[23441] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Toast Song Argument Reflections...
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Price, Todd)
Fri Jan 17 14:35:01 2003
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 14:34:54 -0500
Reply-To: "Price, Todd" <Todd.Price@Detroitdiesel.com>
From: "Price, Todd" <Todd.Price@Detroitdiesel.com>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Here is my take on the issue (much less verbose):
If those parties who wish to change the toast song (and I believe that =
3/4
of the fraternity is in favor of changing the song) can agree on ONE =
VERSION
prior to the Convention, the Toast Song will change.
So long as all the parties who desire change cannot agree on a suitable
alternate version, the Toast Song will remain the same.
Any and all debate on the topic at Convention is moot. The above
requirement has to be met in order for change to occur.
My 2 cents,
Todd Price
Section 54 Vice Chair
-----Original Message-----
From: Section 48 Chair [mailto:ctracy.apo@insightbb.com]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 2:29 PM
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
Subject: [APO-L] Toast Song Argument Reflections...
Alright, I know I may get flamed for opening this can of worms again, =
but
I've been following the debate on APO Forums (www.apoforum.com) =
regarding
the Toast Song changes and I have my own take on the entire debacle. =
Here
is what I posted there. I look forward to hearing your opinions.
+++
For the record, I happen to think that the Toast Song is a tradition of =
our
Fraternity and should stay as is because of its historical significance =
to
our heritage. I fully understand the arguments for changing it and =
should
the National Convention decide to change it at some point in the future =
I
will not raise a fuss.
I have never subscribed to the reasoning of continuing to do something =
just
because "That's the way we've always done it." Change is inevitable in
everything and people deal with it in different ways. I wonder if this
entire issue is more about fear of change than anything else. So let's =
level
the playing field and eliminate some misconceptions at the root of some =
of
these arguments.
I will ask you, my fellow Brothers, to consider the following =
definitions of
"fraternity" and "brother" as found in the online edition of Webster's =
New
Unabridged Dictionary (www.websters.com):
fra=B7ter=B7ni=B7ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fr-t=FBrn-t)
n. pl. fra=B7ter=B7ni=B7ties
1. A body of people associated for a common purpose or interest, such =
as a
guild.
2. A group of people joined by similar backgrounds, occupations, =
interests,
or tastes: the fraternity of bird watchers.
3. A chiefly social organization of men students at a college or =
university,
usually designated by Greek letters.
(Definitions 4 and 5 deleted for space)
broth=B7er ( P ) Pronunciation Key (brthr)
n. pl. broth=B7ers
1. A male having the same parents as another or one parent in common =
with
another.
2. pl. often breth=B7ren (brthrn) One who shares a common ancestry,
allegiance, character, or purpose with another or others, especially:
a. A kinsman.
b. A fellow man.
c. A fellow member, as of a fraternity, trade union, or panel of judges =
on
a court.
3. A close male friend; a comrade.
You will note that in both definitions the terms can be and often are =
used
WITHOUT respect to gender. In fact, Pi Beta Phi (www.pibetaphi.org) =
even
calls itself a fraternity even though it is an all-female organization. =
As
such, the argument that to change the words "men of" to "true to" in =
the
Toast Song would negate our use of the word fraternity to describe =
ourselves
is illogical. On the flip side of that coin, it also renders the =
argument
that it is offensive to refer to the female members of our fraternity =
as
"brothers" equally moot.
Now, let's examine the actual wording being proposed. Ladies and =
gentlemen,
I ask you imagine an alternate reality wherein the words "men of" had =
always
been "women of." How long do you think this would have lasted were it =
us men
who were made to sing that we were "women" every time we gathered? I =
can
tell you that I would certainly not be thrilled at the prospect. Not at =
all
because I don't appreciate and respect the opposite gender, but because
that's not who or what I am.
Listen to the entire phrase of the song:
"Men of Alpha Phi Omega, our fraternity."
"Men of Alpha Phi Omega, may we always be."
Where once both statements were accurate representations of who we =
were,
they are no longer accurate statements of who we ARE. We are NOT, with =
the
exception of a few chapters, an all male fraternity anymore. We are a
fraternity of diversity, representing all genders, races, religions, =
creeds,
colors, sexual orientations, species (if you count Kermit and Frank the
Frogs), and Nationalities. THAT is what makes us unique and special. We =
are
who we are so I cannot disagree with Brothers who wish to change our =
song to
more accurately reflect our identity. I will however oppose any =
arguments
that the words "fraternity" or "brother" cannot be used to define our
organization and its members.
If you've read this far, then I commend you for being open-minded =
enough to
listen to another side of the debate. Thank you for taking the time to =
hear
mine.
LFS,
Chris
