Eyes of Texas

[SizzleChest 8314]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The song is going to continue to be an issue. 

Why?

[David Dennison 19542]

1 minute ago, SizzleChest said:

Why?

Because some people find it offensive. It's no longer a source of unity for the university. It's divisive.

[softlynow 1894]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Because some people find it offensive. It's no longer a source of unity for the university. It's divisive.

Nah. But thanks for the hot take.

[SizzleChest 8314]

17 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Because some people find it offensive. It's no longer a source of unity for the university. It's divisive.

[burntorangebongos 10826]

They need to go further. Change the words up some to reflect the awareness that this got derived out of a Rbert E Lee saying. 

Make the Eyes of Texas are upon us. Don't sing it after the games for a while. Let everyone buy in that enough changes to alter it into something acceptable has happened. But fuck the song if it isn't possible. Ultimately, the point of your school song should be to unify everybody. Don't sing it until it can.

[David Dennison 19542]

28 minutes ago, softlynow said:

Nah. But thanks for the hot take.

Well, when this comes up again, which it will, just remember that we totally got it solved the last time.

[softlynow 1894]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Well, when this comes up again, which it will, just remember that we totally got it solved the last time.

On a long enough timeline, nothing is solved, because nothing matters.

[David Dennison 19542]

5 minutes ago, softlynow said:

On a long enough timeline, nothing is solved, because nothing matters.

But there is a new class of students every year.

They know about the history of the Eyes of Texas. Some of them will press the issue again. 

So it goes.

[mchookem 16769]

"Owning, acknowledging and teaching about all aspects of the origins of “The Eyes of Texas” as we continue to sing it moving forward with a redefined vision that unites our community."

i think that will make a difference. i think this will be much less divisive than it would have been if it had been scrapped altogether. i also like the idea of added/modified lyrics. 

i like all the suggestions. it was a difficult conversation and UT leadership took it seriously. i would expect nothing less. 🤘

i mean, look at what Sharp and aggy are doing...🙄

[Pasken 1312]

I'm not going to be singing it at games. Mostly the fact it was debuted in a minstrel show but also because it's a bad music parody. If that's alma mater material then I wish we would have gotten rid of it and asked Weird Al to just write us a new one.

[Texas73 422]

2 minutes ago, Pasken said:

I'm not going to be singing it at games. Mostly the fact it was debuted in a minstrel show but also because it's a bad music parody. If that's alma mater material then I wish we would have gotten rid of it and asked Weird Al to just write us a new one.

The Eyes will be louder than ever when games resume so your voice won't be missed. 

[Pasken 1312]

Just now, Texas73 said:

The Eyes will be louder than ever when games resume so your voice won't be missed. 

I think you're wrong. It'll be a "mixed" reaction at best with the loudest voices coming from the older, whiter crowd.

[SizzleChest 8314]

27 minutes ago, Texas73 said:

The Eyes will be louder than ever when games resume so your voice won't be missed. 

People aren't and will never be compelled to sing the alma mater.  Players are no longer required to sing it.

Some are not satisfied with this outcome announced today.  Some are.

But, will it render students, alumni, and administrators to a continuing state of 'hot war' amongst themselves over it?  Not in my opinion.

I don't think the Eyes will continue to be the focal point diversity and inclusion issue moving forward. There are some other issues that, if achieved, arguably will go farther in making significant progress than eliminating the alma mater (or changing it).  And there's certainly always more that could be done from a financial investment perspective to support black students and change long-standing perspectives at UT.

 

Edited July 14, 2020 by SizzleChest

[mchookem 16769]

FWIW, my husband is close friends with one of the earliest black letterman, who played with Whittier. he and others have reached out to Hartzell and CDC throughout all of this. none of them (in this particular circle) wanted the Eyes to be eliminated and they were all pretty adamant and vocal about it. several even reached out to current players to discuss. 

they are all apparently very pleased with the developments. 

also, Earl and Ricky's comments in response are very moving. ❤🤘

[Queen Bitch 1692]

Have we seen comments from current student athletes yet?

[Longboard Horn 41355]

https://abc13.com/education/ut-will-not-remove-eyes-of-texas-after-pushback/6315367/

The University of Texas has rejected calls by its athletes to change the school's fight song that they say has racist undertones.  The university says "The Eyes of Texas" will remain... It's also keeping its statue of prominent segregationist James Hogg.  UT says it plans to attempt to educate visitors and students on the "history and context of symbols that remain," erect several statues honoring Black figures in the university’s history and rename two campus buildings.

[mchookem 16769]

"the school's fight song"?? jackasses 🙄

[Longboard Horn 41355]

4 minutes ago, mchookem said:

"the school's fight song"?? jackasses 🙄

More like dumbasses. It's the Alma Mater, not the fight song.

[Tonesky 1059]

This is a month old, but I don't see it posted anywhere.  Hard to find any holes in this well researched proof of racist origins and intent of The Eyes.  The author is Alberto A. Martinez, PhD, a UT history professor.  He concludes:

 

Quote

 

UT’s Report claims that the song is “a call to accountability,” and that very probably it was not rooted in connection to General Lee, and that its original performance at a racist show was incidental, because it was not created for that purpose.

However, contrary to UT’s Report, the neglected historical evidence shows that the title of The Eyes of Texas was inspired by words about General Robert E. Lee in the Civil War, and that the song was created for UT’s first full-fledged minstrel show, on the day of the show, to make fun of UT’s President, while overall mocking Black persons.

That is not what the song presently is, and that is not how most singers intend it. But those are its origins.

 

 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

17 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

This is a month old, but I don't see it posted anywhere.  Hard to find any holes in this well researched proof of racist origins and intent of The Eyes.  The author is Alberto A. Martinez, PhD, a UT history professor.  He concludes:

 

 

Thanks for sharing. That paper was new to me.  I had read the Commission's report when it first came out, and it was rather obvious the discussions surrounding Lee and the confederacy in the executive summary appeared disconnected from page 11 of the commision report.  That was a big question mark for me.  Now, it isn't clear to me why some of the evidence Martinez presented in his paper seemingly was left out of the commision report.  It also isn't clear why their analysis and conclusions are so drastically different.

[TwiceHorn 32079]

57 minutes ago, Tonesky said:

This is a month old, but I don't see it posted anywhere.  Hard to find any holes in this well researched proof of racist origins and intent of The Eyes.  The author is Alberto A. Martinez, PhD, a UT history professor.  He concludes:

 

 

I'm sorry that's absurd.  That's even more transparently trying to reach a result than the Committee report.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I'm sorry that's absurd.  That's even more transparently trying to reach a result than the Committee report.

Why do you feel that way?

[TwiceHorn 32079]

13 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Why do you feel that way?

It strains to reach its conclusions.  It poses as ineluctable logic, but it's just piecing together factoids in a way that supports the conclusion.

It's easier just to say: The University of Texas at Austin was a virulently racist institution run by virulently racist white men up until about 1960, or even as late as 1970.  Anything that originated in that time period, therefore, is the product of a virulently racist institution and inherently and inextricably linked to racism, not just abstract connections to "the confederacy" or the South, but real actual structural and institutional racism.

That's a pretty accurate statement.  Other than the part "anything that originated in that time period," which is a matter of opinion.

But it also throws the baby out with the bathwater.  That's what this argument boils down to.  There's a little bit, maybe even a lot, of shit or piss in the bathwater at UT.  Do we throw the baby out, too?  Or do we dump the bathwater, keep the bathtub, and clean off the baby?

 

Edited April 23, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[GW Hayduke 1957]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

It strains to reach its conclusions.  It poses as ineluctable logic, but it's just piecing together factoids in a way that supports the conclusion.

How so? 

I know you mean the paper strains to reach its conclusions, but interestingly I had the same perception of the commission report's executive summary and disconnect with it's own page 11.  There seemed to be a lot of strain and semantic games between the two. 

I recommend you take a look at the the section of the paper under the heading "Was the Eyes of Texas Inspired by Robert Lee?" Comparing the commision report (pg 11 and the executive summary) and the paper (section on Robert Lee), there appears to be some evidence left out of the commission report.  That raises questions.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

26 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's easier just to say: The University of Texas at Austin was a virulently racist institution run by virulently racist white men up until about 1960, or even as late as 1970.  Anything that originated in that time period, therefore, is the product of a virulently racist institution and inherently and inextricably linked to racism, not just abstract connections to "the confederacy" or the South, but real actual structural and institutional racism.

That's a pretty accurate statement.  Other than the part "anything that originated in that time period," which is a matter of opinion.

But it also throws the baby out with the bathwater.  That's what this argument boils down to.  There's a little bit, maybe even a lot, of shit or piss in the bathwater at UT.  Do we throw the baby out, too?  Or do we dump the bathwater, keep the bathtub, and clean off the baby?

I don't think we would want to throw the baby out of the bath water along with everything else that came prior to 1970.  I understood a goal of the effort was to conduct an informed assessment on the origins of the eyes.  I'm not 100% confident the commission's executive summary fairly did that. 

[Longhorn_Fan68 34106]

It's just a fucking song. Who gives a shit? If it's deemed to be racist in origin, then fine, write a new one. people don't come to Texas to sign The Eyes. We'll be fine

[TwiceHorn 32079]

54 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

How so? tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt
+_"?{_

I don't dispute that it was in some form or fashion inspired by Lee.  Prather idolized him, that seems to be an historical fact.  Exactly which source or phrase or quotation of Lee Prather adopted seems less than clear.  But it doesn't fucking matter.

Prather didn't write the song.  

It's not some paean to the lost cause or to Lee. It borrows a phrase.  

There's general agreement that it was a parody of Prather.  Parody means that the literal sentiments expressed are not to be taken seriously. It doesn't matter whether the intention of the parody was to make fun of Prather, Lee, or the attentuated racist connections between them and the phrase.  It is not to be taken literally or seriously.

The bit about whether it was written for or simply first performed at a minstrel show is another portion I find the piecing together of material pretty strained, also.

And the bit about Til Gabriel Blows His Horn being lifted straight out of a racist song is also strained as fuck and ignores the rwo-thousand-year-old origin of the arcangel Gabriel and his horn and its significance of the end time.

It's easy enough to connect just about anything associated with UT in the first decade of the 20th century to racism.  The question is how meaningful is that connection, really?

 

The best argument on the baby/bathwater front is, as an "alma mater," or just a song, it's a really shitty baby, not even a baby at all, so who really cares if we throw it out.

I am rather fond of the baby, and would rather wipe it off and keep it, but, I can see how others might feel differently.

Edited April 23, 2021 by TwiceHorn

[GW Hayduke 1957]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's easy enough to connect just about anything associated with UT in the first decade of the 20th century to racism.  The question is how meaningful is that connection, really?

That is the question the commission was tasked with answering.  I'm not convinced the executive summary reflects an honest attempt.   

I would say your below statement goes a lot further than what the commission was willing to say.

10 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't dispute that it was in some form or fashion inspired by Lee.

I don't know what happened, but I'm assuming there were a large number of folks who were all wordsmithing and negotiating the executive summary.  It probably got convoluted. 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

[TwiceHorn 32079]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

That is the question the commission was tasked with answering.  I'm not convinced the executive summary reflects an honest attempt.   

I would say your below statement goes a lot further than what the commission was willing to say.

I don't know what happened, but I'm assuming there were a large number of folks who were all wordsmithing and negotiating the executive summary.  It probably got convoluted. 

I conflated two problems I see with this whole deal.  The first is the arguments trying to tie the song ever closer to some racist something or other, when there isn't a scintilla of evidence that the song itself was written with the intention to demean blacks.  The second is that even if you accept that it's connected as set forth, in the second paper, there still isn't a scintilla of evidence that the song was written with the intention to demean blacks.

Summaries I guess are always problematic, because they summarize.  I guess everyone's on edge because of Barr and the Mueller Report.  I'm not too troubled by it, because the report seems to be pretty complete.

The Committee's report contains basically the same information, but doesn't go to great lengths to connect dots that may or should or should not be connected.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

9 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I conflated two problems I see with this whole deal.  The first is the arguments trying to tie the song ever closer to some racist something or other, when there isn't a scintilla of evidence that the song itself was written with the intention to demean blacks.  The second is that even if you accept that it's connected as set forth, in the second paper, there still isn't a scintilla of evidence that the song was written with the intention to demean blacks.

Summaries I guess are always problematic, because they summarize.  I guess everyone's on edge because of Barr and the Mueller Report.  I'm not too troubled by it, because the report seems to be pretty complete.

The Committee's report contains basically the same information, but doesn't go to great lengths to connect dots that may or should or should not be connected.

Barr and the Mueller Report is a decent analogy.  I imagine there were papers and analysis similar to the Martinez paper that were shared around between students, athletes, journalists, and professors, and it was probably generally accepted that Lee was an inspiration.  Then reading the commission's executive summary, it would be rather obvious it was a whitewash job.  It is unfortunate.  In both instances, the media took the intended narratives and ran with it

[Tonesky 1059]

Was the Civil War about slavery or states rights?  There will never be agreement regarding the facts of the origin of The Eyes.  But, a substantial and material number of our Longhorn brothers and sisters are equally offended by the states rights narrative, statues of Robert E. Lee, and The Eyes.  That will never change.  Things may simmer down for a time, with athletes and band members showing up and participating in UT tradition without expressing their offense, but the issue is guaranteed to resurface. 

My personal view is that The Eyes is tainted with racism and needs to go.  I LOVE The Eyes.  I have sung it at weddings, etc.  Being part of it in a packed stadium following a big win is about as uplifting and stirring of an experience as any can be.  I will miss it.  But, it needs to go.  More to the point, it will go.  The only question is when.  Midland Lee High School, The Washington Redskins, etc. resisted repeated calls for change, and eventually gave in to the inevitable.  The same will eventually happen with The Eyes.  And, the sooner change comes, the sooner healing begins. 

Go Stanford Tree!

[David Dennison 19542]

 

[RomaVicta 30593]

On 4/26/2021 at 3:46 PM, Tonesky said:

Was the Civil War about slavery or states rights?  There will never be agreement regarding the facts of the origin of The Eyes.  But, a substantial and material number of our Longhorn brothers and sisters are equally offended by the states rights narrative, statues of Robert E. Lee, and The Eyes.  That will never change.  Things may simmer down for a time, with athletes and band members showing up and participating in UT tradition without expressing their offense, but the issue is guaranteed to resurface. 

My personal view is that The Eyes is tainted with racism and needs to go.  I LOVE The Eyes.  I have sung it at weddings, etc.  Being part of it in a packed stadium following a big win is about as uplifting and stirring of an experience as any can be.  I will miss it.  But, it needs to go.  More to the point, it will go.  The only question is when.  Midland Lee High School, The Washington Redskins, etc. resisted repeated calls for change, and eventually gave in to the inevitable.  The same will eventually happen with The Eyes.  And, the sooner change comes, the sooner healing begins. 

Go Stanford Tree!

I feel the same way.  A school, national, or organizational song should unite everyone in that entity.

On the football board last year, I wrote that I'd give the decision to a representative committee of black students and let them make the call. The only thing I would pose to them beyond that is if they think it would be okay to revisit the issue in ten years. 

I don't see it as a negotiation because I don't feel comfortable arguing with someone who truly feels alienated, insulted, or uncomfortable with some tradition we have.

Lastly, I feel that is says something better about the University that we'd lay aside a beloved tradition to embrace people who once feared to even set foot on campus. We're siupposed to be the smart ones. The smart move that will be a credit to all of us seems obvious to me.

We're the State University of Texas. We belong to all Texans. All Texans are welcome and encouraged to be Longhorns whether they've ever attended or not. 

 

[elfenix 34752]

5 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

We're the State University of Texas. We belong to all Texans. All Texans are welcome and encouraged to be Longhorns whether they've ever attended or not. 

t-shirt sip fans

[wildcat09 29579]

On 4/26/2021 at 3:46 PM, Tonesky said:

Was the Civil War about slavery or states rights?  There will never be agreement regarding the facts of the origin of The Eyes.  But, a substantial and material number of our Longhorn brothers and sisters are equally offended by the states rights narrative, statues of Robert E. Lee, and The Eyes.  That will never change.  Things may simmer down for a time, with athletes and band members showing up and participating in UT tradition without expressing their offense, but the issue is guaranteed to resurface. 

My personal view is that The Eyes is tainted with racism and needs to go.  I LOVE The Eyes.  I have sung it at weddings, etc.  Being part of it in a packed stadium following a big win is about as uplifting and stirring of an experience as any can be.  I will miss it.  But, it needs to go.  More to the point, it will go.  The only question is when.  Midland Lee High School, The Washington Redskins, etc. resisted repeated calls for change, and eventually gave in to the inevitable.  The same will eventually happen with The Eyes.  And, the sooner change comes, the sooner healing begins. 

Go Stanford Tree!

The civil war was about slavery.

[RomaVicta 30593]

4 hours ago, elfenix said:

t-shirt sip fans

Among the most un-Texas things about Texas A&M is their exclusivity. They, as you allude to, scorn fans who are not alumni while claiming to be all about Texas. DKR himself said that he believed that many in the state viewed UT as their team and their school, and that this was  great thing. I agree. I love that we have include Spanish broadcasts for those Spanish speakers who feel a connection.

Aggies take pride in conforming. They institutionalize a phony, forced Texan persona, "Howdy! Howdy! Howdy! We're being real friendly! See how friendly we're being! Get your fucking faggot ass off the sacred grass you red bastard!!!!!!! Howdy!"

This is about the The Eyes. Years ago on the weekend Case McCoy got his OU victory, I was forced to watch the game at the Moon Tower where I was invited to a co-ed wedding shower. I watched the game outside with one other graduate and a bunch of locals, none of whom looked like the college type. 

We won that game and a rough-looking woman with giant smile stood up and led all of us in The Eyes. Fantastic.

I'd miss the song, but I want that feeling of unity more.

[Poolflood 845]

5 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

I feel the same way.  A school, national, or organizational song should unite everyone in that entity.

On the football board last year, I wrote that I'd give the decision to a representative committee of black students and let them make the call. The only thing I would pose to them beyond that is if they think it would be okay to revisit the issue in ten years. 

I don't see it as a negotiation because I don't feel comfortable arguing with someone who truly feels alienated, insulted, or uncomfortable with some tradition we have.

Lastly, I feel that is says something better about the University that we'd lay aside a beloved tradition to embrace people who once feared to even set foot on campus. We're siupposed to be the smart ones. The smart move that will be a credit to all of us seems obvious to me.

We're the State University of Texas. We belong to all Texans. All Texans are welcome and encouraged to be Longhorns whether they've ever attended or not. 

 

 

52 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Among the most un-Texas things about Texas A&M is their exclusivity. They, as you allude to, scorn fans who are not alumni while claiming to be all about Texas. DKR himself said that he believed that many in the state viewed UT as their team and their school, and that this was  great thing. I agree. I love that we have include Spanish broadcasts for those Spanish speakers who feel a connection.

Aggies take pride in conforming. They institutionalize a phony, forced Texan persona, "Howdy! Howdy! Howdy! We're being real friendly! See how friendly we're being! Get your fucking faggot ass off the sacred grass you red bastard!!!!!!! Howdy!"

This is about the The Eyes. Years ago on the weekend Case McCoy got his OU victory, I was forced to watch the game at the Moon Tower where I was invited to a co-ed wedding shower. I watched the game outside with one other graduate and a bunch of locals, none of whom looked like the college type. 

We won that game and a rough-looking woman with giant smile stood up and led all of us in The Eyes. Fantastic.

I'd miss the song, but I want that feeling of unity more.

Nothing will ever unite a large, diverse community 100%.  And feelings shouldn't be the tipping point.

I liked your Case story.  I have similar stories.  If someone feels that you are racist because you sang the song with pride, does that make you a racist?  Of course not.

I'm all for inclusiveness,  I welcome UT fans who decide not sing the song.  I just believe they are poorer for shunning the experience of unity I feel when we sing it, win or lose.

[Queen Bitch 1692]

I wanna win football games more than I wanna sing the Eyes. 

[Willfully Horn 8264]

My daughter, going into her senior year, (a half semester early,) says it’s time to “abolish” the song. I had my time on campus, this is her time. I support her.

Edited May 6, 2021 by Willfully Horn
Non humble brag

[tantric superman 4668]

On 4/26/2021 at 3:46 PM, Tonesky said:

Go Stanford Tree!

[GW Hayduke 1957]

9 hours ago, Poolflood said:

If someone feels that you are racist because you sang the song with pride, does that make you a racist?

No one thinks you are a racist. This isn't about what people think about your identity or whether you are a victim.  This is about a song, the origins of the song, and whether we should have a song that unifies the whole school or not.  

[AnTiM 1695]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

No one thinks you are a racist. This isn't about what people think about your identity or whether you are a victim.  This is about a song, the origins of the song, and whether we should have a song that unifies the whole school or not.  

If you think there is any song in the world that would unify the whole school you are sadly mistaken.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13731]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

No one thinks you are a racist. This isn't about what people think about your identity or whether you are a victim.  This is about a song, the origins of the song, and whether we should have a song that unifies the whole school or not.  

There seems to be a straw man element to the defense of the Eyes. I don't think I saw or heard anyone claim that if you've sung the song, you're a racist because of that.  I would guess that 99.99% of us were unaware of the real history of it. Info about the UT-affiliated minstrel shows appear to have been quickly swept under the rug once they were ended in the 50s. I imagine there was major embarrassment and many wanted to pretend they never happened.

I don't get the hang-up on whether the phrase is somehow related to Robert E. Lee or not. I'm sure there are many things that good or bad people have said, and that doesn't necessary impact that phrase or saying. To me, the biggest problem with the Eyes of Texas is that is was originally sung by someone in blackface. It's not a 100% certainty but all evidence points to that it was. There is no reasonable doubt with that aspect.

 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There seems to be a straw man element to the defense of the Eyes. I don't think I saw or heard anyone claim that if you've sung the song, you're a racist because of that.  I would guess that 99.99% of us were unaware of the real history of it. Info about the UT-affiliated minstrel shows appear to have been quickly swept under the rug once they were ended in the 50s. I imagine there was major embarrassment and many wanted to pretend they never happened.

I don't get the hang-up on whether the phrase is somehow related to Robert E. Lee or not. I'm sure there are many things that good or bad people have said, and that doesn't necessary impact that phrase or saying. To me, the biggest problem with the Eyes of Texas is that is was originally sung by someone in blackface. It's not a 100% certainty but all evidence points to that it was. There is no reasonable doubt with that aspect.

 

I understand the Robert E. Lee/confederacy origin issue hasn't gone away because the Commission's report did not handle it well.  The section on Lee in the below linked article addresses the issue better than I could.  It is apparent to some that the commission report's executive summary whitewashed the Lee issue.  

https://almartinezut.medium.com/true-origins-of-the-eyes-of-texas-3f2188569f0e

[RomaVicta 30593]

11 minutes ago, AnTiM said:

If you think there is any song in the world that would unify the whole school you are sadly mistaken.

You're turning the argument upside down.  The discussion about The Eyes is not prompted by objections that it fails to unify 100% of everybody everywhere. I don't know where you even get that other than as a deflection.

The discussion is that an important segment of what we'd like to see as the Texas Longhorn family is alienated by the song's history and what it represents to them. I believe the people of that group and am willing to settle the issue by letting them have final say. That this group of people is still living in the worst part of our history makes my solution a pretty tiny sacrifice to make things better.

Your line of argument springs from this, written by Poolflood:

Quote

Nothing will ever unite a large, diverse community 100%.  And feelings shouldn't be the tipping point.

I liked your Case story.  I have similar stories.  If someone feels that you are racist because you sang the song with pride, does that make you a racist?  Of course not.

I'm all for inclusiveness,  I welcome UT fans who decide not sing the song.  I just believe they are poorer for shunning the experience of unity I feel when we sing it, win or lose.

Feeling shouldn't be the tipping point because you would be deprived of a feeling you have?

Your argument is akin to the ones about the Confederate battle flag. Southern pride. Part of the history of using that flag is indeed that innocent. Should that mean we ignore what the flag means to black Americans? Should that mean we excuse those who wave that flag for more sinister reasons? 

Also, don't confuse my desire to find a solution that may mean we lose the song with some kind of fear that I'm being willfully misunderstood. I don't think the persons wanting to end use of the song have ever said that those who sing the song are racist. That's another misunderstanding or deflection. They express what the song means to them, and I believe them.

[wildcat09 29579]

30 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

There seems to be a straw man element to the defense of the Eyes. I don't think I saw or heard anyone claim that if you've sung the song, you're a racist because of that.  I would guess that 99.99% of us were unaware of the real history of it. Info about the UT-affiliated minstrel shows appear to have been quickly swept under the rug once they were ended in the 50s. I imagine there was major embarrassment and many wanted to pretend they never happened.

I don't get the hang-up on whether the phrase is somehow related to Robert E. Lee or not. I'm sure there are many things that good or bad people have said, and that doesn't necessary impact that phrase or saying. To me, the biggest problem with the Eyes of Texas is that is was originally sung by someone in blackface. It's not a 100% certainty but all evidence points to that it was. There is no reasonable doubt with that aspect.

 

Certain people will always take any criticism of historical racism, or even acknowledgement of it, as a direct personal attack against them. It's inexplicable (just kidding, it's entirely explicable).

[David Dennison 19542]

1 hour ago, AnTiM said:

If you think there is any song in the world that would unify the whole school you are sadly mistaken.

Texas Fight?

[shakahorn 1658]

40 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Texas Fight?

Especially the second stanza.

[Macanudo 13327]

2 hours ago, shakahorn said:

Especially the second stanza.

OU Sucks or Make 'em eat shit?