[19408] in APO-L
Re: All Male
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jrhmdtraum@AOL.COM)
Tue Oct 20 09:51:36 1998
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 1998 09:51:05 EDT
Reply-To: Jrhmdtraum@AOL.COM
From: Jrhmdtraum@AOL.COM
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In a message dated 10/12/98 8:18:39 PM, Jeff wrote:
<<
My point is, if we do nothing, the all-male discrimination will end on
its own. The trends of the past 20+ years proves that. There are now
only a handful of all-male chapters currently, and they will die out
or go co-ed eventually. If you try to force these chapters to go
co-ed they will resent your efforts and may even quit the fraternity
rather than going co-ed; but if you wait and let them gradually choose
to go co-ed on their own, the end result will be the same, minus the
resentment. Personally I do not want to see resentment and bitterness
created in the fraternity, even among all-male chapters.
There is also the issue that the National Convention of 1976 made an
agreement with them to respect their right to be all-male in return
for their agreement to permit women to be admitted into the
fraternity. I agree that agreements can and should be changed from
time to time, but if we are to do this, we should come up with a
better reason for changing our original agreement rather than just
"OK, time's up." That is why I asked if there is some compelling
reason that we need to act on this issue at the Minneapolis
convention, and I have not yet seen one.
Don't get me wrong, I do not support discrimination. But I also do not
support top-down initiatives to force people not to discriminate. If
we are patient, I am confident that the issue will resolve itself.
-Jeff>>
Jeff,
We were confident that the issue would resolve itself too and... At the '76
National, most chapters did not want to go coed at the start of the meeting,
as you know, it was turned down at the previous conventions. We forced the
issue with a lawsuit pending that would have a) cost the National alot of
money to defend (they had a sizable amount set aside for this reason) b) would
have forced the fraternity to go coed (the 6th (?) (San Francisco) Circuit
Court had already reviewed the case (via Stanford Law School faculty whom were
our lawyers) and said that they would accept the case and that their initial
opinion was that we were in violation of Title 9 (to my understanding, this
has not changed as chapters use indirect federal money for office space, etc
-- unless they meet completely off campus) c) forcing the issue via the
courts would have left a bad taste for all. Thus due to our BIG STICK
(negotiation Roosevelt style) we got the fraternity to accept the compromise
without too big of a fight.
Retrospectively, I sort of wish we had gone the legal way. It is of no doubt
that going coed "saved" the fraternity. The chapters that are still all male
see no reason to change and, I believe, won't unless they are forced. Why
force them now. I believe that you and I and all of our brothers thus
indirectly support discrimination by allowing some of "our" chapters to
discriminate. I hope that you and the members of your chapter consider this
and consider how you would feel if it were not sex but race that we are
talking about. One of the problems with America today, in my opinion, is that
we do not consider race and sex the same. That is why women get paid less
then a man for doing the same work, etc.
Yes, some members might quit if forced to change. At about the same time that
the above was first being seriously considered, the Stanford Band which had
been all male for years was forced by the University (Title 9) to go coed
(1973, I believe). A lot of members quit and the Band was not as good as it
had been for several years. It is now as good as it ever was and perhaps the
best college Band in the country again.
So, I would urge you and your brethern to look at the issue as if it were race
and if some of our chapters did not let blacks or hispanics join. How would
you feel about the issue then. If you still believe that a forced change
would be bad, then that is your opinion. If you would feel that we must allow
blacks to join, then I would urge you to feel the same about women.
John
Zeta '70-'74
