[24330] in APO-L
Re: [APO-L] Toast Song: Tradition versus the 21st Century
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason Rice)
Sat May 29 10:32:59 2004
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 07:32:42 -0700
Reply-To: Jason Rice <moonbug76@yahoo.com>
From: Jason Rice <moonbug76@yahoo.com>
To: APO-L@LISTSERV.IUPUI.EDU
In-Reply-To: <127.421cbb2b.2de9add0@aol.com>
--0-2068152733-1085841162=:17536
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
This seems to be a little overstated. There may be some who are for not changing the Toast Song due to tradition, but I think there is more behind it for most of them, even if they do not know how to express it.
It is more than a "this is how it has always been; we can't change it" thing. We are a fraternity; both men and women know this when joining. They also know that in fraternities people are called brothers. Why is this upseting to people? And if it is, why do you join? It seems one does not join an organization whose basic beliefs and actions are not something you agree with.
I wonder if we should change the terms of all things that people see as offensive due to the reference to man (or men). We have went from mankind to human kind (though this still contains the word man); chairman has been changed to chairperson; they have talked about changing manhole cover to something else, but they aren't sure what. Next we need to change the word woman. It seems that man makes up a majority of that word, and should be considered to be sexist due to this. What should we change it to?
I agree with what Jessie said. If we change too much of an organization, we lose what makes us different than the others. If you don't want to be a brother don't join a fraternity. If you are male and join a soroity, I would expect you to be a sister. This is not done to promote one gender over the other. This in know way is saying that women aren't important or that they don't have the same liberties and privilages as men. It means that we are all one, and no one is better than the other. When you start using different words, you start getting into the "separate but equal" argument. It seems to be human nature to rank things. It is easy to rank sisters as lower when they are called sisters. While it can still be done, it is a little harder to do when we are all brothers.
I say this as a male femanist (though definitely not to the extreme, as that brings about sexism on the other end.)
Irwin Chui <Chewster97@aol.com> wrote:
Dearest Brothers:
You know, people "once said" that women should not join the U.S. Armed Forces, because it is a "traditional" male organization, along with the dangers of the enemy raping, having forced sex, or torturing a women prisoner of war that is unbearable to see or know about.
Well, look now...approx. 25% to 30% of the current U.S. military in Iraq are composed of women. Women that are willing to bear the ultimate sacrifice, just like their male counterparts.
The Toast Song debate has become a civil war affair between tradition versus global inclusive respect in the 21st century.
So, in that case, if the U.S. were to follow "tradition", just like what the proponets of the Toast Song in keeping "men of", why shouldn't the U.S. just do the following below:
1. Repeal the 19th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which allows women to vote.
2. Ban all homosexuals, lesbians, and transgenders, because religion explains traditionally it should be both a male and female.
3. Most importantly, abolish the 13th amenment of the U.S. Constitution, and impose slavery of people once again, because traditionally, the majority race should rule, just like motto of the Nazi German party.
Yes, in all fairness and justice, are we really the number # 1 service fraternity in the world? or do we just say that, because we can't and won't admit that tradition is much better off than equality. What kind of positive example and interpretation are we setting and sending to the younger generations around the world?
In LFS,
Irwin Chui
Section 4
Region X
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger
--0-2068152733-1085841162=:17536
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
<DIV>This seems to be a little overstated. There may be some who are for not changing the Toast Song due to tradition, but I think there is more behind it for most of them, even if they do not know how to express it. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is more than a "this is how it has always been; we can't change it" thing. We are a fraternity; both men and women know this when joining. They also know that in fraternities people are called brothers. Why is this upseting to people? And if it is, why do you join? It seems one does not join an organization whose basic beliefs and actions are not something you agree with. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I wonder if we should change the terms of all things that people see as offensive due to the reference to man (or men). We have went from mankind to human kind (though this still contains the word man); chairman has been changed to chairperson; they have talked about changing manhole cover to something else, but they aren't sure what. Next we need to change the word woman. It seems that man makes up a majority of that word, and should be considered to be sexist due to this. What should we change it to?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree with what Jessie said. If we change too much of an organization, we lose what makes us different than the others. If you don't want to be a brother don't join a fraternity. If you are male and join a soroity, I would expect you to be a sister. This is not done to promote one gender over the other. This in know way is saying that women aren't important or that they don't have the same liberties and privilages as men. It means that we are all one, and no one is better than the other. When you start using different words, you start getting into the "separate but equal" argument. It seems to be human nature to rank things. It is easy to rank sisters as lower when they are called sisters. While it can still be done, it is a little harder to do when we are all brothers.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I say this as a male femanist (though definitely not to the extreme, as that brings about sexism on the other end.)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR><B><I>Irwin Chui <Chewster97@aol.com></I></B> wrote:</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=replbq style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid"><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 face=Arial size=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" PTSIZE="10">Dearest Brothers:<BR><BR>You know, people "once said" that women should not join the U.S. Armed Forces, because it is a "traditional" male organization, along with the dangers of the enemy raping, having forced sex, or torturing a women prisoner of war that is unbearable to see or know about.<BR><BR>Well, look now...approx. 25% to 30% of the current U.S. military in Iraq are composed of women. Women that are willing to bear the ultimate sacrifice, just like their male counterparts.<BR><BR>The Toast Song debate has become a civil war affair between tradition versus global inclusive respect in the 21st century.<BR><BR>So, in that case, if the U.S. were to follow "tradition", just like what the proponets of the Toast Song in keeping "men of", why shouldn't the U.S. just do the following
below:<BR><BR>1. Repeal the 19th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which allows women to vote.<BR><BR>2. Ban all homosexuals, lesbians, and transgenders, because religion explains traditionally it should be both a male and female.<BR><BR>3. Most importantly, abolish the 13th amenment of the U.S. Constitution, and impose slavery of people once again, because traditionally, the majority race should rule, just like motto of the Nazi German party.<BR><BR>Yes, in all fairness and justice, are we really the number # 1 service fraternity in the world? or do we just say that, because we can't and won't admit that tradition is much better off than equality. What kind of positive example and interpretation are we setting and sending to the younger generations around the world?<BR><BR><BR>In LFS,<BR><BR>Irwin Chui<BR>Section 4 <BR>Region
X<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT><p>
<hr size=1><font face=arial size=-1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>Friends. Fun. <a href="http://messenger.yahoo.com/">Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger</a>
--0-2068152733-1085841162=:17536--
