[24313] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Toast Song
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason Risner)
Tue May 25 14:58:50 2004
Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 14:58:34 -0400
Reply-To: Jason Risner <zoomer69@mail.com>
From: Jason Risner <zoomer69@mail.com>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <003801c44279$b0c89d30$aaedaf80@famtree>
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Gallagher [mailto:famtree@UDel.Edu]
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 1:00 PM
To: Jason Risner
Subject: Re: [APO-L] Toast Song
> The BSA policy regarding the politics surrounding it is to provide an
> experience pursuant to its purposes (not sure of exact quote) without
> exposing youth "to the politics of the day"
> How does this relate to APO? My SC believes pledges should not be
involved
> in intrachapter conflicts. By his reasoning, one could assume that they
> should not be aware of or put into other APO conflicts.
Good question. I'm not sure what BSA does is necessarily relevant here. I
see that policy as an attempt to prevent adult leaders from using the
children involved as pawns for their own agenda. Alpha Phi Omega is
different because the people who pledge are adults and can think for
themselves.
I can understand the desire of chapters to shield pledges from APO
conflicts - who hasn't seen pledges quit over politics in the chapter? But
the point of pledging is to train people to become brothers - and that means
accepting the fraternity for both the positive and the negative. I think the
burden is on the chapter to make sure there is enough positive experiences
in becoming a brother to overcome any negative aspects.
If a person doesn't like an aspect of the fraternity enough to leave, it's
just as easy to leave as a brother as it is to leave as a pledge. The
difference: you've wasted time and energy making that person a brother
instead of finding a pledge that will accept the fraternity for both the
good and bad.
> How is full understanding of the song possible by those who didn't see it
> change? If so, how does one educate oneself on the background?"
Learn your APO history. Make sure your chapter's education program exposes
the pledges to that history, and shows how that shaped and formed the
fraternity it is today. At a national level, make education on the history
and gathering that history a priority. That heritage, in large part, defines
who we are and what makes us different than other organizations.
It also provides insight for those who feel change is necessary, to get a
better understanding of what change is needed and how to accomplish it. To
paraphrase a famous quote, those who don't understand the mistakes made
before are bound to repeat them.
> A more "offensive" version [of the toast song] drawing dedicated
brothers...
> you mean people who overlook/see through it, seeing more in APO? Those
for
> a "more inclusive" version may be less dedicated? Why?
Yes - or to put it another way, a song that makes me care and want to be
more dedicated, despite (or possibly because of) elements that some may find
offensive.
"Member" is too generic, too sterile. It doesn't inspire. It doesn't create
passion. "Brother" conveys an entirely different meaning to me - that I'm
part of something special, exclusive. It inspires me to make the fraternity
special.
Yet it offends others who choose to see an entirely different meaning,
regardless of whether or not they understand what the meaning is supposed to
be. I feel the wording would be much less of an issue if chapters took the
time to educate themselves and their brothers (or prospective brothers)
about the song. But I digress.
Changing the song merely to be PC won't help the fraternity. Changing the
song in a way that is PC yet is as compelling (or more so) than what we
currently have will.
- Jason Risner
Epsilon Lambda alum
