What's the big deal about having gays in your org?

[moe.ron]

I've always wondered this. if the person is an upstanding citizens who uphold the standards of your organization, what's the big deal?

[SirHornyToad]

One of our recent alums came out about 2 years after he graduated, wasnt that big of a deal, we gave a gay guy a bid once but he didnt accept, oh well

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by moe.ron
I've always wondered this. if the person is an upstanding citizens who uphold the standards of your organization, what's the big deal?

There is no big deal. If, and when, it becomes a big deal, its at the local level. This has greatly diminished from decades ago, not from any internal initiative, but from changes in society.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by moe.ron
I've always wondered this. if the person is an upstanding citizens who uphold the standards of your organization, what's the big deal?

I guess GC likes this topic.

The big deal is that some people use their organizations to further their sexual agenda. That includes overtly heterosexual men and women AND overtly homosexual men and women. Sexual orientation is something that shouldn't be worn as a badge of honor and thrown in people's faces.

Truth be told, there are a couple of NPHC fraternities that are known as "gay fraternities" depending on where you live. It is fine to be accepting of different people but not fine for your organization to be marked the "gay's men's frat" or the "heterosexual men's frat." This is what happens when the sexual preference of members overshadows the fraternity's purpose. Both homosexual and heterosexual men (and women, to a lesser extent) are "guilty" of doing this.

We have GLBT fraternities and sororities for the specific purpose of giving sexual minorities a safe haven to address GLBT issues and build GLBT networks. Those fraternities and sororities do not discriminate against heterosexuals, but they have a specific purpose involving sexual orientation. NPHC organizations' purposes do not (maybe someone's ritual reads otherwise...I wouldn't know) involve sexual orientation.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
I guess GC likes this topic.

The big deal is that some people use their organizations to further their sexual agenda. That includes overtly heterosexual men and women AND overtly homosexual men and women. Sexual orientation is something that shouldn't be worn as a badge of honor and thrown in people's faces.

Truth be told, there are a couple of NPHC fraternities that are known as "gay fraternities" depending on where you live. It is fine to be accepting of different people but not fine for your organization to be marked the "gay's men's frat" or the "heterosexual men's frat." This is what happens when the sexual preference of members overshadows the fraternity's purpose. Both homosexual and heterosexual men (and women, to a lesser extent) are "guilty" of doing this.

We have GLBT fraternities and sororities for the specific purpose of giving sexual minorities a safe haven to address GLBT issues and build GLBT networks. Those fraternities and sororities do not discriminate against heterosexuals, but they have a specific purpose involving sexual orientation. NPHC organizations' purposes do not (maybe someone's ritual reads otherwise...I wouldn't know) involve sexual orientation.

They are not "known as", they are "accused of" being. There's a HUGE difference and it is a big deal in trying to present it. It would be similar to saying that depending on where you are, there are NPHC sororities that are KNOWN as "Ho sororities." It's not the image that any of the organizations are trying to present. With that in mind, for people not in the org to present their argument by using that ridiculous notion of "in this area XYZ is 'known as'" is definitely not called for.

There are homosexual members in all of the orgs. I'm very sure there are no designated homosexual chapters. So that "known as" argument needs to really stop being perpetuated by people OUTSIDE of the organizations in question. That also brings up the reason why members of the org fight so vehemently to stop the continuation of such OUTRAGEOUS myths. An initiated member has all of the rights and privileges accorded them. The organization does not however have to accept that member presenting an image not in line with the image the org wants presented.

[sugar and spice]

Originally posted by moe.ron
I've always wondered this. if the person is an upstanding citizens who uphold the standards of your organization, what's the big deal?

For some people, being homosexual is automatically in conflict with "upholding the standards of the organization." If you see homosexuality as being on the same par as child molestation, then one can't be gay and upholding the moral standards of the GLO at the same time. (For the record, I think I'm made it clear that I don't believe in this viewpoint at all, but there are plenty of people out there that do.)

It's kind of along the same lines as the discussions we've had about members who are pregnant or drug users. These people aren't hurting anybody. Many of them are great people who could be great sisters or brothers. But there is still enough prejudice about homosexuality, drug use, and women's roles that people are worried either about having a brother or sister who doesn't fit "the norm," or they're worried how people will stereotype their organization if some of their members deviate from it.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
They are not "known as", they are "accused of" being. There's a HUGE difference and it is a big deal in trying to present it.

Es lo mismo.

What you are "known as" (and therefore) "accused of being" is a factor of perception. What messages we put out there influence others' perceptions of us.

If someone knows more homosexual Alphas than heterosexual Alphas, which happens, that person may assume that Alpha is "gay friendly" which may lead some to "know Alpha as" AND "accuse Alpha of being" the gay black man's fraternity.

This is ONE reason why many Alphas have an issue with homosexuality in the frat.

[Tom Earp]

So, when did being Gay have anything to do with the beleifs of what any GLO had to do with anything?

I know Gays in LXA and some are very good friends of Mine and Brothers.

Dont try to tell me that there are not Gays in Your Organizations. You may never have or will have known.

While I have not gone through it in its intirity, It is Titled, "Out On Fraternity Row".

Amazing insight to say the least.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
Es lo mismo.

What you are "known as" (and therefore) "accused of being" is a factor of perception. What messages we put out there influence others' perceptions of us.

If someone knows more homosexual Alphas than heterosexual Alphas, which happens, that person may assume that Alpha is "gay friendly" which may lead some to "know Alpha as" AND "accuse Alpha of being" the gay black man's fraternity.

This is ONE reason why many Alphas have an issue with homosexuality in the frat.

It's the same as if someone knows more unladylike and Hoish Deltas, would that make Delta "known as" a Ho Sorority? Get out of here with that nonsense.

Stop helping to perpetuate nonsense. Especially since it was not necessary for you to name a specific org.

Thanks.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
It's the same as if someone knows more unladylike and Hoish Deltas, would that make Delta "known as" a Ho Sorority? Get out of here with that nonsense.

Stop helping to perpetuate nonsense. Especially since it was not necessary for you to name a specific org.

Thanks.

To those people, yes Delta is "known as" (which is the same as "accused of being"...LOL) the ho sorority. That doesn't offend me because people's perceptions are THEIR realities. This is subjective. We aren't talking about objective TRUTHS here.

I really think you have kryptonite against my messages. Anyone with a grain of sense can see that I am explaining why SOME BGLO members have an issue with gays in their organization. I am petitioning for EVERYONE to stop letting their sexuality be blatant to the point that it overshadows their organization's purpose.

Instead of understanding that, you would rather your feelings be hurt because I mentioned Alpha. LOL!!! You will just have to get over that.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
To those people, yes Delta is "known as" (which is the same as "accused of being"...LOL) the ho sorority. That doesn't offend me because people's perceptions are THEIR realities. This is subjective. We aren't talking about objective TRUTHS here.

I really think you have kryptonite against my messages. Anyone with a grain of sense can see that I am explaining why SOME BGLO members have an issue with gays in their organization. I am petitioning for EVERYONE to stop letting their sexuality be blatant to the point that it overshadows their organization's purpose.

Instead of understanding that, you would rather your feelings be hurt because I mentioned Alpha. LOL!!! You will just have to get over that.

No kryptonite, but you have launched into my my messages. Hmmmm.

Also when you can explain something without naming orgs, then you do it. Instead, you chose to name Alpha. Anyone with sense can see that you were making a passive aggressive attack. Did you name any of the other orgs that have been accused? No, you didn't. I know how much you hate when people do the passive aggressive thing. I can't believe you've fallen into that. Now take your own advice.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
No kryptonite, but you have launched into my my messages. Hmmmm.

Also when you can explain something without naming orgs, then you do it. Instead, you chose to name Alpha. Anyone with sense can see that you were making a passive aggressive attack. Did you name any of the other orgs that have been accused? No, you didn't. I know how much you hate when people do the passive aggressive thing. I can't believe you've fallen into that. Now take your own advice.

I pick up on patterns quickly. Hmmmm.

Get over it. I made a general point and used a specific example. I can use the Alphas and Nupes as examples of organizations with the "gay black male" stereotype and stigma. I can use Omega as an example of an organization with the "overtly and crassly heterosexual black male" stereotype and stigma. How's that for passive aggression?

Members from these three fraternities who are offended are invited to a GET OVER IT party. Don't bother RSVPing.

[IceColdAce06]

Last word.

You feel you have to have it. That's the pattern you're detecting.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally posted by IceColdAce06
Last word.

You feel you have to have it. That's the pattern I'm detecting.

I corrected your post for you.

I told you not to RSVP and you did. Think about it.

[IceColdAce06]

Originally posted by DSTCHAOS
I corrected your post for you.

I told you not to RSVP and you did. Think about it.

Somehow you think you control what I can and can not do. You have some deep rooted issues that you need to work out. Handle that.