| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Should UTenn keep the "Lady Vols" name for all its women's teams? |
| Yes |
|
56% |
[ 41 ] |
| No |
|
43% |
[ 31 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 72 |
|
| Author |
Message |
gopher5
Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 3338
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/24/15 10:06 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
| mzonefan wrote: |
Speaking of loss of monikers, is there anyone out there who remembers how this transition went at Minnesota? I remember when the men were represented by the block M, and the women were represented by "Ms". They had separate athletic administrations. It's been about 12-13 years, I think. |
Yes, this was happening at the time that Brenda left MN for MD. They still have a Ms. that has been covered by Goldy's face to appear as M near the scoreboard at the Sports Pavilion (current home of volleyball, wrestling, gymnastics and where the women's basketball team played before moving back to the Barn).
|
|
larmarch5
Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Posts: 424
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 10:23 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| SpaceJunkie wrote: |
| Ladyvol777 wrote: |
| In the South you are either a Lady or a Bitch. |
I never knew that "lady" is a derogatory term for a female. |
No more than "Mister". How about The Mister Vols? The Lord Vols? The Gentlemen Vols?
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 12:47 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
The team had formerly been known as the "Volettes" (ugh!) and found that name thoroughly offensive. They liked "Lady Volunteers" which pretty rapidly became "Lady Vols" and therefore, according to Pat in her autobiography, they chose that name.
Now, since you admit that the name is not offensive, I can only assume that you are trying to pick a fight. However.....
In the case of a name like "Redskins" I am opposed to it. I find it downright offensive. "Warriors" is not and I don't see why Marquette felt they had to change it. As far as certain other names like "Fighting Sioux", "Seminoles", and "Hurons" I think the school should work it out with the tribes and the PC crowd should stay out of it.
In sum, I think your questions are frivolous and stupid and I'm not going to play your game.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 12:57 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| summertime blues wrote: |
The team had formerly been known as the "Volettes" (ugh!) and found that name thoroughly offensive. They liked "Lady Volunteers" which pretty rapidly became "Lady Vols" and therefore, according to Pat in her autobiography, they chose that name.
Now, since you admit that the name is not offensive, I can only assume that you are trying to pick a fight. However.....
In the case of a name like "Redskins" I am opposed to it. I find it downright offensive. "Warriors" is not and I don't see why Marquette felt they had to change it. As far as certain other names like "Fighting Sioux", "Seminoles", and "Hurons" I think the school should work it out with the tribes and the PC crowd should stay out of it.
In sum, I think your questions are frivolous and stupid and I'm not going to play your game. |
Having trouble, huh. So you resort to your typical name calling. Figures.
Your primary defense of the Lady Vols name has been that the players and former players chose it and want to keep it. And you've basically said the AD and those in charge of the university should just butt out.
It seems quite reasonable to ask you whether you believe, as it appears from your comments, that the players' choice is all that matters. That they have the final say. That the school administration has no right to decide what name the university teams should play under, and that there are no limits or restraints to the players' choices. I think you know perfectly well what the obvious answers are to the two questions I posed. You just don't want to admit it.
Oh, and by the way, FSU has had a written agreement with the Seminole tribe for many years regarding the use of the name. That's why the NCAA allowed them to retain it. But that has nothing to do with the two questions I posed to you.
|
|
Beemer
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Posts: 483
Location: Connecticut
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 1:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| tfan wrote: |
The boss likes him but he sounds like a jerk. Very frustrating combo to have to deal with.
| Quote: |
In his three years as UT's athletics director, Hart has attracted controversy while being given increased authority on campus by UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek, who made Hart a vice chancellor and member of his Cabinet
Under Hart's leadership, more than half of the athletics board that provides oversight of the department was dismissed, and then the board began meeting in secret and said it has stopped taking meeting minutes. Hart was involved in a public disagreement with the school's marching band director, Dr. Gary Sousa. The disagreement led to Sousa, a tenured professor, losing his position running the band because of claims of insubordination, though he has kept his faculty job. |
| Quote: |
- Of the 15 people laid off under Hart's consolidation plan, 12 were women.
- Of the eight-member leadership team created by Hart, seven are men, with NCAA rules mandating a senior woman administrator[/list]. |
|
I don't have a dog in this hunt but I have to say this information is very disturbing.
It is one thing to try to reduce costs but when an AD seemingly targets one group for the deepest cuts that is a red flag.
_________________
Go Huskies! Go Sun!
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 1:17 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Beemer wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
The boss likes him but he sounds like a jerk. Very frustrating combo to have to deal with.
| Quote: |
In his three years as UT's athletics director, Hart has attracted controversy while being given increased authority on campus by UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek, who made Hart a vice chancellor and member of his Cabinet
Under Hart's leadership, more than half of the athletics board that provides oversight of the department was dismissed, and then the board began meeting in secret and said it has stopped taking meeting minutes. Hart was involved in a public disagreement with the school's marching band director, Dr. Gary Sousa. The disagreement led to Sousa, a tenured professor, losing his position running the band because of claims of insubordination, though he has kept his faculty job. |
| Quote: |
- Of the 15 people laid off under Hart's consolidation plan, 12 were women.
- Of the eight-member leadership team created by Hart, seven are men, with NCAA rules mandating a senior woman administrator[/list]. |
|
I don't have a dog in this hunt but I have to say this information is very disturbing.
It is one thing to try to reduce costs but when an AD seemingly targets one group for the deepest cuts that is a red flag. |
You might want to consider that you're only being given one side of the story. I don't have a dog in this hunt either, but Hart is a very experienced and well regarded administrator. He was Executive Director of Athletics at Alabama, AD at East Carolina, and long time AD at FSU before taking the Tenn job. He wasn't some unqualified drinking buddy of the Chancellor as has been suggested. His son is or was AD at UTC as well, I believe.
Everybody who gets cut and their friends and allies always raise hell about it, particularly in university settings. I found it interesting that one of the beefs here was about using recorded music at football games. A lot of schools have started doing that because it tends to get the fans louder and more involved. There was a big stink at Notre Dame from former band members and their friends when ND did the very same thing a couple of years ago. But Jack Swarbrick is a terrific and highly successful AD. Maybe using recorded music isn't necessarily a sign of incompetence after all. Maybe most of the complaints are the same thing that happens at every school when the administration tries to change things that people have gotten used to.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 1:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
The team had formerly been known as the "Volettes" (ugh!) and found that name thoroughly offensive. They liked "Lady Volunteers" which pretty rapidly became "Lady Vols" and therefore, according to Pat in her autobiography, they chose that name.
Now, since you admit that the name is not offensive, I can only assume that you are trying to pick a fight. However.....
In the case of a name like "Redskins" I am opposed to it. I find it downright offensive. "Warriors" is not and I don't see why Marquette felt they had to change it. As far as certain other names like "Fighting Sioux", "Seminoles", and "Hurons" I think the school should work it out with the tribes and the PC crowd should stay out of it.
In sum, I think your questions are frivolous and stupid and I'm not going to play your game. |
Having trouble, huh. So you resort to your typical name calling. Figures.
Your primary defense of the Lady Vols name has been that the players and former players chose it and want to keep it. And you've basically said the AD and those in charge of the university should just butt out.
It seems quite reasonable to ask you whether you believe, as it appears from your comments, that the players' choice is all that matters. That they have the final say. That the school administration has no right to decide what name the university teams should play under, and that there are no limits or restraints to the players' choices. I think you know perfectly well what the obvious answers are to the two questions I posed. You just don't want to admit it.
Oh, and by the way, FSU has had a written agreement with the Seminole tribe for many years regarding the use of the name. That's why the NCAA allowed them to retain it. But that has nothing to do with the two questions I posed to you. |
I didn't call you anything. I called your *questions* frivolous and stupid for the following reason: you had already said that you did not find "Lady Volunteers" offensive, therefore, the point is moot.
I answered by giving examples because frankly, you posed a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. If you don't like that, too bad. I'm not playing your game. And I knew the answer to FSU already.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 1:27 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
The boss likes him but he sounds like a jerk. Very frustrating combo to have to deal with.
| Quote: |
In his three years as UT's athletics director, Hart has attracted controversy while being given increased authority on campus by UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek, who made Hart a vice chancellor and member of his Cabinet
Under Hart's leadership, more than half of the athletics board that provides oversight of the department was dismissed, and then the board began meeting in secret and said it has stopped taking meeting minutes. Hart was involved in a public disagreement with the school's marching band director, Dr. Gary Sousa. The disagreement led to Sousa, a tenured professor, losing his position running the band because of claims of insubordination, though he has kept his faculty job. |
| Quote: |
- Of the 15 people laid off under Hart's consolidation plan, 12 were women.
- Of the eight-member leadership team created by Hart, seven are men, with NCAA rules mandating a senior woman administrator[/list]. |
|
I don't have a dog in this hunt but I have to say this information is very disturbing.
It is one thing to try to reduce costs but when an AD seemingly targets one group for the deepest cuts that is a red flag. |
You might want to consider that you're only being given one side of the story. I don't have a dog in this hunt either, but Hart is a very experienced and well regarded administrator. He was Executive Director of Athletics at Alabama, AD at East Carolina, and long time AD at FSU before taking the Tenn job. He wasn't some unqualified drinking buddy of the Chancellor as has been suggested. His son is or was AD at UTC as well, I believe.
Everybody who gets cut and their friends and allies always raise hell about it, particularly in university settings. I found it interesting that one of the beefs here was about using recorded music at football games. A lot of schools have started doing that because it tends to get the fans louder and more involved. There was a big stink at Notre Dame from former band members and their friends when ND did the very same thing a couple of years ago. But Jack Swarbrick is a terrific and highly successful AD. Maybe using recorded music isn't necessarily a sign of incompetence after all. Maybe most of the complaints are the same thing that happens at every school when the administration tries to change things that people have gotten used to. |
Art, were you born a contrarian, or do you have to work at it?
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
PlayBally'all
Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Posts: 271
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 6:24 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| This is a name the basketball team itself CHOSE, and the the other women's teams then adopted. |
Just so I understand, is it your contention
(1) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or choose to retain any nickname it likes, and that the school's administration, AD, President, Board of Trustees have no say in the matter?
(2) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or retain any name it wants even if it is offensive?
By the way, I'm not trying to argue here either that the Lady Vols IS offensive, or that the Board of Trustees made the decision so there's no need to argue about that. I'd just like to know your answer to these two questions. |
Do you just enjoy needless drama? NOBODY connected with UT has suggested that the term Lady Vols not be used because it is offensive in any way. The point is that this name is NOT OFFENSIVE. That is the case whether you live in California, Oregon, Texas or Tennessee. The male equivalent is not Lord. The male equivalent is Gentlemen. Is that term offensive>?
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 6:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PlayBally'all wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| This is a name the basketball team itself CHOSE, and the the other women's teams then adopted. |
Just so I understand, is it your contention
(1) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or choose to retain any nickname it likes, and that the school's administration, AD, President, Board of Trustees have no say in the matter?
(2) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or retain any name it wants even if it is offensive?
By the way, I'm not trying to argue here either that the Lady Vols IS offensive, or that the Board of Trustees made the decision so there's no need to argue about that. I'd just like to know your answer to these two questions. |
Do you just enjoy needless drama? NOBODY connected with UT has suggested that the term Lady Vols not be used because it is offensive in any way. The point is that this name is NOT OFFENSIVE. That is the case whether you live in California, Oregon, Texas or Tennessee. The male equivalent is not Lord. The male equivalent is Gentlemen. Is that term offensive>? |
Actually it is lord. As in lords and ladies. It's sourced from British royalty, as in Lord and Lady Smith.
And no one has said it's "offensive" per se, but in this usage it is unquestionably condescending and demeaning to women athletes. It was used to separate women from the "real" mens athletes - a notion that is decades outdated if it was ever appropriate at all.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/24/15 6:53 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
Actually it is lord. As in lords and ladies. It's sourced from British royalty, as in Lord and Lady Smith.
And no one has said it's "offensive" per se, but in this usage it is unquestionably condescending and demeaning to women athletes. It was used to separate women from the "real" mens athletes - a notion that is decades outdated if it was ever appropriate at all. |
I think part of my problem with "ladies" is generational. To me it harkens back to the days (50's and early 60's) when female students first began to attend formerly all male or nearly all male schools (other than "teachers colleges") in large numbers. In the years prior to my college experience the majority of female students never earned a degree, they married a graduating male student. And they weren't called students either, they were referred to as "coeds" It was a separation and IMO using the term "ladies" or adding "ettes" to invent a feminine version of an organization fall into the same category.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11142
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/25/15 9:59 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| PlayBally'all wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| This is a name the basketball team itself CHOSE, and the the other women's teams then adopted. |
Just so I understand, is it your contention
(1) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or choose to retain any nickname it likes, and that the school's administration, AD, President, Board of Trustees have no say in the matter?
(2) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or retain any name it wants even if it is offensive?
By the way, I'm not trying to argue here either that the Lady Vols IS offensive, or that the Board of Trustees made the decision so there's no need to argue about that. I'd just like to know your answer to these two questions. |
Do you just enjoy needless drama? NOBODY connected with UT has suggested that the term Lady Vols not be used because it is offensive in any way. The point is that this name is NOT OFFENSIVE. That is the case whether you live in California, Oregon, Texas or Tennessee. The male equivalent is not Lord. The male equivalent is Gentlemen. Is that term offensive>? |
For the record, I find "Lady Vols," "Lady Cougars", etc. offensive. It clearly defines, in my mind, the women's team as different from the primary team, which is the Volunteers or Cougars -- and "different" in this case is not better or even equal.
"Lady" also connotes "ladylike" and a certain demeanor that one would never expect from a men's team, or a team that prides itself on competitiveness and physicality.
As has been pointed out, if the men's teams are the Gentleman Vols or Gentlemen Cougars, then I have no issues with "Lady" as an adjective. But I do not know of a single program at any level that refers to its men's teams as the Gentlemen anything.
That said, finding it offensive doesn't mean I'm totally against the Lady Vols, given the history of the program. I would prefer it if it weren't used any more, but there are reasons to keep it.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Beemer
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Posts: 483
Location: Connecticut
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/25/15 1:50 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
The boss likes him but he sounds like a jerk. Very frustrating combo to have to deal with.
| Quote: |
In his three years as UT's athletics director, Hart has attracted controversy while being given increased authority on campus by UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek, who made Hart a vice chancellor and member of his Cabinet
Under Hart's leadership, more than half of the athletics board that provides oversight of the department was dismissed, and then the board began meeting in secret and said it has stopped taking meeting minutes. Hart was involved in a public disagreement with the school's marching band director, Dr. Gary Sousa. The disagreement led to Sousa, a tenured professor, losing his position running the band because of claims of insubordination, though he has kept his faculty job. |
| Quote: |
- Of the 15 people laid off under Hart's consolidation plan, 12 were women.
- Of the eight-member leadership team created by Hart, seven are men, with NCAA rules mandating a senior woman administrator[/list]. |
|
I don't have a dog in this hunt but I have to say this information is very disturbing.
It is one thing to try to reduce costs but when an AD seemingly targets one group for the deepest cuts that is a red flag. |
You might want to consider that you're only being given one side of the story. I don't have a dog in this hunt either, but Hart is a very experienced and well regarded administrator. He was Executive Director of Athletics at Alabama, AD at East Carolina, and long time AD at FSU before taking the Tenn job. He wasn't some unqualified drinking buddy of the Chancellor as has been suggested. His son is or was AD at UTC as well, I believe.
Everybody who gets cut and their friends and allies always raise hell about it, particularly in university settings. I found it interesting that one of the beefs here was about using recorded music at football games. A lot of schools have started doing that because it tends to get the fans louder and more involved. There was a big stink at Notre Dame from former band members and their friends when ND did the very same thing a couple of years ago. But Jack Swarbrick is a terrific and highly successful AD. Maybe using recorded music isn't necessarily a sign of incompetence after all. Maybe most of the complaints are the same thing that happens at every school when the administration tries to change things that people have gotten used to. |
The red flags for me are the athletics board meeting in secret and that of 15 positions cut 12 were held by women. It was my understanding that the two departments were being merged (?) but it looks instead like Hart was less than even handed about it. Whether it was intentional or not I don't know but it doesn't look good, and neither does meeting in secret for any reason. What is he up to that he doesn't want anyone to know?
I know nobody likes change but sometimes it is needed. Hart seems to have alienated people who might have supported his changes if he'd just been more tactful about what he was doing and why. Maybe he feels tact isn't necessary because he has the full support of the UT Chancellor.
I think it is too bad all of this is happening, I don't think it is good for the university or the athletes.
_________________
Go Huskies! Go Sun!
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/25/15 3:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I wonder if someone could link to the Tennessee Athletics Board that might explain what it is, who is on it, who makes the appointments, who it reports to, and what its functions and responsibilities are.
I didn't find it on the UT website.
|
|
PlayBally'all
Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Posts: 271
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/25/15 6:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| PlayBally'all wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| This is a name the basketball team itself CHOSE, and the the other women's teams then adopted. |
Just so I understand, is it your contention
(1) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or choose to retain any nickname it likes, and that the school's administration, AD, President, Board of Trustees have no say in the matter?
(2) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or retain any name it wants even if it is offensive?
By the way, I'm not trying to argue here either that the Lady Vols IS offensive, or that the Board of Trustees made the decision so there's no need to argue about that. I'd just like to know your answer to these two questions. |
Do you just enjoy needless drama? NOBODY connected with UT has suggested that the term Lady Vols not be used because it is offensive in any way. The point is that this name is NOT OFFENSIVE. That is the case whether you live in California, Oregon, Texas or Tennessee. The male equivalent is not Lord. The male equivalent is Gentlemen. Is that term offensive>? |
Actually it is lord. As in lords and ladies. It's sourced from British royalty, as in Lord and Lady Smith.
And no one has said it's "offensive" per se, but in this usage it is unquestionably condescending and demeaning to women athletes. It was used to separate women from the "real" mens athletes - a notion that is decades outdated if it was ever appropriate at all. |
The term is in no way "unquestionably condescending" and is in no way shape or form demeaning. You are the only person using the term to separate anyone and you are the only one using the term "real" mens athletes..... You cannot simply declare it so and have it be that way. The only thing condescending is your belief that you know the intent of someone or some group that you know very little to nothing about.
The term Lady is sourced from Britain and as so was used to denote class and nobility. The term Lady as never been used in the U.S. to denote nobility, just as the term Lord has never been used in the U.S. to denote nobility. In the U.S., the terms Lady and Gentleman have been used. In the U.S., the term Lady has been used to describe a woman of authority and as a term of respect in the same way that the term Gentleman is used when referring to a man.
Like it or not, there is an appropriate way to carry yourself and there is an appropriate level of manners that individuals, male or female, should exhibit in their daily lives.
|
|
PlayBally'all
Joined: 17 Oct 2013
Posts: 271
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/25/15 6:34 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Beemer wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
| tfan wrote: |
The boss likes him but he sounds like a jerk. Very frustrating combo to have to deal with.
| Quote: |
In his three years as UT's athletics director, Hart has attracted controversy while being given increased authority on campus by UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek, who made Hart a vice chancellor and member of his Cabinet
Under Hart's leadership, more than half of the athletics board that provides oversight of the department was dismissed, and then the board began meeting in secret and said it has stopped taking meeting minutes. Hart was involved in a public disagreement with the school's marching band director, Dr. Gary Sousa. The disagreement led to Sousa, a tenured professor, losing his position running the band because of claims of insubordination, though he has kept his faculty job. |
| Quote: |
- Of the 15 people laid off under Hart's consolidation plan, 12 were women.
- Of the eight-member leadership team created by Hart, seven are men, with NCAA rules mandating a senior woman administrator[/list]. |
|
I don't have a dog in this hunt but I have to say this information is very disturbing.
It is one thing to try to reduce costs but when an AD seemingly targets one group for the deepest cuts that is a red flag. |
You might want to consider that you're only being given one side of the story. I don't have a dog in this hunt either, but Hart is a very experienced and well regarded administrator. He was Executive Director of Athletics at Alabama, AD at East Carolina, and long time AD at FSU before taking the Tenn job. He wasn't some unqualified drinking buddy of the Chancellor as has been suggested. His son is or was AD at UTC as well, I believe.
Everybody who gets cut and their friends and allies always raise hell about it, particularly in university settings. I found it interesting that one of the beefs here was about using recorded music at football games. A lot of schools have started doing that because it tends to get the fans louder and more involved. There was a big stink at Notre Dame from former band members and their friends when ND did the very same thing a couple of years ago. But Jack Swarbrick is a terrific and highly successful AD. Maybe using recorded music isn't necessarily a sign of incompetence after all. Maybe most of the complaints are the same thing that happens at every school when the administration tries to change things that people have gotten used to. |
The red flags for me are the athletics board meeting in secret and that of 15 positions cut 12 were held by women. It was my understanding that the two departments were being merged (?) but it looks instead like Hart was less than even handed about it. Whether it was intentional or not I don't know but it doesn't look good, and neither does meeting in secret for any reason. What is he up to that he doesn't want anyone to know?
I know nobody likes change but sometimes it is needed. Hart seems to have alienated people who might have supported his changes if he'd just been more tactful about what he was doing and why. Maybe he feels tact isn't necessary because he has the full support of the UT Chancellor.
I think it is too bad all of this is happening, I don't think it is good for the university or the athletes. |
Hart is an ASS. He was abrasive and hostile toward women's sports at FSU and he has been twice as abrasive and hostile at UT. To lead, you must have a unified Athletic Department. This half man will never have that at UT due to his actions alone.
|
|
norwester
Joined: 14 Jun 2006
Posts: 6367
Location: Seattle
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 1:25 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| PlayBally'all wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| PlayBally'all wrote: |
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| summertime blues wrote: |
| This is a name the basketball team itself CHOSE, and the the other women's teams then adopted. |
Just so I understand, is it your contention
(1) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or choose to retain any nickname it likes, and that the school's administration, AD, President, Board of Trustees have no say in the matter?
(2) that a school's team is entitled to choose to adopt or retain any name it wants even if it is offensive?
By the way, I'm not trying to argue here either that the Lady Vols IS offensive, or that the Board of Trustees made the decision so there's no need to argue about that. I'd just like to know your answer to these two questions. |
Do you just enjoy needless drama? NOBODY connected with UT has suggested that the term Lady Vols not be used because it is offensive in any way. The point is that this name is NOT OFFENSIVE. That is the case whether you live in California, Oregon, Texas or Tennessee. The male equivalent is not Lord. The male equivalent is Gentlemen. Is that term offensive>? |
Actually it is lord. As in lords and ladies. It's sourced from British royalty, as in Lord and Lady Smith.
And no one has said it's "offensive" per se, but in this usage it is unquestionably condescending and demeaning to women athletes. It was used to separate women from the "real" mens athletes - a notion that is decades outdated if it was ever appropriate at all. |
The term is in no way "unquestionably condescending" and is in no way shape or form demeaning. You are the only person using the term to separate anyone and you are the only one using the term "real" mens athletes..... You cannot simply declare it so and have it be that way. The only thing condescending is your belief that you know the intent of someone or some group that you know very little to nothing about.
The term Lady is sourced from Britain and as so was used to denote class and nobility. The term Lady as never been used in the U.S. to denote nobility, just as the term Lord has never been used in the U.S. to denote nobility. In the U.S., the terms Lady and Gentleman have been used. In the U.S., the term Lady has been used to describe a woman of authority and as a term of respect in the same way that the term Gentleman is used when referring to a man.
Like it or not, there is an appropriate way to carry yourself and there is an appropriate level of manners that individuals, male or female, should exhibit in their daily lives. |
Actually, I believe that you are incorrect. It's the fans of the "Lady Vols" name arguing that it's not demeaning, because it's not in their eyes (solely based on history, I guess). But separating women by calling them "lady" volunteers when men are just "volunteers" implies a separate set of standards. Women are condescended to all of the time by being asked to behave in a more lady-like manner, when their behavior in their setting is perfectly acceptable coming from a male colleague (e.g. raising one's voice in discussion). Or a female candidate who takes certain actions is a "bitch" while the same behavior from men is seen as "decisive" or characterisitic of "leadership".
Whether you like it or not, words like "lady" have become recognized as words with meaning beyond the surface, due to their role in subjugating non-conformists. Language matters. Yes, men and women and all people should comport themselves in a reasonable manner. But "reasonable" doesn't mean some sort of pre-defined societal notion of what a man or woman should be. And "lady" is pre-defined. You go to cotillion to learn to be a lady. You sit "like a lady". There are many more examples, and they all hearken back to a certain genteel standard that may be viewed with admiration by many, but is acknowledged as an area of scorn for those who fall outside those norms. As one would expect a women's basketball player to do (too physical, aggressive, competitive to be a "lady").
_________________
Don't you know the plural of "anecdote" is "data"?
|
|
Beemer
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Posts: 483
Location: Connecticut
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 2:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
I don't see it that way.
I see it as a way of differentiating the women's team from the men's team.
Not lesser, not worse. Not more, not better. Just different.
It is all in how you look at it I guess.
_________________
Go Huskies! Go Sun!
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 2:30 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Beemer wrote: |
I see it as a way of differentiating the women's team from the men's team. |
Correct ^^^^ which is the basic problem.
| Beemer wrote: |
Not lesser, not worse. Not more, not better. Just different.
|
Incorrect. ^^^^ It connotes lesser. "Real" athletes are tough and "manly". Women athletes are gentle and "ladylike." The roots and purpose of the differentiation is obvious to anyone who has moved beyond the era of Father Knows Best.
Or maybe you'd like to go back to the days of having the women wear nice "ladylike" ankle length skirts when they play basketball.
I thought the long-discredited notion of "separate but equal" being an acceptable approach got thrown out about 50 years ago.
|
|
hyperetic
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 5360
Location: Fayetteville
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 2:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
I see it as a way of differentiating the women's team from the men's team. |
Correct ^^^^ which is the basic problem.
| Beemer wrote: |
Not lesser, not worse. Not more, not better. Just different.
|
Incorrect. ^^^^ It connotes lesser. "Real" athletes are tough and "manly". Women athletes are gentle and "ladylike." The roots and purpose of the differentiation is obvious to anyone who has moved beyond the era of Father Knows Best.
Or maybe you'd like to go back to the days of having the women wear nice "ladylike" ankle length skirts when they play basketball. |
The problem with that line of thinking, as I see it, is it doesn't matter to the people who think lesser of women's sports whether they are called the Lady Vols or just Vols. They will still think less of women's sports. To the people who truly respect women's sports, their not going to respect them less just because they are called the Lady Whatevers. |
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 3:02 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
I see it as a way of differentiating the women's team from the men's team. |
Correct ^^^^ which is the basic problem.
| Beemer wrote: |
Not lesser, not worse. Not more, not better. Just different.
|
Incorrect. ^^^^ It connotes lesser. "Real" athletes are tough and "manly". Women athletes are gentle and "ladylike." The roots and purpose of the differentiation is obvious to anyone who has moved beyond the era of Father Knows Best.
Or maybe you'd like to go back to the days of having the women wear nice "ladylike" ankle length skirts when they play basketball.
I thought the long-discredited notion of "separate but equal" being an acceptable approach got thrown out about 50 years ago. |
If that's the way you see it, Art, that's your problem. I think there are a few hundred Lady Vols, present and former, from several sports, who would gladly argue the point with you. I suspect they could easily make their argument stand.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
Beemer
Joined: 19 Jul 2014
Posts: 483
Location: Connecticut
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 3:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| Beemer wrote: |
I see it as a way of differentiating the women's team from the men's team. |
Correct ^^^^ which is the basic problem.
| Beemer wrote: |
Not lesser, not worse. Not more, not better. Just different.
|
Incorrect. ^^^^ It connotes lesser. "Real" athletes are tough and "manly". Women athletes are gentle and "ladylike." The roots and purpose of the differentiation is obvious to anyone who has moved beyond the era of Father Knows Best.
Or maybe you'd like to go back to the days of having the women wear nice "ladylike" ankle length skirts when they play basketball.
I thought the long-discredited notion of "separate but equal" being an acceptable approach got thrown out about 50 years ago. |
In your opinion it connotes lesser You really should differentiate your opinion from facts, you might not come across as a jackwagon so often.
Why is this the basic problem? The teams are different. One is made up of women, one is made up of men (duh). Women & men are different (double duh).
I don't see any "insult" in Lady Volunteers or Lady Whateveryourcollegeis. I don't see them as "lesser" or as "ladylike" for that matter. Their name distinguishes them from the men's team no more and no less.
_________________
Go Huskies! Go Sun!
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66903
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/26/15 3:54 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Beemer wrote: |
| I don't see any "insult" in Lady Volunteers or Lady Whateveryourcollegeis. I don't see them as "lesser" or as "ladylike" for that matter. Their name distinguishes them from the men's team no more and no less. |
Why do they need to be differentiated from the men's team? Isn't the fact of them being women differentiation enough?
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
|
|
|
