Texas athletes petitioning University to replace "The Eyes of Texas" and to no longer require athletes to sing it

[UTEX_ME 4754]

58 minutes ago, texashorne said:

I am curious.. what does an "offended" person do? Do they seek emotional support from counselors? Go to group meetings? It's a serious question. Is there a current plan of action for students who are struggling emotionally because of the song? Is there any data on students receiving services from the university stemming from this?

 

Being a victim is the new American dream

[randygilman 643]

5 hours ago, dec3169 said:

Might be awkward too if the LHB decides they won't play it.

Then get a new band

[Js1 85152]

Starting to feel like some of those racist emails could have been lifted from posters in this thread.  Really crushing it in making people think it’s only a few bad apples....

[randygilman 643]

David Dennison is just being a troll at this point. He's pressing your buttons (the editorial). Once Hartzell drops his nutz on Dennison's face with a report that will bolster university efforts to have the Eyes of Texas remain the alma mater, he'll crawl back and be a CR shithead and we won't have to worry about his bullshit again.

Edited March 4, 2021 by randygilman

[Js1 85152]

1 hour ago, Cashcar said:

This - saves a lot of money to cancel the band. They and Overshown can pay to watch games moving forward.

Cancel LHB? I thought we loved traditions. Only when it suits you, huh?  Because it’s been around since 1900

[Hookem2147 20935]

None of this happens if the professor who had an agenda doesn’t go out of his way to try to convince players about his views on the song. 90% of players couldn’t even tell you the words to the song, must less tell you the meaning of it. It all had to be pointed out to them.

[Hookem2147 20935]

You best believe a college student in the band is going look for their 15 seconds of fame by making the biggest deal they can out of The Eyes. Nick Moyle or the Texas tribune probably already have 10 of them on speed dial for an interview so they can publish another hit piece.

[randygilman 643]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Cancel LHB? I thought we loved traditions. Only when it suits you, huh?  Because it’s been around since 1900

We do enjoy unifying traditions that have never once been uttered, utilized, or celebrated for anything resembling racist intent, have nothing more than loose, tangential second-hand connections to a prominent southerner, and were a eye-grabbing throw-in among reasonable and honorable requests that the school has carried out.

Apparently, the LHB doesn't think the same. 

[UncleSonny 6564]

1 hour ago, texashorne said:

I am curious.. what does an "offended" person do? Do they seek emotional support from counselors? Go to group meetings? It's a serious question. Is there a current plan of action for students who are struggling emotionally because of the song? Is there any data on students receiving services from the university stemming from this?

 

Since this is a very cool and serious question, sure, there is an employee counseling center on campus. I hope any student uses the services if they are in crisis for any reason but honestly I don’t think it will be necessary for most. We had multiple student posters here say most current students don’t give a shit either way and the players have already made it clear they are cool with it as long as they aren’t required to sing. 

I have a serious question too. Is a group of white people telling a group of black people when they are allowed to be offended (and what by) a perfect example of white supremacy in action?

[randygilman 643]

Just now, UncleSonny said:

Is a group of white people telling a group of black people when they are allowed to be offended (and what by) a perfect example of white supremacy in action?

When what they find offense in is based in little to no fact, it's hard to accept it at its face value. 

[UncleSonny 6564]

Just now, randygilman said:

When what they find offense in is based in little to no fact, it's hard to accept it at its face value. 

So...yes?

[randygilman 643]

Just now, UncleSonny said:

So...yes?

You must have missed the "based in little to no fact" part. 

Better said, "not based in reality."

Edited March 4, 2021 by randygilman

[Js1 85152]

3 minutes ago, randygilman said:

We do enjoy unifying traditions that have never once been uttered, utilized, or celebrated for anything resembling racist intent, have nothing more than loose, tangential second-hand connections to a prominent southerner, and were a eye-grabbing throw-in among reasonable and honorable requests that the school has carried out.

Apparently, the LHB doesn't think the same. 

Got it. You don’t like LHB and Overshown being so uppity and having thoughts so cancel culture is okay now.  Cool cool cool 

[randygilman 643]

2 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Got it. You don’t like LHB and Overshown being so uppity and having thoughts so cancel culture is okay now.  Cool cool cool 

I said none of those things. Overshown is free to share his opinoin. LHB members are free to share their opinion. Doesn't mean they aren't opinions, specifically concerning the eyes, with any basis in reality. 

 

And since every fucking thing needs qualifieers these days, of course I believe that emails, threats, and messages of ill will sent to any player are abhorrent bullshit that should not be tolerated. 

 

If you're going to step into the arena of public opinion on touchy issues, you better be ready to play a team and not run versus air. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by randygilman

[UncleSonny 6564]

6 minutes ago, randygilman said:

You must have missed the "based in little to no fact" part. 

Explain please. The facts are the song was written to be performed at a minstrel show and that’s where it was first preformed. I wrote that as value neutral as possible. 

If a player takes that information and decides they no longer want to sing the song, what do you mean that it’s “based it in little or no fact”. Seems like nonsense to me. And you still haven’t answered a yes or no question. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by UncleSonny

[Wulaw Horn 18985]

10 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

Since this is a very cool and serious question, sure, there is an employee counseling center on campus. I hope any student uses the services if they are in crisis for any reason but honestly I don’t think it will be necessary for most. We had multiple student posters here say most current students don’t give a shit either way and the players have already made it clear they are cool with it as long as they aren’t required to sing. 

I have a serious question too. Is a group of white people telling a group of black people when they are allowed to be offended (and what by) a perfect example of white supremacy in action?

White supremecy?  I’d think that goes too far with the normal connotations of that word. Maybe tone deaf. 

[randygilman 643]

Just now, UncleSonny said:

Explain please. The facts are the song was written to be performed at a minstrel show and that’s where it was first preformed. I wrote that as value neutral as possible. 

If a player takes that information and decides they no longer want to sing the song, what do you mean they it’s “based it in little or no fact”. Seems like nonsense to me. And you still haven’t answered a yes or no question. 

Minstrely is shitty. 

Have you ever listened to the Eyes of Texas and thought, "you know what, this jolly old tune is celebrating minstrelry!" No. Because it doesn't.

If they don't want to sing the song, they don't have to sing the song as the university has clearly that laid out. But if their reasoning for not singing the song is not based in reality, it's still not based in reality. 

 

[UncleSonny 6564]

4 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

White supremecy?  I’d think that goes too far with the normal connotations of that word. Maybe tone deaf. 

What the words actually mean. You know, like one race’s belief in their superiority over another. I mean, look at this guy:

7 minutes ago, randygilman said:

But if their reasoning for not singing the song is not based in reality, it's still not based in reality. 

Lol. Literally defining what their reality should be. Because given a set of facts, they didn’t come to the same decision that he did. After all, who would know more about a black kids reality than randygilman?

 

[randygilman 643]

2 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

What the words actually mean. You know, like one race’s belief in their superiority over another. I mean, look at this guy:

Lol. Literally defining what their reality should be. Because given a set of facts, they didn’t come to the same decision that he did. After all, who would know more about a black kids reality than randygilman?

 

Reality is reality. It does not care what you look like. It does not care what you believe. It does not care how fast your forty time is. Reality is reality, and the reality is that the only connections The Eyes of Texas has to racism are loose, tangential, manufactured and second hand, and dubious at the very best. 

[UncleSonny 6564]

You are talking about facts and reality like this is 2+2=4. It’s not that. How you described the EOT connection to racism: 

6 minutes ago, randygilman said:

the only connections The Eyes of Texas has to racism are loose, tangential, manufactured and second hand, and dubious at the very best

Loose: subjective 

tangential: subjective

manufactured: your opinion based pretty much nothing 

second hand: wrong 

dubious: subjective

These are the “reality based facts” you decided the EOT controversy by. Your personal experiences with race could effect who you feel about every one on of them. And you’ve decided you know better.

Can you answer the original question now? Is a group of white people telling a group of black people when they are allowed to be offended (and what by) a perfect example of white supremacy in action?

[randygilman 643]

7 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

You are talking about facts and reality like this is 2+2=4. It’s not that. How you described the EOT connection to racism: 

Loose: subjective 

tangential: subjective

manufactured: your opinion based pretty much nothing 

second hand: wrong 

dubious: subjective

These are the “reality based facts” you decided the EOT controversy by. Your personal experiences with race could effect who you feel about every one on of them. And you’ve decided you know better.

Can you answer the original question now? Is a group of white people telling a group of black people when they are allowed to be offended (and what by) a perfect example of white supremacy in action?

I don't care what you look like. If you are offended by something and your reasons behind the offense are loose, tangential, manufactured, second hand, and dubious, it doesn't matter what you look like; the reasons are still loose, tangential, manufactured, second hand, and dubious. No one is telling them what to be offended by. They are more than welcome to continue to be offended by it. Their offense is not based in reality. 

Good evening. This is going nowhere. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by randygilman

[randygilman 643]

Im not answering the question because it's the type of question that would drop directly out of Bevo's rectum.

[Helobious 9495]

6 minutes ago, randygilman said:

Reality is reality. It does not care what you look like. It does not care what you believe. It does not care how fast your forty time is. Reality is reality, and the reality is that the only connections The Eyes of Texas has to racism are loose, tangential, manufactured and second hand, and dubious at the very best. 

None of that is reality, that’s all your opinion. To you those connections may seem that way but others don’t see it like that. The “reality” is that the song was debuted at a minstrel show. That’s it. Any conclusions about whether or not the song itself is racist are all subjective. 
 

Fwiw, I don’t think the song itself is racist, but that’s just my opinion. I think an argument can be made that racist people had a hand in the creation of the song, or that the song was debuted at a racist event. If that is problematic enough for some people to want the song to be done away with who am I to discount their conclusion.

[UncleSonny 6564]

2 minutes ago, randygilman said:

Im not answering the question because it's the type of question that would drop directly out of Bevo's rectum.

Smart enough for that dynamite phrasing of ‘bullshit’ but not quite smart enough to simply answer “yes, but that’s not what is happening here”.  

Or maybe you have another reason to not want to answer it. Guess that will remain a mystery. Gnght. 

[randygilman 643]

4 minutes ago, Helobious said:

I think an argument can be made that racist people had a hand in the creation of the song, or that the song was debuted at a racist event.

That sounds really loose,, tangential, manufactured, second hand, and dubious, especially considering not a single word of the Eyes of Texas, the thing actually at issue here, is racist in the slightest amount. 

[Helobious 9495]

If you repeat those words enough maybe one day you’ll understand what they mean.

Edited March 4, 2021 by Helobious

[cam4mav 770]

perception is the reality for the person perceiving. civil discussion and acknowledgement of differing ideas can lead to mutual agreeance of a new perceived reality by both formerly opposing views.

 

This is not what appears to be happening.

 

The university has been presented with a chance to pivot and lead in a new direction, evolving with it's membership, or shun change for the sake of satisfying the olds with the checkbooks.

 

It's just a fucking song. If someone doesn't like it and thinks it's racist, don't force them to stay on the field for it. A university the size of UT should be much bigger and far above this type of drama.

[Revolution512 1480]

Everyone has the right to be offended. Doesn’t make your opinion right nor do you get to control how anyone reacts to you being offended. Everyone thinks their thing is the worst. 
 

Leave the field if you want, I don’t care. The song should stay. Racist alumni should fuck off. 

[ChiTownDoc 21107]

Racists fuck everything up.  Racists want the song.  So the song will likely be toast.  At this point it barely matters whether the song is racist or not.  Big cigars are great but when major sponsors decide they don’t want it, it’s gone.  Maybe the major sponsors stay out of it - but I doubt that.  
 

Here’s the real big swinging dicks:

https://texassports.com/sports/2013/7/29/sponsor_0729134007.aspx

Edited March 4, 2021 by ChiTownDoc
Link

[Wulaw Horn 18985]

6 hours ago, UncleSonny said:

What the words actually mean. You know, like one race’s belief in their superiority over another. 

Like I said- not the normal connotation of the word or how it’s most commonly used which is as an active form of really bad shit- like Active klansmen or the like. 

[SwanderedTalent 5761]

4 hours ago, cam4mav said:

The university has been presented with a chance to pivot and lead in a new direction, evolving with it's membership, or shun change for the sake of satisfying the olds with the checkbooks.

perception is reality, and all that

[DigglerontheHoof 21083]

6 hours ago, Helobious said:

None of that is reality, that’s all your opinion. To you those connections may seem that way but others don’t see it like that. The “reality” is that the song was debuted at a minstrel show. That’s it. Any conclusions about whether or not the song itself is racist are all subjective. 
 

Fwiw, I don’t think the song itself is racist, but that’s just my opinion. I think an argument can be made that racist people had a hand in the creation of the song, or that the song was debuted at a racist event. If that is problematic enough for some people to want the song to be done away with who am I to discount their conclusion.

Racist people created damn near everything in the U.S.  Including the actual USA.   Maybe all white folks should just commit mass seppuku. 

I have zero problem with eradicating every single Confederate statue, school, street, army base, town named reference on earth.  Good riddance to the Old South and anyone who pines for it.  Fuck 'em in the ass. 

Oh and I'd love to punch every single one of those racist donners in their pussy mouths.  Horrible cunts. 

This EOT shit is just a cause too far for me, though.  There's no a single person alive who saw these racist shows and the song has zero racial tones to it. 

[Pam Cummings 9596]

9 hours ago, texashorne said:

I am curious.. what does an "offended" person do? Do they seek emotional support from counselors? Go to group meetings? It's a serious question. Is there a current plan of action for students who are struggling emotionally because of the song? Is there any data on students receiving services from the university stemming from this?

 

I understand the need for social justice and equality and whatnot, for me it's a big time example of knowing when to pick your battles....seriously, what was the end game here? Getting rid of eyes does nothing to combat racism. Literally zero. Just seems like a troll job.

[PassiveAggressiveCoach 118]

7 hours ago, Helobious said:

None of that is reality, that’s all your opinion. To you those connections may seem that way but others don’t see it like that. The “reality” is that the song was debuted at a minstrel show. That’s it. Any conclusions about whether or not the song itself is racist are all subjective. 
 

Fwiw, I don’t think the song itself is racist, but that’s just my opinion. I think an argument can be made that racist people had a hand in the creation of the song, or that the song was debuted at a racist event. If that is problematic enough for some people to want the song to be done away with who am I to discount their conclusion.

If you discount everything someone who may or was racist creating you'd be canceling a lot of stuff. 

[BurntOrange&White 39717]

9 hours ago, Js1 said:

Cancel LHB? I thought we loved traditions. Only when it suits you, huh?  Because it’s been around since 1900

To be fair they canceled themselves. 

[BurntOrange&White 39717]

6 hours ago, cam4mav said:

perception is the reality for the person perceiving. civil discussion and acknowledgement of differing ideas can lead to mutual agreeance of a new perceived reality by both formerly opposing views. 

 

This is not what appears to be happening.

 

The university has been presented with a chance to pivot and lead in a new direction, evolving with it's membership, or shun change for the sake of satisfying the olds with the checkbooks.

 

It's just a fucking song. If someone doesn't like it and thinks it's racist, don't force them to stay on the field for it. A university the size of UT should be much bigger and far above this type of drama.

I think staying on the field out of respect for the paying fans is not a bad compromise. They were told they didn’t have to sing or participate just remain on the field. All this backlash was caused because of the Sam picture at the Cotton Bowl. 
 

This is all boiling down to Tom Herman not having discipline with his players and going against his bosses guidelines that every other coach in the athletic department went by. The way the eyes was handled by the volleyball team is the perfect example of how it can be respectful to fans as well as those who have the belief that the song is racist. 
 

please reference FCB’s article with multiple Texas coaches on record. 

Edited March 4, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[Ghost of LL 15495]

16 hours ago, Machinator said:

 

Some of our fucking donors need to fucking check themselves.  I mean, it's nice that you're rich and all, but you're not that big a fucking deal.

Overshown says, that athletic department officials came to the players and said, “These are some high-power people that come to see you play and they can keep you from getting a job in the state of Texas."  First off, I absolutely believe that someone in the AD said that.  And I absolutely believe that person was passing along what s/he heard from some big cigar(s).

And that is stupid as fuck.

Ok--so one donor isn't going to hire DeMarvion Overshown.  Maybe a dozen won't.  Guess what--this isn't fucking Alabama.  There are more than a dozen employers in this state.  And virtually none of the employers in this state give a fuck about The Eyes of Texas or college football generally.  They care about profitability.  And to the extent they care about college football at all, it's more likely that they care about some team other than the Texas Longhorns.  And even to the extent they do care about the Texas Longhorns, there's a very good chance that they're not assholes who are going to refuse to hire you because you stood up for what you thought was right vis-a-vis The Eyes of Texas (even if we ourselves happen to disagree).

We've got some donors that think their dick is a lot larger than it is.  I mean, you may get treated like a BSD on gameday in Austin.  But the fact is, if you go to Davos, you're a fucking pudknocker.  So don't run around here thinking that you control who does and who doesn't get a job in the State of Texas.

Fuck, man.  These fucking people.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13418]

3 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Racists fuck everything up.  Racists want the song.  So the song will likely be toast.  At this point it barely matters whether the song is racist or not.  Big cigars are great but when major sponsors decide they don’t want it, it’s gone.  Maybe the major sponsors stay out of it - but I doubt that.  
 

Here’s the real big swinging dicks:

https://texassports.com/sports/2013/7/29/sponsor_0729134007.aspx

This. When Nike tells UT to remove the song, the song will be removed. It's that simple. Sponsors > Donors. And the donors will always come back. Where are the donors going to go? Are they going to adopt some other school but require the EOT to be played there?

UT was extremely racist back in the day. The whole country was. State schools in the South definitely did their best to keep it 100% white.  And sometimes the pendulum overly swings back the other way. If the EOT is never played again, does it really matter? The minstrel show was dropped somewhere along the way, and UT survived. And I bet someone was pissed when that show was cancelled.

For the people who want the song to remain, they don't understand the argument. And for the record, I don't think this is a racist opinion. But they say they want to argue the facts, which are murky at best. But emotions on both sides are the driving force.  People who think the song is racist vs. people that are pissed at being called a racist for singing the song.  There is no middle ground here.

 

[NoRagrets 1125]

I’d encourage all of our players to sing whatever alternate lyrics they want when the song is played, as long as they are in good taste and respectful to the university. A new song, or at least new words, will bubble up organically.

[Ghost of LL 15495]

15 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

For the people who want the song to remain, they don't understand the argument. And for the record, I don't think this is a racist opinion. But they say they want to argue the facts, which are murky at best. But emotions on both sides are the driving force.  People who think the song is racist vs. people that are pissed at being called a racist for singing the song.  There is no middle ground here.

 

I think there is a middle ground.  I'm standing on it.  I think a whole lot of people are.  But it's pretty uncomfortable middle ground.

I don't think there's anything racist about the song.  But I appreciate that others have differing opinions.  And I understand where their opinions come from.

But here's the big question facing all of us come September--when those drums start to roll, are you going to throw your horns up and sing along, knowing that a significant number of people around you are going to think that you're singing along to a racist song?  I mean, leaving aside whatever you think about the song personally . . . are you willing to visually and audibly go along with a song that many other people think is racist?

There's a whole fascinating psychological discussion to be had here about permission structures and degrees of agreeability.  And it's going to play out with each one of us.

But from the standpoint of The University, what does it do when a quarter of the stadium isn't throwing up the horns?  Or a third?  Or a half?

I support playing our alma mater before and after games.  But those of us on that side need to prepare ourselves for the day when it is not played.  Because whether we like it or not, that day is coming.

[Js1 85152]

1 hour ago, Ghost of LL said:

Overshown says, that athletic department officials came to the players and said, “These are some high-power people that come to see you play and they can keep you from getting a job in the state of Texas."  First off, I absolutely believe that someone in the AD said that.  And I absolutely believe that person was passing along what s/he heard from some big cigar(s).

Oh I see what you did there.

And yes, it was probably Plonksy because the only thing she cares about is money.  

[NeverMarryAStripper 21784]

Why haven't were heard from any of our players of Chinese descent?  The EOT is song to the tune of I've Been Working on the Railroad.  It seems like the players of Chinese descent are the ones that should really be offended by it.

[Guest Lobo]

SIAP:  Texas Exes chimes in on behalf of alums:  https://www.dallasnews.com/news/education/2021/03/04/ut-alumni-students-upset-by-donor-threats-to-pull-money-if-eyes-of-texas-goes-away/

Chuck was offered earlier today to go on CBS National News to discuss but declined and turned it over to the University.  Which is gonna make things even more awkward when a national news outlet starts grilling us all on this.  

There are a lot of alumni who complain, publicly and privately, about how much the student body of UT has "changed" over the last 10-20 years.  What they really mean is the same 500 legacy families from Dallas and Houston should have access to UT no matter what, that all these Hispanic and Asians shouldn't really be on our campus.  Some, but not this many.  And this, the Eyes of Texas song, is their new Hill on which to wage their frustration.  Some, not all.  I see it in some corners of our alumni population, not all.  The Texas Exes Board of Directors and Staff have to hear these complaints constantly when it's time to discuss scholarships, or alumni giving, or the Eyes of Texas song.  

Having said that, the song is not inherently racist and I voted to keep it.  If 500 Capitol insurrectionist racist fuckbags wanna sing, "America, the Beautiful"...the song doesn't become racist.  It's a wonderful song with tradition, just like the Eyes of Texas.  It just means we live among stupid people with racist tendencies that don't want anybody to know they're racist, but they also want everybody to know they're racist but don't care that you know they're racist while pretending to be not racist because of racism.  

[Chuckie Finster 22613]

The insistence of the small but vocal community of racist alumni to use this song as some sort of rallying cry is the quickest way to ensure that The Eyes of Texas is tainted and ultimately removed.

[UncleSonny 6564]

4 hours ago, Wulaw Horn said:

Like I said- not the normal connotation of the word or how it’s most commonly used which is as an active form of really bad shit- like Active klansmen or the like. 

I get what you are saying and I think you are touching on something here. Some people on this thread and those donors who sent the emails want to be able to tell other groups the things they are allowed to be offended by. They are comfortable openly expressing the belief that they don't think a group of people have the capability to rationally navigate their own emotions, thoughts, and experiences.  

At the same time, most of those people would be offended to be called a white supremacists. They genuinely hate Nazis, skinsheads, klansmen and all of it. Not a single swastika tattoo between them. Their line of thinking is white supremacy though, it just is. It's not as bad or scary as burning crosses in from of a black family's house. That's the active form of bad shit you reference. But this passive form of bad shit is really prevalent and harmful and it gets to the heart of everyone talking past each other.

 

[StassneyHorn 6540]

On 3/2/2021 at 10:14 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Well, I have to admit, that was the only angle I could come up with when trying to figure out how the song itself is racist, and I haven't paid any attention to the controversy over the last 9 months.

So, it's not out of the question, although the timing seems odd.  I mean, weren't the lyrics crafted well past the turn of the century?  

I'm probably rehashing many old discussions, but I'm not reading 132 pages.  I'll bow out and wait for the (ahem) "report".  (You know, the one that says it's OK to sing the song, because that was clearly the conclusion going in.)

[UncleSonny 6564]

3 hours ago, PassiveAggressiveCoach said:

If you discount everything someone who may or was racist creating you'd be canceling a lot of stuff. 

 

4 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Racist people created damn near everything in the U.S.  Including the actual USA.   Maybe all white folks should just commit mass seppuku. 

I have zero problem with eradicating every single Confederate statue, school, street, army base, town named reference on earth.  Good riddance to the Old South and anyone who pines for it.  Fuck 'em in the ass. 

Oh and I'd love to punch every single one of those racist donners in their pussy mouths.  Horrible cunts. 

This EOT shit is just a cause too far for me, though.  There's no a single person alive who saw these racist shows and the song has zero racial tones to it. 

This wasn't the point though. The conversation you both are responding to wasn't about cancelling everything that someone finds racially insensitive. We shouldn't and can't do that. You can think doing away with the song is a bridge to far given the facts without saying anyone who has a problem with it are just playing the victim, have an agenda, or have no rational basis to feel the way that they do.

 

50 minutes ago, NeverMarryAStripper said:

Why haven't were heard from any of our players of Chinese descent?  The EOT is song to the tune of I've Been Working on the Railroad.  It seems like the players of Chinese descent are the ones that should really be offended by it.

Seriously? This is maddening and exactly what I'm talking about. How does it seem like a good idea from your position to say Chinese people are allowed to be offended by this but not black people?

[NeverMarryAStripper 21784]

5 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

 

This wasn't the point though. The conversation you both are responding to wasn't about cancelling everything that someone finds racially insensitive. We shouldn't and can't do that. You can think doing away with the song is a bridge to far given the facts without saying anyone who has a problem with it are just playing the victim, have an agenda, or have no rational basis to feel the way that they do.

 

Seriously? This is maddening and exactly what I'm talking about. How does it seem like a good idea from your position to say Chinese people are allowed to be offended by this but not black people?

It didn't say anyone wasn't allowed to do or feel anything.  I merely asked a question.  People can, and are offended, by anything.  Sometimes I'm offended by their offense though. 

[Js1 85152]

JUST. ASKING. QUESTIONS. 

[Guest Lobo]

31 minutes ago, UncleSonny said:

Seriously? This is maddening and exactly what I'm talking about. How does it seem like a good idea from your position to say Chinese people are allowed to be offended by this but not black people?

Dude, it's totally cool.  He's not racist...he jerks off to Asian porn.