I don't doubt their president is clueless. Our president is too. It used to be students would protest and have sit-ins. Maybe they've done all that at the Univ. of Missouri and it hasn't worked. My question to them would be how is forfeiting a football game going to force out the school president?? Hell, the PSU administration would have been happy to see us go 0-12 for the next decade. The eggheads in their ivory towers don't generally care if an athletic team wins or not. They'll sit in their overstuffed chairs and congratulate each other about how they're smarter than everyone else.
African-American athletes threaten to strike at Mizzou
- Thread starter canuckhal
- Start date
Stop. Just. Stop.
Even the university's chancellor said today, "Racism has deep roots at our university. Racism shapes the current climate for and educational experience of all of our students."
You're being short sighted here. This kind of thing can have long terms effects on the university. Would you want Penn State to be known as a university which does not accept minorities as equals? Would you want black student athletes shunning the university because of it?
This didn't start with the football strike. Other students have been active for some time now and a graduate student has been on a hunger strike for a week now. You didn't hear about any of that until the football team decided to strike. Then it becomes national news. Which is precisely why the football team decided to weigh in. Missing the Baylor game will cost Missouri at least $1 million. The rest of the season - I don't know how much it will cost. But unless their board is as stupid as the Penn State board they will do something about it.
Pinkel is not going to take away any scholarships. He and his entire team are standing united on this. (His and their words.)
How are they not accepted as equal given their demand is social justice over justice and demand that the president acknowledge his white male privilege?
I agree with your above sentiments. However, I've read the stated goal of the players is to have the university president resign or be fired. Maybe I'm wrong (I have been before - a lot) but I can't see the president resigning because the football team wants him to nor can I imagine their governing body crumbling and firing him in the near future because the football team demands it. As far as I know, knee jerk personnel decisions are only make by the Penn State BoT.
I've never been to Columbia, MO, so I have no idea what the campus racial atmosphere is like. Hopefully they can somewhat resolve the current issues and work on the underlying problems going forward.
I know that he's made the wise decision to stand behind his team - but I'm sure Pinkel also recognized the tremendous downside and consequences he would have faced had he came down hard on the striking players. Instead, he's made the honorable choice to stand behind his young men and demonstrate tremendous leadership.
NP, IDK....the Governor's words today have been pretty stark.
Something is gonna have to give, and the guy may very well have to resign or be fired.
Then a whole bunch of a certain type are going to act all resentful that he had to go....butt hurt. Same as it ever was.
Has a kind of inevitable feel to it, and recognizing that seems to be a less painful alternative than not.
Maybe he can snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. IDK.
Nonsense. Strikes can force dialogue when one side won't talk. Read our labor history, particularly in the U.S.A..
People should be really careful about being tempted to view this through a Penn State lens. Penn State has had its own problems over the years, but Penn State admitted its first "colored" student in 1899. The name of the student protest group at Mizzou is "ConcernedStudent1950" and this is a reference to Mizzou's first admission of an African American student in 1950.
By 1950 Penn State had a black fraternity, a black member of Skull & Bones, black student-athletes, a visit from Paul Robeson, multiple black PhD grads, and we had cancelled a football game against Miami because of racial discrimination.
The bottom line is that even though there is always room for improvement at Penn State, it would be a big mistake to form opinions about what is going on at Missouri based on whatever each of us know individually from our experiences at Penn State. The southern schools are still dragging around a legacy of hundreds of years of racism and it doesn't do anyone any good to pretend it's not a problem.
By 1950 Penn State had a black fraternity, a black member of Skull & Bones, black student-athletes, a visit from Paul Robeson, multiple black PhD grads, and we had cancelled a football game against Miami because of racial discrimination.
The bottom line is that even though there is always room for improvement at Penn State, it would be a big mistake to form opinions about what is going on at Missouri based on whatever each of us know individually from our experiences at Penn State. The southern schools are still dragging around a legacy of hundreds of years of racism and it doesn't do anyone any good to pretend it's not a problem.
I absolutely agree with you, Aoshiro, and I wasn't at all trying to draw full equivalency between what's going on at Missouri and the history and experiences of AA's at Penn State. I lived in State College in the early 2000s when race bubbled to the surface on campus with the Old Main sit-in and the death threats against black student leaders, as well as quality of life and academic representation complaints from black students similar to the complaints that we see here at Missouri. The big difference to me is the severity of the history at the two schools (although I do think you paint PSU's racial history in a slightly kinder lights than others might - in 1950, as you mention, PSU had all of a half dozen black students and they weren't permitted to live in the dorms) and the fact that Spanier, from my recollection, handled things much better than the Missouri president is currently.
I had to do some googling to refresh my memory, but it's interesting to see some of the similarities and some of the differences: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/04/us/penn-state-students-end-sit-in-over-threats-against-blacks.html
EDIT: upon further research, PSU ended their policy of not allowing blacks to live on campus in around 1946, so by 1950 they could have lived on campus.
Last edited:
If Penn State fans and alums quit giving money to the university we could have forced out the BOT.
[Sarcasm]
Well clearly the protests of the spring of 2001 didn't make much noise at Penn State, since Louis Freeh failed to mention them at all, even to note that they were something that would have required a lot of attention from university administrators like Schultz and Spanier and perhaps overshadowed McQueary's murky report.
It's pretty odd that the New York Times even noticed.
But thanks for reminding us.
[/Sarcasm]
Stop it because I disagree with you? What a productive dialogue!
Essentially the complaints boil down to Payton Head, the black president of the student government (which one must wonder if Mizzou is the racist hellhole some of you are making it out to be, how did he get elected?) claiming he had a racial slur yelled at him as he walked. Later, an intoxicated white man yelled the n word at the Legion of Black Collegians at 1am as they were rehearsing for a play (that man was accosted and "moved" from campus). Later the same month, someone smeared feces on a wall in the shape of a swastika (and from everything I could find this took place in a general dormitory so it's a stretch to say it targeted any group in particular). Apparently, this past weekend another incident of an intoxicated white man calling a couple of black students the n-word occurred.
Based off of that, this whole thing has devolved into an effort to destroy the university president, demand special courses and the hiring of more black staff and faculty, remove a statue of Thomas Jefferson from campus, sabotage the university at a prospective students day, and now of course threaten to boycott football.
If you think ignorant words from mostly drunk idiots warrants upending the entire university, fine. That's your right and it is the right of the people in this protest to practice their free speech. No one can or should force the football players to play or prevent the students from peacefully protesting. However, I, for one, do not think this movement is in any way a rational or mature response to what has transpired. Nor do I think it is appropriate to insinuate that an entire system and group of people are racist because of the deplorable actions (or really in this case, words) of a few. Kind of like how I don't think it is appropriate for people to deplore Penn State because of the bad actions or lack of actions of a few.
As for the chancellor, what do you think he was going to say? Number 1, of course there are racist roots at the university. Missouri was a slave state after all. Nothing is ever going to change that no matter how hard one tries. Does that mean that no progress can ever be made and that every demand made by a member of an identity group that was once harshly mistreated generations ago must be accepted at face value no questions asked? Number 2, this thing has been spiraling out of control and the chancellor has personally been a target of this movement. It's a pretty natural reaction to give some ground and try to ease tensions.
Btw, I have news for you, there are plenty of people here at Dear Old State who think it is an oppressive/racist/sexist/homophobic/horrible/no_good_place too. Do you think it's time to change this university en masse too?
this link has a nice timeline of events and does it in an objective way:
http://www.themaneater.com/special-sections/mu-fall-2015/
It's certainly interesting timing and I think it's an interesting question to see how the events may have affected each other. But, I do believe that, based on the timeline and Collegian archive articles that I saw (http://blackhistory.psu.edu/assets/...icles_Death_Threat_and_Protests_2000_2001.pdf), the first protests occurred in October 2000 and then picked up again when the death threats against the Black Student Union were sent in late April 2001, and the sit-ins didn't begin until after the Blue-White game in April into May. The McQueary timeline, from what I had seen, spanned generally from early February until mid/late March of 2001.
All of those that are not upholding their agreement . They were giving scholarships to play a sport . If they are not playing then they should have to pay for their education
What the eff do you personally know about what it's like to be a black student at Mizzou? Why the eff do you think your opinion of this is more valid than the kids who actually live and go to school there?
#Arrogance
Well, perhaps the university isn't holding up its end of the agreement.
I know roughly 60 Black Penn State students were sent hate Emails sometime around 2000/2001. When they were traced to a Temple Computer Lab in Philadelphia, the media seemed to drop it like a hot potato.
Don't know enough about the Missouri situation, but if they are complaining about swastika's, I would guess the Jewish students would be more concerned than the Blacks. Millions of Jews were actually killed under that symbol. Are the Jewish students striking too? When I checked Missouri's ethnic and religious breakdown, it said there are roughly 750 Jewish students at the University of Missouri. What has been their stance on this situation?
They have been having a problem with that, too, this year. Wasn't too hard to find the answer to your question.
http://www.newstribune.com/news/2015/apr/18/organizations-urge-university-protect-jewish-stude/
In other related news, the knives are out....
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/the-buzz/article43682574.html
Last edited:
Unreasonable demand to fire President immediately. Let them strike. Mark Emmert can apologize to Baylor, step in and fire the President himself or impose sanctions that allow all offended players to transfer and play immediately. Maybe he could even threaten sanctions against any University who turned down accepting a player who applied. He is all powerful and needs to get involved. This is now a football problem and a culture issue.
In this day and age Strikes are the disgusting tool of over entitled, lazy, and gimme something I did not earn factions that suck the blood out of our country.
Let me guess, you think racism is a myth. You tell minorities to suck it up and deal with it and then whine and play the victim card and blame the media every time conservatives do something stupid.
Guys like him are the reason there is still a need for unions. He's probably a management type who loves to bully employees.
The players seem intent on not doing any football related activities until the person on the hunger strike eats.
Here's the list of demands from the protest group led by the student on the hunger strike:
I. We demand that the University of Missouri System President, Tim Wolfe, writes a handwritten apology to the Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demonstrators and holds a press conference in the Mizzou Student Center reading the letter. In the letter and at the press conference, Tim Wolfe must acknowledge his white male privilege, recognize that systems of oppression exist, and provide a verbal commitment to fulfilling Concerned Student 1-9-5-0 demands. We want Tim Wolfe to admit to his gross negligence, allowing his driver to hit one of the demonstrators, consenting to the physical violence of bystanders, and lastly refusing to intervene when Columbia Police Department used excessive force with demonstrators.
II. We demand the immediate removal of Tim Wolfe as UM system president. After his removal a new amendment to UM system policies must be established to have all future UM system president and Chancellor positions be selected by a collective of students, staff, and faculty of diverse backgrounds.
III. We demand that the University of Missouri meets the Legion of Black Collegians' demands that were presented in 1969 for the betterment of the black community.
IV. We demand that the University of Missouri creates and enforces comprehensive racial awareness and inclusion curriculum throughout all campus departments and units, mandatory for all students, faculty, staff, and administration. This curriculum must be vetted, maintained, and overseen by a board comprised of students, staff, and faculty of color.
V. We demand that by the academic year 2017-2018, the University of Missouri increases the percentage of black faculty and staff campus-wide to 10%.
VI. We demand that the University of Missouri composes a strategic 10 year plan by May 1, 2016 that will increase retention rates for marginalized students, sustain diversity curriculum and training, and promote a more safe and inclusive campus.
VII. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding and resources for the University of Missouri Counseling Center for the purpose of hiring additional mental health professionals — particularly those of color, boosting mental health outreach and programming across campus, increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility of the counseling center, and reducing lengthy wait times for prospective clients.
VIII. We demand that the University of Missouri increases funding, resources, and personnel for the social justices centers on campus for the purpose of hiring additional professionals, particularly those of color, boosting outreach and programming across campus, and increasing campus-wide awareness and visibility.
There's clearly an issue when it comes to race relations in that area, if not among the student body itself. I can see where some of the demands are valid and will promote positive change.
That said, the first two are ridiculous. If the players refuse to play based solely on those two not being met it could have catastrophic consequences.
The president didn't do anything to warrant his removal/resignation. At worst he was insensitive by not reacting (to an incident) in a public forum quickly enough.
What the eff do you personally know about what it's like to be a black student at Mizzou? My guess is, nothing.
one reason and one reason ONLY we should be supporting the Missouri football program
Gary Pinkel defends Joe Paterno
never never never forget he was one the first and only coaches to speak out in support of Joe
Gary Pinkel defends Joe Paterno
never never never forget he was one the first and only coaches to speak out in support of Joe
That's great, but I'm not exactly comfortable with Pinkel taking on his boss's boss publicly. I'm sure he does defend his players and is against racism, but this whole thing involving the football program and going public is a mess. It has become about football and comes off, as someone else here said, the tail wagging the dog.
The president needs to do something about the racial situation on campus (and I am not necessarily advocating that he resign or get fired because I don't have all the information). His mistake is that he did not act immediately, before this became a football issue. If he acts now, it will be seen as placating and bowing down to the football team to get them on the field. It would appear as though the football coach and players have overwhelming influence on the president. That, friends, reeks of a football culture problem.
well I think that is important distinction: this was not initially a football issue. the football players made the decision to utilize the power of their involvement in the program to raise public awareness after efforts to address this problem failed. I don't think this is the tail wagging the dog, and let's drop the pretension that football programs exist in a vacuum below the administration. Blame the NCAA all we want, but they (and the universities) have made billions off the backs of these players over the years.
On a side note, I wonder how people felt when Joe insisted on taking a stand against segregation. How dare he use the football program to address social ills . . .
I'll never forget that sitting in the stands for that Blue/White game. I remember walking away puzzled to hear the words I heard about those protesters but to think that those same fans had no problems rooting on black players to win for our school.
Of course it's not just a PSU thing, obviously. I guess I'll never understand how people who feel such hatred (the words I heard were definitely hateful) toward black kids but cheer on the black players who put on a helmet with their teams colors.
I was just watching Good Day Philadelphia co-host Alex Holley talk about her experiences at Mizzou. She says that racism on campus is nothing new and there were always little incidents here and there while she was a student. She was there around the same years that Jeremy Macklin was there. She mentioned one incident where UM students put cotton balls on the floor of the Black Cultural Center so that the black students would have to pick them up.
The protests are completely undermined by the 1st demand whereby they require that the president admits his "white male privilege".
So the very first thing that those opposing racism at this university do is not only racist but also sexist?
Because of this I can't support them. If they had focused entirely on treating all people equally regardless of race, then they have me and probably millions more. But their effort, if that is the first demand, is entirely misguided.
They are using race as a weapon the same way they believe it is used against them. So they are just as bad as anyone who may have threatened someone that they support. They are using the university president's race and his sex to make public threats to him and his family. How can any good person who wants there not to be racism at that school support public racist and sexist threats against university president?
If and when they retract the "white male privilege" then I can support their cause if it remains non-violent.
So the very first thing that those opposing racism at this university do is not only racist but also sexist?
Because of this I can't support them. If they had focused entirely on treating all people equally regardless of race, then they have me and probably millions more. But their effort, if that is the first demand, is entirely misguided.
They are using race as a weapon the same way they believe it is used against them. So they are just as bad as anyone who may have threatened someone that they support. They are using the university president's race and his sex to make public threats to him and his family. How can any good person who wants there not to be racism at that school support public racist and sexist threats against university president?
If and when they retract the "white male privilege" then I can support their cause if it remains non-violent.
Undermined in your eyes and the eyes of folks like you.
Over in reality land, none of their demands have been undermined. Go figger.
