Interesting Comments............what some grad members REALLY think of undergrads......

Well folks, directly after my previous update to the Times, comments started flooding my mailbox concerning the article on the proposal that was put before the NPHC (if you ain't read it yet, you need to- click HERE) to abolish undergraduate intake. I can honestly say that all the mail I've gotten was positive- with ONE blaring exception, which I just could't let slide by without sharing. This came thru the NPHC listserver on June 5th from a certain Executive Director of another NPHC organization who's name I will not mention.

Before I move forward, I'd like to give mention to an article in the new Black Issues in Higher Education- go to the library or peep around your Administration Building. The cover title is "Broken Pledges: Can the 'Membership Intake' Process Stop Fraternity Violence". I have a copy of the article in the mail on it's way to me (thanks Walter!!) and I recommend that ALL greeks (grad and undergrad) read thru it. I haven't read it yet, but from what I hear, my timing with my article her on the TIMES couldn't have been more perfect!!

Knowledge is POWER. Stay informed, stay alert, stay financial and VOTE!!!!

On to the letter.............

this came in response to someone on the nphc listserve that read my article here on the TIMES.

Date: Thu, Jun 5, 1997 3:07 AM EDT

While I can not take issue with what my friend Frater Womack stated at his regional conference, the NPHC does not have the authority or power to impose its will on any of the constituent member organizations. There is a large misconception about what NPHC is and what it can do. The power to govern them rest in the hands of the member organizations. There has not been any discussion that I am aware of regarding this matter. The article was inflammatory in part and the information reported was incorrect. I understand the rest of it was an opinion piece. To be credible your articles need to based on accurate accounts and true facts. NOW FOR THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM!!!!! Undergraduate chapters are eliminating themselves everyday with their at-risk behavior. The colleges and universities can not afford the risk. There is a move under foot by college and universities to not recognize groups with houses nor groups that have parties and do not have million dollar plus insurance policies. You know where that leaves NPHC groups. We need to wake up and recognize...!

Date: Fri, Jun 6, 1997 2:00 AM EDT

Y'all knew a response was coming, don't act suprised. :)

Get the popcorn, this is a long one.

Bro. *********,

You'll mind my slight humor and sarcasm at your expense- your obnoxiously STANK attitude and blatant transfer of blame to undergraduates and trivialization of the issue in your previous letter has brought out my evil twin tonight, and he'll be responding on my behalf.

> the NPHC does not have the authority or power to

>impose its will on any of the constituent member organizations. There is a

>large misconception about what NPHC is and what it can do. The power to

>govern them rest in the hands of the member organizations.

Well DUH- who do you think runs the NPHC? If the NPHC Council of Presidents votes unanimously to accept a proposal (a la February 1990--u sure Walter? I could've sworn the decision was made in 89 and was to take effect in 90....) as our elected officers they are empowered to act on behalf of the entire organization (as they did with the whole pledging/intake thang). I'm not as moronic as you sound; I know all the member organizations need to AGREE on it- (just like Omega Psi Phi had a moratorium on the issue and didn't accept it directly in 1990 until later.......) and even if 8/9 agree, the ninth one still doesn't have to enforce it (I may be a bit shaky on this part- somebody e-mail me an NPHC constitution).

>There has not

>been any discussion that I am aware of regarding this matter. The article

>was inflammatory in part and the information reported was incorrect.

Back up homie. No discussion that YOU were aware of. On the flip side, I've gotten confirmation from three regions and several national officers that such a discussion did take place- and since I didn't see your name listed as being anything or anyone official in neither the Winter 95-96 Edition of the Crescent on page 28 nor the Spring/Summer Edition of the Crescent for 1996 on page 26 and you're not able to take issue with what Carter said, AND the fact that I just got off the phone with my National 2nd Vice President Abby Raymond, I will go on to say that I heard it from offical sources for my organization--------- and unless information to the contrary is supplied from my organization, I'm going to take it as being official.

Furthermore, since you can't take issue with what Carter said and you're not aware of any meeting that YOU know of, how can you say that the information I'm relaying is incorrect?

>I understand the rest of it was an opinion piece. To be credible your

>articles need to based on accurate accounts and true facts.

I'm quite credible- you just need to be schooled. How long have you had your compuserve account? :) National HQ sends ME events and announcements to post on the ZPBSTimes website and disseminate via e-mail, since my Sigma-Zeta mailing database contains over 700+ people AND I run the ZPBS National E-mail database, which both our current International President and the Former Grand Baselius for Zeta Phi Beta Sorority have registered their names on thereby giving tacit approval. (which reminds me- I'll also be updating the format of the list shortly so new registrations show up immediately).

>NOW FOR THE CRUX OF THE PROBLEM!!!!! Undergraduate chapters are >eliminating themselves everyday with their at-risk behavior.

BOVINE SCATULATION and I'm about to tell you why. The CRUX of the problem is not with undergrads eliminating themselves- where'd they learn all this LOVELY behavior from, Mr. Executive Director? One of my sorors made a wonderful point on the ZPBSTimes discussion board recently- the FIRST people to try and suspend someone were some of the SAME GRADUATE CHAPTERS that were hazing undergrads and teaching them to haze (NOT PLEDGE- there is a difference). To blame undergrads exclusively is to understate and misunderstand the entire issue at hand. There's more than just illegal intake involved here-- The CRUX of the problem lies in the following:

A. GRADUATE MEMBER DISCRIMINATION against undergraduates. Do as I say, not as I've done. It's real trife how many of the graduate members are all willing to hollar at their undergraduate chapters about what they need to do, and if they don't, they get suspended, yet and still the same does NOT hold true at the other end of the spectrum. See, if I was Steve Cokely, I'd probably say there was a conspiracy afoot to purposely discourage undergraduates from participating in the political process (location of conferences, hotels chosen, topics discussed, registration fees, membership dues from year to year, laws which state you need to be in the organization FOREVER before you can hold a regional or national position, etc....etc....), but that would be WAAY too easy.

B. LACK OF COMMUNICATION between undergraduate and graduate chapters- the blame lies on BOTH sides in this one, but the burden lies upon the graduate chapter, since they're SUPPOSED to be advising the chapter---and advising a chapter doesn't mean that you come in, say "do this, this and this, or you're suspended" and then leaving- advising is an ongoing process where the advisor builds a trustworthy relationship with the chapter, much the same as a son has with his father to the point where they can be FRIENDS and still maintain who's who. If some of these advisors that are NOT doing their jobs would establish this type of relationship with their chapters, trust would be built and the advisor could actually ADVISE the chapter on do's and don't's. Instead, we're left with a large level of mistrust between undergrads and grads- grads having a stereotype of undergrads (which in most cases, comes from guilt regarding things that THEY did as an undergrad to potential members and others.......) that they can't be trusted and undergrads having the impression of graduate members being straight up HYPOCRITES (see point A and B.S. above) and only out to suspend somebody or snatch somebody's letters. Neither one's communicating........

Since the graduate chapter is supposed to be advising, the burden of opening up lines of communication falls upon THEM. Instead of barking down laws and statues, go spend some time, talk and get to know your undergrads. Show them HOW to make a brother (not a MEMBER) without breaking his leg/arm/neck/insert your body part here and how to build a bond between him/her and his /her line and the rest of the chapter.

I'm an education major- we been through the whole human growth and development thang and all the signs of a healthy family as well as parenting styles----and the number one sign of a healthy family is communication because it when both parties or ALL parites know how each other is feeling and thinking, respect and trust automatically grow. The best parenting style (terminology dependent on who's school of though you follow) is AUTHORITATIVE- and being an advisor is no different. Authoritative (NOT AUTHORITARIAN) basically means that although laws are in place, the child's (or in this case the chapter's) feelings, wants and needs are taken into account in decisions which are made. Mutual respect for the parent (advisor) is built up within the child (chapter) so that the motivation for not breaking the rules and protecting the chapter becomes INTRINSIC (based on personal conviction) rather than EXTRINSIC (based on not wanted to endure the consequences).

(damn, why didn't remember all this on the exam?????)

C. Putting a BAND-AID over a GUNSHOT WOUND-- to use the same illustration I used in my article. You're an intelligent man- did you realistically think that pledging would just MYSTERIOUSLY dissapear after 1990??? REALITY CHECK- it's been there for decades before YOU were born and to act like an ostrich and hide your head in the sand and say that pledging and hazing would no longer occur after Feb. 1990 is both ludicrous and unrealistic. In fact, MORE chapters have gotten snatched and MORE suspensions, injuries and LAWSUITS have occured SINCE 1990-------so (QUESTION FOR THE LIST) what good has HONESTLY come out of eliminating above ground pledging???

Somebody on the list (besides me) made a good point a while ago when that mail about the white fraternity that was eliminating alcohol from their houses---they were doing so in STAGES. Folks ain't got no patience and want everything at once (that's the point that was made) and want instant gratification. Once again I say that MAYBE if the NPHC would've decided to PHASE OUT pledging over a period of time, we wouldn't be at the SORRY state we're at now.

Side note on the intake process- a lot people wouldn't have so much of a problem with it if HISTORY was STRESSED and the intake education period was longer so that we could observe and bond with our new "frat" and "sorors"..........

D. THE INTAKE PROCESS- all of a sudden, anyone with grades and the gpa can become a brother or soror---we've gotten a LOT more shirt-wearers since 1990 than in years previous---it should NOT be easy to join a fraternity or sorority: it shouldn't be LIFE-THREATENING either, but it should be set up to still screen members out. Most of you won't just let anyone into your real family......so why just let anyone into your organization? How can you call yourself my "soror" and not even know my birthdate? Or how can you call yourself my "frat" and not even know all the founders? I done seen graduate chapters only be concerned about whether or not the individuals paid their money and whether or not they're financial and that's it- no history, no time spent teaching, nuffin'. Make me sick to my stomach. I'd like to see ONE person on this list who would NOT be disgusted if they met someone who didn't know the basic history of the organization (stuff that you can find on the INTERNET)- like the FOUNDER'S NAMES and the FOUNDING DATE. Yet and still, some chapters in ALL 9 of our organizations choose to bypass this and only be concerned about the money.

Another point is that there's no bonding. Most people coming in under a straight intake process don't know each other.....or the brothers/sorors in the chapter....and when they do get to know a little something, most of them don't like each other (can we say SPLIT CHAPTER?)--not that this didn't exist before, but it's gotten worse with not being able to screen new members better. I think DST is probably the only ones with a better structured process---if I'm correct, if a potential member doesn't attend I THINK 85% of the membership classes they will NOT become a member of the organization (please correct me if I'm wrong).

Not to sound like the elitist talented tenth, but are we clubs, where membership is based on dues and superficial qualifications, or are we brotherhoods and sisterhoods where membership is a special thing to be cherished and where many are called but the chosen are few?

>The colleges and universities can not

>afford the risk. There is a move under foot by college and universities to

>not recognize groups with houses nor groups that have parties and do not

>have million dollar plus insurance policies. You know where that leaves

>NPHC groups. We need to wake up and recognize...!

This last part I can agree with you on- we do need to wake up--------which is EXACTLY why I wrote my article in the first place!! I'll grab the exact figures later, but we all know that the heart of the organization is the undergraduate chapter. There isn't a person on this list who didn't get exposure to fraternities and sororities in their undergraduate years in one form or another (with the exception of possible honorary members who might be reading this). If there wasn't an undergraduate chapter at your campus, I'd dare venture to say that 99% of you wouldn't be subscribed to this list today (Either you got interested in undergrad and went grad or you came in thru undergrad).

What we NEED to do is start focusing on publicizing in our local and national media EVERYTHING that we (all of our organizations) do in the area of service to the community, no matter how small or how big. Y'all done figured me out already- my line names (PrimeTime alias Spotlight) were given for a reason- the reason being that I'm going to take Charles' job as director of publicity :) --seriously, if we FLOODED the media with all of the work that our organizations do (persistence and annoyance), it would help to stem the tide of negative information being flooded into the media concerning African-Americans and particularly BGLO's.

Thanks for reading my book. Hope you're not taking any of this personal Bro. *******......I'm just EXTREMELY outspoken and highly opinionated. The issue is a lot broader than what you made it appear to be......in fact, it's a lot broader than what I stated it to be, but my little essay here (soon to be featured on my website) got enough of it's point across.

I'm going to bed now. I have ANOTHER long day ahead of me.

(end e-mail here)