[15417] in APO-L
Debating the actual open membership proposals
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Reuben ``Fuzz'' Hochstedler)
Sun Nov 10 02:25:13 1996
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 1996 02:22:13 -0500
Reply-To: "Reuben ``Fuzz'' Hochstedler" <hochstrd@CS.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
From: "Reuben ``Fuzz'' Hochstedler" <hochstrd@CS.ROSE-HULMAN.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
Well we've discussed them quite a bit, would anyone like to take an
actual LOOK at the resolutions being discussed? Well, if you don't,
skip this message.
There are actualy three resolutions that relate to this issue, they
are labeled R-7, R-8 and R-13 and they all must pass through the
Chapter Operations reference committee. The text of these proposals
was taken from the URL:
http://www.odu.edu/~src/APhiO/Convention/Packet/Resolutions.html
----
Robert E. Lee Correll, IV, Region III Director Chapter Operations
John Conover, Jr., Region III Extension Coordinator Reference #: R-5
Mike Ogilvie, Region III Parliamentarian
Jamie Conover, Section 81 Chair
Diane Trafton, Section 83 Chair
Lee Peters, Section 84 Chair
Michael Leahy, Zeta Beta Advisor
Linda Prevatte, Alpha Delta Delta Advisor
Be it resolved that:
Any perceived agreement allowing gender discrimination, commonly
referred to as the "1976 Gentleman's Agreement", authorizing all-male
chapters at co-educational institutions, is no longer in force and is
to be considered null and void.
Rationale:
The National Convention is the supreme authority of the National
Fraternity, and is never bound by past decisions. Therefore, the
Fraternity has the right to reevaluate the actions of previous
conventions, and the obligation to enforce the Fraternity's open
membership policies.
--------
Robert E. Lee Correll, IV, Region III Director Chapter Operations
John Conover, Jr., Region III Extension Coordinator Reference #: R-6
Mike Ogilvie, Region III Parliamentarian
Jamie Conover, Section 81 Chair
Diane Trafton, Section 83 Chair
Lee Peters, Section 84 Chair
Michael Leahy, Zeta Beta Advisor
Linda Prevatte, Alpha Delta Delta Advisor
Be it resolved that:
This convention reaffirms the "1976 Gentleman's Agreement" allowing or
authorizing the continuation of all-male chapters at co-educational
institutions chartered before 1976.
Rationale:
The National Convention is the supreme authority of the National
Fraternity and is never bound by past decisions. The Fraternity has
the right and obligation to reaffirm the right of a chapter to
discriminate based on gender.
----
Submitted by M. Tomusiak, National Board Member at Large Chapter Operations
Reference #: R-13
Proposal:
Be it resolved that every Chapter of Alpha Phi Omega shall review its
membership policies with respect to the exclusion of potential members
based on gender, and by the 1998 National Convention, take action to
open membership to all students.
Rationale:
Banning students of either gender on co-ed campuses is contrary to the
open membership policy stated in our Bylaws, and inconsistent with the
Fraternity ideals of world-wide Leadership, Friendship and
Service. least of the equality proposals
----
Everything I am about to type is hereby disclaimed with IMHO:
As I stated in an earlier message, the first resolution to be
effective would have to result in bylaws and scaa ammendments
disallowing chapters to determine their own membership. If the Rules
and Credentials reference committee agrees with me on this, it won't
be allowed to reach the floor because it attempts to force a change
without the % affirmative vote that should be required.
The second resolution on the other hand would change absolutely
nothing. As they currently read, our bylaws, scaa and published
membership policies allow chapters to determine their own membership.
If it changes nothing then it wouldn't matter how the vote turned
out. It would be like passing a resolution reaffirming that our
colors are blue & gold. Even if it failed our colors would still be
blue & gold. I.e., it's pointless.
The third resolution listed hasn't really been one of focus in our
"debate" (and I use that term very loosely) on APO-L so far. After
just a bit of rewording this one might actually stand a chance of
making it to the floor. Currently it would have each chapter review
its stance on "the exclusion of potential members based on gender",
notice that this is ALL chapters. The rewording comes at the next
point since currently the resolution would force chapters to "open
membership to all students" by the 1998 Nat Con, regardless of the
outcome of the review. If that's the case, why the review?
With the last half of the sentence struck out, this would be a very
non-controversial, easy-to-pass resolution. It would ask each chapter
individually to honestly review their own membership policies and
reevaluate their worth, effectiveness and rationale. This could not
possibly do any harm, perceived or otherwise. It would be quite
brotherly actually!
----
Some other points. I find it... interesting that the three
resolutions above all come from ALUMNI (in the case of the first two,
a lot of alumni, but alumni nonetheless). If this is really such a
hot topic, then why isn't any such proposal coming from the undergrads
themselves?
No one likes change forced upon them by an outsider who hasn't
attempted to see it from their point of view. No one. It makes you
feel like you have no control over your own destiny. However, a
little compassion and empathy can be used to _suggest_ change with far
better results. When you have _choice_ you feel that you still
control your own destiny. It may take more time, but it will be much
more effective.
----
I would like everyone to notice that I have not made my own opinions
on the "emotional side" of this issue, or "how I would vote" known,
and that I won't. I am merely attempting to point out important
aspects of this issue that others are glossing over or ignoring
completely. As an alumnus I do not believe it is my place to voice my
personal opinion on a subject that only directly effects the
undergrads. It is my place to assist the undergrads in their attempt
to understand the different aspects of the issues thus allowing them
to make well-informed decisions. I encourage other alumni/ae to do
likewise, this fraternity really belongs to the undergrads, after we
graduated, we hang around at their discretion and to assist them in
guiding the fraternity forward.
InLFS,
Reuben "Fuzz" Hochstedler
+-- Current ---------------------------------------------------------------+
| mailto:hochstrd@eecs.umich.edu http://www.cs.rose-hulman.edu/~hochstrd/ |
| http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~hochstrd/ mailto:hochstrd@cs.rose-hulman.edu |
+------------------------------------------------------------- Permanent --+
