I commented on this in the Kent Rowald Memorial Quad earlier tonight (and I guess I could link your reddit link there because it belongs there more than in the general forums). Supposedly the Washington Post had an article on college yearbooks featuring blackface photos today and both Rice and George Washington were mentioned in it.
These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
There’s a group of students on campus who think that Rice’s name should be changed just to prove they’re more woke than the rest.
(02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
(02-08-2019 11:11 PM)ranfin Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 11:00 PM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ]There’s a group of students on campus who think that Rice’s name should be changed just to prove they’re more woke than the rest.
Wokeapalooza!!!!
Careful: as AtEase and his sidekicks will tell you, not taking "woke" terminology seriously is an unpardonable sin. They will come after you, and then pat themselves on the back for doing so!
(02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
(02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
Note that the overwhelming majority of the he photos don’t have any names attached to them. So I’m not sure how this is “tearing down private citizens” if they can’t be identified.
But I wonder, should it be completely off limits to recognize past behaviors of members of an organization/group?
I had seen the 1920s Klan photo before, but I wasn’t really aware of how prevelant casual racism was at Rice in the 1950s and 1960s. I’m not exactly surprised, given that we still did not allow in people of color at that time, but I’m not going to be angry that a student has decided to make these photographs publicized. It’s important to know the good and bad of one’s history - and it seems like Rice certainly saw no issue with this rather unsavory part of our history at the time. Luckily, things appear to have changed for the better.
(02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
I see your point about naming these private citizens who have no opportunity to respond. The names could have been blacked out while still making the point.
Plenty of people have NOT seen the Klan photos before. So shedding some light on institutional racism in our country (and our university) is a good thing. I don't know what was in the heart of the student posting these photos, but I'm glad that the photos came out.
Was this virtue-signalling on behalf of the student? I don't know and neither do any of you.
(02-09-2019 10:09 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
I see your point about naming these private citizens who have no opportunity to respond. The names could have been blacked out while still making the point.
Plenty of people have NOT seen the Klan photos before. So shedding some light on institutional racism in our country (and our university) is a good thing. I don't know what was in the heart of the student posting these photos, but I'm glad that the photos came out.
Was this virtue-signalling on behalf of the student? I don't know and neither do any of you.
It is 100% virtue-signaling. Read the tweets further down. He also did this from his private account when he supposedly works for the thresher. An article in the Thresher is a much more appropriate way to address this. I’m not sure who hasn’t seen the Klan picture, everyone I know at Rice had seen it and like Lad said I’m pretty sure the university recognized the issue.
Times change. It’s important to recognize it but that’s clearly not the goal of this kid. He’s more like the kids who think Friends should be taken off Netflix because in the 90s people laughed at Chandler’s dad being trans.
(02-09-2019 10:19 AM)cr11owl Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 10:09 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
I see your point about naming these private citizens who have no opportunity to respond. The names could have been blacked out while still making the point.
Plenty of people have NOT seen the Klan photos before. So shedding some light on institutional racism in our country (and our university) is a good thing. I don't know what was in the heart of the student posting these photos, but I'm glad that the photos came out.
Was this virtue-signalling on behalf of the student? I don't know and neither do any of you.
It is 100% virtue-signaling. Read the tweets further down. He also did this from his private account when he supposedly works for the thresher. An article in the Thresher is a much more appropriate way to address this. I’m not sure who hasn’t seen the Klan picture, everyone I know at Rice had seen it and like Lad said I’m pretty sure the university recognized the issue.
Times change. It’s important to recognize it but that’s clearly not the goal of this kid. He’s more like the kids who think Friends should be taken off Netflix because in the 90s people laughed at Chandler’s dad being trans.
I haven't scoured his twitter feed. I just browsed the photos posted on reddit from the original post. You seem to have very keen insight into this total stranger but I'll take your word that the his tweets seal your case.
I guarantee you there are current Rice students who hadn't seen the Klan photo previously. Personally, I have seen it in the past but had honestly forgotten about it. It was jarring to see it yesterday even after having seen it in the past.
Times change...It is better now so why bring up the past... Get over it. I don't believe that line of reasoning. I'd rather they post the Klan pick on the front page of the Thresher every August than have people shedding light on injustice/racism be written off as "woke virtue-signallers".
Good Chronicle article. Thanks for the link to the above poster.
(02-09-2019 10:09 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
I see your point about naming these private citizens who have no opportunity to respond. The names could have been blacked out while still making the point.
Plenty of people have NOT seen the Klan photos before. So shedding some light on institutional racism in our country (and our university) is a good thing. I don't know what was in the heart of the student posting these photos, but I'm glad that the photos came out.
Was this virtue-signalling on behalf of the student? I don't know and neither do any of you.
The way to address this is in an article with discussion on the concept, not this expose style tabloid tweeting. As for my outrage (harsh way to describe my original comment, but ok) is because this doesn't achieve anything. Its just a holier-than-thou person sensationalizing something without any concept of discourse or digging into why and the attitude at the time.
The SJW types at Rice arent interested in discussion. Merely to prove to you they care more and can lay guilt trips on you for everything. I've been told multiple times that "people of color want x" or stuff like that. As a person of color, I'm capable of making decisions for myself without some SJW casting me in a stereotype.
(02-09-2019 10:19 AM)cr11owl Wrote: [ -> ]...
I’m not sure who hasn’t seen the Klan picture, everyone I know at Rice had seen it and like Lad said I’m pretty sure the university recognized the issue.
...
While many probably have seen these photos, I don't recall having seen them before.
And as disappointing as it is that this is part of Rice's history, I'm glad that I've been made aware of it. While following the recent press coverage on this topic, I've probably exhibited too much of a tendency to view these types of actions as being something that "people I know" would never be associated with. These photos are an eye-opener for me. No, they aren't recent, but some assumptions I would have made about Rice's past apparently need to be adjusted.
(02-09-2019 11:57 AM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 10:09 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 09:17 AM)ExcitedOwl18 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 08:52 AM)Rice93 Wrote: [ -> ] (02-08-2019 10:18 PM)Antarius Wrote: [ -> ]These are the same type of people who object to the color gray because something something confederacy racism.
"The same type of people"?
What is exactly the problem here? Yearbooks from the 20th century have hit the news cycle hard over the past week. In light of this, a review of his or her university's archived yearbooks doesn't seem that crazy.
I'm dismayed that nearly 100% of the outrage in this thread is directed towards "woke" people rather than the disgusting images that found their way to the light.
I’d be fine with it if these yearbooks were from 1970 onward.
But fact is: The Klan photos have been circulated many times before and IIRC, the university has issued a statement/apology on them already.
The black face photos are of people who are either elderly or dead. IMO, it’s unfair to tear these private citizens down on social media when it’s impossible for them to issue an apology/response. Like it or not, blackface was pretty acceptable and widely used during the time when the photos were taken. Certainly times and standards have changed (for the better), but I’m not going to judge someone for a singular, 80 y/o photo.
I see your point about naming these private citizens who have no opportunity to respond. The names could have been blacked out while still making the point.
Plenty of people have NOT seen the Klan photos before. So shedding some light on institutional racism in our country (and our university) is a good thing. I don't know what was in the heart of the student posting these photos, but I'm glad that the photos came out.
Was this virtue-signalling on behalf of the student? I don't know and neither do any of you.
The way to address this is in an article with discussion on the concept, not this expose style tabloid tweeting. As for my outrage (harsh way to describe my original comment, but ok) is because this doesn't achieve anything. Its just a holier-than-thou person sensationalizing something without any concept of discourse or digging into why and the attitude at the time.
The SJW types at Rice arent interested in discussion. Merely to prove to you they care more and can lay guilt trips on you for everything. I've been told multiple times that "people of color want x" or stuff like that. As a person of color, I'm capable of making decisions for myself without some SJW casting me in a stereotype.
Classifying every "SJW" at Rice like they're all the same person is silly. I was a student recently, so I have a little insight into the student body. Are there some people just interested in scoring quick points, saying gotcha when you inadvertently say or do something? Yes. But this is *Rice*. The majority of these "Social Justice Warriors" are pairing their personal/political opinions with majors in economics, engineering, political science, humanities, math/statistics, etc. so that they can use their beliefs to actually make an impact on the country and the world. Painting in broad brushes is stupid when anybody does it, regardless the intent of this one Rice student.
More importantly, why is this thread in a sports forum?
(02-09-2019 02:26 PM)Almadenmike Wrote: [ -> ] (02-09-2019 10:13 AM)Tiki Owl Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.houstonchronicle.com/opinion...600377.php
Well written and IMHO valid. The comments regarding Longstreet are especially valid.
For those who don't subscribe to the Houston Chronicle, here's a link to Comey's original Washington Post column: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html
Comey is playing loose with the facts about Longstreet. Outside of Jefferson Davis, the other 4 Confederates with statues on the avenue all were boys from Virginia. Yes, they were largely intended as a poke in the eye, despite being the losers of the war, but every person with a statue on Monument Avenue had a significant tie to Virginia (and likely Richmond).
I can see why Jefferson Davis was included, given that the capital of the Confederacy was there. And that definitely falls in that poke in the eye type of selection. But the statues that were erected had a certain logic to them - honoring heroes of Virginia - in addition to recognizing a past many probably still longed for. (Having not lived there at that time, I'm obviously making some huge assumptions.)
Longstreet was from Georgia, and he also didn't spend all of his time under Lee. He also was assigned to the Western Front (particularly Tennessee) for an extended period of time. That should help make it clear that there are multiple reasons why Richmonders wouldn't have looked for a statue for him. Comey may have hit on some, but he's simplifying a bit too much.
Why no AP Hill?? He was a corps commander for Lee, as well, as was Jubal Early. And both were boys of Virginia, through and through. Hill died at Petersburg. They didn't get statues, and it wasn't because they switched sides. Their contributions didn't lend themselves to mythologizing, like Jackson and Stuart. Same for Longstreet. (Does Doc C's Myth/Power/Value come into play here in some way?
)