UNH Hockey Fight Song Banned As Theoretically Racist

[yolland]

You've taken the "theoretical" and turned it into censorship.

Schools, colleges and all sorts of other institutions adopt all kinds of "theoretically" suppressive measures in the interests of promoting whatever institutional image they wish to project. Disallowing sales of pornography in campus bookstores, limits on what kinds of personalities may be selected as commencement speakers, rules about what kinds of campuswide campaigns fraternities may and may not undertake, etc. The idea is that the institution has a right to make its own decisions about what sorts of behavior they do and don't put their *official* stamp of approval on. If students wish to play "Black Betty" or White Power music or whatever at their own private tailgater, fine--that doesn't mean the university has to allow it in an *official* context. I think you are really getting onto a crazily slippery slope when you start applying the concept of "censorship" to these scenarios.

 

[A_Wanderer]

C'mon, you guys. If black people / Muslims / Haitians are offended by a song / cartoon / abject poverty, they're supposed to "get over it." If white middle-class Christians get offended by something that doesn't even affect them, it's time to crack out constitutional amendments! Post haste!

Melon

Blacks, Muslims and Haitians (?) are not as offended if not more at homosexuality than white middle class Christians?

 

[melon]

Blacks, Muslims and Haitians (?) are not as offended if not more at homosexuality than white middle class Christians?

What they think is irrelevant, ultimately. I mean, it's very convenient to help bolster the argument for white Christian hatred. But when the two sides have opposing arguments? We just start getting "outrage" threads here in FYM about how all the minorities in the world are out to get us and "destroy America." Why can't they just be "more like us"?

(As for why I mentioned Haitians, they're the classic example of a long-failed state that generally gets half-assed attention about once a decade before they're allowed to collapse back into anarchy. Maybe they should pray to Jesus for oil fields, because then the U.S. will spend hundreds of billions of dollars "rebuilding" the country.)

Melon

 

[bonoman]

For fuck sake...its a song!

A fast paced ra-ra song. This isnt a Ku-Klux-Klan meeting in a hockey arena. Its 20 somethings having fun before the begining of the 2nd and 3rd period.

They play this song at the NHL level. I hear it alot at Edmonton Oiler games. Nobody is sitting in the stand listening to the lyrics, and if you've ever heard the song the only lyrics taht are easily understandable are nananana and whoa black betty. Big deal.

I'm getting so sick of hearing people make stupid shit like this into something big, then somehow making a connection to Haiti, come on Melon!

 

[nbcrusader]

Schools, colleges and all sorts of other institutions adopt all kinds of "theoretically" suppressive measures in the interests of promoting whatever institutional image they wish to project. Disallowing sales of pornography in campus bookstores, limits on what kinds of personalities may be selected as commencement speakers, rules about what kinds of campuswide campaigns fraternities may and may not undertake, etc. The idea is that the institution has a right to make its own decisions about what sorts of behavior they do and don't put their *official* stamp of approval on. If students wish to play "Black Betty" or White Power music or whatever at their own private tailgater, fine--that doesn't mean the university has to allow it in an *official* context. I think you are really getting onto a crazily slippery slope when you start applying the concept of "censorship" to these scenarios.

You can make sense of this after they ban the theoretically racist song, but does the university have the right (to the extent that we deem this a university "sanctioned" song) to play the song? Using the "it might make some people uncomfortable" standard is well down a slippery slope as it won't be respected for other uncomfortable actions.

 

[anitram]

I think the problem is that there are some real and important issues concering bigotry and race out there in our society. But when you have stuff like this targetted in the media, you lose a certain segment of the population which otherwise would have been open to a dialogue. What happens is that the reaction goes from "should we reconsider the use of ___" to "they're whining about something again."

And it isn't just your usual suspects, some backwater racist hicks. But people with real concerns about these issues who see their concerns watered down. Sometimes you have to pick your battles, and to me, this isn't one of those times.

 

[yolland]

Originally posted by nbcrusader
You can make sense of this after they ban the theoretically racist song, but does the university have the right (to the extent that we deem this a university "sanctioned" song) to play the song? Using the "it might make some people uncomfortable" standard is well down a slippery slope as it won't be respected for other uncomfortable actions.

Well of course they have a legal right to play it, that's not the point. It's the university's athletics director (and most likely, other administrative figures not mentioned) who actually made this decision and will have to take public accountability for it. And it's a certainty they knew they would take a lot of flak for this. By making their own administrative decisions about what messages they are and aren't willing to risk sending, they're not cowering in fear before anybody--that's an unwarranted conclusion to jump to about what went into their thinking. Ask anyone who works in any large university's student affairs office about the hundreds of "we're offended" complaints they roll their eyes at and toss aside every year. It's not a question of obligations to give all such complaints equal weight--they have a reputation to promote, and it's up to them to pick and choose their public image battles as they see fit.

 

[melon]

I'm getting so sick of hearing people make stupid shit like this into something big, then somehow making a connection to Haiti, come on Melon!

It just illustrates my point, that's all.

Looking at this from the outside, do you know how absolutely silly it sounds when I hear white people tell black people that something isn't racist? I think it's up to blacks to decide if the song is offensive to them, not the other way around!

Now if the NAACP and other black organizations say that there's nothing wrong with the song, then by all means...sing it until you burst.

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Well of course they have a legal right to play it, that's not the point. It's the university's athletics director (and most likely, other administrative figures not mentioned) who actually made this decision and will have to take public accountability for it. And it's a certainty they knew they would take a lot of flak for this. By making their own administrative decisions about what messages they are and aren't willing to risk sending, they're not cowering in fear before anybody--that's an unwarranted conclusion to jump to about what went into their thinking. Ask anyone who works in any large university's student affairs office about the hundreds of "we're offended" complaints they roll their eyes at and toss aside every year. It's not a question of obligations to give all such complaints equal weight--they have a reputation to promote, and it's up to them to pick and choose their public image battles as they see fit.

How are you sure that the athletic director was not simply taking the easier path once a group of students suggested that he would be labeled "racist" by continuing to play the song?

There may be multiple "we're offended" complaints, but the nature of racial politics does not give all just complaints equal treatment.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I know, there are numerous "jokes" about the movie-but in this setting and context, totally inappropriate and I would agree, homophobic. Not to mention the fact that it states there have been other homophobic chants. There is something about sporting events that brings out the worst in some people.

SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) - Fans of No. 5 Gonzaga have been asked to stop yelling "Brokeback Mountain" at opposing players.

The reference to the recent movie about homosexual cowboys was chanted by some fans during Monday's game against Saint Mary's, and is apparently intended to suggest an opposing player is gay.

The chants were the subject of several classroom discussions over the past week, and the faculty advisers for the Kennel Club booster group urged students this week to avoid "inappropriate chants" during the Bulldogs' Saturday game against Stanford, which was nationally televised on ESPN.

"We implore the students of the Kennel Club to show the nation this weekend what makes Gonzaga different," Kennel Club advisers David Lindsay and Aaron Hill wrote in a letter in the student newspaper, the Bulletin. "We challenge the students of the Kennel Club to exhibit the class, the creativeness and the competitive drive that has become a foundation of this great university."

Mark Alfino, a professor of philosophy at Gonzaga, said the matter had been widely discussed by faculty and students.

"Many faculty members have brought up the discussion in their classes," he said. "They find none of the students have been comfortable with the chant, and that's a good sign."

Ryan Olson, the president of Helping Educate Regarding Orientation, a gay-straight alliance on campus, said the chants are just the latest incident that shows GU is struggling to make gays and lesbians welcome on campus.

In a letter to the Bulletin, the HERO membership wrote, "This is not even remotely the first time that Kennel Club chanters have chanted homophobic phrases at basketball games."

"A lot of people in the Kennel Club say it wasn't them" that chanted "Brokeback Mountain," Olson said. "But there's something to be said about apathy as well. Students didn't stop people from saying it."

In Friday's Bulletin, senior Callie Monroe wrote a column calling the chants a case of "outright discrimination."

"Imagine yourself as a homosexual individual in the midst of your peers, classmates and friends during this 'Brokeback Mountain' cheer," Monroe wrote. "I simply do not understand how a student body claiming to live by Jesuit principles of acceptance and respect for all can allow an incident like this to happen and remain silent."

 

[Carek1230]

There may be multiple "we're offended" complaints, but the nature of racial politics does not give all just complaints equal treatment.

This is very true. Unfortunately. I honestly don't feel anything wrong with the song....for what it is played during and for how long the song has been played for said reason. Jeez.....society seems to spend more time arguing racial politics creating negativity about issues like this. Whatever happened to democracy? Whatever happened to majority rules? (that could be another entire can of worms) But seriously, when I saw the lyrics I actually laughed wondering to myself WTF did this *really* mean? Or why not remove the lyrics and just use the music if it's the music that pumps up the crowds at hockey events and not so much the lyrics if some folks are so offended by the lyric?

I'm still miffed at my high school namesis and mascot , the Fremont Indians, being changed about 10 years ago because a couple dozen American Indians felt it was disrespectful to them and their ancestors to use the name and mascot. The school was established in the late 1800's and had been the same name with the same mascot for a hundred years! Why was the disrespect issue not raised before? They are now the Fremont Cardinals. I just don't understand it. I look at it as a compliment, a people honored by naming a school after them, not disrespecting a group.

Sometimes I wonder what this society is doing to itself!

 

[melon]

"I simply do not understand how a student body claiming to live by Jesuit principles of acceptance and respect for all can allow an incident like this to happen and remain silent."

Because the church behind those "Jesuit principles" doesn't believe in acceptance and respect for all. But get a chant going where they start referring to their opponents as pedophile Catholic priests, and they'll find a way to stop it.

Melon

 

[Se7en]

The school was established in the late 1800's and had been the same name with the same mascot for a hundred years! Why was the disrespect issue not raised before?

it's probably tough to raise your voice when the official stance of the u.s. government against your people had been genocide for almost a century.