By Professor Doom
One thing about
the social justice warriors (SJW) is they are never happy. It’s why our
campuses are now obsessed with micro-aggressions, offenses
so tiny they cannot be seen, and yet still can merit punishment because they
annoy the SJW.
Racism annoys
SJWs as well, and because they being miserable and spreading misery, darn near
everything is racist, from milk to financial
literacy to mathematics.
In the holiday
spirit, then, allow me to address one more thing to make the SJW angry:
--the title is arguably misleading, however, and I ask some forgiveness if
I’ve clickbaited by using their title.
Filing one more in
the “I can’t make this crap up” category, I really think we’ve gone overboard
here. Everything, apparently, can be called racist now, and, more importantly,
you can get kudos from admin (as well as press coverage) for making a claim
that something is racist.
So why is the song
racist?
In the course of her
research, Hamill discovered a playbill indicating that Jingle Bells was first
performed under the title One Horse Open Sleigh in blackface, for a minstrel
show at Ordway Hall on Boston's Washington Street in 1857.
So, the song was performed in blackface
in 1857. And? Almost every professional musical performance in the
United States in the mid-19th century was made in blackface…even
black performers put on blackface. An actual history professor knows this, and knows that if “was
performed in blackface” makes a song racist, every song sung in that century
would be racist.
SJWs are nuts, plain and simple.
The song, as I trust the gentle reader
knows, is about having fun riding a “one horse open sleigh.” What about that is
racist? Essentially nobody in the United States owns a horse anymore, and only
a fraction of those rare few have a sleigh…are they racist, too?
To her credit, the theatre history
professor is backtracking and clarifying only that Jingle Bells has racist
roots…but I find this pretty thin sauce. Simply singing a song in blackface, at
a time when that’s how songs were done, does not make the song racist, or even
attribute racism in any way—it would be scores of years later before “racism”
and “blackface” would become linked. This it taking “guilt by association” way
too far, and the possibility that this song’s possible debut was possibly made
by blackface singers is a historical detail, nothing more.
Checking her other works, I do concede
that she’s a legitimate scholar, and probably not a true SJW, so perhaps she’s
being honest in saying her work is being misinterpreted. Still, you know the
SJWs upon finding out about this legitimate research, will use this as
justification to be offended some more.
If so, I hope some folks will take the
opportunity to bellow it out just few decibels higher than reasonable just for
the non-benefit of the SJW.
The comments section uniformly laughs at
the idiocy here, and rightly so. However, I take it as a message of hope: the
general public is now starting to pay attention not merely to what’s being said
on campus, but also to what’s being considered as publishable research.
Happy Holidays, all, and best wishes for
the new year.
No comments:
Post a Comment