[10012] in APO-L
Re: Toast Song
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John N. Underwood)
Fri Nov 4 10:40:28 1994
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 1994 10:39:29 -0500
Reply-To: "John N. Underwood" <junderw@CS.CLEMSON.EDU>
From: "John N. Underwood" <junderw@CS.CLEMSON.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L%PURCCVM.BITNET@mitvma.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <9411041319.AA16861@cs.clemson.edu>
On Fri, 4 Nov 1994, Steven R. Crawford wrote:
> My point being, you join an organization to be a part of it, not to
> change it to what you want it to be.
People join APO because they believe in its ideals. However, they may
_also_ feel that there is room for improvement. E.g. 1976 - Brothers
chose to admit women. Obviously, they joined APO and _then_ decided
to change it to what they wanted it to be. This sort of thing has been
going on ever since APO was founded and will continue to do so as long
as APO exists. This is a _good_ thing, not something to be afraid of.
Change is one of the things that has made APO what it is today. It is
also one of the reasons that it is still around. Certainly not every
proposed change should be implemented. However, each one should be
considered and not casually dismissed because it is "new". One of the
traditions I have the most respect for in APO is well-considered change.
When a practice of APO alienates a large number of our own members, then
considering a change to that practice only makes sense. At the same time
we must be careful that whatever change we consider does not alienate
other members. We need to recognize that some compromise on _all_ sides
may be in the best interest. We should also try to understand each other's
points of view. When people say that gender-specific language is offensive,
try to find out why. Likewise, when people say that caving it to political
correctness and disregard for tradition is offensive, there is probably a
reason they are saying it. I strongly believe that with any problem, an
open mind and a willingness to listen will lead to a solution that makes
everyone happy.
With that said, I favor the "true to" proposal. I would not blindly
support any proposal just to get rid of "men of", but these words keep
to the spirit of the song very nicely and naturally. I support this change
regardless of the reasons behind it - it is an improvement.
--
John N. Underwood (junderw@cs.clemson.edu)
http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~junderw/apo/apo.html
(Gamma Lambda 1148 / Delta Kappa 432 / Life Member 13404)
