Apparently the Kentucky Derby is racist
 

Don't shoot the messenger!

http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/07/so...-is-offensive/

NOOOOO this is terrifying!

Your use of the word shoot exceeds what can be considered reasonable and acceptable. Not only that, it violates the environment of inclusion here at DT. Steve, can you please hire a sufficient number of safe space facilitators for those of us who have been traumatized (... and, if not, can you give me the name and number of a good attorney, Pointman?).

Honestly, what next? The whole world has gone mad.

Good thing they don't have their party this weekend with a Masters theme..

I assumed they were protesting that the same five trainers get 90% of the horses.

:tro:

From the article:

"Despite Oydanich’s claim that the Derby party related to the antebellum South, the first Kentucky Derby was actually held in 1875, ten years after the Civil War ended."

.... in which Kentucky was on the Union side.

Once again reminded that "Ivy League" =/= "brightest."

:tro::D

I am flabbergasted ...all I can say is that is has now been confirmed that there are more horse asses on the world than there are horses:)

Sorry, MM. I just got out of a safe space after seeing Trump chalked on a sidewalk, now I have to run back into it after seeing this thread.

What is so shocking is the power that these people have. It seems that whenever these groups complain and protest about something, they always get their way, no matter how frivolous their grievance is. The powers that be always cave in. On college campuses, the vocal minority have more power than the silent majority. I'm not saying that minority demands should not be considered. They should be considered, but when deemed frivolous, as in this case, their demands should be ignored.

It's a balancing act, Rupert. To you, the objections were frivolous. To the people objecting, the issue is not frivolous. What needs to be balanced is how important is it to have a Derby-themed party when some people obviously find the idea offensive. (and to give the protesters some credit, let's at a minimum assume that people traditionally dress up for this party trying to look like Old South.) What are the sorority organizers giving up by switching the theme to Woodstock? Yes, they are "caving", but what are they giving up?

If this were a college course being dropped by the college administration for similar "reasons", I'd almost certainly agree with you. But changing a party theme to avoid hard feelings? Different story.

As I've stated at great length in the politics board, I am a big believer in the power of micro aggressions to affect people, but looking at the photo of the party from 2014, it looks like they dressed how they imagined people going to the Derby dress:

http://kentuckysportsradio.com/main/...eme-is-racist/

I also googled the racial makeup of the Dartmouth student body, and it's 50 percent Caucasian. The photo of the sorority members looks to be about 98 percent Caucasian. Since the party is invitation-only, I'm suspecting the issue is about more than the party's theme.

Absolutely ridiculous. This sensitivity crap is becoming more and more
Commonplace; especially with this generation. Get the fuc& over it.
There is no way I would support changing the event.

Right on!!! Bravo!!!
I faced a similar egregious situation just this morning. My paperboy (whoops, papercarrier) came to my door this morning wearing a Yankees T-shirt. An elitist 1 percenter organization. I, being a Mets fan, was so inconsolable I began to upchuck my Honeynut Cherrios. This cannot happen in our decent progressive society. I immediatley called " The Intelligencer" and reported said papercarrier and retreated to my safe place.

People being offended shouldn't end my liberties.

Just because someone complains about something, it doesn't make their complaint legitimate. Their thinking that it is legitimate does not make it legitimate. I'll give you another real life example. A friend of mine lives in a high-rise condominium building. The building puts up a Christmas tree every year in the lobby. Anyway, one of the homeowners wrote a letter to the HOA saying that the Christmas tree was very offensive to her (because she is not Christian). She claimed that when she got home every day and walked into the lobby and had to see the Christmas tree, that is was "very upsetting" to her. Do you think the HOA should have caved in to her and taken the Christmas tree down? Your argument with regard to the Derby party was, "What are they giving up?" I guess you could make the same argument here. I mean it wouldn't be that big of a deal to not have a Christmas tree. But the bottom line is that the vast majority of the people in that building like having a nice Christmas tree in the lobby. In addition, there is hardly a rational person that would find it offensive. I would say the same for the Ky Derby party.

By the way, the HOA did not cave in to that woman. They did not take the Christmas tree down.

What if someone finds the Woodstock theme offensive? That was kind of a culture sex and drugs. If someone found that theme offensive, would that be a legitimate complaint? You seem to have made the assertion that just because a person complains about something, that there must be some legitimacy to the complaint. I would disagree with that.

Exactly! And this is especially true nowadays when people seem to be offended by almost anything, no matter how innocuous.

:tro::tro::tro::tro:

I love the interwebs.

I made no judgement as to the "legitimacy" of the complaint. I only stated that the issue was important to those complaining. What do you even mean by "legitimate"? Do you mean 'rational'? To label them or your Christmas tree complainant as not "rational" is way off base, IMO. I may think that the Derby-party complaints are ridiculous, but that doesn't make them irrational.

Here's a difference between the Derby party and the Christmas tree. The Christmas tree cannot be replaced by something that would be just about equally appealing to those advocating it. Are you going to tell me that a Derby-themed party has some sort of uniqueness that is irreplaceable? We're racing fans here, but that's nonsense.

So what it boils down to is stubbornness, not "liberty". No one forced the sorority to make that decision. But a decision made in favor of campus harmony (at no tangible cost to the goals of the party), is seen by you and others as some sort of awful capitulation.

--Dunbar

http://thedartmouth.com/2016/04/07/k...years-protest/

did anyone read this? it's linked to in the article at the top of the thread.

i don't get why this move is a big deal for anyone. sure it's for the sorority.

I am absolutely going to tell you that there was some uniqueness to the derby party: it was their desire to have a Derby party, just like it is your desire to write back on this message board. Furthermore it is a tradition to have a derby party and they are at liberty as Americans to do whatever they choose and desire to do, but those freedoms are being infringed upon. These people are fighting, irrationally, for something that does not actually hurt them in any shape or form. Being offended is NOT a rational complaint, it is a selfish complaint. If you are offended you remove yourself from the situation until you are no longer offended. If you go home at night and you are still offended by a party being thrown across town... you are an irrational person.

I am a germaphobe. People at Woodstock did not shower for days and it makes me gag just thinking about how they relieved themselves during the festival. Hell they didn't even have those disgusting port-a-potties back then.

I am highly offended by the filth of this microaggression of having a Woodstock themed party. Shame on these girls for not thinking about germaphobes before changing the party to the Woodstock theme. I think they should all apologize to my fellow germaphobes, be expelled and the sorority immediately disbanded without a hearing.

I don't see it as some sort of awful capitulation. I just see it as a pattern that we've been seeing lately where a group is given special consideration simply because of political correctness. If a group of non-minority students complained that the Woodstock theme was offensive, I doubt the theme would have been changed. By the way, I have less of a problem with a sorority giving in on this type of thing, than I do when the school administrators give in on these types of things. I think school administrators have a responsibility to treat all students fairly. There should not be special privileges for certain groups. Nowadays it seems that when certain groups complain about anything, no matter how ridiculous, the administrators cave in for fear of being labeled racist otherwise.

By the way, I have to admit that if I was being harassed by bullies over something ridiculous, I would probably cave in too. For example, if every time I wore a blue shirt, there was some psychotic person who screamed at me and told me they hated blue shirts, I would probably stop wearing blue shirts if I knew I was going to run into that person. The reason I would give in is because it simply would not be worth it to have to put up with the harassment. Who wants some crazy person screaming at you? It wouldn't matter to me that their grievance wasn't legitimate, I would just want to avoid the headache.

I think it is quite possible that the sorority was doing the same thing. And if that is the case, I think it is understandable. I don't like the idea of bullies forcing people to do something through intimidation, but I guess as long as the intimidation is legal, there's nothing anyone can do about it. You just have to make a decision as to whether it's worth it to stand up to the bullies. Sometimes it is just easier to give in and avoid the headache.

let me see if I can manage to generate some empathy for Dartmouth sorority girls.....

eh....nope

Danzig, it appears that the right to choose to NOT have a Derby-themed party, as the sorority members did by a near unanimous vote, is not part of their own liberty.

i equate this, roughly, to my wife telling me she doesn't like the shirt I'm wearing, an old fav of mine, just before we go out. I can't understand her objection to this green shirt (I know better than to say it's irrational), but I'm willing to switch to blue. She'll be happier, and I'm pretty sure I'll be just as happy with the blue shirt. My green shirt may have been "unique" in the narrowest definition of unique, but it's not unique in its ability to be a perfectly fun shirt to wear.

Changing a sorority party theme from Derby to Woodstock has about the same significance.

Exactly. Regardless of the point they are trying to make, which in theory is rather ridiculous, I have a tough time believing that a Dartmouth sorority is really the source or point of origin where something like this should be even take with a grain of salt. A private institution that probably charges 65K a year for students to attend.

The kids probably have the same party with a different theme and are drunk by 2 pm regardless. Such a brutal sacrifice they have made. Instead of drinking cheap bourbon they drink cheap vodka and beer, put a tie dye and some hippy beads on. Tremendous sacrifice these kids have made. Music will probably be better though

Good lord. I maintain that some of the dumbest people I have ever met were my 5 years :):) attending a similar institution

So none of you would have a problem with Churchill cancelling the Derby if the same group demanded the Derby be cancelled on the same basis that they wanted this party cancelled?

wait...there were protests a year ago, so the sorority voted to change their stupid invitation only party...and I'm supposed to worry that Churchill downs will do the same as a group of chicks at Dartmouth?

Is it me or is the point of this being missed?

It's not you. They are totally missing the point. The obvious point is that this is another case of political correctness running amok. This has become a pattern nowadays and it seems to be getting worse. The people who make these demands keep moving the goal posts too. When their demands are met, that is never the end of it. A short time later, they will demand something else.

The thing that many people don't realize is that most of the people making these demands are professional victims. They are unhappy people and they're not really sure why they're unhappy. So in this particular case, they found a reason to be unhappy. They are unhappy because they are offended by the theme of the party. Next time, it will be something else. they're just blowing off steam. It's totally misplaced anger. They will always find something to complain about. The girl in my friend's building was like this. You would be mistaken to take her complaint about the Christmas tree literally. She wasn't really unhappy about the Christmas tree. She was unhappy, period. It had nothing to do with the Christmas tree. She was always complaining about something. If she wasn't complaining, you'd have to assume she was under the weather.

I would love to follow up on the group that complained about the Ky Derby party. I would bet anything that they have complained about several other things and will continue to complain about a number of issues. There are people out there like this. If they're not complaining, they wouldn't have anything else to do. In addition, when they get their way it just encourages them to come up with something else to complain about.

Yup, I dont even know about this case but your points are spot on.

You guys do realize the protest was last year, that it was in regards to racism in general because of the many police stories? That only a few protesters decided to protest at this sorority? That the members decided to make a change based on their own beliefs, not because of the protest last year? You might want to read the story linked in the daily caller article, rather then just going by that piece.
Because it sounds to me that the sorority had close to a year to think all this over, and 96 percent said make the change. Was it due to the protests, or just part of a larger picture? I think its the latter.....
And no, i didnt miss the point that some are trying to make....because i think that is not the point of what happened.

They are professionals at getting their own way and have been doing so their entire life. Thank their helicopter parents for that. It is not so much that they are unhappy but they need to get their own way. I am not even sure deep down they give a **** about getting their own way in this scenario. It is a game to them

No they won't. From the final line of the article Danzig linked to:

"KDE is currently under social probation by the College, and this year’s Woodstock event will be dry."

Article about THAT:
http://thedartmouth.com/2016/02/02/c...-suspends-kde/

Thanks for linking to the Dartmouth article. While I am still offended by the misunderstanding of the use of "antebellum" in regards to the origins of the Kentucky Derby, it's less easy to see it as KDE being "forced" to change their theme, when it looks like the sorority did it under their own initiative.

And I also get Dunbar's point, that for a group of college students who likely have no actual interest in horse racing, that the theme of an annual party is not the hill they want to cry on. I think they just want to dress up and whether they wear fancy hats or love beads is immaterial to them.

:tro:
yeah, antebellum is a term that many apparently think means 'old south'. not quite. nor is the derby antebellum....but, good luck getting that out there. (when lady antebellum hit the scene, I asked....why would a band name themselves lady before the war? have yet to get an answer)
I think after last years various protests, they had a year to consider what they wanted to do going forward, and decided a change from what's been done for years is called for.
but some people don't like change at all, so we get breathless panicky articles, that don't even accurately report what the story was.

I think the real point is...why is this thread that has nothing at all to do with racing in the paddock? and how it is apparent that the Kentucky derby is racist at that?

The Jimmy Winkfield Memorial Party begins 2017 I will invite all the appropriate NY Congressional reps for a picture opportunity. Calling Silvia's to book the date once NYRA announces the date.

Laugh now, but all its going to take is a slight amount of attention to this story and then suddenly they will be targeting the actual Derby itself. And don't think it couldn't happen.

and......
just saw that lady antebellum has been chosen to sing the anthem at the ky derby.
amazing.