if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves. And does any president ever do anything then? They all just signed papers.
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves.
Well, perhaps you need to join some racial equity Zoom chats to see what other seemingly innocuous (to white people) structures, etc. remind our Black brothers and sisters of their nearly 500 years of inherited trauma.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves.
Well, perhaps you need to join some racial equity Zoom chats to see what other seemingly innocuous (to white people) structures, etc. remind our Black brothers and sisters of their nearly 500 years of inherited trauma.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
We attend regular racial equity meetings, about once a month. Still doesn't answer my question about honoring the name of the man who freed the slaves, or in your words, signed a paper. He is generally accepted as the man who freed the slaves. He should be honored. And Grant too. He was against slavery, fought to end it. I believe the only slave he owned was a gift that he freed.
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves.
Well, perhaps you need to join some racial equity Zoom chats to see what other seemingly innocuous (to white people) structures, etc. remind our Black brothers and sisters of their nearly 500 years of inherited trauma.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
We attend regular racial equity meetings, about once a month. Still doesn't answer my question about honoring the name of the man who freed the slaves, or in your words, signed a paper. He is generally accepted as the man who freed the slaves. He should be honored. And Grant too. He was against slavery, fought to end it. I believe the only slave he owned was a gift that he freed.
Lincoln sure didn’t do any favors for native Americans...
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves.
Well, perhaps you need to join some racial equity Zoom chats to see what other seemingly innocuous (to white people) structures, etc. remind our Black brothers and sisters of their nearly 500 years of inherited trauma.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
We attend regular racial equity meetings, about once a month. Still doesn't answer my question about honoring the name of the man who freed the slaves, or in your words, signed a paper. He is generally accepted as the man who freed the slaves. He should be honored. And Grant too. He was against slavery, fought to end it. I believe the only slave he owned was a gift that he freed.
Lincoln sure didn’t do any favors for native Americans...
I think some people get their history lessons from Steven Spielberg.
if we're going to continue with this renaming shit, then do them all, or don't do any of them. there are historical figures across the globe that are considered a net positive to humanity, even if they were alcoholics/drug users/adulterers/abusers/general shitheads/etc.
all humans are flawed. either we accept that and still honour their achievements to society regardless of their personal demons, or we don't.
We going to change all the MLK Blvds?
Honestly, it's a tough argument for me. I think - there are a lot of people that the good outweighed the bad...but who decides that?
that's exactly what i mean. we're accepting of the fact that he was a serial adulterer because of the good, which i agree with. sure, those presidents were slave owners, but society needs to look at the context of the time they were living in. you cannot cast judgment on the distant past based on today's standards.
But those schools exist today, not in the distant past.
Name them for today.
Whatever it costs, it’s a small price to pay for helping to eliminate nearly 500 years of racial trauma, no?
I just don't get how Lincoln (or in other cases, Grant too) is offensive and helps eliminate 500 years of racial trauma. How is Lincoln, the man who freed the slaves, offensive to black culture?
Lincoln held views that were fairly close to this character's.
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
So he didn't free slaves, he just signed a piece of paper that freed the slaves, and it was the paper that actually freed them? Are we arguing over semantics? I still don't know why that would be offensive to the black community, to celebrate the person who signed the paper that freed the slaves.
Well, perhaps you need to join some racial equity Zoom chats to see what other seemingly innocuous (to white people) structures, etc. remind our Black brothers and sisters of their nearly 500 years of inherited trauma.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
We attend regular racial equity meetings, about once a month. Still doesn't answer my question about honoring the name of the man who freed the slaves, or in your words, signed a paper. He is generally accepted as the man who freed the slaves. He should be honored. And Grant too. He was against slavery, fought to end it. I believe the only slave he owned was a gift that he freed.
Lincoln sure didn’t do any favors for native Americans...
True. But I think HFD said it well, we should look at the context of the time and if what they did for the country outweighs the bad, we should still honor them. But its only US political leaders that seem to be targeted. No one has a problem with the thousands of cities named after people, many of them saints and Jesuits, many would consider MLK a womanizer but there's no one from the #metoo movement wanting to rename his streets. Washington was the first president of our country, there should be schools named after him, even if he was flawed. Same goes for MLK, Lincoln and many others who had a big positive impact.
Seems kind of dumb to me. What is wrong with Lincoln? Are we going to rename cities named after people too? Because that is like half the cities in the country then.
Exactly!
On the other hand, at the other end of the spectrum there are probably millions of people who would like to rename Shitabrick, Texas and name it Trumptown, Texas.
Just seems odd to target schools named after presidents, especially presidents that freed slaves and are generally considered the most important in our history. And then, do these people realize their city is named after a saint? A religious figure? St Francis, founded many missions. Just seems ironic to attack one and not the other. I'm actually okay with both names.
Good point! Hadn't thought of that. But what do you suppose they would name it? Quake City? Dot.comville? Upwardlymobleton?
The City
There you go! I've always referred to S.F. as The City anyway (and as a fellow Bay Area-ite, probably you too) so, yeah, right on!
I thought only New Yorkers did that?
Yeah, both, for sure!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
I sort of get where you're coming from, Hobbes, but isn't there a big difference between sports teams being after indigenous peoples who are not cool with that being done, and with American schools being named after famous American presidents? I think so. A big difference, right?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
I sort of get where you're coming from, Hobbes, but isn't there a big difference between sports teams being after indigenous peoples who are not cool with that being done, and with American schools being named after famous American presidents? I think so. A big difference, right?
Big difference? Not really. One scenario is symbolic of oppression, prejudice, and racism. Choose which.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Not completely different. See my response to Brian above.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Not completely different. See my response to Brian above.
Also, I think you might be reading "nothing but condescension" when it's really, in your words, "there's a ton of american history I don't know."
And one cannot really engage in "constructive dialogue" if one's knowledge of a subject is limited.
Should just go to PS#xxx like they do in some places.
Who cares what a school is called.
Where our son goes it is Bret Harte Elementary School.
There are a bunch of Bret Harte schools across the country. I bet more people think the school is named after a booger eater beloved professional wrestler called Bret Hart than a famous author/poet.
Call them all Public School 1, 2, 3, etc. for each town or Cherry Hill 1, 2, 3.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Not completely different. See my response to Brian above.
Also, I think you might be reading "nothing but condescension" when it's really, in your words, "there's a ton of american history I don't know."
And one cannot really engage in "constructive dialogue" if one's knowledge of a subject is limited.
weird. when someone is trying to engage in dialogue with me and they admit maybe they don't know as much as someone else, I tend to help them out/educate them. like mcgruff did. he posted a link that I read.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Not completely different. See my response to Brian above.
sports teams mascots and presidents of the united states are the same. ugh.
Encouraging those to think critically and challenge their bias is not condescending nor arrogant. Self-exploration is education.
that's not what he does. posting "that's your white privilege" or "educate yourself" is arrogant and not worth my time. I don't do it, so I expect others to not as well.
Appears some folks are all for a sport team name change but outraged at school name change. Can't have a foot in both camps, I say.
two completely different situations. and just so you're aware, i don't see anyone here "outraged". we're having a conversation. I have a totally open mind about this. there's a ton of american history I don't know.
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
Not completely different. See my response to Brian above.
sports teams mascots and presidents of the united states are the same. ugh.
If your thinking is that linear, then I suppose I can see how you would assert the two are different.
Stop naming anything government/publicly owned after a person, and stop erecting statutes in anyones image in public places. Any human, especially those that get elevated in the public discourse, have some shit in their background which at some point in time others will find offensive, or whatever. All of them.
A new school needs a name, call it Rectangle Middle School, Oak Tree High School. Not offensive. New street, use a random name generator. Snail Track Drive it is.
Want to erect a statute to commemorate someone, fine. Put up a granite block, a marble egg, whatever the preferred geometric shape is, it could even be abstract art. Put a removable placard on it with the person’s name being honored. That way 75 years from now when that person’s actions and beliefs of the time are no longer viewed as appropriate or whatnot, they can just quietly change the placard.
Stop naming anything government/publicly owned after a person, and stop erecting statutes in anyones image in public places. Any human, especially those that get elevated in the public discourse, have some shit in their background which at some point in time others will find offensive, or whatever. All of them.
A new school needs a name, call it Rectangle Middle School, Oak Tree High School. Not offensive. New street, use a random name generator. Snail Track Drive it is.
Want to erect a statute to commemorate someone, fine. Put up a granite block, a marble egg, whatever the preferred geometric shape is, it could even be abstract art. Put a removable placard on it with the person’s name being honored. That way 75 years from now when that person’s actions and beliefs of the time are no longer viewed as appropriate or whatnot, they can just quietly change the placard.
I’m going to go and yell at some clouds now.
That makes far too much sense for us to actually do it!
Stop naming anything government/publicly owned after a person, and stop erecting statutes in anyones image in public places. Any human, especially those that get elevated in the public discourse, have some shit in their background which at some point in time others will find offensive, or whatever. All of them.
A new school needs a name, call it Rectangle Middle School, Oak Tree High School. Not offensive. New street, use a random name generator. Snail Track Drive it is.
Want to erect a statute to commemorate someone, fine. Put up a granite block, a marble egg, whatever the preferred geometric shape is, it could even be abstract art. Put a removable placard on it with the person’s name being honored. That way 75 years from now when that person’s actions and beliefs of the time are no longer viewed as appropriate or whatnot, they can just quietly change the placard.
I’m going to go and yell at some clouds now.
I'd fully endorse this post had you wrote Snail Trail Drive instead.
Stop naming anything government/publicly owned after a person, and stop erecting statutes in anyones image in public places. Any human, especially those that get elevated in the public discourse, have some shit in their background which at some point in time others will find offensive, or whatever. All of them.
A new school needs a name, call it Rectangle Middle School, Oak Tree High School. Not offensive. New street, use a random name generator. Snail Track Drive it is.
Want to erect a statute to commemorate someone, fine. Put up a granite block, a marble egg, whatever the preferred geometric shape is, it could even be abstract art. Put a removable placard on it with the person’s name being honored. That way 75 years from now when that person’s actions and beliefs of the time are no longer viewed as appropriate or whatnot, they can just quietly change the placard.
I’m going to go and yell at some clouds now.
There certainly is some merit to what you are suggesting, Jer, but some drawbacks as well. For instance, does this mean we spend million of dollars removing the tens or maybe hundreds of thousands of street signs named after people and changing them to numbers or letters of some gender/racial/religious/human neutral words like "Bullshit Boulevard", "Aardvark Avenue", or "Toilet Street"? Sure, a lot of people would be fine with removing "Jefferson Avenue", but what about "Martin Luther King Drive" that runs through San Francisco's (a city whose name we already agree MUST be changed!) Golden Gate Park (which is too reminiscent of "Golden Showers", so better change that one too)? Oh, the howling that would go up over that one! And what about the French village of Passa inaugurating Avenue Jimi Hendrix in 2015? Might be good reason to bomb France, right?! (What I mean is whammy bar dive bombing with a Start, of course!)
OK, enough of my joking. I all seriousness, the one idea I will stand by here is that indigenous peoples have asked us not to refer to them in naming sports teams with Indian/native references. Considering these are the most abused and prone to genocide people on earth, I think we need to heed their request. The rest of this conversation is quite a bit more on the entertaining side of things!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As a white person, I am offended that my state is named after a slave owner. I hereby formally request a name change. Or do the Black folk in the crowd need to stand up and deliver? Should it matter?
As a white person, I am offended that my state is named after a slave owner. I hereby formally request a name change. Or do the Black folk in the crowd need to stand up and deliver? Should it matter?
Huh! And here all along I thought it has something to do with massive laundry!
And, whoa, wait! Do we have any black forum members? I'm serious. I don't know. When I saw Pearl Jam in Missoula in 2012 I don't recall seeing one single person of color at that show. It was a very white show!
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As a white person, I am offended that my state is named after a slave owner. I hereby formally request a name change. Or do the Black folk in the crowd need to stand up and deliver? Should it matter?
Huh! And here all along I thought it has something to do with massive laundry!
And, whoa, wait! Do we have any black forum members? I'm serious. I don't know. When I saw Pearl Jam in Missoula in 2012 I don't recall seeing one single person of color at that show. It was a very white show!
We do.
Also, you were in Missoula, one of the whitest places in the country. We went to the last show in Missoula and were excited when we saw a person of color at the airport as we went to leave town.
As a white person, I am offended that my state is named after a slave owner. I hereby formally request a name change. Or do the Black folk in the crowd need to stand up and deliver? Should it matter?
Huh! And here all along I thought it has something to do with massive laundry!
And, whoa, wait! Do we have any black forum members? I'm serious. I don't know. When I saw Pearl Jam in Missoula in 2012 I don't recall seeing one single person of color at that show. It was a very white show!
We do.
Also, you were in Missoula, one of the whitest places in the country. We went to the last show in Missoula and were excited when we saw a person of color at the airport as we went to leave town.
But your assumption that he was the porter was way out of line. Not cool, bro.
Comments
He didn't free the slaves; circumstances freed the slaves. He signed a piece of paper.
And does any president ever do anything then? They all just signed papers.
Or you could continue not to see why certain things would offend Black folks. Nice that you have that privilege.
And Grant too. He was against slavery, fought to end it. I believe the only slave he owned was a gift that he freed.
But its only US political leaders that seem to be targeted. No one has a problem with the thousands of cities named after people, many of them saints and Jesuits, many would consider MLK a womanizer but there's no one from the #metoo movement wanting to rename his streets.
Washington was the first president of our country, there should be schools named after him, even if he was flawed. Same goes for MLK, Lincoln and many others who had a big positive impact.
Past is prologue.
https://www.history.com/news/5-things-you-may-not-know-about-lincoln-slavery-and-emancipation
Yeah, both, for sure!
I sort of get where you're coming from, Hobbes, but isn't there a big difference between sports teams being after indigenous peoples who are not cool with that being done, and with American schools being named after famous American presidents? I think so. A big difference, right?
(Spoiler: There's no wrong answer.)
i just get so damn tired of, instead of constructive dialogue, for some, it ends up in nothing but condescension.
www.headstonesband.com
And one cannot really engage in "constructive dialogue" if one's knowledge of a subject is limited.
others just like to give arrogant responses.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Stop naming anything government/publicly owned after a person, and stop erecting statutes in anyones image in public places. Any human, especially those that get elevated in the public discourse, have some shit in their background which at some point in time others will find offensive, or whatever. All of them.
A new school needs a name, call it Rectangle Middle School, Oak Tree High School. Not offensive. New street, use a random name generator. Snail Track Drive it is.
Want to erect a statute to commemorate someone, fine. Put up a granite block, a marble egg, whatever the preferred geometric shape is, it could even be abstract art. Put a removable placard on it with the person’s name being honored. That way 75 years from now when that person’s actions and beliefs of the time are no longer viewed as appropriate or whatnot, they can just quietly change the placard.
I’m going to go and yell at some clouds now.
That makes far too much sense for us to actually do it!