5 ms·
> Why don't we discuss the core issue at hand, instead of trying to derail the discussion using "Cancel Culture" battlecries? Perhaps because, to have a discus
by atypicaluser 6y ago
> Why don't we discuss the core issue at hand, instead of trying to derail the discussion using "Cancel Culture" battlecries?
Perhaps because, to have a discussion, one has to have good-faith actors on both sides of the discussion? If one goes into the discussion with 'I'm going to stop playing sports for you if you DON'T stop playing this song' or 'I'm going to stop donating to athletics if you DO stop playing this song,' then there's no discussion to be had--we're merely down to which entrenched party has more power and sway.
While I see the merits of both sides in this debate, what's remarkable is how administrations at UT and most every other liberal arts college in the US have jettisoned their responsibilities as adults (and supposed intellectuals) to lead their students in the art of discussion over controversial issues. Especially when (1) that's what they're there for and (2) they hold most of the cards. This failure on their part is far worse than some squabble over a silly song.
- dragontamer 6y ago> 'I'm going to stop playing sports for you if you DON'T stop playing this song' How about "I don't like that song, so I'm walking off the field before it is played" ?? The story here isn't "Students are forcing school to stop playing the song". (Indeed: the song was still played, and at least one player stood on the field through the duration of the song). The story is "Students are walking off field before song is finished". It doesn't seem like students are taking a very aggressive stance from my perspective. Then again, I never really liked the whole "school spirit" exercises that I was forced into... being a nerd and all.
- mcguire 6y ago"...at least one player stood on the field through the duration of the song)..." He later said he was waiting to talk to the coaches. :-)