An Open Letter to my Sorors: Why VH1's "Sorority Sisters" is Unacceptable!

Dearest Sorors,

 Many of you are already aware of the upcoming reality show “Sorority Sisters” that will premier next week. Considering the history of black reality shows on VH1, I am not interested in giving this show a chance to tarnish the legacy of our Founders, nor the good work being done daily within this organization.  Having a soror on a reality show, where the basis of the show is set up to amplify negative rivalries (and antiquated stereotypes of Black Greek Lettered Organizations) does nothing positive for Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Incorporated.

When I initially became a member of this organization, the first (and most important) lesson that I was taught was that I was now a part of something larger than just myself.  Which meant I no longer only represented myself. Anything in regards to my advertising of the organization; wearing my letters, participating in service projects, attending events or even simply telling someone that I was a Zeta came with a certain level of accountability.

It was always to be considered that my words, actions, and interactions could be a positive or negative reflection of Zeta. I understood that it was my responsibility to be cognizant of this and not bring any disgrace upon the organization to which I now belonged. This should be the uncompromising standard in regards to anyone wishing to publicly advertise affiliation with our organization (especially on a television show).

There are some who wish to justify this blatant disrespect by arguing that another Soror (Syleena Johnson) was on a reality show as well, so why not give the “Sorority Sisters” show a chance? Well Soror Johnson is a singer, and the show was about her life and career as a singer (not her life as a Zeta). The show was not premised around her affiliation with Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc. and herein lies the problem with “Sorority Sisters”:

If this Soror was simply just on a regular reality show being herself, then I wouldn’t be writing this letter. On this show, this particular Soror is “The Zeta” (or living caricature of what the producers think a Zeta woman should be). Because of that, inadvertently she becomes the ‘face’ of Zeta that will be portrayed nationally and that does not sit well with many of us. I do not know her; she could be a very good person. However, the network hosting the television show (VH1) is notorious for propagating reality shows that result in black women being represented in the worst light.  So this gives me great concern. Although the show’s producer is a black woman (Mona Scott-Harris), she clearly is not interested in the grievances expressed, nor the countless petitions signed when it was first discovered that she was going to do this show.

I do not know how our elders will choose to respond but I implore that something be done. We may not be able to tell someone they cannot do a show, but can it not be mandated that our organization’s name, shield, likeness, and paraphernalia not be authorized for use in connection to this show? Large companies demand it all the time (i.e. why no logo’s or emblems are seen on movies and shows unless the show is paying to advertise it). What would have to be done so that the perception of our organization does not rest on the shoulders of one person whose integrity and character will be predictably compromised and provoked for the sake of television ratings?

I cannot speak for any of the other divine nine organizations being represented in this farce of a show, but as a member of this community-conscious, action-oriented organization I cannot remain silent. This show is not only detrimental to the reputation of our organization, but also that of the women in our community as well. So at the very least, let us not dignify this. Let us not watch, not feed the ratings and allow it to die on its own.

 Sisterly,

Neffer-Oduntunde A. Kerr

Zeta Phi Beta Sorority, Inc.

Tau Psi Zeta

'The 'Selfie' Syndrome'

‘The 'Selfie' Syndrome’

 So recently, there was this big debate about the psychological ramifications of people who indulge (or overindulge) in the act of taking---and posting--- ‘selfies’.

When it comes to Social Media, there is a gamut of ‘disorders’ one could diagnose many online offenders with. Since we are so quick to coin new terms when it comes to ‘disorders’ (real or fictional) here are a few I have encountered:

1) Internet ‘thugs’ with their “Online Courage Disorder”. This disorder seems to magically delude individuals sitting behind computer screens into thinking they have grown a pair of balls. Saying things they could never do if the person were standing in their face. This by far is one of more severe disorders in the DSM-IV-OF (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders of Online Fuckery).

2) Or how about the “Foodpornophiles” who can’t seem to eat so much as a potato chip without posting it for the world to see. We get it, you like food. That’s cool, but it also comes across as you being basic and showing us all that you have never been anywhere nice until now (since we’re pointing out online disorders).

3) Maybe we should seek to help the masses (you know who you are) suffering from the epidemic of chronic “Glued to my Phone Syndrome”. These poor drones can’t even enjoy a party or evening out with their friends (as they are compelled to sit in silence next to one another tweeting about how much “fun” they are all having…. I can’t tell).

The above mentioned, along with other soon-to-be invented online ‘disorders’, can be attributed to the over usage of social media. So with all the online ‘disorders’ out there, I don’t quite understand why the attack on ‘selfies’.

Some would say that those who constantly post ‘selfies’ do it for attention (or likes). That they are insecure and looking for the approval of others while deep down inside having little self-esteem and self worth. 

Well I say HOGWASH! 

There will ALWAYS be people who do things for that kind of attention (i.e. the naked bathroom thirst trap ‘selfie’), but those are also the same people who do that kind of stuff in REAL life as well. To say that the ‘selfie’ is a direct reflection of that need for attention is complete and utter foolishness. Those people already had underlying issues with their esteem and self worth before they even downloaded that Instagram app! 

Do I like ‘Selfies’? Hell yeah! How else am I to capture my awesomeness and share it with the world through the perfect filter *insert pseudo-sarcastic tone*. But seriously, when I post a ‘selfie’ I’m expressing how I may be feeling in that moment. It’s not my fault I’m amazing and adorable (or as my friend Nikki would say ‘everybody loves me, and nobodies hate me’).

I wonder if certain selfie-haters take into consideration that some people get lots of likes because people actually know them in real life, they are good friends, and help or inspire others to live better lives.

  

Personally, I think that there are more insecure and unhappy selfie-hating people in the world than those who are happy. I believe these Miserable Minions have simply banded together under the “Attack the Selfie Crew” Act. When it comes to people saying that ‘selfies’ are bad, I will always argue the opposite. I would question why it is viewed as a form of ‘self hate’ opposed to ‘self love’. I would challenge the selfie-hater to identify why someone else taking pictures of themselves would make them so vehemently uncomfortable (I mean c’mon, just keep scrolling or unfollow).

The Fact is, in this digital age, people prefer pictures. Pictures say more than words. They are expressive and mean different things to those to post as well as view them. Let’s consider that before we decide to give someone a complex based off of our own experiences and interpretations. You just might be wrong.

Why I HATE Natural Hair Classifications

 I have been 'natural' (no relaxer or perm) for almost 2 years now.  At times I wasn't sure how to adjust, so when in doubt, I did what everyone else does. I consulted the internet oracle to find out how I should proceed in managing my mane. Thankfully, I learned a great deal of useful advice on youtube and Instagram (from naturalistas like @eclarke6, @themanechoice, @chicandcoily, and @msrobin_nella). In my research, I also noticed something that did not sit well with me AT ALL.

I noticed there was this word I didn't understand, but natural women were using it to describe their tresses. So after googling 'hair typing' I learned that it is basically a classification of one's hair type on a scale of 'fine to coarse' (or coily to kinky). Now most people see no issue with this, but to me, it immediately appeared to be a cultural red flag. Upon further investigation (and to my dismay) I started finding fb groups and different blogs of black women celebrating (or blaspheming) which classification they fell into *School Daze 'good hair/bad hair' plays in the background*. They were comparing themselves to one another, some swooning over one particular type, others implying one was worse than another. It was sickening.

Many naturalistas are quick to berate or look down on a woman with a relaxer (which I am against). Some even brag about how proud they are of their afros and and the things they can do with it. Which is all fine and good, but how is 'strand/texture/whatever' classification any different than the good old fashion 'good hair versus bad hair' school of thought? It isn't. Hair typing is the new age 'good hair/ bad hair' complex and just because you only limit the classification within your own ethnic group does not make it any less heinous and damaging (especially to little girls who may have to be subjected to this nonsense by 'texture obsessed' mothers).

There will always be someone who has something you want and you will always have something someone else wants. As far as hair goes, there are cancer patients and people living with alopecia who would kill for ANY type of hair (regardless of its classification) because the truth is, as long as your hair is healthy, it is the right type.

I refuse to play a part in propagating this divisive foolishness. I refuse to follow, post or join any of these online groups that use 'hair typing' as a platform. Hell, I even refuse to bother looking into what 'type' I fall under and I damn sure wouldn't do that to a daughter or niece. It is culturally counter productive and that is why I hate natural hair classifications.