First they came for the fight song...

GTRules

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
26,975
Georgia Tech

I think I see what you're getting at, but it seems ambiguous to me whether "brave and bold" refers to Georgia Tech as a group or whether it refers specifically to the football team.

The fact that the song is played not just at football games implies it doesn't just refer to the football team
OK. I now see what you have wrong.

The "Brave and Bold" is not Georgia Tech. It's specifically the Georgia Tech football team. No matter what you say, that is still true. Nobody cheers Georgia Tech.

Nobody.

Nobody cheers the institute. The song is about the football team.

Glad to have cleared that up for you.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
3,814
OK. I now see what you have wrong.

The "Brave and Bold" is not Georgia Tech. It's specifically the Georgia Tech football team. No matter what you say, that is still true. Nobody cheers Georgia Tech.

Nobody.

Nobody cheers the institute. The song is about the football team.

Glad to have cleared that up for you.
Weird that we cheer on the football team at basketball games
 

gtm1ke

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Aug 26, 2014
Messages
295
Cheering / being put on the campus doesn't imply whether or not the daughter goes to the school, is an athlete, or is a cheerleader. Any implications read into that line are provided by the reader. The complainers are the same type of people that see a reference to a monkey and start talking about black people - more offensive themselves than the source of their offense.
 

andrew

Bobby Bonilla's Financial Planner
Joined
Jun 5, 2010
Messages
23,250
You guys are all looking at this wrong.

This isn't about what the song means, or who the brave and bold are, or anything like that. This is about providing lyrical reparations for the fact that women weren't allowed to attend the Institute 100 years ago. It's not about the song being sexist, it's about making a modification to it to proactively show that women are welcome on campus.

Now, you might say that all the progress we've made in decreasing the ratio is proof that we are already making great advancements in this area. But if you say that you are being deliberately obtuse, because you know that the people pushing this aren't just interested in making things right, they also want to make sure that everyone is forced to recognize and apologize for past wrongs. Changing a longstanding tradition in the name of equality is a way to do that, regardless of whether the change makes complete sense.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2017
Messages
3,814
I’ve always disliked you. And the level of which increases all the time. You are petty for pettiness sake, and progressive for progressiveness sake.
No I just thought it would be interesting to try to "steelman" the joiners' position. Personally I don't mind the spirit of the change, but I don't support the actual wording change because I think it's sloppy. Swapping son and daughter in the song would be a better move to me because it counters gender stereotypes.
 

GTRules

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
26,975
No I just thought it would be interesting to try to "steelman" the joiners' position. Personally I don't mind the spirit of the change, but I don't support the actual wording change because I think it's sloppy. Swapping son and daughter in the song would be a better move to me because it counters gender stereotypes.
And this tells us all we really need to know.
 

GTCrew

Patrick Henry
Joined
Jul 25, 2002
Messages
41,874
Georgia Tech

I think I see what you're getting at, but it seems ambiguous to me whether "brave and bold" refers to Georgia Tech as a group or whether it refers specifically to the football team.

The fact that the song is played not just at football games implies it doesn't just refer to the football team
It's a football song and was written referring to the football team. The fact that it gets played elsewhere does not change that history.
 

BigDanT

Come and take it.
Joined
Jul 1, 2015
Messages
6,207
You guys are all looking at this wrong.

This isn't about what the song means, or who the brave and bold are, or anything like that. This is about providing lyrical reparations for the fact that women weren't allowed to attend the Institute 100 years ago. It's not about the song being sexist, it's about making a modification to it to proactively show that women are welcome on campus.

Now, you might say that all the progress we've made in decreasing the ratio is proof that we are already making great advancements in this area. But if you say that you are being deliberately obtuse, because you know that the people pushing this aren't just interested in making things right, they also want to make sure that everyone is forced to recognize and apologize for past wrongs. Changing a longstanding tradition in the name of equality is a way to do that, regardless of whether the change makes complete sense.
No, we understand perfectly, we just don’t care
 

GTRules

Dodd-Like
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
26,975
I assure you there’s has never been a GT man who didn’t want more women on campus.
 

18in32

Petard Hoister
Joined
May 23, 2010
Messages
24,042
There are people ITT dancing around and trying to come up with reasons why the song should be kept for tradition or by artful reinterpretation of the lyrics or whatever. The song is definitely sexist because it treats the sexes differently.

I think what's happening to a lot of posters is that subconsciously you know the sexes should be treated differently, but society has so repressed the idea you won't say it out loud.

I'm gonna say it out loud: the sexes are different, men should play football, women should cheer for them, and it ain't ladylike to use bad language. This is all a good thing, and the song shouldn't be changed because doing so would further violate God's created order.

If blacks and homosexuals can reclaim certain epitaphs and use them with pride, I think we need to do the same with 'sexist.'
 

ncjacket

Dodd-Like
Joined
Jun 17, 2002
Messages
14,605
There are people ITT dancing around and trying to come up with reasons why the song should be kept for tradition or by artful reinterpretation of the lyrics or whatever. The song is definitely sexist because it treats the sexes differently.

I think what's happening to a lot of posters is that subconsciously you know the sexes should be treated differently, but society has so repressed the idea you won't say it out loud.

I'm gonna say it out loud: the sexes are different, men should play football, women should cheer for them, and it ain't ladylike to use bad language. This is all a good thing, and the song shouldn't be changed because doing so would further violate God's created order.

If blacks and homosexuals can reclaim certain epitaphs and use them with pride, I think we need to do the same with 'sexist.'
God’s created order? Is the fight song now a religious symbol?
 

Gobees

Flats Noob
Joined
Jan 1, 2009
Messages
827
You guys are all looking at this wrong.

This isn't about what the song means, or who the brave and bold are, or anything like that. This is about providing lyrical reparations for the fact that women weren't allowed to attend the Institute 100 years ago. It's not about the song being sexist, it's about making a modification to it to proactively show that women are welcome on campus.

Now, you might say that all the progress we've made in decreasing the ratio is proof that we are already making great advancements in this area. But if you say that you are being deliberately obtuse, because you know that the people pushing this aren't just interested in making things right, they also want to make sure that everyone is forced to recognize and apologize for past wrongs. Changing a longstanding tradition in the name of EQUITY is a way to do that, regardless of whether the change makes complete sense.
fify....This is the insidious word change that has been implemented into all aspects of life, including business. It's now EQUITY and not EQUALITY, and STAKEHOLDER not SHAREHOLDER. This is totally Marxist in its attempt to change our meritocracy into an oligarchic tyranny.
 

JollyGoodFellow90GT#1

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
21
"I'm a Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech, and a hell of an engineer—
A helluva, helluva, helluva, helluva, hell of an engineer.
Like all the jolly good fellows, I drink my whiskey clear.
I'm a Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech and a hell of an engineer.

Oh! If I had a daughter, sir, I'd dress her in White and Gold,
And put her on the campus to cheer the brave and bold.
But if I had a son, sir, I'll tell you what he'd do—
He would yell, 'To hell with Georgia' like his daddy used to do.

Oh, I wish I had a barrel of rum and sugar three thousand pounds,
A college bell to put it in and a clapper to stir it round.
I'd drink to all the good fellows who come from far and near.
I'm a ramblin', gamblin', hell of an engineer!"

There isn't a darn thing wrong with any of those lyrics! What is wrong is we currently live in a society where up is down and down is up. We don't have to go along with things that don't make sense just because we are told to do so. Therefore, I will continue to sing our school's fight song loud and proud!

HAPPY MOTHER'S DAY! GO JACKETS!
 

BuzzedATL

Varsity Lurker
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
133
The daughter cheers the brave and bold while the son yells one of our most popular cheers. It sounds the same to me. If it said “I’d put my daughter on the campus to sit quietly and behave herself, but if I had a son he could do whatever he wanted” then I see a problem.
 
Top