[22524] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Research Results
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Stromberg)
Mon Apr 22 12:44:53 2002
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020422091809.00a630a0@cstrombe.pobox.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2002 09:34:39 -0700
Reply-To: Chris Stromberg <cstrombe@STANFORD.EDU>
From: Chris Stromberg <cstrombe@STANFORD.EDU>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <07147E67CA69FC346A3EBBC1CBA6AB8B@JayBEE.25-52.zzn.com>
Brothers,
Going back to JayBEE's initial comments, he is certainly correct
that there has been a lot of mis-understanding in the fraternity surounding
the 1976 convention and the oft-talked about "Gentlemen's Agreement". I
would like to add some comments gleaned from watching this discussion for
many years. Let me preface it by saying that I was not at the 1976
convention (I was only 6 months old at the time), so if anyone that WAS at
the convention can offer their insight, I would really appreciate it.
First of all, it does not surprise me that JayBEE found no mention
of the "Gentlemen's Agreement" in the minutes of the convention. A
gentlemen's agreement is not written down, and it is not voted on by a
National Convention. Traditionally, a gentlemen's agreement is a verbal
agreement sealed by a handshake. Thus, there is no reason to believe that
a written record would exist of such a thing.
My take, from watching this list for many years now, is that there
were two parts to the decision at the 1976 convention, one the formal
changes to the By-laws and Fraternity rules that were passed by the
convention delegates and the less formal general understanding of how those
changes would be implemented. It is this less formal general understanding
that I think people initially referred to as the "Gentlemen's Agreement"
(obviously, that meaning was lost over time, but, initially, I think that
was probably what was meant).
The changes made in 1976 could have been interpreted a lot of
ways, in the same way that laws passed by Congress get interpreted many
different ways. As I understand it, the "Gentlemen's Agreement" was
basically the understanding of how those changes would be
interpreted. This understanding would not have been written, but would
have been derived primarily from the discussions held on the floor of the
convention, but also from everything else that was going on at the time.
Now, of course, there are problems with gentlemen's
agreements. First, they are typically verbal agreements, with no
documentation to back them up. Thus, they depend not only on the
individual people's understanding of them, but also on the way that they
are passed along from one person to another. This is why, later, the
Fraternity codified the "Gentlemen's Agreement", according to JayBEE, first
in 1986 by the National Board, and later (in 1998) by the National Convention.
So, one interesting question (at least for me) remains. What was
the original "Gentlemen's Agreement"? Stated another way: How did the
Brothers at the 1976 convention understand how the changes that they had
approved would be implemented?
Certainly, I can only guess at this (having not been there
myself). I think it is clear that the Chapters understood that it would be
their decision when and if to ever go Co-ed. This is the one thing that
everyone seems to agree on. Many also seem to have left with the
impression that all new chapters and all re-chartered chapters would be
co-ed. This seems to not have been the unanimous understanding, and I
can't even say if it was the majority understanding. But that idea was
there, at least for some of the people at the convention.
Anyway, this is my take on the "Gentlemen's Agreement". If there
is anyone on the list who actually was at the 1976 convention, I would
appreciate their comments on this, as the only people who can really answer
this question are the people that were there.
Chris Stromberg
Zeta Chapter
