Washington and Lee

[Anonymous]

If by owning it, you mean adopted a marketing campaign, i agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

W&L has owned up to its history as well:

https://www.wlu.edu/the-w-l-story/university-history/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

W&L has owned up to its history as well:

https://www.wlu.edu/the-w-l-story/university-history/

You are comparing this equivocating web article which does not condemn Lee’s actions, but instead tries to rationalize it and separate the man from the cause he fought for, to the complete mea culpa exhibited by the monument ont he brown campus?

Not even close, man. Not in content. Not in measure. Not comparable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

I am a woke left wing SJW.

I also love W&L, it is an extraordinarily fine school and I would be proud to send my kids there.

Yet I think WRT their history they can do much, much better, and that the school will be much better off when they do.

These are concepts which are not contradictory unless you require positions which are extra-simple and absolute.

Your frat bid comment is stupid, BTW, and that type of rhetoric is even beneath the discussions here. You should stop that and try and be thoughtful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If by owning it, you mean adopted a marketing campaign, i agree

I don't know you, so I have no idea if you are a racist piece of crap or not, but nothing in your post disputes that possibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

I am a woke left wing SJW.

I also love W&L, it is an extraordinarily fine school and I would be proud to send my kids there.

Yet I think WRT their history they can do much, much better, and that the school will be much better off when they do.

These are concepts which are not contradictory unless you require positions which are extra-simple and absolute.

Your frat bid comment is stupid, BTW, and that type of rhetoric is even beneath the discussions here. You should stop that and try and be thoughtful.

We got a do better bro in the house!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

W&L has owned up to its history as well:

https://www.wlu.edu/the-w-l-story/university-history/

You are comparing this equivocating web article which does not condemn Lee’s actions, but instead tries to rationalize it and separate the man from the cause he fought for, to the complete mea culpa exhibited by the monument ont he brown campus?

Not even close, man. Not in content. Not in measure. Not comparable.

"Lee, in particular, has become the subject of increasing scrutiny for his central role as the military leader of the Confederacy. We unequivocally denounce the motivations behind the Confederate cause that Lee chose to defend as well as the views of individuals and groups who employ Confederate imagery to promote an agenda of white supremacy, racism, and xenophobia.

We are committed to educating our community and the public about our namesakes and their role in shaping the history of this institution, our country, and the values that continue to inform our world today. That includes acknowledging that Robert E. Lee chose to fight on the side that sought to preserve the institution of slavery."

That's owning it.

You might not like the school, and I think the name will change one day.
The faculty and current students want this. It's the present environment and future actions that will move W&L forward.

There are tons of predominantly white institutions that have connections to slavery and terrible parts of America's history with race.

Instead of whining on an anonymous board , what are you doing to make things better? The my PWI - insert problematic history here - school is morally superior isn't going to cut it.

If you go to Brown, Yale, Emory, Amherst, etc. good for you.

[Anonymous]

Forget about the name. That’s ridiculous. W&L is a private school enclave that attracts the very well to do private school types. The sorority and frats are beautiful but very expensive. If you are that type of person you know it and will fit right in. Excellent alum connections. If you aren’t that person — it’s a small school so it might not be a great fit. Both my DCs were accepted but chose other SLACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

I am a woke left wing SJW.

I also love W&L, it is an extraordinarily fine school and I would be proud to send my kids there.

Yet I think WRT their history they can do much, much better, and that the school will be much better off when they do.

These are concepts which are not contradictory unless you require positions which are extra-simple and absolute.

Your frat bid comment is stupid, BTW, and that type of rhetoric is even beneath the discussions here. You should stop that and try and be thoughtful.

Welcome to the internet and chat forums. I was replying to the kid above. You’ll learn how threads work in no time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

I am a woke left wing SJW.

I also love W&L, it is an extraordinarily fine school and I would be proud to send my kids there.

Yet I think WRT their history they can do much, much better, and that the school will be much better off when they do.

These are concepts which are not contradictory unless you require positions which are extra-simple and absolute.

Your frat bid comment is stupid, BTW, and that type of rhetoric is even beneath the discussions here. You should stop that and try and be thoughtful.

Welcome to the internet and chat forums. I was replying to the kid above. You’ll learn how threads work in no time.

Yes I know that, so was I to anyone literate. You know that posters can quote you when they agree with you, right?

You'll learn how threads work in no ti- ...nah, maybe you won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

W&L has owned up to its history as well:

https://www.wlu.edu/the-w-l-story/university-history/

You are comparing this equivocating web article which does not condemn Lee’s actions, but instead tries to rationalize it and separate the man from the cause he fought for, to the complete mea culpa exhibited by the monument ont he brown campus?

Not even close, man. Not in content. Not in measure. Not comparable.

"Lee, in particular, has become the subject of increasing scrutiny for his central role as the military leader of the Confederacy. We unequivocally denounce the motivations behind the Confederate cause that Lee chose to defend as well as the views of individuals and groups who employ Confederate imagery to promote an agenda of white supremacy, racism, and xenophobia.

We are committed to educating our community and the public about our namesakes and their role in shaping the history of this institution, our country, and the values that continue to inform our world today. That includes acknowledging that Robert E. Lee chose to fight on the side that sought to preserve the institution of slavery."

That's owning it.

You might not like the school, and I think the name will change one day.
The faculty and current students want this. It's the present environment and future actions that will move W&L forward.

There are tons of predominantly white institutions that have connections to slavery and terrible parts of America's history with race.

Instead of whining on an anonymous board , what are you doing to make things better? The my PWI - insert problematic history here - school is morally superior isn't going to cut it.

If you go to Brown, Yale, Emory, Amherst, etc. good for you.

No, that is not "owning it". At all. I'll use only what you quoted:

"denounce the motivations behind the Confederate cause that Lee chose to defend"

Why not "we denounce Lee"? Because it's that old "he fought for ol' Virginny, not slavery!" bullshit. Oh yeah, he was a treasonous traitor as well, but hey we're focusing on slavery in this discussion.

That includes acknowledging that Robert E. Lee chose to fight on the side that sought to preserve the institution of slavery.

Why not "fought to preserve the institution of slavery"? Again, that equivocating bullshit.

Words matter man. Don't try and tell anyone who can read they mean the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about a Brown University, which was founded by actual slave traders?

Really, really bad example. Brown completely owns up to it’s history, and is repentant for it. I think if W&L removed the Lee statues and replaced it with he kind of slavery memorial Brown has on campus, that would go a long way.

So your example kind of proves the opposing point.

W&L has owned up to its history as well:

https://www.wlu.edu/the-w-l-story/university-history/

You are comparing this equivocating web article which does not condemn Lee’s actions, but instead tries to rationalize it and separate the man from the cause he fought for, to the complete mea culpa exhibited by the monument ont he brown campus?

Not even close, man. Not in content. Not in measure. Not comparable.

"Lee, in particular, has become the subject of increasing scrutiny for his central role as the military leader of the Confederacy. We unequivocally denounce the motivations behind the Confederate cause that Lee chose to defend as well as the views of individuals and groups who employ Confederate imagery to promote an agenda of white supremacy, racism, and xenophobia.

We are committed to educating our community and the public about our namesakes and their role in shaping the history of this institution, our country, and the values that continue to inform our world today. That includes acknowledging that Robert E. Lee chose to fight on the side that sought to preserve the institution of slavery."

That's owning it.

You might not like the school, and I think the name will change one day.
The faculty and current students want this. It's the present environment and future actions that will move W&L forward.

There are tons of predominantly white institutions that have connections to slavery and terrible parts of America's history with race.

Instead of whining on an anonymous board , what are you doing to make things better? The my PWI - insert problematic history here - school is morally superior isn't going to cut it.

If you go to Brown, Yale, Emory, Amherst, etc. good for you.

No, that is not "owning it". At all. I'll use only what you quoted:

"denounce the motivations behind the Confederate cause that Lee chose to defend"

Why not "we denounce Lee"? Because it's that old "he fought for ol' Virginny, not slavery!" bullshit. Oh yeah, he was a treasonous traitor as well, but hey we're focusing on slavery in this discussion.

That includes acknowledging that Robert E. Lee chose to fight on the side that sought to preserve the institution of slavery.

Why not "fought to preserve the institution of slavery"? Again, that equivocating bullshit.

Words matter man. Don't try and tell anyone who can read they mean the same thing.

So if it changed the wording to your specifications you'll approve?

Unfortunately there are a lot of colleges, schools, army bases, bridges, towns, etc. named after white men connected to slavery. Let's hope that the present generation will work to make things better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So if it changed the wording to your specifications you'll approve?

No, nothing to do with me or my specifications. Very simply, if the wording changed to denounce the man then it would mean W&L denounced Robert E. Lee, which would be a good thing. They very deftly but clearly DO NOT do that in what you posted.

If you can't see the difference it is because you don't want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who hate W&L are either woke left wing SJWs who can't tolerate diversity of thought or geeds who never got a frat bid.

People who don’t like W&L didn’t rush and never wanted a bid. Go back to class, son.

We toured. It's 75% greek, heavy drinking and very expensive to participate in the Greek system. Instant no for DS.