the other way around with a BGLOer going to a non-BGLO and asking if they are interested in learning) And, as with sororities doing frat steps, it often works in theory but not in practice. I can think of many times when frat members have said "whoa...are they doing our (insert step), who taught them that" or "when are they going to stop doing our isht." It was cute, cool, and funny at first (I have also seen BGLO frats teach NPC sororities steps) but it can go too far. You feel like you have to remind people that it isn't THEIRS and they now need to get their own. But, once you release the steps and essentially give permission to do them, you can't control where it goes. You can't control what they do with the steps (they might perfect it and perform it tighter than you do ), whether they teach them to someone else, whether they deny you taught it to them, or whether they walk around bragging like "we're real tight with XYZ and they approve of everything we're doing."

/Rant

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

To the bolded black point:
It is actually quite realistic for "our*" subcultures to be exposed to the culture at large without the expectation that the members of the culture at large will want to participate. Especially when "our" particular subculture has historically been demonized, disrespected, disregarded, and (attepted to be) discarded by many members of the culture at large. Its not like you see "mainstream" people trying to join in the black church and/or black religious traditions. There are far too many facets of "our" subculture that it would be realistic to expect mainstream folks not to want to participate in. One of the main indicators of their lack of desire to participate is the fact that they do not join D9 orgs en masse. Another is the fact that most often they do not come to the D9 and ask to be taught to step or any other part of D9 tradition and culture. There generally is no expectation that any subculture must contribute to the culture overall in order to survive. It is actually historically the opposite. Thats why your argument makes little sense to me.

What you don't realize is that if anything, there is more inclusiveness between the cultures now more than ever before because the younger generations have been born into a more inclusive society that shares each other's cultures, and thus they become much more acclimated and thus prone to sharing elements of each other's culture, something that can't be said with prior generations (Gen X, Boomers, etc.).

In all fairness, part of the reasons why "mainstream" people aren't joining the NPHC orgs "en masse", is because "we" have strong reservations about voting them in. There's been many on-line discussions on this topic, and I've had my share in in-person discussions on this subject. Granted, this is far from being the only reason, but it is part of the reason. But I've noticed over the past few years there has been a bigger interest in the mainstream on aspects of our culture and their wanting to be involved in it. So I see what you're saying, but a lot of what's been developing has be a slow gradual process over the past 5-10 years, so it could be too subtle for you to notice on a grand scale.

[Rhoyaltempest] wanted to know, quite validly, why people of a specific culture (D9 Greeks and realistically Black people) extend themselves to include others in a culture they seem to have little to no interest in.

Two things: (1). Is that really the case now or has that historically been the case and things are just now taking a noticeable turn? (2). The same could be said for the mainstream extending themselves to us including them in their culture. To imply that this issue is a one-way street sounds really really far-fetched.

We do ourselves a disservice when we think we have a corner on giving everything away to other cultures, and the mainstream is just being fat, selfish, and stingy by not giving anything back.

So yes, I do and have see Rhoyaltempest's point, I just think that her point comes off as somewhat myopic as to whether that is really, truly, and fully the case.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

The bottom line isn't that different than when BGLO sororities are taught BGLO frat steps. You express interest in something with the potential to learn so you go to your friends or acquaintances to see if they will teach you. (it has also worked the other way around with a BGLOer going to a non-BGLO and asking if they are interested in learning) And, as with sororities doing frat steps, it often works in theory but not in practice. I can think of many times when frat members have said "whoa...are they doing our (insert step), who taught them that" or "when are they going to stop doing our isht." It was cute, cool, and funny at first (I have also seen BGLO frats teach NPC sororities steps) but it can go too far. You feel like you have to remind people that it isn't THEIRS and they now need to get their own. But, once you release the steps and essentially give permission to do them, you can't control where it goes. You can't control what they do with the steps (they might perfect it and perform it tighter than you do ), whether they teach them to someone else, whether they deny you taught it to them, or whether they walk around bragging like "we're real tight with XYZ and they approve of everything we're doing."

/Rant

Basically...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNSLTwPobFE

'Nuff said

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

What you don't realize is that if anything, there is more inclusiveness between the cultures now more than ever before because the younger generations have been born into a more inclusive society that shares each other's cultures, and thus they become much more acclimated and thus prone to sharing elements of each other's culture, something that can't be said with prior generations (Gen X, Boomers, etc.).

This is a common exaggeration. It's like having $5 in the bank, depositing $2, and then running around preaching about how better off you are now because God has given you a lot of $$$$$. "More inclusiveness" is a relative measure that is based on perception of where we've come from. If your point of reference is a society where there are separate drinking fountains or there are damn near zero minorities professors at most universities then, sure, you'll WOW at how inclusive society is now.

This is still an extremely racially segregated society. Americans' routine activities are still conducive to things like low interracial marriage; low interracial violence; and predominantly (insert race and ethnicity) schools, religious institutions, and neighborhoods. All of these are among the proxies in research that measure the level of racial and ethnic integration in societies.

So, all of that extends to how culturally inclusive America is now. I hear 14 year olds talking about how they have friends of various races AT SCHOOL but most of these kids aren't friends when they go home. I also hear these very same kids talk about how they have to "act different" when they around people of different races for a number of reasons. Same shit, different toilet.

[I.A.S.K.]

Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest

Okay, I appreciate everyone's comments (especially the one above since She clearly gets what I'm asking) but only "deepimpact2" has given an answer to the question: "why is it that we (Black folks) feel the need to give away/share our traditions?" meaning why do we seek others out to teach and involve them in what we do almost exclusively?

It was a good question. I sometimes forget that my s/n is gender neutral. lol.

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

What you don't realize is that if anything, there is more inclusiveness between the cultures now more than ever before because the younger generations have been born into a more inclusive society that shares each other's cultures, and thus they become much more acclimated and thus prone to sharing elements of each other's culture, something that can't be said with prior generations (Gen X, Boomers, etc.).

In all fairness, part of the reasons why "mainstream" people aren't joining the NPHC orgs "en masse", is because "we" have strong reservations about voting them in. There's been many on-line discussions on this topic, and I've had my share in in-person discussions on this subject. Granted, this is far from being the only reason, but it is part of the reason. But I've noticed over the past few years there has been a bigger interest in the mainstream on aspects of our culture and their wanting to be involved in it. So I see what you're saying, but a lot of what's been developing has be a slow gradual process over the past 5-10 years, so it could be too subtle for you to notice on a grand scale.



Two things: (1). Is that really the case now or has that historically been the case and things are just now taking a noticeable turn? (2). The same could be said for the mainstream extending themselves to us including them in their culture. To imply that this issue is a one-way street sounds really really far-fetched.

We do ourselves a disservice when we think we have a corner on giving everything away to other cultures, and the mainstream is just being fat, selfish, and stingy by not giving anything back.

So yes, I do and have see Rhoyaltempest's point, I just think that her point comes off as somewhat myopic as to whether that is really, truly, and fully the case.

To the black point:
Im Gen. Y so I see this all the time.

To the bolded:
Are there really that many "mainstreams" at rush for D9 orgs? I didnt know that there where. From all accounts I've ever gotten there arent large numbers of them at any D9 rushes.

To the questions:
1. It is really the case now.
2. I dont think anyone said it was a one way thing. I would wonder why random white people were trying so hard to bring clogging to the D9 if they were. They're not. There is generally no other cultural group so ardously and actively trying to share of itself as Black culture.
To the blue point:
Idk. No one here has expressed that sentiment. But culturally I think we're okay without whatever the mainstream has added. Especially since the cultures that have contributed the most to our own have not been mainstream.

[ladygreek]

I find the turn of this discussion to assimilation and inclusiveness very interesting.

*warning, long rant*

While I did grow up under segregation, it was toward the end when attempts were made to integrate. Notice I did not say desegregate. IMO desegregation is the premise behind separate but equal. While integration plays itself out as together but unequal.

Desegregation would have meant the preservation of one's culture, yet with equal treatment and access to the greater society. We would be a delicious, colorful, healthy salad bowl, not a melting pot.

Integration is just another way to say "if you want what I have, then you must be just like me. But wait that is not entirely possible because your skin color will always be different. So we will just play along and throw you a few bones to keep you at bay."

Personally I always wanted desegregation, because I love being Black and all that entails--good and bad. Others wanted integration. Thus the contention.

In my job, the org (League of Women Voters Minneapolis) bemoans the fact that it can't seem to diversify its membership. But what I have seen is a lot of lip service (which I do think folx are sincere about,) but no real desire to put in the work to truly understand what other races need to be comfortable in the org. Why? Because it would take them out of their own comfort zone. That is where inclusiveness is failing in our society.

So no, I am not one to say WOW look how far we have come, considering the number of years it has taken. Because everyday I feel the frustration of how are we going to get where we really need to be. I do know it won't happen in my lifetime, regardless of the outcome of the last presidential election.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

This is a common exaggeration. It's like having $5 in the bank, depositing $2, and then running around preaching about how better off you are now because God has given you a lot of $$$$$. "More inclusiveness" is a relative measure that is based on perception of where we've come from. If your point of reference is a society where there are separate drinking fountains or there are damn near zero minorities professors at most universities then, sure, you'll WOW at how inclusive society is now.

Good point. Heck I remember when I opened my first savings account as a 12 y/o kid and put $15 in the bank ($30 - $35 adjusted for inflation). As a kid accustomed to having only about $2-$4 (or less) at any given time, I thought I was ballin'. Or as Curly of the Three Stooges once said, "$500? That's almost a million."

This is still an extremely racially segregated society...

I don't know about extremely segregated, but I do know that sometimes, we can be as complicit in having a racially segregated society as the mainstream. Again, it's not a one-way street.

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by I.A.S.K.

To the questions:
1. It is really the case now.
2. I dont think anyone said it was a one way thing. I would wonder why random white people were trying so hard to bring clogging to the D9 if they were. They're not. There is generally no other cultural group so ardously and actively trying to share of itself as Black culture.
To the blue point:
Idk. No one here has expressed that [it is a one way thing]. But culturally I think we're okay without whatever the mainstream has added. Especially since the cultures that have contributed the most to our own have not been mainstream.

Maybe not explicitly, but definately implicitly. And with it being a two way thing it weakens Rhoyaltempest's argument. And it further confirms my point that we all have a duty to contribute to our society as a whole, not merely our own subculture. Which as my chapter's community service committee chairman, is the platform of my administration, and is so expressed via the service projects I present to the chapter for a vote. My rationale is that we don't get our "feeding" merely from our subculture, but from our society as a collective.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by KAPital PHINUst

I don't know about extremely segregated, but I do know that sometimes, we can be as complicit in having a racially segregated society as the mainstream. Again, it's not a one-way street.

Okay, replace "extremely" with "very."

Of course it is a two-way street, however, whites have more power to make all of this happen on a larger scale than minorities do. The things that Blacks try to be exclusive about (as evidenced in this thread) don't mean a damn thing in the larger scheme of things. Segregation is intentional and unintentional, and by choice and by force (i.e. most people don't build their own neighborhoods or choose the zoning for the schools).

[KAPital PHINUst]

Originally Posted by ladygreek

So no, I am not one to say WOW look how far we have come, considering the number of years it has taken. Because everyday I feel the frustration of how are we going to get where we really need to be. I do know it won't happen in my lifetime, regardless of the outcome of the last presidential election.

The last presidential election outcome and what we expect(ed) to come as a result is [going to be] a sham. For a number of reasons, we all, black, white, or otherwise, are going to be in for a very rude awakening. So essentially, the last presidential election will have little or nothing to do with it.