urall, the comment about Italians being offended by the word "Indian" was made with tongue firmly embedded in cheek. The history books taught us that Columbus was Genovese, but then, as old as I am, I didn't have nearly as much history to learn as a kid does nowadays. By ancestry I am about 40% Irish. I am moderately offended by the image of Irishmen portrayed as drunken, ignorant, combative, insensitive louts. I am not offended by such Irish symbolism as leprechauns, 4-leaf clovers, and so on. I think what sets my teeth on edge more than anything else is the stereotyping of anything, especially when it comes to race or national origin. It has taken me a long time to learn not to do it, and I've tried to pass what I've experienced on to my son. It's a long, uphill battle to overcome stereotyping. gdv, the NE Patriots original logo was a cartoon drawn by a Boston Globe cartoonist. His name escapes me. It too is a stereotype of an Irishman, not necessarily of a colonial patriot. The intent was to blend the team name, the game the team plays, and the local ethnic majority into one logo. As far as "patriot" as a team name in New England is concerned, I would refer you to any decent history of New England from the years 1770 to 1790.
FWIW, I would totally buy a Cleveland Spiders' hat.
The argument that says Native American mascots are OK if they are respectful ignores the fact that they invite disrespect from opposing fans. How many pep rallies have used "Scalp the Indians!" when the opposing school has that mascot? I can recall them from my days attenting middle school in Burleson, Texas. I know this is a tired analogy, but if a team had a Jewish mascot, would we accept "Gas the Jews!" as harmless fun? I can sympathize with fans who are lifelong supporters of a franchise or school that uses one of these mascots or names. Sports traditions are cherished. But I don't see how anyone could consider those traditions so important that they perpetuate ugly racial stereotypes. Pro sports have shown they will tear up their traditions in chase of a dollar. Historic stadiums are razed to add more luxury boxes and renamed for sponsors. If Cleveland would drop its stadium name for a buck, and you know they would, why can't they completely drop Wahoo? FWIW, I would totally buy a Cleveland Spiders' hat. Spiders is a killer mascot. Does any top-tier pro team use it?
Anyone can make fun of anyone's mascots, that reasoning doesn't wash. Wahoo should go based solely on the fact that it is a racist depiction of a Native American.
FWIW, I would totally buy a Cleveland Spiders' hat. Spiders is a killer mascot. Does any top-tier pro team use it? I realize they're not a pro team, but the only "major" team I know of that uses Spiders as a nickname is The University of Richmond.
Being of Polish descent, I can relate to Native Americans. Some of the jokes can be absurb and childish however I usually laugh the loudest. Saying that, the post was funny, something will probably be done about the political incorrectness of the logo and hopefully all will be appeased. Hard to figure a Native American point of view without being in his/her shoes.
Is ths line of sensitivity the reason that the word "Rainbow" was removed from the University of Hawaii's team name? It doesnt seem to bother NASCAR fans. Just curious.
My FWIW - many years ago when I first heard there was an American team called the New England patriots, my first thought was "Why would they call a US-based team after the British loyalists during the American revolution. Weren't you the revolutionaries, and the Pom supporters were the patriots?" One man's patriot is another man's...well, you know.
How many pep rallies have used "Scalp the Indians!" when the opposing school has that mascot? I know this is a tired analogy, but if a team had a Jewish mascot, would we accept "Gas the Jews!" as harmless fun? posted by rcade at 12:57 PM CDT on October 20 With all due respect, that is a lousy analogy. If the pep rallies offerred "Send the Indians disease-ridden blankets!" Your analogy would hold. "(Over)charge the Jews!" would hold the analogy... My dad, who was brought up in New Jersey in the 20s and 30s, said they had this cheer: "Matzahs! Fishhooks! Oi gvelt! Give a good substantial yell... OI!"
"Why would they call a US-based team after the British loyalists during the American revolution. Weren't you the revolutionaries, and the Pom supporters were the patriots?" No, no, owlhouse, then it would be the New England United Empire Loyalists, or in less polite terms, the New England Tories. FWIW, my dad's ancestry was loyalist, and our best guess is they evacuated to Nova Scotia in 1776, when Washington surrounded the city of Boston. (Don't fire until you see the whites of my eyes.)
Porn supporters were patriots? Hmmm
B-2 Spirit - not sensitivity to people's feelings, but because the 'bows new coach (June Jones) didn't like the association of the rainbow with the gay rights movement. He changed it out of homophobia. Now, UH is the Warriors. Of course, they're also 7-0, and really it wasn't that big a deal in Hawaii. The name doesn't matter. The winning matters. Same with Cleveland or Washington or Atlanta. Nobody cares what their name is when they're playing well... In fact, so long as they keep "Cleveland," they are clearly part of the same tradition. Now, when California became Anaheim and then became L.A., well, that was much more infuriating to the fans, I think.
I have to agree with the sentiment that people will get over the change and embrace any new mascot if they give it a chance. My alma mater, Miami University (not the U of Miami-Fla) was known as the Redskins when I was there. The school is named after the Miami Tribe of Southwestern Ohio, and their approval was given, contingent on the idea they wouldn't be characatured or mocked in any way (silly Chief Wahoos, tomohawk chops, and all that other garbage.) However, in the late 90's, the writing on the wall became clear. The nickname "Redskins" was deemed offensive by many Native Americans, and whether it was unanimous or not, there was no reason to hang onto it. The school is now known as the Miami Redhawks, most alumni, myself included, agree with the decision. To hang onto the name was pointless and simply lowered the perception of the class of the school. Nobody needed it, nobody misses it.
My high school went from the Indians to the Nighthawks. C'mon, that even sounds cooler than the Indians.
bobfoot: With all due respect, that is a lousy analogy. If the pep rallies offerred "Send the Indians disease-ridden blankets!" Your analogy would hold. "(Over)charge the Jews!" would hold the analogy... Interesting fun fact, maybe not. Looky here
This parody was absolutely hilarious!!!!! As for its political correctness...... Who the F**** cares. The PC people fo the world have gone overboard on everything. Everything in the world offends someone somewhere. Get a life and a sense of humor. I am Irish and I have no problem with all the Irish jokes that abound out there. In the case of Native Americans it bothers some and it does not bother some others. Just like everything. It is just the vocal ones, usually a minority ( and I am not saying the Native American issue is created by a minority of them) that create the illusion that it offends the entire group.
I am Irish and I have no problem with all the Irish jokes that abound out there. And so that entitles you to proclaim that no one of any ethnic group is allowed to object to any caricature of their ethnic group? Thanks for clearing that up.
My alma mater, Miami University ... ... simply lowered the perception of the class of the school. Not possible, tahoe ... I kid, I KID (says the Bobcat grad) On point, funny take on this. But, as a semi-Indians fan (Reds fan, but don't mind seeing the other Ohio team do well), I've wondered how long Chief Wahoo can last. I've not been appalled by it, but I can't fault someone who is (as long as they are truly offended, not just trying to take some activist stance). Is there any true middle-ground here? Would the people that currently get offended still be offended if the team kept the Indians name and made their logo simply the feather? How upset would Cleveland fans be over losing essentially just a cartoon character? But I guess the problem is that the team still wouldn't have much of a mascot (but could take a page from the Reds - just a Mr. Baseball running around).
But I guess the problem is that the team still wouldn't have much of a mascot (but could take a page from the Reds - just a Mr. Baseball running around). Actually, that wouldn't be an issue, either. The team's current mascot doesn't have anything to do with Indians.
Yeah but Slider is wearing a Wahoo hat.
Crap! They'll never figure a way out of that one.
My alma mater, Miami University ... ... simply lowered the perception of the class of the school. Not possible, tahoe ... I kid, I KID (says the Bobcat grad) But just having Roethlisberger gone spruces the place up quite nicely!
I am Irish and I have no problem with all the Irish jokes that abound out there. Well I too am Irish, red-hair, freckles and everything, and while I don't have a "problem" with Oirishness it can be a bit annoying. Most of the time problems like this are because of history and the fact that one term can have so much more animosity loaded into it than another. Just because one person doesn't have a problem with something doesn't mean it isn't offensive. After all I think the idea of snacking on babies is a great one. Other people may object, of course, I paid attention to Fat Bastard when he told me about Baby back ribs
Actually, using the word "Indian" for a Native American is rather insulting to Italians everywhere. It is a constant reminder that Christopher Columbus had absolutely no idea where he was. That's pretty funny... I think you mean offensive to Indians, not Italians. There is no proof to establish where Columbus was from, just that he was Caucasian and probably came from Europe. I think he meant it as a joke but I do hope that this helps a bit: Christopher Columbus was born in Genoa, Italy in 1451.
In the case of Native Americans it bothers some and it does not bother some others. Just like everything. It is just the vocal ones, usually a minority ( and I am not saying the Native American issue is created by a minority of them) that create the illusion that it offends the entire group. Which in itself is an illusion. It's just a vocal minority of blacks that object to Little Black Sambo, right? I am a Native American (Cherokee), and I partake in many of the Nations forums and discussions. The vast majority of us are offended by the Indians logo and the Washington Redskins name. But we know that it demeans you more by continuing to use and defend them. Other than the logo, we don't have a problem with the name Cleveland Indians. I have more of an issue with people making accusations of it being overly PC just so that they can excuse their racism. It took years of lobbying, discussion, boycotts, and economic sanctions before the University of Illinois removed one of the more blatant, stereotypic, offensive mascots in all of sports- their "Chief Illiniwek". What still amazes me is how even highly intelligent and very well educated people could possibly believe that a half naked white boy dressed in buckskin and a chief's headdress jumping wildly up and down somehow "honored" Native Americans. I am however, highly gratified by the general response in this and many other spofi threads on this theme by the majority of contributors. You may keep your scalps.
