Changes to the chant sheet

21 Jun 2016 2:09 PM | 107ist Admin (Administrator)

—by Sherrilynn "Sheba" Rawson

A statement on behalf of the 107IST Board of Directors

As of today, the “Portland Boys” chant has been removed from our web list of chants; new chant sheets printed for stadium distribution will no longer include “Portland Boys” lyrics; and capos and drums/trumpets will no longer lead the Timbers Army in singing “Portland Boys.”

Generally and historically speaking, as a board we don’t weigh in on chants. Other than the annual printing of chant sheets for the stadium and updating the website to match, our general practice as a board has been to leave it to the capos to lead chants and to allow for every person in the stadium to either accept or reject that leadership—bad chants often die because no one will sing them and good ones live because they catch on, not because the board dictates the details of individual chants.

At the same time, although we have heard and read a variety of member opinions and interpretations with respect to “Portland Boys,” not all of them negative, the board recognizes that there are members of the Timbers Army and of the 107IST who find the chant lyric offensive for a variety of reasons.

We considered that we had three options: (1) do nothing; (2) change the chant line in question; or (3) recommend that the chant be removed from the chant sheets, website, and capo/drum and trumpet repertoire.

The board rejected the first option. The arguments in favor of doing nothing would primarily be to honor TA tradition (the chant has been sung by the TA for many years, predating our entry into MLS) and/or to recognize that there is a lack of clear consensus of opinion among TA as to whether the lyric is offensive and why. Given that the chant doesn’t have unique central ties to either TA culture or history (it is a chant with variations sung by many supporters who are fans of many different soccer teams), and given that members offended by the lyric expressed grave concerns to us about issues that relate to our core values as Timbers Army/107ISTs, we decided that doing nothing was not an option.

The board considered attempting to change the chant lyric. Several acceptable alternate lyrics were presented and discussed, both online and in person, among members and within the capo/drum and trumpet corps. The Timbers Army has had a history of changing chant lyrics in the stands before, so we had a sense of what it would take to do so in this case: messaging in the stands both face to face and via papers on seats; reprinted lyrics on chant sheets; repeated direction from capos at multiple games; and a concerted effort by MANY individuals in the stands to educate their peers on a game-by-game basis. Given the potential for creating continued divisiveness within the stands through what would definitely be a long, drawn-out process, the board ultimately rejected this option as well.

Given that inaction was not an option and that changing the chant lyric was rejected, the board voted unanimously to remove “Portland Boys” from the chant sheet, website, and capo repertoire.

We recognize the importance of honoring and recognizing our history; but we also stand for something more. We reject racism, sexism, xenophobia, and homophobia. We reject hate. We value basic human rights and dignity. And if members are concerned that a chant in our canon contains lyrics that run counter to our core, we have a responsibility to decide what we value most.

No single chant defines us, or our ability to show our love for team, town, and TA. Ultimately we know we’ve made the right decision.

Onward, Rose City.


  • 28 Sep 2016 1:11 PM | 107ist Admin (Administrator)
    Shawn Levy says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:14 pm 
    Bravo, one and all, sincerely.
    Woke Bickle

    Allen Schmitz says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:16 pm 
    Catering to the focal minority. This is a garbage decision.

    Alli Sayre says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:23 pm 
    Are you a rapist? If not, why are you in favor of promoting rape culture?

    Harper Morgan-Werner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:13 pm 
    How about we tone down the inflammatory language just because someone doesn’t agree with you?

    Alli says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:50 pm 
    So it’s not inflammatory to grumble about people who are against rapey chant lyrics but it’s inflammatory to call them out? Cool.

    Sherrilynn "Sheba" Rawson says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:18 pm 
    I would say that yes, it is inflammatory to call someone who disagrees with the board’s decision a rapist, or to assume that a person who disagrees with the decision is in favor of promoting rape culture.
    Good people of good will can disagree, strongly, about this issue and many others, without being evil people.

    Harper Morgan-Werner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:00 pm 
    Calling someone a rapist because they disagree with you is inflammatory.

    Brandon K says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:36 pm 
    Alli – Are you an agrammatist? If not, why do you turn a simple word with very clear meaning and make it to be something it is not?

    Alli says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:52 pm 
    So the word your isn’t possessive now? Or are you one of those people who writes “your” instead of “you’re” and are confused about the meaning of the word?

    Lyndsea Moore says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:13 pm 
    As a woman, I find no relation to rape culture in the “Portland Boys” chant. The word “shag” is literally just another word for sex. And when saying “shag your women” it’s just saying have sex with your woman. And if you are finding offense in the use of “your” in the context, then I point out that it is just like saying “my girlfriend/fiancé/wife” or “my boyfriend/fiancé/husband”. It is just saying to have sex with the person you are romantically involved with. Unless you are just offended by sex in general. And I find offense to someone calling a man a “rapist” just because he doesn’t believe in the same thing you do. Am I a rapist for believing that there is no rape reference in a fantastic chant that I’ve been chanting since I was in elementary school? I don’t support rape culture and will be the first to speak out about it when I see it, but this is not rape culture.

    Siri Harding says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:29 pm 
    It’s been interesting to me to see how many people have taken the chant the same way. I always heard it in the “rape and pillage” sense, which seems to be supported by the fact that the chant sheet read “steal your women.”

    Rob Spalding says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:24 pm 
    simmer down Francis

    Marc says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:17 pm 
    What is rape culture?

    Jamaal Scott says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:25 pm 
    As someone who actually knows the history and meaning of this chant (well beyond the US/Timbers). Someone who understands grammar and definitions/meanings of words in the English language. Someone who has over 10 years of dedication to helping victims of real domestic and other abuse, both personally and as a volunteer.
    As all of those things, I can say it is very frustrating to hear people twist something into a meaning that does not make sense, has no historical grounds and just plane does not mean what you are claiming.
    More so the tactics of people who do not like the wording are disgraceful. Attacking others because they disagree with you and claiming they support rape!? Truly, what the fuck is wrong with you? These are the same people that said hi, and smiled, laughed, chanted and enjoyed comradery with. These are mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers. These are both men and women of many ages who simply do not agree with your views on this subject.
    Your actions here are much more despicable than anything you claim to be offended by. You are *ACTIVLTY* calling multiple people, including myself to be rapists or supporters of such act.
    Shame on you. Absolutely shame on you.

    Alexis Marie says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:00 am 
    I hope you know just how insulting it is for you to say things like this.
    You have never lived somewhere with true rape culture. You obviously have no idea what it is like.
    You trivialize REAL problems when you act like the line of a song is ‘promoting rape culture.’ It makes me realize how sheltered and self-serving your motivations are.
    Coming from a country that actually had a rape culture… a true rape culture… not this whiny sheltered suburbanite version. The fact you have the time to get upset at a line in a soccer chant should show you just how petty you are being.
    You are trivializing my entire life experience, and I don’t appreciate it.

    Basmah says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:50 pm 
    In Allen’s defense…he is a good guy who respects and cares about women, but maybe doesn’t always think through some of the comments he posts before he posts them. Allen feels his feelings a little too much sometimes..he is the “Timbers Cry Guy” after all :-/
    I think a lot of people realize that the language of the chant isn’t meant to promote violence against women, but at the same time prolly agree that it is crass and offensive and maybe not in the most awesome taste. It probably would have been changed ages ago if the word was “f*ck” instead of “shag”…but since a lot of soccer supporters are also Anglophiles, it’s lasted a lot longer than it would have otherwise

    Alli says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:54 pm 
    Complaining about a “vocal minority” who is against rape culture sure doesn’t seem respectful to me. Also getting emotional about a chant that we didn’t even write seems a bit odd. We have tons of creative people in the TA, how about we write some original chants?

    Jamaal Scott says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:31 pm 
    I object and disagree that the language supports or is in reference to anything negative or close to rape culture. Many others do as well. While you may choose to view the meaning of certain words in that way, please do not presume to put words or meanings into the mouths of others. Especially when they simply and factually do not mean what you want them to mean.

    Sarah says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 10:58 am 
    Simply and factually, the phrase “shag YOUR women and drink YOUR beer” equates a woman with a pint.

    Ben Horton says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:31 pm 
    Terrible decision. We’ll be chanting this next game, 100% guaranteed.

    Luis says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 11:07 am 
    I really hope we do!

    Allen Schmitz says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:17 pm 

    Shawn Levy says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:24 pm 
    I hear you, but, with respect, “catering to the vocal minority” got the city council to give us a soccer-specific stadium….;-)

    Sara D says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:18 pm 
    While I was not offended by the lyrics, I don’t want to sing what does offend others.
    Thank you

    Jackie Pare says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:22 pm 
    Yay!! An excellent decision made by all involved.

    Ben Horton says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:23 pm 
    I surely do not feel the 107 board represents the TA. It’s basically a PTA board. A who’s whose-who of goody-two shoes.

    Ed Hurtley says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:24 pm 
    I’m someone who interpreted the chant as “we will have a consensual sexual encounter with your significant other who is committing adultery on you!” I interpreted it as a completely non-violent, non-demeaning-to-women line.
    I have no problem with this move. Plenty of people *DID* interpret it as violent and/or demeaning toward women. Because of the sensitivity of the topic, I fully understand the desire to avoid such “triggering” statements in the context of an organization (the TA) that is famously AGAINST discrimination or demeaning of others.
    Good job, 107ist board!
    Now to get rid of the dreadful “Onward…”

    Tim Chamberlin says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:12 pm 
    I always thought it was a suggestion to the players (aka “Portland Boys”) to go home after the match and have *consensual* sex with their wife/girlfriend (and then drink a beer).
    That said the chant is done by just about every other (English speaking) supporters group out there so I don’t care that it is gone since the TA should be about original chants.

    David Wagoner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:24 pm 
    Excellent explanation, background, transparency, implementation, and communication. Thanks to everyone who participated in this process.

    Seth says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:42 pm 
    There’s a way to find the offensive nature in everything. Perhaps chanting “no pity” will hurt the feelings of visiting players who have a boo boo. Maybe we should stop throwing pieces of paper into the air – there are tree farmers who may be offended at such a waste of a precious resource. I bet the sad folks up in Seattle and Vancouver are a little angry about the bonfire chant. While we’re at it, “we are mental” has to go.

    Corri says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:03 pm 
    This isn’t about not being offensive…it’s bigger than that. It’s about standing for the values that make the TA a safe place for EVERYONE.

    Dan says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:08 pm 
    I totally understand what you’re saying here, but we have other chants where we make light of mental health (Mental and Barmby, Mental and Green), talk about burning down massive metropolises full of people, etc. Why can’t we tell the players to go have a good time with their wives and girlfriends?
    I’m very happy with how accepting the TA likes to portray itself and love the pride flags, international flags and chants, etc., but it seems odd that we couldn’t just change the ONE offensive line in the chant to “shag your partner…” or anything along those lines. Not trying to offend here, just genuinely wanting to understand.

    Jamaal Scott says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:36 pm 
    Because one of the largest arguments here is that the word “your” in the sentence implies both objectification of women and rape. It clearly does not, but that is the argument.
    I have also heard from several people who have this view, that such a line as you suggested would still imply rape.
    Clearly I disagree with this view.

    Basmah says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:43 pm 
    I think it’s great that the TA as a whole cares enough to take this issue so seriously. I’ve always hated that line and usually kept silent during that part of the chant. Changing the line would have been an acceptable option, but getting the TA to adopt changes to chants as a whole is always challenging! Take Party in PDX for example – I can’t remember the last time I was at a match where people didn’t insert “Wake the F*ck up” even though it isn’t part of the chant. Bella Ciao is another example…I’d say 50% of peeps at any given match still don’t know the words, haha

    Kristin says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:45 pm 
    Thank you all for taking the matter seriously, considering all points of view and all options, and providing such a clear and thoughtful explanation of the action.
    While I am sure some will disagree with the decision, I hope all can see how well this 107ist leadership attends to concerns and its core values. Well done!

    David R says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:49 pm 
    Has anyone really been far even as decided to hear even go what to do chant more like?

    Shawn Levy says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 2:59 pm 
    I prefered this comment in the original Estonian.

    David Ra says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:27 pm 

    George Quraishi says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:40 pm 

    Travis says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:09 pm 
    Ok so if we are going to go down this path let’s bring out the fact that we as a TA disrespect the absolute greatest symbol that allows everyone to sit back behind keyboards and type comments and make opinions. How about we take a serious look at how we strongly disrespect the American colors and do not allow the flag colors to leave the pitch before screaming and chanting and throwing confetti and raising TIFO’s. You want to fix things then go to the root and respect the one greatest thing that allows you to make these rash decisions. respect the flag, respect the colors and clean up that act

    Chuckles says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:18 pm 
    Cold War’s over, Travis. We won.

    SMR says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:44 pm 
    How about we just compromise and stop with the whole flag-waving thing before sports events. It’s pretty silly.

    Nicholas Garner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:35 pm 
    I’d just assume dispense with the militaristic and nationalistic propaganda. The military needs no help recruiting and we don’t need to encourage more stupid wars. I don’t believe any other league or sport does this. Maybe North Korea? Not good company.

    BamaTimber says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:48 am 
    While I would agree that I rather just see the practice ended, most nations observe the national anthem and colors before sporting events. By most I mean almost all of them. In fact, I can’t think of a major league that doesn’t do it.

    Damian says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:09 am 
    How about every major league in Europe? The only time a national anthem is played is before international fixtures, and then it’s both country’s anthems.
    Sorry, the USA is alone in this custom.

    Paul Atkinson says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:10 pm 
    Well done by the board to listen to everyone, give insight into the process, and come to a reasonable decision.

    John says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:23 pm 
    I would have preferred changing it. In my naivete I never interpreted the song that way and thought I was telling the players to have relations with their significant other and then enjoy a beverage. But the other verses are strong and some of the loudest that we sing. We could skip the verse all together and some people wouldn’t notice. And I don’t understand the idea that we couldn’t learn new words that would change the meaning. Shawn sang, “Valeri is a Wizard” twice and everyone in our section got it. And lastly, my undiagnosed OCD (I probably don’t have OCD, please don’t be offended if you do) says “National Anthem”, “Here We Go”, and then “Portland Boys” is how we start the game. I just don’t see how we can’t drop the verse or change the words.

    Robert says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 2:35 pm 
    Thank you! Why couldn’t we have tried to alter that SINGLE line instead of ripping a whole song out that is one of the loudest and best the TA does?

    Marc says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:33 pm 
    Let me get this straight (sorry correct)… It’s cool to build a bonfire, but not cool to shag…

    Eric says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 3:37 pm 
    As an American I am offended at the scarf waving during the national anthem. As an individual that as helped treat people with mental health issues, I am offended by the let’s get mental and we are barmby. As a clinical researcher in the field of neurology (canabis as a treatment for epilepsy)I am offended by the chant urging refs to take another bong rip. As a north American I am offended at the multitude of slurs we have towards Canadians. But most of all I am offended by this censorship. More than half of the stuff we say at timbers games are offensive. I get being inclusive but this outright censorship is not a valid form of argument. I will respect the decision but I hope this doesn’t start a trend of censorship.

    Travis says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:42 pm 
    Just clap and scream and yell “Give everyone a ribbon for doing a good job, and maybe a hug but that may be viewed as inappropriate.” Give everyone a ribbon. Well said Eric. I personally cannot recall a match where three minutes went by without something that could be viewed offensive.

    April says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:45 pm 
    Ahh, said like true males.

    Luke says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:29 pm 
    “He has a penis, therefor his opinion is invalid”

    Brian says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:38 pm 
    I know plenty of females that speak and have the same opinions. Stop stereotyping males, it’s offensive.

    Lisa says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 9:25 am 

    Nicholas Garner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:37 pm 
    You’re being disingenuous and basically implying that people with actual feelings are nothing more than busybodies. Diminishing people’s sincere, legitimate, feelings is not what the TA, or society in general, should be about.

    Eric says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 12:54 am 
    Your diminishing my sincere feelings. I always feel uncomfortable during the anthem. And I don’t participate in these chants that I find offensive.
    The argument is that if we don’t allow the chant to be said we will all benefit from the change in language. I agree this will 100% work. When I worked with adults with developmental disabilities we would train the staff to think person first. We were working for people with disabilities not disabled people. Its a slight change but language can hurt people. But to limit some ones freedom of speech by means of censorship, that’s where I see the push back coming from.
    Honestly by the end of the season not many people will care that it was taken away.
    Link  •  Reply
  • 28 Sep 2016 1:11 PM | 107ist Admin (Administrator)
    James Belcher says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:29 pm 
    Finally. Onward.

    scottyrayj says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 4:52 pm 
    I’m even happier we’re no longer rhyming “feet” with “feet”.

    Cory says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:28 pm 
    I swear the second part used to be “Portland Timbers can’t be beat” when I first heard it. I must have been drunk, but that was better than rhyming “feet” with “feet”
    (also Jon Snow would be offended by the bastards line anyway…..)

    Some guy says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:09 pm 
    Fucking is fun and so is drinking, that’s all that chant ever ment. That said, I respect the boards decision

    Diane Wiesenfeld says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:11 pm 
    Congratulations and thanks to the board for listening and responding appropriately. Nicky Wiesenfeld, you make Iowa proud.

    l.wells says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm 
    As a female member of the 107ist I want to be counted as not being offended by the Portland Boys chant at any time through the years. I am a feminist and I and support shagging for and between all mutually consenting gender associations. I would never support sexist, racist or hate chants of any kind. I do not believe that Portland Boys was promoting rape or rape culture. I also do not want members to feel violated by any of TA actions so understand why the board took this action even though I do not agree.
    From Urban Dictionary: “… But in the main UK sense, as noun or verb, is an alternative to “f*ck” … but with a slight, important difference of effect. To some ears, “f*ck” (like “bang”) can sound like an aggressive act, and/or violent conquest, whereas “shag” (a softer sound) sounds more like an enjoyable fun activity. “Shag” is still often the preferred term among women who are very keen on “shagging”, very much enjoy shagging men (and/or women) and getting shagged themselves. But don’t so much want to get “f*cked”…”
    Proud to be part of 107ist. Keep on shagging, respecting and loving one another.

    Nicholas Garner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:39 pm 
    It isn’t about shagging. It is about the context, which is the possessive “your.” The entire chant is basically about looting and pillaging – raping. It may not be offensive to some. I am personally not offended by it. It is offensive to other people though and I respect them more than I care about a chant.

    Andrew says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:58 am 
    no, as a Brit, let me tell you that to “shag your women” means to come to your town and bloody well enjoy ourselves. It’s about as rapey as the next line, drinking your beer.

    Damian says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:33 am 
    Exactly! It’s not as if we are talking about breaking into their house, raiding their fridge and drinking ‘their’ actual beer.

    Josh says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 5:46 pm 
    Why don’t you guys (or sorry, I mean people) put this much effort into something that actually matters, like removing guns out of people’s hands!

    Sean says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:34 pm 
    This is really disappointing. I have mixed feeling about the line in question. I’ve heard people change the line to suit their gender identity and sexual orientation, which has always suited me. I understand how the line could be interpreted as a literal endorsement of rape culture, too. Bottom line, I would much rather the line be changed than the chant dropped.
    P.s Fuck Seattle

    Patrick says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:43 pm 
    Uggg, this is a slippery slope. What will change next because some complains about being offended? One of the things I like about the army is that it has been a bit rough at the edges. If you went in there and couldnt deal with foul language you were not going to have a good time. How about standing there a bunch of short people that have a hard time seeing. Might as well ban beer because you don’t like the accidental pint tipped over on you shoes.
    I always saw that line as in we kick so much ass that the other teams supported women folk couldn’t help but have consensual sex with us while bringing us beer…

    Thomas G says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 6:48 pm 
    Wait… is that one verse being scrapped or the whole chant? Shame to ditch the whole thing… “I don’t hear a f**cking thing!” is one of my favorites.

    Robyn says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:32 pm 
    Thank you. We appreciate your hard work and leadership.
    Those objecting: can you consider for a second what it’s like for us as women to hear this misogynistic stuff all the time when we cheer for our team? Can you consider this tiny change for women who cheer with you?

    Jaime says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:01 pm 
    Some women. Please don’t speak for all of us. Not all of us are offended, including some of us who have very good reason to be.

    V! says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:53 pm 
    As someone who has been coming to matches for 10 years, thank you. I have always felt uncomfortable with the misogynous feel of that line and stayed silent during it. Folks have attempted to change it before (“fuck the bosses, drink your beer”, etc.), but nothing ever quite caught on. I’m glad someone spoke up & that you respected it. I’m happy that the TA is keeping it’s core anti-oppression values/culture alive despite the massive expansion & pressure from the invading hoards of weirdo nationalists, shield maidens for the patriarchy, the-REAL-issue-is-anything-but-feminism people, & other bizarre Johnny/Janie-come-latelys.

    mike hoffman says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 7:59 pm 
    Uh oh, soccer just got even more pussified.

    Siri Harding says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:45 pm 
    Please tell me you’re using pussy ironically as a sort of meta joke.

    Nicholas Garner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:41 pm 
    Is it okay if I call Mike out on his misogyny or would that hurt his feelings? If his feelings were hurt, exactly how ironic would that be?

    Siri Harding says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 12:26 pm 
    I’m fine with calling out the misogyny, and I would hope that he would consider whether there was truth to it. And yes, that can generate uncomfortable feelings along with defensive, knee-jerk reactions. I’ve certainly been there myself.

    V! says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 8:11 pm 
    PS It’s not about being inoffensive. It’s about being anti-oppressive. The TA has a long tradition of standing in solidarity with oppressed people & taking action to root out oppressive behavior in ourselves. If you’re not down with that, you’re more than welcome to fuck off. Seattle supporters are really douchy; I’m sure they’d love to have you.

    Luke says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:32 pm 
    Do you not see the irony of your post?

    Nicholas Garner says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:41 pm 
    Thank you.

    joe oneill says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:59 am 
    While we’re at it. I’m REALLY offended at the following chants and I want them not sung anymore immediately.
    “Shoot him like a horse.” OH MY GOD. That is SO offensive. Shoot him like a horse? What in the hell is funny about shooting a horse? Tell me!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It’s NOT FUNNY. Take it out NOW!
    ‘Oh referee, referee, take another bong hit.’ Drug abuse is a SERIOUS problem is this country and we’re ridiculing it? NOT COOL.
    ‘You’re going home in a Portland ambulance.’ What’s funny about a player getting hurt. Tell me? What’s funny about it? NOTHING. Take it out.
    Any kind of profanity. There are CHILDREN IN THE AUDIENCE. How do you think they feel listening to profanity. How do you think it makes them feel about soccer. ALL PROFANITY MUST BE TAKEN OUT NOW!!!!!
    Rooting against the other team, Timbers, or referees. These are PEOPLE. They have feelings. We shouldn’t be saying ANYTHING BAD ABOUT THEM. If you can’t say something nice, don’t say it at all. Anyone saying something mean should be escorted out of the stadium and never allowed to come back.

    Andrew says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:54 am 
    Also, ambulances tend to take people to hospitals rather than home.

    Seeking Enlightment says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:35 pm 
    It’s decided then. Shag Women. Not OK.
    Please tell me TA Boored
    Is it OK to Drink Beer?

    amanda birnbaum says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 9:56 pm 
    As a woman I am actually very dissapoonted by tgis decsion. I often find that I am in fact not offended by things I’m told I should be offended by. For instance the word Cunt does not throw me in a tizzy. I’m more interested in the intent and context of a word or action than the word or action in general. I For me I never found the intent of the word shag to be “rapey”. I thought of it as a mutual action enjoyed by all parties. That’s my interpretation based on my personal experience. I never disrepected anyone who felt different. I never got mad if a person next to me sung different words or not at all. We all have our on experiences which are all equally validm However those who demanded the chant not exist have in my opnion done a diservice to us women who saw it in a different way. In essence they are saying we just don’t get. That we are wrong. That there only can be one way to feel abou this and we now have been told which way that is. To me that is offensive.

    SMR says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 9:45 pm 
    Super! This is a lovely illustration of the concept of privilege. Now you go out and enjoy that privilege, but consider listening to and working with people who don’t benefit from the same.
    Absolutely no one is telling you how to feel. There are, however, people asking that you listen to people who feel differently from you, and act discerningly in the understanding that not everyone is the same as you. Presumably people have been asking you to do this since preschool, they just used less confusing words.
    “I am not offended” must not be used as code for “this should not offend you” because that way lies “those who are offended by this are [other/lesser].”

    joshua lucas says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 10:48 pm 
    I always thought the drink your beer was offensive to recovering alcoholics, and shoot him like a horse was very disrespectful to equine fans…

    Ben Horton says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:04 pm 
    I’ll chant it every game, 10 x louder, that is for sure. Before the game if he drums do not follow.
    Too much political correctness in the TA these days. Jesus christ, stop being so soft. Why does a board get to decide? Of course a board would play it safe, nobody wants to be the bad guy/gal.
    Stop the rotation of lulling songs. Grow some balls and ovaries. It is getting ridiculous with the sanitizing of the TA.

    Gabriel Bliss says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:11 pm 
    This is stupid.

    Travis Sanders says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:54 pm 
    About time. I never felt right singing this chant, and after a few matches I just stopped.

    Charlie Cooper says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:19 pm 
    If you wanted the chant to stay, maybe you should have gone to the board meeting.
    The debate was never about the word shag, it was the implied ownership and stealing of women in a chant that obviously infers pillaging. To quote someone, who once again was AT THE BOARD MEETING. “The chant/line promotes fucking woman and owning them as well as promoting rape culture. You may not think it does, I might not think it does. Either way, that’s what it means.”

    Damian says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:29 am 
    I really don’t see how it HAS to infer pillaging. It’s a chant sung to opposition fans, ideally on the road – it doesn’t really make as much sense at home, hundreds or thousands of miles from ‘their’ women and beer – and it simply taps into the fact that ‘they’ don’t like us. And that it may upset them greatly to watch us enjoying ourselves in ‘their’ city, drinking beer and getting friendly with local ladies. You can call it ‘pillaging’ if you like, but it’s 2016 and we are talking about drinking beer and having sex.
    I don’t see why shag HAS to infer rape.
    I don’t see why the idea of sex with a woman from their city HAS to be non consensual.
    I always imagined that people could theoretically be offended by the mention of sex in the chant, or offended that it is male to female oriented only, but I never in 7 years imagined people would be offended because it ‘promotes rape’.

    Ben Horton says:
    Tuesday, June 21, 2016 at 11:27 pm 
    At this rate we should make the next batch of scarfs with ‘PITY’ on one side, and ‘ON US’ on the other.

    Lilito says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 3:57 am 
    You all are so effing ignorant. Enjoy the match, sing your song, and move on. It’s 90+ minutes…idiots. #DCUnited

    Sanitized Support says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:23 am 
    Question: The Irish singing “Go home to your sexy wives” to Swedish fans…. is that offensive because of the use of your ? Is it possessive and imply the wives are property? No.
    Yes I know it’s called a possessive pronoun but even the dictionary makes the distinction “belonging to or associated with the person.” Associated (of a person or thing) connected with something else. synonyms: related, connected, linked, correlated. My slave is property and offensive. My girlfriend implies I have a relationship with that person.
    You basically caved to people who are so narrowly focused that they would only look at one meaning or context for a word.

    Sarah says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 11:35 am 
    Here’s the deal: the phrase “my wife” identifies a particular woman in relation to you. It doesn’t mean anybody owns or possesses her, just that she is married to you and not your neighbor. The phrase “your women” describes a whole bunch of females. Their relationship to the chanters (wives? daughters? mothers?) is unclear. They are just “your women” in the same possessive sense as “your beer.” And since I believe that no human being has a right to claim possession of another, I’m glad that thousands of people will no longer be roaring this phrase at soccer matches.

    joe oneill says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 7:53 am 
    Garbage decision and giving into a vocal minority. Not surprised at the gutless response from the TA board. The lyric doesn’t imply rape… ‘shag’ simply means having sex. If the Thorns sang ‘Portland Girls we are here, shag your men and drink your beer’, I’d find humor in it and not be offended at all.
    I won’t be renewing my membership in the 107st after this ridiculous decision.

    Andrew says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:53 am 
    That line has always meant “shag the women in your town” rather than “shag your girlfriends”

    Damian says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 1:31 am 

    Nobody says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 9:57 am 
    Maybe the board should’ve taken a vote of the 107ist membership, at least, rather than just rely on a few squeaky wheels at a meeting or twitter for their research. Changing the lyric would’ve been a fine compromise, but the rationale that it’s “too hard” is weak. PTA and small town city council, indeed. Misandry disguised as feminism is not feminism. Personal attacks against people who disagree with the proponents of censorship tells you all you need to know. It’s confused and judgmental, but not feminism. “Shag” and “your” is not misogyny or promoting of “rape culture”, just like “thorny” wasn’t either. Speaking as someone who is close friends with someone who was really assaulted, knowing what it did to her, and knowing she isn’t against this chant, I find the conflating and lack of contextual thought for the words “shag” and “your” to be ridiculous and insulting.

    ECP Bystander says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 11:39 am 
    “Shag your women” is offensive? GTFO. This is why Trump has a real good shot at the White House. Expanding “PC culture” to anything that you don’t like muddies the water for change on real issues. It disenfranchises people and makes them shut off to hear ANY complaints. Rape culture exists. This isn’t it. Stating it promotes rape culture hurts future fights to combat actual rape culture. Absurd.

    Jordan Barth says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 4:02 pm 

    10 PRINT "SHAG"
    20 GOTO 10

    Clarksky says:
    Wednesday, June 22, 2016 at 8:33 pm 
    Thanks TA. I couldn’t think of a better way to show my support than finally coughing up my dues.

    Kathy says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 8:35 am 
    I stayed silent during that line and will miss the song as it’s one of my favorites. It would have been my preference to have changed the single line AND my big voice would have helped lead that change wherever I stood with the TA.

    Sarah says:
    Thursday, June 23, 2016 at 11:21 am 
    Thank you for taking what is apparently a brave stand. Now we see how much it matters to folks to be able to holler about shagging a bunch of women whose only identity is that they are owned by people who also own bee. We couldn’t even agree on whose damn women they were, let alone whether shagging them was a threat or an invitation. Sorry to see the whole chant abolished but I understand why, especially given that people are insisting they’ll keep on yelling a phrase that many of us believe demeans women.

    Alan Lehto says:
    Saturday, June 25, 2016 at 8:25 am 
    Thanks for making a needed change. If the TA were still small, I would have advocated for changing the lyrics but can understand the issues around doing that now.

    Kathy says:
    Saturday, June 25, 2016 at 9:45 am 
    I strongly feel the 107ist board made the correct decision in removing this chant from the chant sheet. Thanks for taking a courageous stand.

    Adam Herstein says:
    Sunday, June 26, 2016 at 10:25 pm 
    I was wondering why this one wasn’t sung today. While I will miss this chant (and always said “steal your cider, drink your beer” instead of the offending line), I think this was the right choice by the TA. Thanks for looking out for everyone!

    Patrick Alston says:
    Wednesday, June 29, 2016 at 3:08 pm 
    I think I will vote against this action with the only voice I know how to use in this organization. I will not be paying my Dues next year if this is how the organization is going to behave.

    Kirk Theis says:
    Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:27 am 
    I will sincerely miss the “Do you hear _____ sing?” verse. Probably one of my favorite moments in each game. I do fear that we are starting down a sad and frustrating slope. Regardless…. I will still be buried in green and gold!

    Kirk Theis says:
    Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:33 am 
    PS. I always took the line to mean the other teams supporters women, and of course their beer… But still having nothing to do with rape. It’s not our fault that the Portland boys are clearly better than any other teams supporters, and therefore women willingly leave for the clearly better choice. Much like the high school dance scene in any 80’s movie. Eventually the girl leaves the jerk and choses the right guy. Either way… very much mutual consent.

    Adam Bacher says:
    Wednesday, July 6, 2016 at 5:14 pm 
    While I fully support removing the offensive language, why can’t we just remove the one verse. It’s a great chant.
    Any chance of it just being reworked?

    luke says:
    Sunday, July 10, 2016 at 8:47 am 
    Some of this should have been avoided with a more nuanced and future focused statement that was honest. With more responsible acknowledgement of the validity of people and less marginalization of the dissenting opinion. What needed to be said is we considered this line in the song and struggled over what we felt were contrasting views; censorship or demeaning language towards women. In the end we felt that the harm done to those we intend to censor is more palatable (maybe the word, i dont know) then the harm we would cause by not removing the song. It would not solve all of the dissenting opinions but would at least acknowledge that to have them is not about intolerance towards the value of women. Often when people feel heard they can then move on and accept the new necessary reality. Those who are proponents of the change should appreciate those who were willing to give up something to further your inclusion in the community, Those who disagree should understand sacrifice for the sake of community is necessary. That could lead to a closer and future thinking exit to this struggle. At least for reasonable people. Just trying to be positive, thanks.
    Link  •  Reply

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software