|
Post by alum on Oct 12, 2017 8:11:07 GMT -5
Quick survey:
If, as a number of us have suggested, the Board decides to keep the name Crusader but ditch the guy in the knight suit, would this cause anyone to stop donating, return the mail, get really mad, etc.?
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 12, 2017 8:20:35 GMT -5
2017: A Crusade Against The Crusaders!
Do you feel that under your toes? Hell must be freezing over. You have to laugh a little.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 12, 2017 8:28:55 GMT -5
It's provided in the last para, last sentence of the section on Background in the link in Fr B's email; If you're pressed for time I would give it priority over the other link to the lecture on the Crusades note that Fr B is just out of camera range on the right... many of the points made in these posts are covered more eloquently in this discussion session... there are also points that will raise your blood pressure
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 12, 2017 8:35:13 GMT -5
"If, as a number of us have suggested, the Board decides to keep the name Crusader but ditch the guy in the knight suit, would this cause anyone to stop donating, return the mail, get really mad, etc.?" ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I guess we could keep the name Crusaders (which may or may not still offend some people) as in The Holy Cross Crusaders Basketball Team offset by a small beagle as a mascot to bring to the games. Maybe even a thoroughly nonthreatening beagle puppy. Without teeth if possible. Sort of like Handsome Dan but much much cuter.
Not sure that would satisfy everyone (especially the easily offended and grouchy cat lovers) and personally I am content with the status quo myself. But who doesn't love a cuddly little dog?
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Oct 12, 2017 8:43:30 GMT -5
I am deathly allergic to dogs. I am offended that you tried to kill me.
|
|
|
Post by nhteamer on Oct 12, 2017 8:44:38 GMT -5
fix
is
in
what a joke
The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL)
Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 12, 2017 9:06:25 GMT -5
fix is in what a joke The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL) Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion. Were you laughing before or after you watched it.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 12, 2017 9:06:55 GMT -5
Alum: Quick survey:
If, as a number of us have suggested, the Board decides to keep the name Crusader but ditch the guy in the knight suit, would this cause anyone to stop donating, return the mail, get really mad, etc.?
HC Pride: I guess we could keep the name Crusaders (which may or may not still offend some people) as in The Holy Cross Crusaders Basketball Team offset by a small beagle as a mascot to bring to the games. Maybe even a thoroughly nonthreatening beagle puppy. Without teeth if possible. Sort of like Handsome Dan but much much cuter.
Not sure that would satisfy everyone (especially the easily offended and grouchy cat lovers) and personally I am content with the status quo myself. But who doesn't love a cuddly little dog?
I am deathly allergic to dogs. I am offended that you tried to kill me. OK, then a toothless and hairless small beagle puppy as a mascot. We could dip him in some sort of cream to keep the dander down if that is the problem. (I was thinking one of those hairless cats - actually a declawed and toothless hairless kitten - but they creep people out and that would be offensive)
|
|
|
Post by alum on Oct 12, 2017 9:21:56 GMT -5
So I guess hcpride is not going to answer the question but instead make funny comments. Anyone else interested in responding?
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Oct 12, 2017 9:38:11 GMT -5
So I guess hcpride is not going to answer the question but instead make funny comments. Anyone else interested in responding? First, hairless cats may have even more dander, so I am offended that in your bid to not offend or kill me, you increased the chances of me dying and thus, being more offended. You caveman... Second, I will respond. If we kept "Crusader," but made the physical, visible mascot "X," where "X" could be literally anything on earth, then the problem wouldn't be "fixed" in the eyes of those who I imagine are against the Crusader moniker. As a result, I think your question is a little flawed. The word Crusader triggers these folks to refer to KKK newspapers, what the Taliban calls the United States, or what these historical glossaries refer to religious wars of persecutions-- Christians against Muslims. Their beef is not with a cartoon/muppet knight or his sword. It is the perception that Christians violently persecuted people. They are focusing on an only-partially accurate (at best) etymology of the word, rather than seeing it as a way to strive against all odds for what is good, no matter the cost, citing Ignatian values. You'd have a better chance of keeping the knight logo and changing the name to Purple Knights, Royal Knights, Royals, or any other similarly ubiquitous grammar school mascot.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Oct 12, 2017 9:39:48 GMT -5
Keeping the name but dropping the mascot would be stupid, a wuss move of the lowest order. It would disappoint me but I would not stop contributing to the college
|
|
|
Post by WCHC Sports on Oct 12, 2017 9:41:52 GMT -5
The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL) Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion. Professor Bazzaz was a fine professor, as I took one of her classes on the history of the Middle East. She was very powerful in her connection to the subject matter, intelligent, and reasonable. Professor Langohr taught a class on democratic governments in less-frequently-popular/read-about/learned-about countries, and happened to be the last final I ever took before graduation. Without knowing the rest of the panel, and not that my opinion is worth the paper it's not printed on, I think they are fine choices.
|
|
|
Post by hcpride on Oct 12, 2017 9:43:02 GMT -5
So I guess hcpride is not going to answer the question but instead make funny comments. Anyone else interested in responding? First, hairless cats may have even more dander, so I am offended that in your bid to not offend or kill me, you increased the chances of me dying and thus, being more offended. You caveman... Second, I will respond. If we kept "Crusader," but made the physical, visible mascot "X," where "X" could be literally anything on earth, then the problem wouldn't be "fixed" in the eyes of those who I imagine are against the Crusader moniker. As a result, I think your question is a little flawed. The word Crusader triggers these folks to refer to KKK newspapers, what the Taliban calls the United States, or what these historical glossaries refer to religious wars of persecutions-- Christians against Muslims. Their beef is not with a cartoon/muppet knight or his sword. It is the perception that Christians violently persecuted people. They are focusing on an only-partially accurate (at best) etymology of the word, rather than seeing it as a way to strive against all odds for what is good, no matter the cost, citing Ignatian values. You'd have a better chance of keeping the knights and changing the name to Purple Knights, Royal Knights, Royals, or any other similarly ubiquitous grammar school mascot. I believe I have triggered alum in my attempt to find the most inoffensive mascot possible. Beyond that, I agree the name/moniker 'crusader' itself may be a trigger for some as you note...no matter the inoffensive mascot.
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 12, 2017 9:46:44 GMT -5
I'm watching the video between obligations at work, and so far these individuals seem reasonable, including our friend from Chestnut Hill, who brings to light, more eloquently than I have, the issue of being able to reconcile that symbols represent different things to different people. This is a gross generalization of his point, and I will certainly give his points, and those of the others on the panel, my thought and consideration. Admittedly, this is a highly academic exercise, but so be it. HC is, after all, a college.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Oct 12, 2017 9:50:45 GMT -5
So I guess hcpride is not going to answer the question but instead make funny comments. Anyone else interested in responding? First, hairless cats may have even more dander, so I am offended that in your bid to not offend or kill me, you increased the chances of me dying and thus, being more offended. You caveman... Second, I will respond. If we kept "Crusader," but made the physical, visible mascot "X," where "X" could be literally anything on earth, then the problem wouldn't be "fixed" in the eyes of those who I imagine are against the Crusader moniker. As a result, I think your question is a little flawed. The word Crusader triggers these folks to refer to KKK newspapers, what the Taliban calls the United States, or what these historical glossaries refer to religious wars of persecutions-- Christians against Muslims. Their beef is not with a cartoon/muppet knight or his sword. It is the perception that Christians violently persecuted people. They are focusing on an only-partially accurate (at best) etymology of the word, rather than seeing it as a way to strive against all odds for what is good, no matter the cost, citing Ignatian values. You'd have a better chance of keeping the knight logo and changing the name to Purple Knights, Royal Knights, Royals, or any other similarly ubiquitous grammar school mascot. Make the dog a West Highland Terrier (a "Westie"). They have hair, not fur, and no dander. Of course, they are all white, so that may be a problem for some.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Oct 12, 2017 10:02:41 GMT -5
fix is in what a joke The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL) Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion. Anyone remember Professor Vince McBride ? If not, he led a quasi faculty effort to force HC to drop football altogether. Thankfully, his efforts failed. I'm surprised Clark Booth wasn't chosen to moderate this current nonsense.
|
|
|
Post by hc6774 on Oct 12, 2017 10:37:24 GMT -5
I'm watching the video between obligations at work, and so far these individuals seem reasonable, including our friend from Chestnut Hill, who brings to light, more eloquently than I have, the issue of being able to reconcile that symbols represent different things to different people. This is a gross generalization of his point, and I will certainly give his points, and those of the others on the panel, my thought and consideration. Admittedly, this is a highly academic exercise, but so be it. HC is, after all, a college. I believe all the panelists agreed, back then at least, that it is not the most pressing issue on campus, but that it should be addressed and it will be difficult. Several mentioned the matter of the strong association that alums have to the 'moniker' that has been used for almost 100 years.
|
|
|
Post by hiltonheadcrusader on Oct 12, 2017 10:43:16 GMT -5
fix is in what a joke The Panelists: Rev. John F. Baldovin, S.J., ’69, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College; (THERE YA GO. THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST CHOICE FOR THE PANEL) Sahar Bazzaz, associate professor of history; Mark P. Freeman, Distinguished Professor of Ethics and Society, psychology; Kendy M. Hess, associate professor of philosophy; Vickie Langohr, associate professor and chair of political science; and Mathew Schmalz, associate professor of religious studies. Thomas M. Landy, director of the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics and Culture, moderates the discussion. Saddened at this politically correct BS exercise. If this goes the way I expect, good bye Holy Cross. Go Crusaders.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Oct 12, 2017 11:16:20 GMT -5
Quick survey: If, as a number of us have suggested, the Board decides to keep the name Crusader but ditch the guy in the knight suit, would this cause anyone to stop donating, return the mail, get really mad, etc.? Would show that the leadership on the Hill is pretty weak.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 12, 2017 11:16:40 GMT -5
In general, I'm not a huge fan of cartoonish type figures running around at sporting events. They do nothing for me. I would have no problem if they keep the name Crusader and Iggy isn't invited to games anymore. He wasn't there for most of my time going to HC sporting events anyway. However, I don't have five year olds in tow with me and that seems more like Iggy's target audience. I also might be more attached to Iggy if he acted more like Igor (for younger fans, check out DiMarz's avatar)
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 12, 2017 11:36:20 GMT -5
I am one of the ones that Tom refers to as occasionally having a 5 year old in tow. Iggy (I hate the name) is a big hit with my granddaughter who seeks him out at any HC event she attends. So, I hope he stays at least until she and her younger brother "outgrow" him.
More seriously, though, is there any doubt that the foam rubber, cuddly Crusader at games is less the issue than the concept of a ravenous, barbaric slaughterer of innocent Muslims and Jews? The name "Crusader" is the primary target.
So, IMO, it is a non-starter that the College will ditch Iggy and keep the name.
While I have not absolutely made up my mind because it will depend on how the whole process plays out, I am leaning towards the withholding of any donations and/or work that I do with the school if the Crusader is discarded. To me, it will be the administration/BOT turning their back on the history and nature of the College (i.e. turning from its core Catholicism in favor of non-Catholics because they might be offended or, more concisely, being politically correct).
P.S. I do give Fr Boroughs and the administration credit for pro-actively brining the subject to the fore for calm and considered discussion rather than waiting for the stuff to hit the fan and react accordingly. It was just a matter of time before that would happen in our politically correct world. Doing it pre-emptorily takes a little of the emotion out of the decision.
|
|
|
Post by rickii on Oct 12, 2017 11:37:23 GMT -5
In general, I'm not a huge fan of cartoonish type figures running around at sporting events. They do nothing for me. I would have no problem if they keep the name Crusader and Iggy isn't invited to games anymore. He wasn't there for most of my time going to HC sporting events anyway. However, I don't have five year olds in tow with me and that seems more like Iggy's target audience. I also might be more attached to Iggy if he acted more like Igor (for younger fans, check out DiMarz's avatar) Can you imagine if we still had our student 'Crusader' clad rider atop the white stallion galloping around Fitton Field ?
( and also the student with shovel and bucket....just in case ? )
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Oct 12, 2017 11:44:46 GMT -5
Rickii, I remember the Crusader riding atop a noble steed. Since someone earlier used the "in for a penny, in for a pound," may I suggest that if the Crusader stays, that we go the whole nine yards and bring back a "real" Crusader and gallop around Fitton for football games. Would that attract more fans from Freshmen Field tailgates?
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Oct 12, 2017 12:38:35 GMT -5
Rickii, I remember the Crusader riding atop a noble steed. Since someone earlier used the "in for a penny, in for a pound," may I suggest that if the Crusader stays, that we go the whole nine yards and bring back a "real" Crusader and gallop around Fitton for football games. Would that attract more fans from Freshmen Field tailgates? It would if he came from through Freshman Field on his way to Fitton and lanced a few stragglers at the tailgates
|
|
|
Post by joe on Oct 12, 2017 13:07:18 GMT -5
After watching the discussion, I'd submit that it was fairly objective, although highly intellectualized. Similar to the points I raised in my letter to the college, the challenge is going to be acceptance of the notion that the image of the Crusader means different things to different people. Additionally, we must determine whether or not we can simultaneous embrace the positive associations of "The Crusader," as we all know him or her, while also being sensitive to the group of individuals who connote that imagery with darker events from the annals of religious and world history. With this in mind, in making the decision to abandon or retain The Crusader, with or without his or her sword and shield, we must address whether or not priority should be shown to any specific group. At the risk of generalizing, the groups seem specifically on one hand to be the majority of Holy Cross students and alumni, most of whom, if they are not indifferent, would prefer to retain the Crusader moniker, and on the other hand a smattering of students, faculty, alumni, and others who feel otherwise. I believe the answers to these questions are "Yes," and "Yes." We seem to have an abundance of intellect among Crusaders both on the hill and around the globe to be able to be able to embrace and educate others on the positive virtues of The Crusader, while making it clear that we denounce the more negative ones.
|
|