|
Post by beavadelic on Sept 25, 2017 14:39:35 GMT -8
Aah yes, "slipperyslopeism" to dismiss legitimate debate. These issues have been raised and WILL be aired, whether you like it or not. If you don't want to contribute that is your choice. P.S. The "Rod Sterling" reference dates you. For better or for worse. There's no "i" in team and no "t" in Serling. Reparations for everyone! But considering the digression of this thread, maybe that Sterling guy that used to own the Clippers SHOULD weigh in here! (A Freudian typo?)
|
|
rafer
Sophomore
Posts: 1,565
|
Post by rafer on Sept 25, 2017 15:02:06 GMT -8
Dismiss debate?? Seriously, by reading this thread it looks EXACTLY like debate, SOOOO you might want to catch up. BTW, what is your number?? Just airing thoughts here............ But to the point, "where does it end"?? When do we know we are there?? Is this another gov't agency of acceptability?? What if my name Lee, oh the humanity!!! 10 question marks in a paragraph that doesn't contain an actual question. Congratulations. That's some sort of illiterate accomplishment. If you can't see any questions in there we have a serious educational situation in this country. Try reading slowly this time, talk about illiterate accomplishment!! i.e. when, is there, what, where...see a pattern here LoL.
|
|
rafer
Sophomore
Posts: 1,565
|
Post by rafer on Sept 25, 2017 15:04:53 GMT -8
There's no "i" in team and no "t" in Serling. Reparations for everyone! But considering the digression of this thread, maybe that Sterling guy that used to own the Clippers SHOULD weigh in here! (A Freudian typo?) Good catch, might be the right guy but I'm not that clever!!
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Sept 25, 2017 19:15:38 GMT -8
Right, what I was saying is that I don't think we are going to rename all these buildings. We're going to draw a line at what is "too racist." And that, to me, is insane. Either we scrub all names from buildings of people who were sorta racist, or we leave them and make sure to educate everyone about why their name is on the building and why these people were not infallible. I have no problem with leaving someone's name on the building while also mentioning that this person was not without fault. Sort of like allowing Pete Rose into the Hall of Fame, but making sure that on the plaque it says "Pete Rose was a supreme a-hole who bet on his own team. Also collected 4,192 hits." Pete Rose had 4,256 hits. SaveSave
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 25, 2017 19:26:19 GMT -8
Aah yes, "slipperyslopeism" to dismiss legitimate debate. These issues have been raised and WILL be aired, whether you like it or not. If you don't want to contribute that is your choice. The "Rod Sterling" reference dates you. For better or for worse. From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races, much as Lincoln did. It seems logical to me, therefore, that if you want to expunge Slats Gill from the memory of Oregon State, then you should also want to expunge monuments to Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps you would want Lincoln's racist quotes highlighted in our children's history books? Just let the children know that he was a bad man in some ways? Should we also include the sordid details of MLK's life in our history books so that children see him as less of a heroic figure? I'm wondering how you rationalize dumping on Slats Gill without doing the same to Lincoln and MLK, if that is how you roll? Personally, I'm in favor of showing children the unsavory side of Americans that are held up as heroic figures. JFK was an adulterer many times over. Andrew Jackson committed Indian genocide. None of these fellows was a saint, so if we're going to do this, let's go all the way and not exempt your faves. The movie "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" came out in 1967 and was quite controversial. Back in the days of Slats Gill, probably a majority of Americans were against racial mixing, and probably a lot of professors and students felt the same way. You are picking on Mr. Gill even though he was not far out of the mainstream thinking back then. His only real distinction from other people was that, as a coach, he was in a position to limit minority opportunities on the basketball court. But he retired from coaching in 1964, and racial integration was only really beginning in the early 60's, so he really did no more damage than probably most other coaches in the country. Are you going to hunt down all the other coaches back then at other schools and in other sports and bring the hammer down on their legacies, too? "From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races" Where did you read that - or are you just pulling it our of your tailpipe? Or perhaps projecting your own current views onto coach Gill?
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Sept 25, 2017 20:33:43 GMT -8
Right, what I was saying is that I don't think we are going to rename all these buildings. We're going to draw a line at what is "too racist." And that, to me, is insane. Either we scrub all names from buildings of people who were sorta racist, or we leave them and make sure to educate everyone about why their name is on the building and why these people were not infallible. I have no problem with leaving someone's name on the building while also mentioning that this person was not without fault. Sort of like allowing Pete Rose into the Hall of Fame, but making sure that on the plaque it says "Pete Rose was a supreme a-hole who bet on his own team. Also collected 4,192 hits." Pete Rose had 4,256 hits. SaveSaveYes, yes he did. I can't pull that number from my memory though. 4,192 I can and really that's the important number. The last 64 are just showing off.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 26, 2017 7:03:02 GMT -8
That's why I put it in quotations. I know you did. You should have italicized Sterling, instead. Or Sterling (sic). Quotations are sufficient for a message board.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 6:45:16 GMT -8
From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races, much as Lincoln did. It seems logical to me, therefore, that if you want to expunge Slats Gill from the memory of Oregon State, then you should also want to expunge monuments to Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps you would want Lincoln's racist quotes highlighted in our children's history books? Just let the children know that he was a bad man in some ways? Should we also include the sordid details of MLK's life in our history books so that children see him as less of a heroic figure? I'm wondering how you rationalize dumping on Slats Gill without doing the same to Lincoln and MLK, if that is how you roll? Personally, I'm in favor of showing children the unsavory side of Americans that are held up as heroic figures. JFK was an adulterer many times over. Andrew Jackson committed Indian genocide. None of these fellows was a saint, so if we're going to do this, let's go all the way and not exempt your faves. The movie "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" came out in 1967 and was quite controversial. Back in the days of Slats Gill, probably a majority of Americans were against racial mixing, and probably a lot of professors and students felt the same way. You are picking on Mr. Gill even though he was not far out of the mainstream thinking back then. His only real distinction from other people was that, as a coach, he was in a position to limit minority opportunities on the basketball court. But he retired from coaching in 1964, and racial integration was only really beginning in the early 60's, so he really did no more damage than probably most other coaches in the country. Are you going to hunt down all the other coaches back then at other schools and in other sports and bring the hammer down on their legacies, too? "From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races" Where did you read that - or are you just pulling it our of your tailpipe? Or perhaps projecting your own current views onto coach Gill? Here's a relevant quote from the first black player who played for Slats Gill. There's no indication from this account that on a personal level, Gill was disrespectful to individual blacks. I'll look for where I found the discussion of Coach Gill's opinion of "racial mixing". (I didn't make it up.) After their one-on-one game, “I saw shadows on the floor,” Monroe recalls. “And suddenly out of the shadows come Slats Gill and (assistant coach) Red Ro-Describing it as an almost full-time job, Mon-roe enjoys trimming trees on his rural land. When Slats asked if I’d be interested in playing basketball, I told him, ‘Yeah, that would be fun.’ “Gill was a living legend; the arena was already named after him. An All-American as a player at Oregon State in the ‘20s, he had been head coach of the Beavers since 1928 and was in the fi-nal stages of a Hall of Fame career that spanned 36 seasons. Monroe was Gill’s first black athlete.“People always ask, ‘Was Slats a prej-udiced person?’ “ Monroe says. “I never saw it that way. But I remember one time we were playing the University of Port-land and Art Easterley – who later be-came my best friend – was killing us. At halftime, Slats went into the locker room and slammed the door and said, ‘Can’t any ya’ll stop that colored boy?’ I was sit-ting down at the end of the bench, laugh-ing to myself. Oregon Stater article
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 7:07:00 GMT -8
From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races, much as Lincoln did. It seems logical to me, therefore, that if you want to expunge Slats Gill from the memory of Oregon State, then you should also want to expunge monuments to Abraham Lincoln. Perhaps you would want Lincoln's racist quotes highlighted in our children's history books? Just let the children know that he was a bad man in some ways? Should we also include the sordid details of MLK's life in our history books so that children see him as less of a heroic figure? I'm wondering how you rationalize dumping on Slats Gill without doing the same to Lincoln and MLK, if that is how you roll? Personally, I'm in favor of showing children the unsavory side of Americans that are held up as heroic figures. JFK was an adulterer many times over. Andrew Jackson committed Indian genocide. None of these fellows was a saint, so if we're going to do this, let's go all the way and not exempt your faves. The movie "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" came out in 1967 and was quite controversial. Back in the days of Slats Gill, probably a majority of Americans were against racial mixing, and probably a lot of professors and students felt the same way. You are picking on Mr. Gill even though he was not far out of the mainstream thinking back then. His only real distinction from other people was that, as a coach, he was in a position to limit minority opportunities on the basketball court. But he retired from coaching in 1964, and racial integration was only really beginning in the early 60's, so he really did no more damage than probably most other coaches in the country. Are you going to hunt down all the other coaches back then at other schools and in other sports and bring the hammer down on their legacies, too? "From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races" Where did you read that - or are you just pulling it our of your tailpipe? Or perhaps projecting your own current views onto coach Gill? Here is one mention of Gill's opinion on racial mixing: While it was the most obvious example of racial tensions on campus, it was by no means the first. In 1963, State Representative Berkeley Lent, who later went on to be Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court, publicly accused OSU Basketball Coach “Slats” Gill of intentionally forbidding blacks from playing on the team. One of the coach’s defenders explained: “Slats was a very moralistic man. He didn’t believe in Negroes going out with white girls… when there were enough girls of their own kind on campus, he would allow Negroes on his team.” www.corvallisadvocate.com/2013/0516-being-black-in-corvallis/Here's an excerpt from a book that I found in a google search: "A colleague told me a few years ago that Armory "Slats" Gill, the basketball coach (1928-1964) after whom the coliseum is named, refused to recruit black basketball players because he did not want them dating white girls, and there were virtually no black coeds."
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 28, 2017 9:13:24 GMT -8
"From what I've read, it seems that Slats Gill objected to a mixing of the races" Where did you read that - or are you just pulling it our of your tailpipe? Or perhaps projecting your own current views onto coach Gill? Here is one mention of Gill's opinion on racial mixing: While it was the most obvious example of racial tensions on campus, it was by no means the first. In 1963, State Representative Berkeley Lent, who later went on to be Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court, publicly accused OSU Basketball Coach “Slats” Gill of intentionally forbidding blacks from playing on the team. One of the coach’s defenders explained: “Slats was a very moralistic man. He didn’t believe in Negroes going out with white girls… when there were enough girls of their own kind on campus, he would allow Negroes on his team.” www.corvallisadvocate.com/2013/0516-being-black-in-corvallis/Here's an excerpt from a book that I found in a google search: "A colleague told me a few years ago that Armory "Slats" Gill, the basketball coach (1928-1964) after whom the coliseum is named, refused to recruit black basketball players because he did not want them dating white girls, and there were virtually no black coeds." 2 third hand assertions from unnamed people: "one of the coach's defenders (unnamed) explained..." "a (unnamed) colleague told me a few years ago.." That qualifies as "tailpipe" in my book. Across a 36 year coaching career. Meanwhile Norm Monroe, the black player who knew him played for him and still alive, goes on record stating he wasn't prejudiced.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 9:45:25 GMT -8
Here is one mention of Gill's opinion on racial mixing: While it was the most obvious example of racial tensions on campus, it was by no means the first. In 1963, State Representative Berkeley Lent, who later went on to be Chief Justice of the Oregon Supreme Court, publicly accused OSU Basketball Coach “Slats” Gill of intentionally forbidding blacks from playing on the team. One of the coach’s defenders explained: “Slats was a very moralistic man. He didn’t believe in Negroes going out with white girls… when there were enough girls of their own kind on campus, he would allow Negroes on his team.” www.corvallisadvocate.com/2013/0516-being-black-in-corvallis/Here's an excerpt from a book that I found in a google search: "A colleague told me a few years ago that Armory "Slats" Gill, the basketball coach (1928-1964) after whom the coliseum is named, refused to recruit black basketball players because he did not want them dating white girls, and there were virtually no black coeds." 2 third hand assertions from unnamed people: "one of the coach's defenders (unnamed) explained..." "a (unnamed) colleague told me a few years ago.." That qualifies as "tailpipe" in my book. Across a 36 year coaching career. Meanwhile Norm Monroe, the black player who knew him played for him and still alive, goes on record stating he wasn't prejudiced. It's clear you have your teeth into something that you're going to pursue doggedly and that nothing going to change your opinion. There's a time to let sleeping dogs lie, and this is one of them. Coach Gill wasn't a KKK member like some distinguished UO guy that had a duck building named after him. As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races. That's what really matters. Disrespect on a personal level is what inflames hatred. What you are doing is feeding your own hatred in some crusade to purge the historical record and purify our collective conscience. Which is just stupid. And pardon me if I state the obvious, as I may be a thickhead, but you are just a squonk.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 28, 2017 10:15:00 GMT -8
2 third hand assertions from unnamed people: "one of the coach's defenders (unnamed) explained..." "a (unnamed) colleague told me a few years ago.." That qualifies as "tailpipe" in my book. Across a 36 year coaching career. Meanwhile Norm Monroe, the black player who knew him played for him and still alive, goes on record stating he wasn't prejudiced. It's clear you have your teeth into something that you're going to pursue doggedly and that nothing going to change your opinion. There's a time to let sleeping dogs lie, and this is one of them. Coach Gill wasn't a KKK member like some distinguished UO guy that had a duck building named after him. As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races. That's what really matters. Disrespect on a personal level is what inflames hatred. What you are doing is feeding your own hatred in some mission to purge the historical record and purify our collective conscience. Which is just stupid. Not sure how you come to that conclusion from what I've posted. "As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races." That is correct. I'm saying that I haven't seen any valid evidence that Gill was prejudiced. You seem to be saying it doesn't make any difference whether he was or wasn't. On that, we disagree. I've disagreed respectfully and said nothing hateful toward you in this entire exchange.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 10:31:51 GMT -8
It's clear you have your teeth into something that you're going to pursue doggedly and that nothing going to change your opinion. There's a time to let sleeping dogs lie, and this is one of them. Coach Gill wasn't a KKK member like some distinguished UO guy that had a duck building named after him. As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races. That's what really matters. Disrespect on a personal level is what inflames hatred. What you are doing is feeding your own hatred in some mission to purge the historical record and purify our collective conscience. Which is just stupid. Not sure how you come to that conclusion from what I've posted. "As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races." That is correct. I'm saying that I haven't seen any valid evidence that Gill was prejudiced. You seem to be saying it doesn't make any difference whether he was or wasn't. On that, we disagree. In this case, as far as we know. it matters little, just as you think MLK's failings matter little. Was Coach Gill overall a good person? A bad person? Give me a well-researched answer. Did he go home and kick the dog every day, just for good measure? Was he respectful to people? Did he cheat on his wife? Was he honest? Was he a good friend? Was he generous? You have one measuring stick labeled "PREJUDICE" for judging another human being, and when all you have is a hammer, everything's a nail. Half an inch by this measure and a man is evil? The man who does that is one who qualifies as "prejudiced". Judge the entire person rather than focusing on a single failing. Don't besmirch a dead man's memory on the basis of a single flaw. Is it possible to have some degree or kind of prejudice in you but still be a good person? If you think not, then I suggest you keep thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Sept 28, 2017 10:59:28 GMT -8
Not sure how you come to that conclusion from what I've posted. "As far as you know, he was respectful at a personal level to people of all races." That is correct. I'm saying that I haven't seen any valid evidence that Gill was prejudiced. You seem to be saying it doesn't make any difference whether he was or wasn't. On that, we disagree. In this case, as far as we know. it matters little, just as you think MLK's failings matter little. Was Coach Gill overall a good person? A bad person? Give me a well-researched answer. Did he go home and kick the dog every day, just for good measure? Was he respectful to people? Did he cheat on his wife? Was he honest? Was he a good friend? Was he generous? You have one measuring stick for judging another human being, and when all you have is a hammer, everything's a nail. Judge the entire person rather than focusing on a single failing. Don't besmirch a dead man's memory on the basis of a single flaw. Is it possible to have some degree or kind of prejudice in you but still be a good person? If you think not, then I suggest you keep thinking. You're making this more complex than it is. From everything I've seen so far, I see no compelling evidence that Gill was prejudiced - therefore I would not support renaming Gill Coliseum. I'll be interested in the discussions that take place on campus around this issue. There is a public meeting on Thursday, October 19 at 5:30 pm in the Memorial Ballroom to discuss this question specifically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2017 11:04:46 GMT -8
In this case, as far as we know. it matters little, just as you think MLK's failings matter little. Was Coach Gill overall a good person? A bad person? Give me a well-researched answer. Did he go home and kick the dog every day, just for good measure? Was he respectful to people? Did he cheat on his wife? Was he honest? Was he a good friend? Was he generous? You have one measuring stick for judging another human being, and when all you have is a hammer, everything's a nail. Judge the entire person rather than focusing on a single failing. Don't besmirch a dead man's memory on the basis of a single flaw. Is it possible to have some degree or kind of prejudice in you but still be a good person? If you think not, then I suggest you keep thinking. You're making this more complex than it is. From everything I've seen so far, I see no compelling evidence that Gill was prejudiced - therefore I would not support renaming Gill Coliseum. I'll be interested in the discussions that take place on campus around this issue. There is a public meeting on Thursday, October 19 at 5:30 pm in the Memorial Ballroom to discuss this question specifically. Then I apologize for misreading your posts. If it turns out Coach Gill DID regularly kick the dog (or commit some similar egregious act) just for good measure, then I say get his name off that building. But then I like dogs.
|
|