FanDuel - WFBC

December 09, 2009

Sioux Sue to Save North Dakota's Mascot: After the board of regents decided to drop the Fighting Sioux name and mascot at the University of North Dakota, some members of the Spirit Lake Tribe have sued to save them. "They are putting us up on a pinnacle," said tribal member Frank Black Cloud. There are 400 American Indian students at the school. One, Frank Sage, said the name is hurtful. "To do what they're doing, you're more or less selling out," he said of the litigants. The New York Times has put together a slide show of changes made since the NCAA announced that schools with these mascots could not host its championships in any sport. The only holdouts keeping their names with a tribe's approval are the Florida State Seminoles, Utah Utes, Central Michigan Chippewas and the Catawba Indians. The Alcorn State Braves are keeping their name in spite of losing championship events.

posted by rcade to general at 08:30 AM - 53 comments

There's an interesting wrinkle to this fight, which seems like it will lose because one of the two Sioux tribes involved has been adamantly opposed to the mascot.

When Ralph Engelstad donated $100 million to build the school's hockey arena, which bears his name, he ordered that thousands of Fighting Sioux logos be built into the structure.

I don't understand people who think their college sports mascot must be given more respect than the right of an indigenous people to be treated with dignity. If a Sioux tribe doesn't want the name, North Dakota should follow the other schools that have made the change.

posted by rcade at 08:39 AM on December 09

Political correctness run amuk.

posted by jjzucal at 09:19 AM on December 09

one step closer to obscurity

posted by graymatters at 09:41 AM on December 09

I don't see the publicity benefit to having your tribe used as a sports mascot. I've lived in Florida for 12 years. I can't tell you a single thing about the Seminole tribe in spite of hearing about Florida State constantly over that period. How did the mascot help that tribe be less obscure to the public?

posted by rcade at 09:45 AM on December 09

Political correctness run amuk.

Can we get an Spofi RFC to settle whether we want "amok" or "amuk"? It's been an issue for years. Screw it, just add a button next to "B", "I" and "link".

posted by yerfatma at 09:58 AM on December 09

"Amuk" ain't a word. Wait, ain't ain't either. In any event, "amuck" is.

posted by manics21 at 10:06 AM on December 09

Sure, but that hasn't stopped the anti-PC troop.

posted by yerfatma at 10:27 AM on December 09

Stop already.

An organization that thinks highly enough of a group / race of people to want to use their name and attempt to achieve the standards they have set should be considered honoring their heritage.

Do we need to get to the point where all sports teams need to be named after plants ?

posted by cixelsyd at 10:33 AM on December 09

Did you even read the story? The Sioux tribal council at Standing Rock in North Dakota did not agree that it is an honor, so the state's board of higher education voted to dump the mascot.

I love how the "it is an honor" crowd doesn't actually care about the opinions of the group supposedly being honored. If the two tribal groups in North Dakota had backed the mascot, it would have been saved.

Anyone who thinks these mascots were chosen to honor American Indians is bullshitting themselves. That's an affectation adopted long after the fact to justify their continued use.

posted by rcade at 10:55 AM on December 09

And no one knows the origin of "hoya" as the Georgetown school mascot.

posted by yerfatma at 11:10 AM on December 09

Let's put aside the native North American referencing (and maybe the Aztecs too, I guess) and go back to antiquity for our team names.

I so deeply want to love me some Hittites. Proud, fierce, warlike. Boo-ya.

In other news... at this moment, a group of militant Franciscan friars in brown robes is marching on San Diego's MLB team headquarters looking for a showdown. Team name change or else. I wouldn't want to mess with 'em. They've been silent for so long. They've got a lot of pent up energy to release.

Anyone changing a team name, please at least do the right thing and if you're naming a team after an object like an animal or a figure, do the human race a favor and make it plural, for god's sake.

All those brainy people at Stanford and they end up naming their teams the Cardinal? WTF? That's just one lousy bird. (Or one archbishop). We're talking about team sports. You can't name 80 guys after one bird. Put a freakin' "S" on the end of that name, will ya?

What if everyone did that? The New York Giant? Who is that team named after - Rex Ryan?

posted by beaverboard at 11:27 AM on December 09

All those brainy people at Stanford and they end up naming their teams the Cardinal? WTF? That's just one lousy bird. (Or one archbishop). We're talking about team sports. You can't name 80 guys after one bird. Put a freakin' "S" on the end of that name, will ya?

Cardinal as in red, the colour.

posted by tommytrump at 01:05 PM on December 09

This thread may prove to be good. Perhaps some popcorn is in order.

posted by THX-1138 at 01:33 PM on December 09

Let's call them the Vikings. No one has sued over the use of that name. Drop the name Seminoles, too. Then those who know nothing about them can completely forget they exist.

posted by sandskater at 01:53 PM on December 09

Ironic.... You just can't win in today's world

posted by Goyoucolts at 01:55 PM on December 09

This thread may prove to be good. Perhaps some popcorn is in order.

Are you kidding? We've already seen about 2/3 of the same "arguments" in favor of native mascots that we've seen roughly 23,648 times before, including:

a)It's an HONOR if we caricature your ethnic group, so there, dammit, no matter how you feel about it.

b)If we ban Native mascots, we must also ban any other team mascot that is named after anything human or human-like, because it's equally pejorative.

c)Oh this is all PEEEEE CEEEEE (and no I don't have to read any goddamn article, I already know what it says, magically, because I'm a genius).

We already had this discussion a gajillion times, most recently here -- not even a month ago -- and I'm a wee bit tired of members who were here for those discussions trotting out the same tired and trite pseudo-arguments that have already been refuted a gajillion times. Intellectually honest grownups do not behave like that.

posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:07 PM on December 09

This case seems a little different than your average friendly Washington Redskins thread. Here (correct me if I'm wrong) it appears that the tribe, minus some 400 students and one tribal ex-chairman, voted to allow the logo but the BHE chose to go ahead and ban it.
So like I said above, you can't win. Change the name to appease some, or keep the name the majority voted for and get slammed by the PC crowd.

posted by Goyoucolts at 02:18 PM on December 09

Drop the name Seminoles, too. Then those who know nothing about them can completely forget they exist.

How could we forget when it gets brought up incorrectly every time one of these threads pops up? And I'm sure the Seminoles will appreciate a defense from the same person who tried to argue away the implicit meaning of "white pride". Your interest is just in the pride of Native Americans, right?

posted by yerfatma at 02:20 PM on December 09

I don't see the publicity benefit to having your tribe used as a sports mascot. I've lived in Florida for 12 years. I can't tell you a single thing about the Seminole tribe in spite of hearing about Florida State constantly over that period. How did the mascot help that tribe be less obscure to the public?

Growing up in Florida, we had a field trip to the Seminole tribe reservation annually. We had to learn about the tribe in Florida history class. While I don't think FSU chose them as a mascot to honor them, I think they were chosen and are touted because they are the only Native American tribe to never surrender to the U.S. Government. They are the Unconquerable Seminoles. All that to say, I think they are a bigger part of Florida history and culture than they are given credit for. The reason why they don't work as a mascot for me is that everything that flows from a tribe being a mascot is poison. The spirit groups, the opposing teams t-shirts, the depictions, the songs are all offensive.

As to this particular issue, I would never expect a large group of people to have one mind about anything.

posted by bperk at 02:25 PM on December 09

correct me if I'm wrong

You're wrong. The school asked two Sioux tribal councils to OK the continued use of the name. One did but the other didn't (and dithered about giving any response at all), so the state board decided to stop fighting and drop the mascot.

The backers of the Fighting Sioux mascot had their chance. All they had to do was convince both councils to OK the name.

posted by rcade at 02:28 PM on December 09

Thanks for the background, Bperk. I need to ask my kids what they've learned about the Seminoles.

posted by rcade at 02:29 PM on December 09

Ahh, so the Standing Rock tribe was still unsure. My mistake. I still stand by my previous statement, though; this does seem to be rather ironic... The "offensive" name and logo are changed, and people are still pissed off.

posted by Goyoucolts at 02:41 PM on December 09

I would never expect a large group of people to have one mind about anything.

That is the exact reason why all of the Pilgrims were not massacred out of hand. One side of my family voted to burn the ships with them in it, the other half wanted to give them corn. What can I say.

posted by irunfromclones at 02:49 PM on December 09

I love how the "it is an honor" crowd doesn't actually care about the opinions of the group supposedly being honored.

Those who insist it's not an honor don't care about the opinions of the group that is actually honored either.

Anyone who thinks these mascots were chosen to honor American Indians is bullshitting themselves.

"I am full blood and I grew up on this reservation," said Eunice Davidson, 57, who wore a Fighting Sioux sweatshirt on a recent afternoon. "I have to tell you, I am very, very honored that they would use the name."

Sorry, Eunice. You are just bullshitting yourself and naive.

Is it just too simple to immediately attack anyone's motive for disagreeing that it's dishonorable?

As to this particular issue, I would never expect a large group of people to have one mind about anything.

Exactly, and here we have a group in which some are offended and some are not.

What argument could be made for those who aren't offended to keep the mascot, that's not "trite," or "intellectually dishonest."

Or are the Sioux who wish to keep the mascot just screwed because by default if something is offensive to someone it must be changed? I think that is the type of thing that some people just don't buy into.

I mean my question is, "is there an acceptable argument for the Sioux who are suing?"

posted by tselson at 03:03 PM on December 09

I vote that all teams with native mascots choose a Latin moniker like the Hoyas. Or pick an animal name, like the Washington Squirrels.

posted by yzelda4045 at 03:04 PM on December 09

I'm a wee bit tired of members who were here for those discussions trotting out the same tired and trite pseudo-arguments that have already been refuted a gajillion times. Intellectually honest grownups do not behave like that.

Yet, it seems that these items mostly get posted by those who are on your side of the argument, i.e. that such mascot names should be banned. The mere posting of these items is essentially trolling. So, if such posts are to be allowed, then I see no reason why both sides should not be expressed. Isn't that really the purpose of such posts anyway - to bring out the non-ban arguments whether we believe in them or not?

posted by graymatters at 03:04 PM on December 09

Those who insist it's not an honor don't care about the opinions of the group that is actually honored either.

If the Sioux tribes had agreed to the mascot like the Utes, Seminoles and Chippewas, then in my book it would be less of an issue. I don't think those tribes are honored by being trivialized as mascots, but at least the names have their blessing.

Sorry, Eunice. You are just bullshitting yourself and naive.

You miss the point. When Indian-related mascots were introduced, it was considered harmless amusement. While Eunice may be honored today, in 1930 the name was chosen with zero input from actual Sioux as to whether they were honored or not. Read some of the incidents that have occurred over the years because of the mascot in the commentary 30 years of telling us to be honored and tell me how honored you would feel. In the '70s, one local shopkeeper put up this sign: "Redskins, go back to the reservations, leave their name alone."

The mere posting of these items is essentially trolling.

Bullshit. The link was to a current story in the New York Times about the lawsuit. Linking to a news story is not trolling simply because it provokes strong opinions.

No one is trying to exclude the other side, Graymatters. But it would be nice if these stories did not attract so many knee-jerk opinions from people who don't even bother to read the link or educate themselves at all about the subject. We could use a lot less of this and more of this.

posted by rcade at 03:46 PM on December 09

I mean my question is, "is there an acceptable argument for the Sioux who are suing?"

Yeah, they think that it gives their tribe positive publicity. The argument for nicknames that use a specific tribe are more complex than those with names like Redskins. But, it is hard to run away from the negative depictions from the other team and the trite depictions by the actual school in any event. I think FSU is one of the schools that tries hard to work with the local tribe to be respectful, but it can only go so far. The fight song is pretty outrageous. The names of school organizations involve spears and feathers. The opposing teams t-shirts involve every negative Native American stereotype imaginable. What can you say about the tomahawk chop? The school is fighting a losing battle to maintain a respectful image for the tribe.

posted by bperk at 04:03 PM on December 09

The mere posting of these items is essentially trolling.

it would be nice if these stories did not attract so many knee-jerk opinions from people who don't even bother to read the link

graymatters, I am sensitive to what you're saying and I don't want to suggest there's no acceptable position other than What I Think. It's just frustrating to see a new crew of people make the same set of arguments, especially when they're closed to hearing counter-arguments (I swear I'm not completely closed to the other side, as long as they'res some attempt at speling punctuation and grammer).

posted by yerfatma at 04:25 PM on December 09

Are you kidding? We've already seen about 2/3 of the same "arguments" in favor of native mascots that we've seen roughly 23,648 times before, including:

Hell no, I 'aint kidding. I love watching people get their panties in a bunch even if it is about the same old stuff. Never underestimate the power of people to say something outrageous and stupid where matters of race are concerned (myself included). Besides, it can be like a car wreck. And NASCAR still seems to have fans.

Plus, too, what's more:

With all the fodder for protestation, I'm the one that get's yer attention?

posted by THX-1138 at 04:29 PM on December 09

The school is fighting a losing battle to maintain a respectful image for the tribe. I don't think respect is the reason UND changed the name, because they originally didn't want to. This clip from the article, But some university officials said they began worrying that the debate was leading other institutions to avoid competing against them in sports. seems to prove that an actual logistical/financial reason existed: Exterior pressure from various groups was creating negative coverage for the university, and said coverage was leading other schools to choose different sports opponents. The Standing Rock tribe just wanted another year to discuss the issue fully, so they can make the correct choice. "Negative depictions" don't really come into the sueing part as the only people throwing around those terms are the students (and honestly, what else do you expect from students? Speaking as a student in Eugene, OR, everyone here wants a issue to trumpet. Can't imagine it would be any different in North Dakota) Let the Sioux elders fight to get that extra year of discussion, and if in that extra year they find the term disrespectful, honor the original agreement. If they don't, keep the name.

posted by Goyoucolts at 04:40 PM on December 09

it would be nice if these stories did not attract so many knee-jerk opinions

And after all this time and all the postings, you really expect any different?

it is hard to run away from the negative depictions from the other team . . .The opposing teams t-shirts involve every negative Native American stereotype imaginable.

Yet, it is not that opposing team that gets the criticism. Instead, it is the team with the native mascot that gets criticized as though the opposing team's negative use is justified in some way.

posted by graymatters at 05:05 PM on December 09

Negative depictions are going to occur regardless of the mascot, but it's hard to feel good about your heritage getting ridiculed. While I can almost see a case for keeping the Fighting Sioux, it's names like the Redskins that need to go...how is that name allowed to continue?

I think all teams should be forced to use either animal names or colors, with really clever teams using both, like my Golden Gophers.

Now if we can just get the real team to play that hard.

posted by dviking at 05:23 PM on December 09

I don't know what you're all blabbering about.

irunfromclones won this fucking thing hours ago.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 08:20 PM on December 09

irunfromclones won this fucking thing hours months ago.

Out of curiosity, though. I went to Miami University, named after the Miami tribe who were indigenous to southwestern Ohio until it was decided that we could make better use of the land than them. If you'd really like to pay tribute to a tribe, wouldn't the more reasonable way to honor them to be to name the university after them rather than the mascot?

posted by tahoemoj at 09:10 PM on December 09

Yerfatma. I don't equate the term "Redskin" with Seminole. Apparently you do. One is a slur, the other a legitimate name. You choose to read the politically incorrect nuance into "white pride". I don't. Your agenda is showing again. What caught my attention here was rcade's lack of curiosity for the 12 years his attention was drawn to a group he knew nothing about save they were the name of a college team. A little intellectual curiosity could have brought him up to speed. Apparently exercising some cultural awareness and learning about them wasn't important enough. That lacks the thrill of righteous indignation that comes from whaking the politically correct "Easy button". Like I said, call them the Vikings. Just don't tell the Swedes.

posted by sandskater at 10:33 PM on December 09

You miss the point. When Indian-related mascots were introduced, it was considered harmless amusement. While Eunice may be honored today, in 1930 the name was chosen with zero input from actual Sioux as to whether they were honored or not. Read some of the incidents that have occurred over the years because of the mascot in the commentary 30 years of telling us to be honored and tell me how honored you would feel.

I didn't. I was trying to make one. I feel you are belittling those who claim to feel it's an honor, you are asking me how honored I would feel, but I sense you are more trying to tell me that the Eunice's of the tribe are just ignorant. And that if she read the commentary she would quit feeling that her tribe was being honored, today.

I'm not a Sioux, she is. Why automatically discount how she feels?

Hey, I thought this one was a good post as the actual people involved were arguing both sides. I just feel that no one even listens to those who oppose them and automatically question their motives for doing so.

One can't just call Eunice a beer bellied, mullet headed, gap toothed, racist redneck and be done with it, can they?

posted by tselson at 10:48 PM on December 09

I feel you are belittling those who claim to feel it's an honor, you are asking me how honored I would feel, but I sense you are more trying to tell me that the Eunice's of the tribe are just ignorant.

I challenge you to find a comment where I've called Eunice or other Sioux tribal supporters of the name ignorant or questioned their motives. You continue to misread my original comment, which was about when the names were chosen.

What caught my attention here was rcade's lack of curiosity for the 12 years his attention was drawn to a group he knew nothing about save they were the name of a college team. A little intellectual curiosity could have brought him up to speed. Apparently exercising some cultural awareness and learning about them wasn't important enough.

You seem to think it's some big gotcha that I don't know anything about the Seminole Indians. I'm not clear on why that matters. The issue is whether the sports use of the Seminoles brings any beneficial publicity to the tribe. Here, if you talk about the Seminoles people think you're talking about FSU. The tribe is completely invisible. That's some honor.

I asked my kids about the Seminoles tonight. They knew about the Timucua and Wampanoag, but nothing about the Seminoles.

In the conference I follow because of my alma mater, the Arkansas State Indians became the Arkansas State Red Wolves and the Louisiana-Monroe Indians became the Louisiana-Monroe Warhawks. It didn't take long for people to adjust. These are just sports mascots. If the name in North Dakota is changed, in five years the Fighting Sioux will matter as much to them as the mascot it replaced -- the Flickertails.

posted by rcade at 11:31 PM on December 09

I challenge you to find a comment where I've called Eunice or other Sioux tribal supporters of the name ignorant or questioned their motives. You continue to misread my original comment, which was about when the names were chosen.

No, I'm trying to ask why you insist it should matter to her. You acknowledged that she "may be honored today," then seemed to dismiss the righteousness of her feelings("I have to tell you, I am very, very honored that they would use the name.") by referencing how the name was chosen in 1930.

It comes across as "well if she only knew the truth," she'd change her mind and realize she shouldn't feel honored.

It's not about me, I'm just trying to see how this thread goes when it's not so easy to dismiss an opposing point of view as it comes from within the minority and not from the outside.

I'm not that good at making a point I guess. Then again, I actually like the name Flickertails.

posted by tselson at 12:26 AM on December 10

The Seminoles are actually an amalgam of the original indians found in Florida(can't remember the name), some black slaves, and the Creek Indians. They're the only tribe to never sign a peace treaty with the federal government and were never subdued by federal forces. They now own and run numerous casinos and bought the Hard Rock Cafe chain of restaurants. The Seminoles negotiated and approved the use of their name and any asssociated images with FSU. The history of these people is a testament to their resilency, adaptability, and tenacity and is worth knowing. You won't read about them in the media because they don't fall into the "victim" category so cherished by the left. They're strong, independent, and no one can claim them as their "cause". Probably the same reason they're not a priority in the public schools that Yerfatma insists are not politically left. They don't need your righteous indignation about matters you don't understand and clearly haven't taken the time to find out. They've gotten what they wanted from FSU and the fact that you don't know that is not seminal to them. Pardon the pun.

posted by sandskater at 12:40 AM on December 10

cough, *owned,* cough...

posted by Goyoucolts at 02:05 AM on December 10

I don't equate the term "Redskin" with Seminole.

Then why bring them up every time we have a post about other groups of Native Americans who aren't happy about being used as a mascot?

posted by yerfatma at 09:04 AM on December 10

Probably the same reason they're not a priority in the public schools that Yerfatma insists are not politically left.

That's funny. I live in a part of North Florida that's so Republican we have four different stations broadcasting Rush Limbaugh. My kids' public school had a Pat Buchanan contributor as principal and a bunch of Republican teachers. Educational priorities are set by a Republican majority school board, Republican state legislature and Republican governor.

I enjoyed your Seminole history lesson. As of 2005, only three actual Seminoles had ever graduated from FSU. The school's president set up a Seminole scholarship program after the NCAA went after its name and they needed to pretend they had been honoring the tribe all these years.

Here's some more history of the honor: For 40 years, FSU's boosters were called the Scalp Hunters. The school once had a Chief Fullabull mascot who acted drunk at basketball games and another big-nosed buffoon named Sammy Seminole.

Around 700 colleges and high schools have retired their Indian mascots since protests began in the '70s.

posted by rcade at 09:41 AM on December 10

No, I'm trying to ask why you insist it should matter to her.

Giving my opinion on American Indian mascots is not the same thing as insisting that others share my opinion. I don't need to defend myself over things I didn't say, so I'm just going back to your original question: Is there an acceptable argument for the Sioux who are suing?

Most people -- even on the anti-mascot side -- accept the NCAA's current position that the mascots can continue being used if the tribes involved support them.

The Sioux's problem is that a tribal council wouldn't agree to support the mascot. If we accept that the Seminole tribe in Florida has the right to sanction (or not sanction) that mascot, why would we deny the same right to the Sioux in North Dakota?

posted by rcade at 10:40 AM on December 10

the public schools that Yerfatma insists are not politically left

Wow, what? "politically left"? That's not what my tax dollar is for. I'm paying to have kids turned into midget fag commies.

posted by yerfatma at 10:50 AM on December 10

The Seminoles negotiated and approved the use of their name and any asssociated images with FSU. The history of these people is a testament to their resilency, adaptability, and tenacity and is worth knowing. You won't read about them in the media because they don't fall into the "victim" category so cherished by the left. They're strong, independent, and no one can claim them as their "cause". Probably the same reason they're not a priority in the public schools that Yerfatma insists are not politically left. They don't need your righteous indignation about matters you don't understand and clearly haven't taken the time to find out. They've gotten what they wanted from FSU and the fact that you don't know that is not seminal to them. Pardon the pun.

OK. I won't beg the obvious question of who is actually suggesting that the Seminoles have to change their name, but isn't this exactly what the Sioux nation has decided? One tribe doesn't like it, it has to be unanimous in the eyes of the university and it isn't. That's self determination. Same deal.

Oh wait, sorry - I didn't get to all the liberals-are-weak shit. I see. My mistake.

I enjoyed your Seminole history lesson. As of 2005, only three actual Seminoles had ever graduated from FSU. The school's president set up a Seminole scholarship program after the NCAA went after its name and they needed to pretend they had been honoring the tribe all these years.

Here's some more history of the honor: For 40 years, FSU's boosters were called the Scalp Hunters. The school once had a Chief Fullabull mascot who acted drunk at basketball games and another big-nosed buffoon named Sammy Seminole.

Wait - why didn't you mention this part, sandskater? I thought you were an authority on the subject? Why'd this stuff change? Don't the Seminoles like these honours?

cough, *owned,* cough...

Spoke too soon, huh?

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 05:52 PM on December 10

I disagree with your "self determination" analysis... The Sioux didn't choose anything. One tribe wanted to keep the name, the other was unsure. They merely asked for more time. The University went ahead and voted for the name change without waiting for the input of both tribes.

They don't need your righteous indignation about matters you don't understand and clearly haven't taken the time to find out. They've gotten what they wanted from FSU and the fact that you don't know that is not seminal to them. Pardon the pun.

cough, *owned,* cough...

Spoke too soon, huh?

Umm... No, I still think that was a pretty kick-ass statement. It sums up what I think on the subject, anyway. The subject being discussed has nothing to do with the negative connotations attached to Native American symbols used as sports mascots. It was simply questioning whether or not suing was a viable option. Since the BHE made their decision without waiting for the Sioux, I think it is a viable option. The rabble-rousing talk of everyone anxious to affirm that yes, they think that the pricks who want to keep the name/slur are racists just detracts from the issue.

And I liked the pun

posted by Goyoucolts at 09:17 PM on December 10

The University went ahead and voted for the name change without waiting for the input of both tribes.

You make it sound as if this was rushed. The Board of Higher Education announced in October 2008 that if it could not reach an agreement with the two Sioux tribes this year, UND should begin phasing out the mascot and logo in January 2010. Proponents of the name had more than a year to win approval from the tribes. That didn't happen.

According to Indianz.Com, the new chairman of the Standing Rock tribe won't be pushing for a vote on the name because it is "very, very divisive" for them. So the "waiting for input" argument is moot.

posted by rcade at 09:28 PM on December 10

Yerfatma. I know you like "straw" in your arguments so may I suggest you try to stop grasping at it. It was your post that directed me to the term "redskin". I didn't bring it up and please show the posts where I "bring them up every time...." Your sarcasm regarding the liberal bent of public schools is a poor substitue for reality. Oh, wait, you have 100+ years of no actual teaching experience. I'll take my 37 years of actually doing the job, negotiating contracts, doing grievances, being a union member and knowing the philosophies and platforms at the local, state, and national levels to your "hearsay" accreditation. The "midget fag commie" rejoinder was beneath you and you should "reassess" your use of terminology that is hurtful and demeaning to other groups.
Weedy. rcade introduced the idea that the use of the Seminole name was not appropriate for the university. Scroll up and catch up. Weedy& rcade. Scalp hunters, Chief Fullabull, and Sammy Seminole: Salient verbs? Were called and (once) had. Refer to the history lesson and answer your own question (Why did this stuff change?). The Seminoles made it change not by eliminating its use, but by insuring it was used in a manner they deemed respectful. I disagree with your comment "all the liberals are weak shit." Liberals are not "weak". Thanks for the assist, Weedy.
rcade. The Seminoles could buy FSU and make it a "graduation" present. Maybe there's still some of yerfatma's straw left for you to grasp.

posted by sandskater at 02:13 AM on December 11

It's interesting that some of the people claiming the Fighting Sioux complaints are political correctness also believe that "Redskins" is an unacceptable mascot. How do you think Redskins became unacceptable to many sports fans, if not for people making it an issue?

Believe it or not, there are still public schools in the U.S. using Redskins as their mascot, according to AISTM. Does the anti-PC crowd think it's acceptable for these schools to use a patently offensive racial slur as their mascot? What message does that send to American Indian children in those districts?

posted by rcade at 08:26 AM on December 11

Oh, wait, you have 100+ years of no actual teaching experience. I'll take my 37 years of actually doing the job . . .

Is there some relevancy here that I'm missing?

posted by yerfatma at 10:18 AM on December 11

Given these threads are rarely productive, I'll make an attempt to be honest and open about my take. Given these threads are a constant re-hash of the same positions with new people, here's a roadmap to how I see them:

1. Post is made about Native Americans not caring for a team name.
2. Someone jumps in to declare this the product of "PC police" or similar. Thread falls apart right here as it create such a rift no one listens to anyone else.
3. We get the recurring Insensitive Guys . . .

Insensitive Guy #1: "Hey, what about the Vikings? Why don't the Swedes complain about that?"
Insensitive Guy #2: "High five, brah! Even better, what about the . . . 'Fighting Irish'?! LOL101!!"

No we're really off the rails. The thread began with a post about a minority group that's been historically oppressed in this country to this very day, people who sit on government-assigned land, many with no hope of a job. They suffer from unemployment, alcoholism and various other Very Bad Things at rates way beyond the norm for the rest of the US population.

So you've got that on one hand. And then someone compares it to Notre Dame. Irish-Americans. An ethnic group that was oppressed in this country, but given they were white and it was never explicitly legal to kill them, were able to pull themselves up to such a point they took over much of the workings of the country (specifically politics and the public service sectors). "Redskins" is a demeaning insult turned into a team name by people who aren't members of that ethnic group. "Fighting Irish" is the early 20th-century equivalent of "YOU GOT SOMETHING TO SAY, ASSHOLE? I DIDN'T THINK SO. YEAH, YOU BETTER WALK AWAY" applied by members of that famously pugilistic ethnic group to their "own" team. It's not an equivalence and anyone suggesting so is either impressively dim-witted or being purposefully obtuse.

4. The next character in our threadroom drama is The Professor. He takes the Insensitive Guys by the hand and leads them to a smarter place: history. The Professor pulls out his showstopper, the Florida Seminoles, a tribe everyone know of, but not so well that people aren't fuzzy on the details. So you can bend, hammer and shape the Seminoles into anything you like. Use them as a synecdoche for all Native Americans to show how these poor, misguided protesters could find a better solution to this problem by simply coming to grips with the fact some white people like to use a term they find offensive to refer to a bunch of adults playing a game.

Now we've got a hundred car derailment because this nonsense is exactly the shit people are upset about: acting as though one fairly unique Native American tribe can stand in for various different Native American tribes is insulting. Unless you all feel that it would be ok to assume I can get a decent measure of your opinions by driving down to Cambridge and stopping at a coffee shop near Harvard and asking the nearest latte sipper what his opinions on the infield fly rule are.

The real speed bump in these threads for me is what I perceive as willful obtuseness, an absolute refusal to walk a mile in the other person's (authentic!) moccasins. This makes me unconscionably rude, but whenever your feelings get hurt by something I say in these threads, remind yourself that my insult is the result of my high opinion of you all, that in spite of your poor spelling, atrocious grammar and fuzzy logic, I assume none of you are so stupid as to honestly not see the other side of the Buffalo Nickel.

posted by yerfatma at 11:48 AM on December 11

The only holdouts keeping their names with a tribe's approval are the Florida State Seminoles, Utah Utes, Central Michigan Chippewas and the Catawba Indians.

I think the "tribe approval" exception is utter nonsense and simply leaves a glaring loophole those in favor of Native American mascots can use to fight this. Typical NCAA mealy mouthed BS.

posted by cjets at 04:50 PM on December 11

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.