This Uconn student doesn't like the new logo...

[pap49cba]

LINK

 

[meyers7]

Herbst did not respond to requests for comment.

Yea, I wouldn't either.​

Some people.
​

 

[alexrgct]

What in the name of all that is sacred is this happy horsesh!t???

 

[Olde Coach]

What in the name of all that is sacred is this happy horsesh!t???

Get a life, lady.

 

[earl the pearl]

Some people will play any card in furtherance of their positions..........

 

[terif831]

What is she saying? The new logo is going to promote violence/rape? Well, considering this is a brand-new logo, the past incidences that she's talking about must have been perpetrated by athletes who wore the "friendly" Husky.

She obviously needs to take a few more classes. Doesn't have enough to do......

 

[pinotbear]

Some people will play any card in furtherance of their positions..........

Earl, I wish I thought that this position was that well thought-out, or calculated. I don't think much thought at all has gone into it - it's strictly a "anything that looks aggressive is intimidating, and has sexual/male-dominate/controlling component, and that is bad", knee-jerk reaction. We could all come up with examples of more deliberately frightening images in and outside of sports. We could all come up with more accurate representations of the kind of posture/image that the student is concerned about. We could all point out that athletic competition almost inherently involves some degree of focused aggression (and, that may be key to its' development in our societies).

All I can say is: if she thinks that image is intimidating, she's never seen ursusminor striding to the plate with a bat in her hand.

 

[terif831]

Just read the longer article about this in Nan's news links. Apparently the letter she wrote to Herbst has a lot more to do with her perception of how the university is dealing with instances of rape and/or abuse against women on campus, and not that much to do with the logo. She's been receiving on-line threats because of this letter, but the article does not contain the text of the letter, nor a link to it that I could see.

 

[DobbsRover2]

Not exactly sure what a sexual assault personifying logo would look like, though the ones used for the Richland Thunderducks and the Scottsdale CC Fighting Artichokes would probably come closest. Clearly this is not a crazy or humorous subject because it is the case that some people will displace real fears of in this case campus violence on to an image that is used to evoke power and intimidation. But the new logo is far closer to a real husky dog face than the old "friendly" one, which I'm not really sure what type of dog it was based on. Sure the school and the designers wanted a fiercer image, but to associate a truer husky image with sexual assault speaks more to the mind of the beholder, who is clearly troubled by certain aspects of campus life. Some instead may see pride and determination in the Husky's face rather than the brute power Ms. Luby pictures. Possibly better that Geno came out with a compliment about the logo than Paul Pasqualoni.

Many colleges make their logos exude a far nastier persona than the usual image of the animal, and the SEC schools such as Florida, Kentucky, Arakansas, and Georgia are especially keen on the snarly side look. Georgetown and Gonzaga have evil-looking Bulldogs, and Oregon State even makes its Beaver look like a killer. Such gentle seeming creatures as turtles, jackrabbits, terriers, and cardinals are nastied up by MD, South Dakota, Boston U, and Louisville, and even the banana slug of UC Santa Cruz can give you the willies if you've watched a string of 1950s alien-menace movies. Camels, elephants, roadrunners all get turned into wolverine nasty images, and only the truly comic book look of the Duke, ND, and Wake Forest images lessen the dark side look of the "Could it be Satan?" or drunk who wants to punch your lights out look.

But if you want pure out-and-out terror, fear, and loathing rolled together in a logo, you gotta get a Bogalusa Toad t-shirt. Wait until he gets his hands on you.

 

[caravaggio]

The article is not really about the new logo, but rather the prioritization on the re-imaging of UConn athletics over what the writer considers unresponsiveness to behavioral issues (including sexual assault) within the university by athletes:

"Instead of giving these problematic aspects of male athletic peer culture at UConn a second look or a giving the real face of athletics a true makeover, it appears that the focus of your administration is prioritizing the remodeling of the fictional face of the Husky Logo. Instead of communicating a zero tolerance atmosphere for this kind of behavior, increasing or vocalizing support to violence against women prevention efforts on campus in the face of such events, or increasing support to student run programs that seek to work with athletes on issues of violence as well as academic issues, it would appear that your administration is more interested in fostering consumerism and corporatization than education and community."

There actually is a link in above-linked article ("wrote"), and after reading the article, I actually agree with her main point. It's a shame that "meta" article linked in this post does such a poor job of conveying the student's message.

 

[EricLA]

There was a rather lengthy thread on the men's side regarding this. Most were less than complimentary to the writer, and that's putting it mildly (myself included). Now if there was a larger letter and this was just an excerpt from it, then I can see where it might be taken out of context, but it's hard to take someone seriously when they write this...

As a UConn student who is proud of my University’s academics and my future degree, I feel frustrated; as a woman student living at this campus I am outright offended. I am appalled by the selective amnesia these justifications display and angered at the superficiality of this Visual Identity Program.

I get that she may want to argue that it's more important for the university to spend resources on promoting women's issues, etc. But the histrionics are over the top on that one...

 

[meyers7]

"Instead of giving these problematic aspects of male athletic peer culture at UConn a second look or a giving the real face of athletics a true makeover, it appears that the focus of your administration is prioritizing the remodeling of the fictional face of the Husky Logo. Instead of communicating a zero tolerance atmosphere for this kind of behavior, increasing or vocalizing support to violence against women prevention efforts on campus in the face of such events, or increasing support to student run programs that seek to work with athletes on issues of violence as well as academic issues, it would appear that your administration is more interested in fostering consumerism and corporatization than education and community."

I don't see how the two issues are related at all. I don't see how working on one is going to affect the other or vice-versa.

 

[Harry Mangurian]

I gave up my football season tix.
I was afraid to turn my back on the new logo.

UCONN is designing still another logo where the husky has whips and chains.
(not that there's anything wrong with that)

I am glad that the Prez has more important things to do than respond to some loon.
(I wish Pres. Herbst had said that)

 

[alexrgct]

So, I'm the son of a radical feminist professor of Women's Studies (and I mean a real radical revolutionary kind of woman- calling her a radical is not rhetoric), and I self-identify as feminist myself. Having said that, this young woman went about making her point the wrong way.

Firstly, UConn athletics has been a very positive presence for girls and young women in this state, in particular with its basketball program. Because of it, girls (and boys, for that matter) have had 20+ years of strong female role models. That's simply something that has to be acknowledged before dumping on UConn's athletic department.

Secondly, by creating a false dichotomy between dealing with alleged sexual violence issues properly and the new logo, she's muddying the waters. There's no reason the university can't address the topics she's concerned with AND have a new logo; it's simply not zero-sum. Why not just keep the argument simple: this happened, this has been the university's response, this is what would have been appropriate, why does this discrepancy exist? Tying moral outrage to something that the AD has done theoretically in lieu of the response you want is a poor approach to making your point.

 

[pap49cba]

This story has achieved liftoff. Rush Limbaugh just devoted about ten minutes to it on his show. Watch the MSM, ESPN, etc. start to swarm.

 

[meyers7]

This story has achieved liftoff. Rush Limbaugh just devoted about ten minutes to it on his show. Watch the MSM, ESPN, etc. start to swarm.

Not only that.

http://www.dailycampus.com/writer-of-open-letter-attacked-online-1.3036489#.UXqysUryDTr

 

[JimGunther]

EXACTLY!

Illustrating the absurd with absurdity.

FWIW: I don't like the new logo but, the student's interpretation reeks of projection.

This story has achieved liftoff. Rush Limbaugh just devoted about ten minutes to it on his show. Watch the MSM, ESPN, etc. start to swarm.

 

[boontonbomber]

This story has achieved liftoff. Rush Limbaugh just devoted about ten minutes to it on his show. Watch the MSM, ESPN, etc. start to swarm.

you listen to rush limbaugh?

 

[pap49cba]

you listen to rush limbaugh?

Is that a problem?

 

[RegisteredUconn]

LINK

Finding hidden messages in logos and icons reminds me of an old joke (which I've adapted slightly for purposes of this discussion).

A psycharist is administering a rorschach test and, no matter what the image, the patient's interpretation is related to a certain part of the male anatomy. The shrink tells the patient she has an unhealthy obsession with sex.

"Me?!" she exclaims. "You're the one with all the dirty pictures!"

 

[caravaggio]

Alex, I somewhat agree with your point (and like your analysis) in that I think the writer seems to assume that redoing the logo/identity of UConn athletics either precludes the university from also addressing the bad "marks" that she points to about the athletics dept.

However, I do think that her use of the rebranding for her main point is not inappropriate. It essentially creates a discursive nexus to link the rebranding with the incidents: the UConn administration is spending lots of resources and efforts into marketing this new UConn athletics identity, and the writer is essentially saying, "hey wait, let's really take a look into the mirror and let me give you my view of what's going, and it's nothing like what you are trying to present." I do think the writing is too dramatic, but I don't think using the opportunity created by UConn's efforts to create a new "identity" for the athletics dept to draw attention to a serious problem within the same dept is unreasonable.

It's making great use of a awareness-raising opportunity (even if her article itself may not have been the best example of advocacy). A classic strategy of consciousness raising.

So, I'm the son of a radical feminist professor of Women's Studies (and I mean a real radical revolutionary kind of woman- calling her a radical is not rhetoric), and I self-identify as feminist myself. Having said that, this young woman went about making her point the wrong way.

Firstly, UConn athletics has been a very positive presence for girls and young women in this state, in particular with its basketball program. Because of it, girls (and boys, for that matter) have had 20+ years of strong female role models. That's simply something that has to be acknowledged before dumping on UConn's athletic department.

Secondly, by creating a false dichotomy between dealing with alleged sexual violence issues properly and the new logo, she's muddying the waters. There's no reason the university can't address the topics she's concerned with AND have a new logo; it's simply not zero-sum. Why not just keep the argument simple: this happened, this has been the university's response, this is what would have been appropriate, why does this discrepancy exist? Tying moral outrage to something that the AD has done theoretically in lieu of the response you want is a poor approach to making your point.

 

[Icebear]

Alex, I somewhat agree with your point (and like your analysis) in that I think the writer seems to assume that redoing the logo/identity of UConn athletics either precludes the university from also addressing the bad "marks" that she points to about the athletics dept.

However, I do think that her use of the rebranding for her main point is not inappropriate. It essentially creates a discursive nexus to link the rebranding with the incidents: the UConn administration is spending lots of resources and efforts into marketing this new UConn athletics identity, and the writer is essentially saying, "hey wait, let's really take a look into the mirror and let me give you my view of what's going, and it's nothing like what you are trying to present." I do think the writing is too dramatic, but I don't think using the opportunity created by UConn's efforts to create a new "identity" for the athletics dept to draw attention to a serious problem within the same dept is unreasonable.

It's making great use of a awareness-raising opportunity (even if her article itself may not have been the best example of advocacy). A classic strategy of consciousness raising.

caravagio as I read alex I think you two agree overall.

 

[boontonbomber]

Is that a problem?

not for me.

 

[Giovanni]

LINK

I don't know what Carolyn Luby's problem is but I'll bet it's hard to pronounce. Poor thing most likely has no life so she desperately needs attention. Get help, Luby!

 

[Aluminny69]

Some of the best comedy on the air. So reactionary as to pass itself in opinion coming and going.

Rush describes it as "illustrating absurdity with absurdity." I think this complaint about the new logo qualifies.