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

[TwiceHorn 31343]

25 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

What's odd is how long the University promoted the Lee/Prather narrative.

The University accepted the narrative of Dean Taylor, who was a beloved figure and remains so within the College of Engineering.  Unfortunately, he was apparently mistaken, or maybe he was accurate in reporting what Prather thought, and Prather was mistaken.

In the event, Prather, like many early UT benefactors, faculty, and administrators, was enamored with the confederacy.  That's not a happy fact for anyone.

But Prather didn't write the song.  A student did to make fun of his apparent infatuation with General Lee or at least a saying he seemed to like for whatever reason. Edited to strike the reference to Lee because there's no evidence that Sinclair considered Lee's connection, if any, at all.

Edited March 10, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[David Dennison 18724]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

That’s fair but I don’t really see much of a difference between citing Gregg or Lee. They are both confederate generals. Seemingly Taylor in 30s misassigned statements by Gregg. But that error isn’t really consequential to the thrust that the confederacy was intertwined with the origin story of the eyes.  

We could say that other folks used phrases similar to the eyes (like Washington), but Prather and Taylor we’re quoting confederate generals and not Washington.  

Prather was UT president at the time of his Lee/Greg speech and at the time of composition of the eyes song. I may be mistaken but I also believe the debut of the song was at an event for Prather (which also happened to be a minstrel performance likely in black face).

I’m not convinced the connection is fabricated

The Taylor busing is impressive. 

[TwiceHorn 31343]

23 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

That’s fair but I don’t really see much of a difference between citing Gregg or Lee. They are both confederate generals. Seemingly Taylor in 30s misassigned statements by Gregg. But that error isn’t really consequential to the thrust that the confederacy was intertwined with the origin story of the eyes.  

We could say that other folks used phrases similar to the eyes (like Washington), but Prather and Taylor we’re quoting confederate generals and not Washington.  

Prather was UT president at the time of his Lee/Greg speech and at the time of composition of the eyes song. I may be mistaken but I also believe the debut of the song was at an event for Prather (which also happened to be a minstrel performance likely in black face).

I’m not convinced the connection is fabricated

It's important because it doesn't become some racist saying simply because a Confederate officer said it.  In the Gregg context, it's just an exhortation, like "give em hell, boys."

The original Taylor-based narrative, that Lee frequently invoked "the eyes of the South" at a distinctly southern college and Prather became enamored of Lee and the saying, is a bit more insidious because it implies and endorses southern separatism and a bit of the Lost Cause mythology.  Even that isn't really all that convincing because you can't impute that implication and endorsement to the author of the song.

There is exactly zero evidence that John Lang Sinclair knew or gave a frogs fat ass why Wm. L. Prather liked the saying or had any intention of carrying that "celebration of the Confederacy" into the song itself.  It seems undisputed that Sinclair wanted to poke fun at his use of the phrase, which does not endorse the phrase, or contemplate its origins or connections or connotations.

Edited March 10, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Guadaloopy 10933]

1 hour ago, mdleast said:

Can I get a playlist of you guys’ other favorite railroad based songs? TIA

 

[GW Hayduke 1952]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's important because it doesn't become some racist saying simply because a Confederate officer said it.  In the Gregg context, it's just an exhortation, like "give em hell, boys."

The original narrative, that Lee frequently invoked "the eyes of the South" at a distinctly southern college and Prather became enamored of Lee and the saying, is a bit more insidious because it implies and endorses southern separatism and a bit of the Lost Cause mythology.  Even that isn't really all that convincing because you can't impute that implication and endorsement to the author of the song.

There is exactly zero evidence that John Lang Sinclair knew or gave a frogs fat ass why Wm. L. Prather liked the saying or had any intention of carrying that "celebration of the Confederacy" into the song itself.

I still see some issues though. The exhortation would be “give em hell boys and defeat the union so we can keep our slaves.”

We don’t know what Sinclair knew about Prather’s fondness for the phrase and the confederacy but it wouldn’t be a stretch for Sinclair to have heard some version of the Lee/Gregg story. 

[Cajun 11675]

 

[CowtownHorn 5126]

 

[Longhornstampede 3174]

 

[Tex Pete 20208]

30 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I still see some issues though. The exhortation would be “give em hell boys and defeat the union so we can keep our slaves.”

We don’t know what Sinclair knew about Prather’s fondness for the phrase and the confederacy but it wouldn’t be a stretch for Sinclair to have heard some version of the Lee/Gregg story. 

Great. You’ve destroyed the racist strawman and we’re all better for it. 

[Dusty 15]

Origin...

2 Chronicles 20:12

O our God, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do: but our eyes are upon thee.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[High Plains Drifter 10984]

5 hours ago, Your Mom said:

I’m not seeing the connection between Lee and the song at all.  Are you saying that anytime that anyone says “the eyes of_______ are upon you.” thats it’s related to Lee?  Because if that’s what you’re saying it’s really fucking stupid.  That was and still is a common figure of speech. It’s older than Lee. 
 

Sombody talking to Robert E.  Lee once scratched their balls too. Does that link all future ball scratching to Lee?  Am I being racist at the moment as I type with one hand and scratch my balls with the other? 

 

 

Ok, mom, now you're just making shit up.

 

 

[Cajun 11675]

^^Well, the players, band, and card carrying members of the perineally offended do it, so why can't he?

And the word is "reimiagined".

[PassiveAggressiveCoach 118]

7 hours ago, Machinator said:

LHN spent about 30 seconds summarizing the report at the end of the baseball game, then showed the team standing and singing the Eyes. No drama.

You just wait. In 5-10 yrs they may not be singing it. You watch. -DD

[PassiveAggressiveCoach 118]

7 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

I recommend you take a look at page 11 of the report and note the discussion of Prather’s speech in November 1900. The quotes from the summary you provided do not appear to clearly line up with the contents of the report (page 11)

Even if true. Prather didn't write the damn song. Did you read the report? It was some nerd with writers block from the glee club. They locked his poor ass in his dorm room until he came out with a song. Prather just liked the song when he heard it. You trying to twist the story? 

[BurntOrange&White 39750]

7 hours ago, David Dennison said:

What's odd is how long the University promoted the Lee/Prather narrative.

 

 

Your use of the word promoted is laughable. 

[Newy25 7659]

4 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Your use of the word promoted is laughable. 

The guy just found out that there is no tooth fairy despite spending hundreds of posts implicitly saying we are all racists for not believing in the tooth fairy. The cognitive dissonance he must have felt when a committee had to write a report saying there was no tooth fairy must have been very difficult for him. Let him have a reason to look to to help him cope his dissonance. 

[ChickenSandwich 9803]

7 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

I still see some issues though. The exhortation would be “give em hell boys and defeat the union so we can keep our slaves.”

We don’t know what Sinclair knew about Prather’s fondness for the phrase and the confederacy but it wouldn’t be a stretch for Sinclair to have heard some version of the Lee/Gregg story. 

Lee had been dead for 30 years. It’s the equivalent of today’s students making songs, references, and jokes about Jimmy Carter. It’s bullshit. 

[Istian 241]

7 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

I still see some issues though. The exhortation would be “give em hell boys and defeat the union so we can keep our slaves.”

We don’t know what Sinclair knew about Prather’s fondness for the phrase and the confederacy but it wouldn’t be a stretch for Sinclair to have heard some version of the Lee/Gregg story. 

Precisely. We don’t know. Assuming in the absence of certainty is part of the problem and serves no purpose other than to twist the narrative. 
 

The report simply acknowledges that racist tendencies existed back then (they do today, obviously), but that there’s no documented connection of the Eyes to anything explicitly racist. To say the song is racist is factually incorrect until proven otherwise. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13419]

26 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Lee had been dead for 30 years. It’s the equivalent of today’s students making songs, references, and jokes about Jimmy Carter. It’s bullshit. 

 Jimmy Carter has been dead for 30 years?

[ChickenSandwich 9803]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

 Jimmy Carter has been dead for 30 years?

Nixon works 

[BurntOrange&White 39750]

1 minute ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

 Jimmy Carter has been dead for 30 years?

[Nice Guy Eddie 13419]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

That Prather apparently idolized Lee I suppose is somewhat problematic, but the relationship to the song itself is like six degrees of Kevin Bacon.  It is fabricating a connection from the whole cloth.

Its a bit weird when any adult idolizes someone. Hopefully this isn't true but most likely impossible to prove one way or the other.

[BurntOrange&White 39750]

2 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Its a bit weird when any adult idolizes someone. Hopefully this isn't true but most likely impossible to prove one way or the other.

I'm sure you've never heard of a guy by the name of Vincent Paul Young?

[Born Burnt 6171]

8 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

See my edit.

Prather cited not Lee, but Gregg, and not saying "the eyes of the South," but rather "the eyes of General Lee," which is more consistent with the fact that it is a general exhortation rather than some southern, lost cause shibboleth.

The whole Prather-Lee-Confederacy-Racism thing is beyond attenuated to the point of silly.

That Prather apparently idolized Lee I suppose is somewhat problematic, but the relationship to the song itself is like six degrees of Kevin Bacon.  It is fabricating a connection from the whole cloth.

The report also seems to establish that the song was not written FOR a minstrel show, but in a more general and innocent context and happened to be performed AT a minstrel show due to circumstance of available venue and Prather's attendance.  That is a problematic aspect of the song, but still does not establish that the song is the product of or intended to invoke racial animus.

Pos rep for "shibboleth."

[TwiceHorn 31343]

38 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Your use of the word promoted is laughable. 

It's a fair statement, I think.

In the limited historical efforts prior to this big report, which comprise a couple of Alcalde articles and some similar things, the Taylor story was accepted and repeated as true.

Some people may not really know who Taylor was, as I think his prominence has faded.  But he was the first Dean of engineering and back in the day, Taylor Hall was the former engineering building and had been repurposed to house mainframe computers.  It was across the street from Welch, where Gates and O'Donnell are today. https://jimnicar.com/tag/taylor-hall/

The "student lounge" in ETC is called the Taylor Lounge.  The College of Engineering newsletter used to be called "The Ramshorn" because of a checkmark Taylor applied to exceptional homework or tests. https://www.engr.utexas.edu/academics/undergraduate-education/student-success-initiatives/ramshorn-scholars-program

In the 80s and 90s, particularly within the engineering "community," T. U. Taylor was about as beloved an historical figure as existed on campus.

So, his story of early goings-on on campus was taken as gospel.  But apparently it was not completely accurate.

[NeverMarryAStripper 21784]

This is all like a giant game of Telephone combined with 6 degrees of General Lee

[Tex Pete 20208]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Lee had been dead for 30 years. It’s the equivalent of today’s students making songs, references, and jokes about Jimmy Carter. It’s bullshit. 

In an era without the internet or even television. 

[TwiceHorn 31343]

1 hour ago, Istian said:

Precisely. We don’t know. Assuming in the absence of certainty is part of the problem and serves no purpose other than to twist the narrative. 
 

The report simply acknowledges that racist tendencies existed back then (they do today, obviously), but that there’s no documented connection of the Eyes to anything explicitly racist. To say the song is racist is factually incorrect until proven otherwise. 

Agreed.  I wouldn't call it a "burden of proof" thing, exactly (as in who has the burden of proof that EOT is a horrid racist ditty), but more along the lines of to bend the story to impute racist motivation to John Lang Sinclair just doesn't make much sense.

The story would have to be something like: 

Sinclair: That old bastard Prather sure likes to prattle on about the eyes of Texas. 

Other Character: Yes, it's irritating as hell, but it's also a celebration of the CSA, Robt. E. Lee, and how the South will rise again. 

Sinclair: Sure enough.  Let's write a song making fun of the old bastard, and, along the way, we can remind those uppity nigras that the eyes of Texas are upon them and we'll never let them get away. 

Other Character:  Yes!  And we can put it in the minstrel show in blackface.

Sinclair:  Brilliant!  It will be a very crafty double-entendre.  We'll fool everyone with our disguised racism!

Like anything, I suppose it's in the realm of possibility.  But it seems quite unlikely.  For one thing, at the time, there wasn't any particular reason to disguise one's racism.  If one wanted to write a racially demeaning song for a minstrel show, there was nothing to stop it, so why be so cryptic?

Some of the other racially demeaning songs or chants of the era, like Gator Bait, seem cryptic to us, but that's because the original meaning had been lost to history.  With EOT, it hasn't been lost to history, it just never was.

Edited March 10, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[bad_teammate 13156]

This report is great in the sense that it gives us a credible basis to educate future Longhorn athletes and debunk the "this song is about a slavemaster overseeing his slaves" myth, but I don't see how this really quells any drama unless we get 100% buy-in from the team to stay for The Eyes.

If even 1 player decides to leave the field we know exactly how a huge portion of our fanbase will react: Personal attacks, character assassination, loud public whining, threats to withdraw support, etc...

This looks like just another kick of the can down the road.

Edited March 10, 2021 by bad_teammate

[Js1 85158]

13 hours ago, Nueces River Rat said:

Mack Brown needs to be canceled. 

He lost to aggy in a bowl game, may as well. 

[ChickenSandwich 9803]

9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

This report is great in the sense that it gives us a credible basis to educate future Longhorn athletes and debunk the "this song is about a slavemaster overseeing his slaves" myth, but I don't see how this really quells any drama unless we get 100% buy-in from the team to stay for The Eyes.

If even 1 player decides to leave the field we know exactly how a huge portion of our fanbase will react: Personal attacks, character assassination, loud public whining, threats to withdraw support, etc...

This looks like just another kick of the can down the road.

Not really. Transfer portal etc. everyone now knows the score and are free to choose their own path.

One player leaving the field would speak more of the player than any imagined protest they may be having. 

[GTNY 280]

10 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

What do you think I am not comprehending? 

Are you under the impression that the report establishes the confederacy, General Lee, and General Gregg played no role in the origin of the eyes?   If so, you are misreading the report.  There are two speeches by Prather noted on that page.  One recorded in October 1899 and another recorded December 1900.  The December 1900 speech clearly established that Prather (two years before the eyes was written) linked the eyes to the confederacy. He refers to both Lee and Gregg (confederate generals) in the speech, and the quotes Gregg as stating "the eyes of texas are upon you" and "the eyes of General Lee are upon you." 

Then in 30's, the Dean of Engineering again links the confederacy and Lee (leaving out Gregg) back to eyes.  

There is no reason to hide from any of that.  Those are facts in the report.

I'm not saying it has no links, but what you are quoting isn't right in the report. Those arent "facts in the report" - those are existing claims the report researched and could not substantiate with evidence. 

On the first speech, the report states there is confusion and other sources don't cite Lee in it.

On your Dean of Engineering comment (Thomas Taylor if I am reading it/you right), the report says this explicitly "Perhaps Prather did tell Taylor a different story than he told the medical students. But this appears unlikely. For there to have been two separate events involving “the eyes” of some person or region, and that separately inspired Prather’s “eyes of Texas,” seems a stretch. More likely Taylor misremembered." 

It goes on - Taylors story is that Prather told him he got it from Lee using it at his Washington College addresses but the report states "Further, research has failed to discover in the records of Washington & Lee University (as Washington College is now called) evidence that Lee ever closed an address to the students with the phrase attributed to him by the Taylor account. Absence of evidence, of course, is not proof of absence. But if the phrase was as common with Lee as Taylor asserted, one would expect some supporting evidence. "

[Poe It Up 126]

What would be the justification for a player walking off the field? What report are they reading? It’s genuinely confusing. 

[bad_teammate 13156]

5 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

One player leaving the field would speak more of the player than any imagined protest they may be having. 

 

1 minute ago, Poe It Up said:

What would be the justification for a player walking off the field? What report are they reading? It’s genuinely confusing. 

And it already begins.

The new standard is that players get to choose. The fanbase needs to respect that. Maybe we will get 100% standing from the team or only 90%. We don't know yet. Either way it is not YOUR business whether or not those players choose to stand there so unless your goal is to be divisive and cause problems for the university, you should keep your thoughts to yourself about our student-athletes.

[BurntOrange&White 39750]

7 minutes ago, Poe It Up said:

What would be the justification for a player walking off the field? What report are they reading? It’s genuinely confusing. 

Players walk off the field after loss vs stay on the field after win. Basically 

[Poe It Up 126]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

And it already begins.

The new standard is that players get to choose. The fanbase needs to respect that. Maybe we will get 100% standing from the team or only 90%. We don't know yet. Either way it is not YOUR business whether or not those players choose to stand there so unless your goal is to be divisive and cause problems for the university, you should keep your thoughts to yourself about our student-athletes.

They can do whatever the hell they want to do, I’m just curious what information they have that I don’t. 

[bad_teammate 13156]

1 minute ago, Poe It Up said:

They can do whatever the hell they want to do, I’m just curious what information they have that I don’t. 

You already know they don't have information you don't. You just want a justification when you're in no position to demand a justification and you want to let the world know you disapprove. Only the world doesn't care whether or not you approve. 

[edit]

The ideal situation is singing The Eyes and having a fanbase that learns to shut its god damned mouth sometimes and not constantly embarrass us by attacking its own student-athletes over political grievances. Grown men learning how to mind their own business is always a good thing.

Edited March 10, 2021 by bad_teammate

[The Earl of Texas 3131]

Some of y’all get way too worked up over this. 

[Poe It Up 126]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

You already know they don't have information you don't. You just want a justification when you're in no position to demand a justification and you want to let the world know you disapprove. Only the world doesn't care whether or not you approve. 

Demanding? Or am I asking their position to be clarified? That’s how discussions work, but I guess all this “we need to have tough discussions” it the total bullshit I believed it was from the beginning.

 

[TwiceHorn 31343]

The report still doesn't completely resolve the issue with players and the song and its use after games.

What it does do is give people that object to it a reasoned, rational basis to believe that it never was of racist intent and has become even less so.  

You can't tell people what to think or believe, particularly when it comes to a racially sensitive topic.

But the report goes a long way to establishing a reasonable, rational, fact-based reason why the University maintains the tradition other than "fuck your feelings, black man."

The thing that irked me about the whole situation was that a lot of animus toward the song was based on a completely false mythology.  That it was some kind of Simon Legree overseer song.

And it turns out that not only is that false, but the main connection to the confederacy and Robert E. Lee is even more gossamer than originally believed.

Edited March 10, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[Armybrat 40757]

23 hours ago, mdmost said:

I think they're referring to the original show in 1903, Brat.

Yes, but my purpose in reposting the Cactus photos is to counter the ludicrous notion that the 1903 UT minstrel show might not have had students performing in blackface. Blackface was a staple of minstrel shows throughout the first half of the 20th century, particularly in the South, and that included those performed on the UT campus into the 1960s as illustrated. To suggest otherwise is a copout, IMO.
Don’t know why that post warranted a neg, but to each his own.

[Armybrat 40757]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The report still doesn't completely resolve the issue with players and the song and its use after games.

What it does do is give people that object to it a reasoned, rational basis to believe that it never was of racist intent and has become even less so.  

You can't tell people what to think or believe, particularly when it comes to a racially sensitive topic.

But the report goes a long way to establishing a reasonable, rational, fact-based reason why the University maintains the tradition other than "fuck your feelings, black man."

The thing that irked me about the whole situation was that a lot of animus toward the song was based on a completely false mythology.  That it was some kind of Simon Legree overseer song.

Agreed on all points.

[bad_teammate 13156]

Just now, Poe It Up said:

Demanding? Or am I asking their position to be clarified? That’s how discussions work, but I guess all this “we need to have tough discussions” it the total bullshit I believed it was from the beginning.

1) Why do you want them to "clarify" their position for you? Answer honestly. Are you being an "I'm just curious <actually preparing for an attack>" passive aggressive person or is your curiosity genuine and unbiased?

2) If you are genuinely curious and unbiased, why are you asking people who aren't the student-athletes?

Short version: If you don't have anything nice to say about the student-athletes on this, keep it to yourself.

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

The thing that irked me about the whole situation was that a lot of animus toward the song was based on a completely false mythology.  That it was some kind of Simon Legree overseer song.

And with that debunked, hopefully resistance to the tradition fades over time. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

But in the meantime, we have to hold together.

[TwiceHorn 31343]

1 minute ago, Armybrat said:

Yes, but my purpose in reposting the Cactus photos is to counter the ludicrous notion that the 1903 UT minstrel show might not have had students performing in blackface. Blackface was a staple of minstrel shows throughout the first half of the 20th century, particularly in the South, and that included those performed on the UT campus into the 1960s as illustrated. To suggest otherwise is a copout, IMO.
Don’t know why that post warranted a neg, but to each his own.

The report establishes that in almost all likelihood, the song was performed in blackface.  There's no definitive proof, but examination of the "program" of the show and the cast of characters indicates about as clearly as possible, that it was performed in blackface.

[Istian 241]

17 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

And it already begins.

The new standard is that players get to choose. The fanbase needs to respect that. Maybe we will get 100% standing from the team or only 90%. We don't know yet. Either way it is not YOUR business whether or not those players choose to stand there so unless your goal is to be divisive and cause problems for the university, you should keep your thoughts to yourself about our student-athletes.

I fall somewhere on this spectrum. It’s encouraging that Texas now has a document that supports its claims that the song doesn’t have racist origins. The problem is the already established narrative and the reaction of people who don’t experience life the same way the football players do. 
 

I don’t envy Sark for having to support his statement that everyone will be there for the song but the only way this works at all is for the entire team to stay - even if they don’t sing. Not everyone sang in the past anyway. Hopefully the team votes to look at it as an opportunity to appreciate fan support and has everyone agree to stay. If not, I think we’ll be having a conversation about getting rid of the song sooner rather than later. It just won’t be worth the continuous trouble. 

[Your Mom 4802]

13 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Please tell me you're not actually this stupid, mom.

Or is it just that you don't know who Prather is? The quoted text literally gives the origin of the specific phrase The eyes of Texas are upon you which then led to the school alma mater. Your misdirection about the phrase being used in other contexts is completely irrelevant.

I swear, some of y'all take the stupidity on one side of the discussion and must say to yourselves "Oh yeah, I'm gonna out-stupid those sons of bitches, just watch!"

GTFO of here with that. I have a perfectly clear understanding who the men are, what they said, and how they likely meant it.  But, like many phrases, it can be unacceptable in one context and perfectly acceptable in another.   
There are plenty of phrases that can only be racist and they should all be canceled. This isn’t one of them. 

[mdmost 42881]

12 minutes ago, Armybrat said:

Yes, but my purpose in reposting the Cactus photos is to counter the ludicrous notion that the 1903 UT minstrel show might not have had students performing in blackface. Blackface was a staple of minstrel shows throughout the first half of the 20th century, particularly in the South, and that included those performed on the UT campus into the 1960s as illustrated. To suggest otherwise is a copout, IMO.
Don’t know why that post warranted a neg, but to each his own.

I get you and I agree. There isn't definitive proof of blackface at the first show but it stands to reason that it happened. Even if it didn't, blackface was used later and up until the 1960s. It took protests by students to stop that "tradition". The neg is because some don't want to be reminded of the past. 

Personally, I'm satisfied with the report because it acknowledges that past and tries to move towards the future. I also like that students/players aren't required to sing it. If a donor or alum has an issue with that, they can frankly f off. You do not get to dictate what the players do. You are not a shareholder. You are a fan or giver of money. If you object to what a player does then you're free to take your money elsewhere. For all the people who say players are free to transfer out if they don't want to sing the song, you are free to find another team to support if you can't get past the program allowing them to opt out. You will be replaced especially if Sark does well here. 

Edited March 10, 2021 by mdmost

[Poe It Up 126]

14 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

1) Why do you want them to "clarify" their position for you? Answer honestly. Are you being an "I'm just curious <actually preparing for an attack>" passive aggressive person or is your curiosity genuine and unbiased?

2) If you are genuinely curious and unbiased, why are you asking people who aren't the student-athletes?

Short version: If you don't have anything nice to say about the student-athletes on this, keep it to yourself.

And with that debunked, hopefully resistance to the tradition fades over time. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

But in the meantime, we have to hold together.

Probably a little bit of both, I mean, I’m only human. In light of the findings, I’m genuinely curious what they would find objectionable to the degree that they would need to protest the song. That isn’t dictating how they feel, it’s trying to understand their position. But I fully expect after being force fed this narrative of “tough conversations” that I’ll be given the standard platitudes you’ve already thrown my way. 
 

 

[Cajun 11675]

2 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

 

 

Your use of the word promoted is laughable. 

Especially given his track record of 24/7 promotion.

[BurntOrange&White 39750]

36 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The report still doesn't completely resolve the issue with players and the song and its use after games.

What it does do is give people that object to it a reasoned, rational basis to believe that it never was of racist intent and has become even less so.  

You can't tell people what to think or believe, particularly when it comes to a racially sensitive topic.

But the report goes a long way to establishing a reasonable, rational, fact-based reason why the University maintains the tradition other than "fuck your feelings, black man."

The thing that irked me about the whole situation was that a lot of animus toward the song was based on a completely false mythology.  That it was some kind of Simon Legree overseer song.

And it turns out that not only is that false, but the main connection to the confederacy and Robert E. Lee is even more gossamer than originally believed.

That false mythology was proudly promoted by dumbshit Dennison.