j p o wrote:
I didn't really think it was based in racism until I read the people defending it.
No kidding. Talk about not helping your cause.
Lavender Room
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [j p o]
[ In reply to ]
I didn't really think it was based in racism until I read the people defending it.
No kidding. Talk about not helping your cause.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this.
Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [sosayusall]
[ In reply to ]
sosayusall wrote:
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this. Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Well, these kids did choose Texas. It's no mystery what the spirit song is. Why choose to attend a school to play a sport if you are insulted by its spirit song? Short, keeping it real, answer: they weren't insulted by it. They just got to Texas, got tribally aligned, and joined the powerplay. How could you live with yourself 10 to 20 years from now if you weren't sticking it to the man when you had the chance?
But, constitutionally, nobody's money can force anyone to do anything. It's seems very much a first amendment issue at this point. There'll need to be some kind of agreement, or it's going to be everybody upset at everbody at the end of the game.
Hmmm... on second thought maybe it won't be thaaat unfamiliar.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
SH wrote:
sosayusall wrote:
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this. Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Well, these kids did choose Texas. It's no mystery what the spirit song is. Why choose to attend a school to play a sport if you are insulted by its spirit song? Short, keeping it real, answer: they weren't insulted by it. They just got to Texas, got tribally aligned, and joined the powerplay. How could you live with yourself 10 to 20 years from now if you weren't sticking it to the man when you had the chance?
But, constitutionally, nobody's money can force anyone to do anything. It's seems very much a first amendment issue at this point. There'll need to be some kind of agreement, or it's going to be everybody upset at everbody at the end of the game.
Hmmm... on second thought maybe it won't be thaaat unfamiliar.
So you think that all of the players knew the lyrics of the song and the historic background before joining? Really?
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
SH wrote:
But I can also understand alumni taking umbrage at the idea that they've been secretly participating in some racist charade for the past half century every time they've joyously and harmoniously sang their traditional UT spirit song.If someone finds out what they have been doing is actually racist, a normal person stops doing that thing, not tells those black people they can just leave the state.
I know I would not take umbrage if I found out some stupid song I sang was actually racist. I think we can judge the people taking umbrage by it.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
Why do you think the alumni care if the student athletes are on the field when the song is playing ?
What right does a donor have in telling the admin what to do about the school?
The donor doesn’t like a perceived slight by student athletes for not caring about the school. So the donor wants to control what’s going on.
That’s the issue. And guess what the players don’t care as much about the school as the donor.
What right does a donor have in telling the admin what to do about the school?
The donor doesn’t like a perceived slight by student athletes for not caring about the school. So the donor wants to control what’s going on.
That’s the issue. And guess what the players don’t care as much about the school as the donor.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
SH wrote:
sosayusall wrote:
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this. Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Well, these kids did choose Texas. It's no mystery what the spirit song is. Why choose to attend a school to play a sport if you are insulted by its spirit song? Short, keeping it real, answer: they weren't insulted by it. They just got to Texas, got tribally aligned, and joined the powerplay. How could you live with yourself 10 to 20 years from now if you weren't sticking it to the man when you had the chance?
But, constitutionally, nobody's money can force anyone to do anything. It's seems very much a first amendment issue at this point. There'll need to be some kind of agreement, or it's going to be everybody upset at everbody at the end of the game.
Hmmm... on second thought maybe it won't be thaaat unfamiliar.
So you think a young black kid who manages to be accepted to play football for UT - likely a huge opportunity for him - should turn it down if he finds the singing of the song to be offensive? The white privilege is strong here. You almost sound like one of those donors telling them to go to a different school if they don't like it.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [chaparral]
[ In reply to ]
chaparral wrote:
SH wrote:
sosayusall wrote:
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this. Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Well, these kids did choose Texas. It's no mystery what the spirit song is. Why choose to attend a school to play a sport if you are insulted by its spirit song? Short, keeping it real, answer: they weren't insulted by it. They just got to Texas, got tribally aligned, and joined the powerplay. How could you live with yourself 10 to 20 years from now if you weren't sticking it to the man when you had the chance?
But, constitutionally, nobody's money can force anyone to do anything. It's seems very much a first amendment issue at this point. There'll need to be some kind of agreement, or it's going to be everybody upset at everbody at the end of the game.
Hmmm... on second thought maybe it won't be thaaat unfamiliar.
So you think that all of the players knew the lyrics of the song and the historic background before joining? Really?
My claim is that if you were offended by it, pre-signing, you probably wouldn't go to the school.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [chaparral]
[ In reply to ]
chaparral wrote:
SH wrote:
But I can also understand alumni taking umbrage at the idea that they've been secretly participating in some racist charade for the past half century every time they've joyously and harmoniously sang their traditional UT spirit song.
If someone finds out what they have been doing is actually racist, a normal person stops doing that thing, not tells those black people they can just leave the state.
I know I would not take umbrage if I found out some stupid song I sang was actually racist. I think we can judge the people taking umbrage by it.
That's not why I said people would take umbrage.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [Kay Serrar]
[ In reply to ]
Kay Serrar wrote:
SH wrote:
sosayusall wrote:
Yeah I honestly don’t think the donors are that racists. But the situation plays out like this. Athlete - I don’t want to sing that song
Admin - ok we went going to make you sing that song but we are going to play it.
Donor - if they don’t want to sing that song like everyone before then they should go somewhere else.
The donor is completely off base. He doesn’t want his norms to be changed - doesn’t care why. also wants to be able to force other people to do something. And also wants to indirectly control who gets admitted to UT based on his own criteria.
That’s the only reason why this is an issue. A donor is telling the admin what the standards for the student athletes should be. It’s insane that if you give someone enough money they will force 18 years olds to do something.
This is what cancel culture really looks like.
Well, these kids did choose Texas. It's no mystery what the spirit song is. Why choose to attend a school to play a sport if you are insulted by its spirit song? Short, keeping it real, answer: they weren't insulted by it. They just got to Texas, got tribally aligned, and joined the powerplay. How could you live with yourself 10 to 20 years from now if you weren't sticking it to the man when you had the chance?
But, constitutionally, nobody's money can force anyone to do anything. It's seems very much a first amendment issue at this point. There'll need to be some kind of agreement, or it's going to be everybody upset at everbody at the end of the game.
Hmmm... on second thought maybe it won't be thaaat unfamiliar.
So you think a young black kid who manages to be accepted to play football for UT - likely a huge opportunity for him - should turn it down if he finds the singing of the song to be offensive? The white privilege is strong here. You almost sound like one of those donors telling them to go to a different school if they don't like it.
UT gets very good recruits. Very good recruits have a lot of choices about where to go to school. I never said they should turn it down, but I did imply that if it was important to them then they probably would turn it down. This is all germain to the idea that the "racism" of this song isn't apparent to the singer or the listener -- because the song just isn't racist. Any racism must be manufactured via a very questionable guilt by association game that could make just about anything racist. (Which would have been apparent had you read the rest of this post or my other posts.)
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
I can meet you half way. Every Lee I knew growing up was Chinese or Black so it didn’t immediately register with me why Lee High School should change names. So I did have to learn - or as you said join my tribe - that having black children go to a public high school named after a man who fought to keep black children slaves is not okay.
These things are rarely obvious. The intent behind naming a base after Pickett, a man whose name is synonymous with a failed military maneuver (Picketts Charge) and who fled to Canada to avoid being tried for sedition, seems fairly straight forward. As you might put it, the city council (or whoever chose the name) gathered their tribe together and decided to send a message to the local negros.
My problem with your characterizations here is your failure to see both tribes at work. No one is actually offended that players don’t want to play sing along. That tribe has pulled out their go to card - tradition - and rallied the troops.
These things are rarely obvious. The intent behind naming a base after Pickett, a man whose name is synonymous with a failed military maneuver (Picketts Charge) and who fled to Canada to avoid being tried for sedition, seems fairly straight forward. As you might put it, the city council (or whoever chose the name) gathered their tribe together and decided to send a message to the local negros.
My problem with your characterizations here is your failure to see both tribes at work. No one is actually offended that players don’t want to play sing along. That tribe has pulled out their go to card - tradition - and rallied the troops.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [ajthomas]
[ In reply to ]
That’s the controversy.
One tribe is saying we don’t want to sing their songs. They can still sing their songs.
The other tribe is saying if they arnt going to sing our songs they need to dance somewhere else. Even if this was about singing happy birthday the power structure is still there between different classes of people.
The “players” tribe at this point doesn’t hold many cards and has a lot to lose. The rich donor who is trying to exert his influence has nothing to lose (in fact saves money) and holds the cards.
Equating the two tribes is silly because of what they have to lose vs. their relative power vs. what their gripes are about. Saying “if you don’t like the status quo go somewhere else” for a public university by a non university employee who holds a lot of power in society is the issue. (Especially in light of the “my freedoms” crowd).
One tribe is saying we don’t want to sing their songs. They can still sing their songs.
The other tribe is saying if they arnt going to sing our songs they need to dance somewhere else. Even if this was about singing happy birthday the power structure is still there between different classes of people.
The “players” tribe at this point doesn’t hold many cards and has a lot to lose. The rich donor who is trying to exert his influence has nothing to lose (in fact saves money) and holds the cards.
Equating the two tribes is silly because of what they have to lose vs. their relative power vs. what their gripes are about. Saying “if you don’t like the status quo go somewhere else” for a public university by a non university employee who holds a lot of power in society is the issue. (Especially in light of the “my freedoms” crowd).
Last edited by:
sosayusall: Mar 5, 21 7:09
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [sosayusall]
[ In reply to ]
The longhorn network is worth far more than the donations of a group of alumni. The players have one card, but it’s a pretty good one: you start losing games over this crap and see what happens.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [ajthomas]
[ In reply to ]
Personally I don’t see the controversy on the players end. They don’t want to do [x], that doesn’t directly relate to my playing.
I see the controversy on the donors end. I want [x] in return for my money.
Even though we know donors get a lot of pull. The issue is that here it is explicit of what they want and on what (an issue dealing with racism). People with power want to exert their power on a lesser powerful class of people. That’s the issue. Specifically telling them what they have to do.
The secondary issue is that The players were told standing for the national anthem was not allowed because it disrespected the military (obviously false). Now the players are “told” they have to actively sing songs because it disrespects the school if they don’t (very silly). All of this is against the backdrop of white people arguing about wearing masks because it violates their freedoms.
The current players can’t leave. They don’t have many cards. The future players do. The current players also have their limited time to make it to the next level.
I see the controversy on the donors end. I want [x] in return for my money.
Even though we know donors get a lot of pull. The issue is that here it is explicit of what they want and on what (an issue dealing with racism). People with power want to exert their power on a lesser powerful class of people. That’s the issue. Specifically telling them what they have to do.
The secondary issue is that The players were told standing for the national anthem was not allowed because it disrespected the military (obviously false). Now the players are “told” they have to actively sing songs because it disrespects the school if they don’t (very silly). All of this is against the backdrop of white people arguing about wearing masks because it violates their freedoms.
The current players can’t leave. They don’t have many cards. The future players do. The current players also have their limited time to make it to the next level.
Last edited by:
sosayusall: Mar 5, 21 7:27
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [ajthomas]
[ In reply to ]
I completely agree with you that it's all about power now*. But that can run both ways, right?
I never liked the song for reasons I've already explained (and others I haven't even gotten into). I also give $0 to the UT football program, and am not emotionally tied to how the team does. I have no dogs in this hunt other than to try and give a voice to the proposition that sometimes everything isn't all about racism.
* and the stakes have never been lower!
I never liked the song for reasons I've already explained (and others I haven't even gotten into). I also give $0 to the UT football program, and am not emotionally tied to how the team does. I have no dogs in this hunt other than to try and give a voice to the proposition that sometimes everything isn't all about racism.
* and the stakes have never been lower!
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
The issue isn’t all about racism. It’s more about power structure between young black athletes and old white men. (I also wouldn’t include the term “dog hunt” dealing with anything tangentially related to race in America).
Last edited by:
sosayusall: Mar 5, 21 7:46
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
So the committee came out with their decision: the song stays.
I appreciate the scholarly effort put forth.
I appreciate the scholarly effort put forth.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [ajthomas]
[ In reply to ]
A bit more nuanced than that...
--------
A University of Texas committee formed in November to investigate the history of "The Eyes of Texas" released a 58-page report Tuesday that says the school song was not written with racist intent but acknowledges that its first public performance was likely by performers in blackface during a minstrel show.
The song, which was written in 1903, is traditionally played at sporting events, including before and after Texas Longhorns football games. In recent years, as history of the song's origins became more well known, it has become a controversial issue for the university, dividing the community.
"These historical facts add complexity and richness to the story of a song that debuted in a racist setting, exceedingly common for the time, but, as the preponderance of research showed, had no racist intent," the report states in its executive summary. "'The Eyes of Texas' should not only unite us, but hold all of us accountable to our institution's core values."
The report recommended that students not be required to sing the song.
https://www.espn.com/...st-intent-texas-song
--------
A University of Texas committee formed in November to investigate the history of "The Eyes of Texas" released a 58-page report Tuesday that says the school song was not written with racist intent but acknowledges that its first public performance was likely by performers in blackface during a minstrel show.
The song, which was written in 1903, is traditionally played at sporting events, including before and after Texas Longhorns football games. In recent years, as history of the song's origins became more well known, it has become a controversial issue for the university, dividing the community.
"These historical facts add complexity and richness to the story of a song that debuted in a racist setting, exceedingly common for the time, but, as the preponderance of research showed, had no racist intent," the report states in its executive summary. "'The Eyes of Texas' should not only unite us, but hold all of us accountable to our institution's core values."
The report recommended that students not be required to sing the song.
https://www.espn.com/...st-intent-texas-song
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [Kay Serrar]
[ In reply to ]
Kay Serrar wrote:
The report recommended that students not be required to sing the song.Going to be some unhappy donors and coaches if that recommendation is accepted...
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [Tri2gohard]
[ In reply to ]
Tri2gohard wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
The report recommended that students not be required to sing the song.Going to be some unhappy donors and coaches if that recommendation is accepted...
Are you saying the donors and coaches are for forcing people to sing the song?
Why do they hate freedom of speech (song)?
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [WelshinPhilly]
[ In reply to ]
WelshinPhilly wrote:
Are you saying the donors and coaches are for forcing people to sing the song? Why do they hate freedom of speech (song)?
Here is my original post from Page 1:
Tri2gohard wrote:
Alumni and donors are pissed: https://www.texastribune.org/...texas-donors-emails/
Players say they were threatened/forced to stay on the field:
https://www.texastribune.org/...yes-of-texas-donors/
Sark says the song is staying put:
https://bleacherreport.com/...p-eyes-of-texas-song
I love that Texas is an absolute CFB dumpster fire. Watching their fans meltdown on Twitter weekly enhances the CFB experience on Saturdays in the fall.
Been a lot of debate about the whys in this thread, but cliff notes is some Black players don't want to sing what they say is a racist song. New HC says the song is staying, donors said the Blacks can leave if they don't like it but the song is staying and the players better sing, or else!
As I said above, I just love watching a dumpster fire.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [Kay Serrar]
[ In reply to ]
I don't know if it is still true but there was a time when the Houston Chronicle was the largest publication (by far) to never receive a journalism Pulitzer.
It appears the committee split the baby in half.
It appears the committee split the baby in half.
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [Tri2gohard]
[ In reply to ]
Quote:
Been a lot of debate about the whys in this thread, but cliff notes is some Black players don't want to sing what they say is a racist song. New HC says the song is staying, donors said the Blacks can leave if they don't like it but the song is staying and the players better sing, or else! As I said above, I just love watching a dumpster fire.
so they keep the song, but "horns down" gets you in trouble...
maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD
Re: The Eyes of Texas Controversy [SH]
[ In reply to ]
The Eyes of Texas does not have racist lyrical content.
Melody can't be racist in and of itself.
I've Been Workin on the Railroad likely got its melody from an Austrian composer's Poet and Peasant Overture from 1846.
The words to I've Been Workin have been updated several times to get rid of racist language in the 150+ years since it originally was written.
I've Been Workin is a popular folk song in the US, but also a popular nursery rhyme in Japan, and has been sung or performed in countless children's shows, including Thomas the Train, The Chipmunks, Barney & Friends, etc.
The Eyes of Texas is NOT I've Been Workin; it just shares a melody
I think any contention that the song is racist is silly.
That said, if students don't want to sing it, so be it. They shouldn't be forced. But the school also shouldn't be forced to change the song.
Slowguy
(insert pithy phrase here...)
Melody can't be racist in and of itself.
I've Been Workin on the Railroad likely got its melody from an Austrian composer's Poet and Peasant Overture from 1846.
The words to I've Been Workin have been updated several times to get rid of racist language in the 150+ years since it originally was written.
I've Been Workin is a popular folk song in the US, but also a popular nursery rhyme in Japan, and has been sung or performed in countless children's shows, including Thomas the Train, The Chipmunks, Barney & Friends, etc.
The Eyes of Texas is NOT I've Been Workin; it just shares a melody
I think any contention that the song is racist is silly.
That said, if students don't want to sing it, so be it. They shouldn't be forced. But the school also shouldn't be forced to change the song.
Slowguy
(insert pithy phrase here...)
This issue is far from settled.
The dustup over the plaque is the latest example of UT-Austin officials standing by “The Eyes” over pleas that the university distance itself from the alma mater song because it originated at a minstrel show where students likely wore Blackface.
...
Just this week, a threatening incident was reported to UT-Austin police where a student-led online event about “The Eyes of Texas” was crashed by an unknown man on camera wearing a bandana over his mouth and nose and who appeared to be loading a large gun.
...
“I think this is the tip of the iceberg honestly,” Walker said. “This is the beginning of it and people resisting that decision and not accepting a committee of people deem[ing] the song isn’t racist. There's a whole generation of students and minority students that are equally and more mad than we are and don't want to enter a space that predetermined their opinions don’t matter.”
https://www.texastribune.org/...-of-texas-ut-austin/
Suffer Well.
Quote:
Dozens of students at the University of Texas at Austin who give campus tours to prospective Longhorns are refusing to work this week over a dispute about a plaque with “The Eyes of Texas” lyrics hanging in the Admissions Welcome Center. The dustup over the plaque is the latest example of UT-Austin officials standing by “The Eyes” over pleas that the university distance itself from the alma mater song because it originated at a minstrel show where students likely wore Blackface.
...
Just this week, a threatening incident was reported to UT-Austin police where a student-led online event about “The Eyes of Texas” was crashed by an unknown man on camera wearing a bandana over his mouth and nose and who appeared to be loading a large gun.
...
“I think this is the tip of the iceberg honestly,” Walker said. “This is the beginning of it and people resisting that decision and not accepting a committee of people deem[ing] the song isn’t racist. There's a whole generation of students and minority students that are equally and more mad than we are and don't want to enter a space that predetermined their opinions don’t matter.”
https://www.texastribune.org/...-of-texas-ut-austin/
Suffer Well.