|
|
Post by believeinthebeavs on Jun 26, 2020 10:20:48 GMT -8
This has gotten out of hand....
|
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Jun 26, 2020 11:05:02 GMT -8
Beyond ridiculous. Glove, how about a multi-board poll to see what percentage of OSU fans support this decision.
|
|
|
|
Post by 411500 on Jun 26, 2020 11:18:41 GMT -8
Has this been authenticated?
If so, whoever made this decision should provide their reasons for doing so. On the face of it, it seems too much of a stretch, too far beyond the bounds of common sense.
Who has been grieved by this term? How has the public welfare been diminished?
Like I say, if this is real, somebody needs to provide the public with an explanation that is more persuasive than what meets the eye....
GO BEAVS!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jun 26, 2020 11:24:30 GMT -8
Beyond ridiculous. Glove, how about a multi-board poll to see what percentage of OSU fans support this decision. You might be surprised. |
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Jun 26, 2020 11:52:09 GMT -8
Beyond ridiculous. Glove, how about a multi-board poll to see what percentage of OSU fans support this decision. What poll question and answers do you want? |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Jun 26, 2020 13:25:07 GMT -8
Beyond ridiculous. Glove, how about a multi-board poll to see what percentage of OSU fans support this decision. What poll question and answers do you want? How about a renaming poll? I personally was never offended by it, but I never liked it either. When I first heard it as a kid, it made no sense to me. As I understand (if I even do), it's mainly due to the close proximity of the two universities, and so more likely to have divided homes like existed during the Civil War, but it felt like a stretch correlation, and that the long history deserved it's own original name. I don't like changing things to pacify those that would abuse and pollute movements that have very justified grievances at their origins, but I would not mind that these annual events at my university remove the reminder of one of our most tragic stretches in history - particularly since the correlation to it is trite, at best. |
|
|
|
Post by jefframp on Jun 26, 2020 13:49:41 GMT -8
Has this been authenticated? If so, whoever made this decision should provide their reasons for doing so. On the face of it, it seems too much of a stretch, too far beyond the bounds of common sense. Who has been grieved by this term? How has the public welfare been diminished? Like I say, if this is real, somebody needs to provide the public with an explanation that is more persuasive than what meets the eye.... GO BEAVS!! Here you go: link |
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Jun 26, 2020 15:17:09 GMT -8
What poll question and answers do you want? How about a renaming poll? I personally was never offended by it, but I never liked it either. When I first heard it as a kid, it made no sense to me. As I understand (if I even do), it's mainly due to the close proximity of the two universities, and so more likely to have divided homes like existed during the Civil War, but it felt like a stretch correlation, and that the long history deserved it's own original name. I don't like changing things to pacify those that would abuse and pollute movements that have very justified grievances at their origins, but I would not mind that these annual events at my university remove the reminder of one of our most tragic stretches in history - particularly since the correlation to it is trite, at best. go for it |
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Jun 26, 2020 17:26:42 GMT -8
Beyond ridiculous. Glove, how about a multi-board poll to see what percentage of OSU fans support this decision. What poll question and answers do you want? Simple yes or no question - Do you agree with the decision to drop the name 'Civil War' from all games between OSU and UO in all sports ? Everybody I've spoken with today thinks it's completely asinine. |
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Jun 26, 2020 19:43:34 GMT -8
Just about every country in existence has had a civil war and they have all been bloody nasty things. I'd prefer it be called something else, preferably something silly.
|
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Jun 26, 2020 21:58:15 GMT -8
Just about every country in existence has had a civil war and they have all been bloody nasty things. I'd prefer it be called something else, preferably something silly. I never loved the term, I never hated it. But it's one of those college things with a long, long history that fans of both schools have had as part of their heritage - like Beavers and Ducks. If, over time, it fell into disuse and garnered little fan interest, it would make sense to change the name. But this reason? This makes no sense whatsoever. There seems to currently be a contest of sorts in this nation to see who can act the biggest fool. Ed Ray threw his hat in the ring this morning. |
|
|
|
Post by qbeaver on Jun 27, 2020 9:21:37 GMT -8
Seems silly to me...what this accomplishes in the big scheme of things I will never know. Please...no Platapus game or bowl...if we are going to change the name,let's come up with something cool...
|
|
bmoc
Freshman
Posts: 597
|
Post by bmoc on Jun 27, 2020 10:19:03 GMT -8
I don't think anyone should be allowed to remove something unless they have a viable alternative or replacement. Skirmish in the Valley, Uncle Phil vs. Burritos/Potato Salad, Empty Arena Battle Royale.....
|
|
|
|
Post by willtalk on Jun 29, 2020 17:51:30 GMT -8
I suppose it is a sign of how little history is taught today at any level. The USA was not the only nation that experienced a civil war. It was commonplace throughout history. This PC stuff is totally out of hand. Frankly, I find it offensive and so do other people, but that is the hypocrisy of it. Only certain people can be allowed to be offended. That is dictated by whatever the present political agenda finds expedite to promote. I like the correct part put the political is the part I object too.
|
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Jun 29, 2020 19:56:49 GMT -8
Actually, they know their history TOO well. They are following the classic formula that has propelled the most odious regimes into power. 1) Identify an "other" that most citizens will agree should be persecuted. (e.g. racists) 2) Start the ball rolling with attacks on the easiest targets. 3) When no one objects, expand the attacks - in short order the slightest taint will suffice to justify the harshest of attacks. When it reaches this point, virtually every organization will fall into line - resistance becomes too expensive for any public group or corporation to pay.
In the 1950's the "other" was communists. The attacks were initially against communists, which evolved to include "sympathizers". Fortunately that attempt fizzled out for the simple reason that America was too damn prosperous for the threat of communism to be taken that seriously.
In the late 1960's, Mao's China suffered through the devastating Cultural Revolution. In that case, the "other" were traditionalists - a category that was easily expanded as the revolution progressed.
And, of course, the Germany of the 1930's had the Jews. Over time the doctrine evolved from requiring three Jewish grandparents to just one, and eventually merely being sympathetic to the Jews was enough to cost people their jobs.
Now, you might doubt that modern America could possibly have anything in common with Nazi Germany or Maoist China, but I offer a few simple litmus tests which apply.
1. Are there a variety of statements which are objectively anodyne yet are all-but-suicidal to utter?
2. Is it routine for politics and policy to explicitly contradict well established (and formerly uncontroversial) scientific fact?
3. Is "otherness" routinely applied posthumously, even to the heroes of the past?
Each of these demonstrates a pathology which any healthy society will reject. Yet you can find examples of all these in Maoist China and Nazi Germany. (You will have to work harder to find the evidence in McCarthyism, simply because that movement failed to achieve the necessary mass.) And you can easily examples of all three pathologies here today.
So, count me on the side of preserving the "Civil War" tradition - and anything else that smacks of mob rule. Our republic has little to fear from racists, communists, bourgeoisie, or Jews, but I pray we never underestimate the destruction the mob can bring.
|
|
