University of Alabama - “ peak neo-antebellum white Southern culture” - NYT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of this reaction has to do with people being offended at the notion of a “white culture” being described at all.

Try again. It's fine to describe white culture, but if you're writing for The NY Times, you need to provide some stats, not just your feels.

I mean she has some stats and cites to legal investigations

Of The Machine. Which is not a white sorority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

That’s quite an interpretive leap you made there

No answers, just insults again, hmmm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand the repeated Karen references.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

Numerous links are included in the Op-Ed.

Was the term "Karen" even used in the article?

[Anonymous]

Thanks for posting, great article. Nice distillation of a phenomenon, I've tried my best to ignore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

Numerous links are included in the Op-Ed.

Was the term "Karen" even used in the article?

Cottom did not provide any links that document discrimination at Alabama. Or any links that make the connection between these sororities and becoming a woman who wields power anywhere. Go ahead and read Cottom's links and see for yourself.

Cottom linked to articles about the cultural phenomenon. She linked to attempts (sometimes mostly white according Cottom's NY Times link, go figure) to integrate and institute affirmative action at the sororities and fraternities. Links about The Machine, which, in case you need to be reminded, is not a sorority.

Of course Cottom didn't say "Karen," that's just shorthand for the particular way Cottom is going after white women. As you knew. Look, I'm a progressive and wouldn't want my daughter to join a sorority, especially not these sororities. But you do get my hackles up when you trash white women with no "there" there. If Cottom can document her arguments I'll back her 100%, but she doesn't even try, and that's a problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Exactly. And BTW Dr. Cottom would probably rather be critically thinking and writing about black sororities in an academic journal than writing about ‘Bama rush. She made her lack of interest in white sorority girls pretty clear, which is probably offensive to some of them. Hence the outrage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Exactly. And BTW Dr. Cottom would probably rather be critically thinking and writing about black sororities in an academic journal than writing about ‘Bama rush. She made her lack of interest in white sorority girls pretty clear, which is probably offensive to some of them. Hence the outrage.

So disinterested that she wrote a column about it? I don't think so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t even like the Greek system and I thought that article sounded incredibly petulant and whiny.

+100
No fan of the Greek system here, but that author is clearly insanely jealous.

I mean that’s how grievance culture works. You have to advance a grievance…in perpetuity. Her article is so de rigeur right now. It smacks of pettiness and jealousy, but it’ll get clicks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t even like the Greek system and I thought that article sounded incredibly petulant and whiny.

+100
No fan of the Greek system here, but that author is clearly insanely jealous.

I mean that’s how grievance culture works. You have to advance a grievance…in perpetuity. Her article is so de rigeur right now. It smacks of pettiness and jealousy, but it’ll get clicks.

Thanks to y’all. I’m not sure why you’re promoting this piece by complaining about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

she does actually discuss stats and link to a couple of legal investigations. but again she’s not writing a legal brief. read the whole article, it’s good. you’re not progressive if you can’t tolerate a discussion of the racial aspects of all-white sororities in Alabama! I don’t like “Karen” either but that’s not what this is. among other things you are completely missing the gender/class analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

she does actually discuss stats and link to a couple of legal investigations. but again she’s not writing a legal brief. read the whole article, it’s good. you’re not progressive if you can’t tolerate a discussion of the racial aspects of all-white sororities in Alabama! I don’t like “Karen” either but that’s not what this is. among other things you are completely missing the gender/class analysis.

Are you serious? She gives stats about the lack of integration. She never gives stats about the reasons for that lack or any serious gender/class/racial analysis. Which is why she leaves us with the insinuation that it's because they're ... white women.

And yes, I'm totally fine with criticism of white women--when it's justified with actual evidence. Start a thread about the Trump women's career choices, show us that Tiffany has a law degree she doesn't bother to use, and I'm right there with you.

You should have the same standards too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gawd, the obsession that some people have with a bunch of college kids who just want to make friends and have fun (and yes, meet boys…how shocking that college girls want to do that!). It’s not that deep. If you don’t like it, don’t participate.

I mean exactly. I have no kid at Bama or in a sorority but come on, the girls are very attractive. Stop making like it is a bad thing to be attractive.

This is true through sororities including Black ones. The conformity about beauty and behavior is the same.

Dr Cottom as an intersectional thinker would have lots to say about how gendered/racialized/class beauty standards play out at black sororities. However this article is not about black sororities and black sorority rush is not a Tik Tok global trend.

Intersectionality is fine.

You still can’t make claims about your corner of the world (“white sororities perpetuate the white patriarchy”) without at least trying to get us from point A to point B using facts and evidence.

And you still can’t generalize to sweeping claims about how all Greeks are bad after you’ve peered at a handful of white sororities.

This is the NYT, not the UNC student newspaper.

yes you can make claims that all-white sororities in Alabama have something to do with race without using data. now you ARE being stupid.

You're being deliberately obtuse.

Cottom is making two implied claims. I say "implied" because she doesn't provide facts or evidence for either of them.
(1) These white sororities DISCRIMINATE against black women. It should be obvious to you that it's impossible to argue there's a racial power imbalance without showing black women can't join these white sororities.
and
(2) these white sorority women actually get power of their own via the sororities, instead of "branding" or marrying it.

Cottom provides zero evidence for either claim. Re claim (1), transparently side-steps the whole affinity-group thing that some of her defenders here claim actually make black women want to AVOID these white sororities. In fact Cottom concludes with "who would want to integrate that?", effectively underscoring the idea that black women want nothing to do with these white sororities.

So it's quite a leap to conclude that all white sororities (all white fraternities too?) should be abolished because black women don't want to participate in them. That makes zero sense.

It's an Op-Ed, not a research paper.

It's The NY Times, not the UNC school newspaper. Even David Brooks (a total clown, although I appreciate he's parted from the MAGAs) uses stats and facts. Go to The NY Times Opinion page today, and everybody else has a ton of hyperlinks supporting their theses.

Like pp, I'm a progressive who is tired that Karen has become acceptable and those who use it aren't even required to give reasons for slinging it.

she does actually discuss stats and link to a couple of legal investigations. but again she’s not writing a legal brief. read the whole article, it’s good. you’re not progressive if you can’t tolerate a discussion of the racial aspects of all-white sororities in Alabama! I don’t like “Karen” either but that’s not what this is. among other things you are completely missing the gender/class analysis.

Are you serious? She gives stats about the lack of integration. She never gives stats about the reasons for that lack or any serious gender/class/racial analysis. Which is why she leaves us with the insinuation that it's because they're ... white women.

And yes, I'm totally fine with criticism of white women--when it's justified with actual evidence. Start a thread about the Trump women's career choices, show us that Tiffany has a law degree she doesn't bother to use, and I'm right there with you.

You should have the same standards too.

unlike you, I don’t need the assertion that white Alabama sororities have something to do with race something that needs to be proven by Einstein in order to be mentioned in an opinion piece.