[17799] in APO-L
Re: Role of alumni
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Howard Wolf)
Thu Nov 27 01:50:45 1997
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 1997 01:49:42 -0500
Reply-To: Howard Wolf <howardwolf@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
From: Howard Wolf <howardwolf@WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
To: Multiple recipients of list APO-L <APO-L@VM.CC.PURDUE.EDU>
> From: John Grossi <jgrossi@BBNPLANET.COM>
> Subject: Re: Your APO-L post about female members
>
> John R Hall wrote:
> > I as one Life member (and have the support from others with list growing) am
> > unable to support the national fraternity with funds as long as it practices
> > blatant discrimination.
>
> Brother Hall--
>
> I hesitate to get involved yet again in the discussion over this touchy
> issue, an issue that has been festering for 25 years. Everytime I open
> my mouth I feel like I'm punching a bowl of jello on this topic, but I'm
> feeling capricious so I'll throw my opinion in yet again. I feel the
> need to mention one thing that needs to be kept in mind by all of us
> alumni who continue to participate in this organization.
Much like Brother Grossi, I agree that the "all male" issue is a can of
worms that I would prefer not to get into, however I also agree with him
that Brother Hall's post brings up a totally different issue that the
alumni too often forget.
> This organization is run by the actives. We, the alumni, are here
> because they've not told us to go away. The ultimate authority in Alpha
> Phi Omega *IS* the National Convention, which is composed of the
> chapters. They are supreme.
AMEN!!! Note: As Brother Licata has already pointed out, technically
the Nat'l Board and an Alumnus Representative from each Region have
votes as a part of the National Convention, (however I believe that in
practice the Nat'l Board Members generally abstain from voting), but
even with only 60% chapter attendance, the active chapters have over 90%
of the voting power.
> I had four wonderous years as an Active Brother at Worcester
> Polytechnic Institute, and today I have the honour of advising the
> chapters and groups in three states and one Canadian Province. To me
> advising means I give the actives the information they need to make an
> intelligent decision, and then let them make the decision, just as
> someone let me make my own. Sometimes I may underline where my opinions
> are, but I certainly don't tell them what to do. That's the beauty of
> Alpha Phi Omega, we are an organization of the actives and are
> responsive to THEIR needs. Your needs and my needs do NOT matter, we are
> not active brothers.
It is the above paragraph that makes me enter this discussion. Let me
state that I support Brother Grossi's views regarding the role of alumni
100%. I would go one step further to suggest to chapters that they need
to remember this AND need to remind alumni when we forget this. I would
also suggest that we alumni who are serving as
advisors/Sectional/Regional/Nat'l roles need to remind ourselves of this
as well. If we are out-of-touch with the needs/desires/feelings of the
active brotherhood, how can we be of service to them?
I've heard it said (and I agree with the sentiment) that the alumni who
stay involved and take on the various leadership roles become their own
"chapters" especially at conferences and conventions. The reasoning for
this is because we often live in diverse areas of the
Section/Region/country, those are the few times when we have the
opportunity to see our fellow "chapter" brothers. However, we need to
be careful that we don't spend all of our time with each other, without
also interacting with the chapters, because if we do, how is our
presence at these conferences benefitting the "real chapters"? There
needs to be a balance.
> If the actives decide they want all-male chapters,
> it's there choice, and if you've got a
> problem with that, it's tough. This is leadership, making a decision and
> dealing with the consequences.
To steer away from the all-male issue, I offer the following ludicrous
example that would demonstrate very similar reactions: What if the
National Convention decided to drop the service aspect of the fraternity
and become a purely social fraternity? My personal reaction (as I'm
sure most if not all of you reading this would agree) to this would
probably be "SEE YA!" and I probably wouldn't continue to support the
fraternity through my time, energy, and money. HOWEVER, I would also
state that I would support the National Convention's right to make that
decision, much as I would despise it.
[As an aside, it's been said before, but I think it bears
repeating...those of us who have been on here for at least a year tend
to get frustrated when someone brings up the various hot issues (e.g.
All Male, Toast Song, BSA, Gender-specific language, etc.) yet again.
However, it usually is someone NEW to APO-L that brings it up. They
haven't been through it before. Remember, the average length of a
brother being involved with the fraternity is 18 months (I'm not certain
of the exactness of this stat but from personal observations it appears
about right). If the "old-timers" (especially alumni) show our
frustration because we've been through these discussions before, we too
often end up imposing our views as opposed to offering our opinions on
the subjects.]
Just to be sure that I have been clear. My feelings are as follows (and
they transcend APO to society and those little rights and freedoms
mentioned in those documents called the U.S. Constitution and the Bill
of Rights):
1) Everyone has a right to their own personal opinions/feelings. If
this means supporting or not supporting APO with
time/energy/money/resources that is your given right and I'll support it
even if I disagree with it.
2) No one has the right to impose their personal opinions/feelings on
someone else (be it those in regards to APO or something totally
unrelated such as religious beliefs), if you do, I'll fight you even if
I agree with you.
Howard Wolf
Section 59 Chair
