I guess this kicked over a "cracker" barrel.
As many of you probably are aware, since 2002, a Colorado college has called its intramural basketball team the "Fightin' Whites," a protest against a local high school that used the name "Fightin' Reds." The protest featured kitschy t-shirts with a 50's era clip art white man. Initially it was thought this would inspire introspection by offended Caucasians, but mostly the move had the opposite effect: Many of those who e-mailed asking about the Fighting Whites T-shirts are whites who think it is about time they had a team named after them, team member Jeff VanIwarden said. "It's obvious some of the people are taking it the way it's not supposed to be taken," VanIwarden said. "They think it's cool and we're honoring the white man." (snip) VanIwarden said the team will try to dissuade people from making light of the shirt by adding a message on the back condemning racial stereotypes. The argument is made that the selection of Indian mascots is racist and demeaning. Every time this subject arises, there are people who inevitably ask, "What if there was a team named the Coloreds, or the Jews, or something?" I think it's notable that there are no such nicknames/mascots now referring to black people (like yours truly) or Jews (with the exception of Yeshiva University's Maccabees), but there are multitudes that are/were named after Native North American tribes as well as the remainders of the Grecian Empire (Trojans, Spartans), Scandinavians (Vikings, Flying Dutchmen), Germanic tribes (Vandals), and British Isle folk (Celtics, Celts, Scots, and, of course, the Fighting Irish). Now, THINK, people: what do all of those nicknames have in common? They appear to be have been chosen not to demean the namesakes, but to honor those peoples' warriors and to inspire their fighting spirit in the athletes that wear the school's name. I submit that if blacks and Jewish people were admired throughout our nation's history rather than feared and/or demeaned, there would be sports teams named after them. Here's a list of the nicknames and mascots of American colleges and universities. Mark my words: if the Indian nicknames go away, the eventual next target will be the 27 schools that cheer for the "Crusaders."
grum@work: Google is your friend. Google is your friend as long as you aren't Chinese.
Again, this whole honor those peoples' warriors excuse is always used by everyone except the people supposedly being honored. Notable exceptions are tribes that have close contacts with or many children in a school, and that school has a level of approval from that tribe. Any Native American will tell you that the term redskin, brave, or an insignia like the Cleveland Indians is as derogatory to us as nigger or little black sambo is to blacks. Why one is OK while the other is not remains an amazing mystery. Perhaps you don't take us seriously because we do not riot and burn neighborhoods down, or have an anti-defamation league backed by the media.
Now, THINK, people: what do all of those nicknames have in common? They appear to be have been chosen not to demean the namesakes, but to honor those peoples' warriors and to inspire their fighting spirit in the athletes that wear the school's name. Thank you great father, it all makes sense now. It really is the greatest of honors to for Indians to be a mascot for the Illini, incorrectly based on Sioux Indians, played by a white kid. How very stupid of me.
chris2sy: Thank you great father, it all makes sense now. It really is the greatest of honors to for Indians to be a mascot for the Illini, incorrectly based on Sioux Indians, played by a white kid. How very stupid of me. I said, "THINK," not "spit out yet another sarcastic knee-jerk response."
On January 27th, in the Devil Rays thread, you just said: "I can almost hear some of you scoff at that, so let me ask you: is there a team name that you wouldn't just swallow and regurgitate? Would you stand up and cheer for the Chicago Cannibals? Would you wear the Starter jacket of the Green Bay Gestapo? Would you put a Seattle Serial Rapists bumper sticker on your car? Or buy a replica jersey of the Tennessee Terrorists? Would you be OK with your son tacking up a Pittsburgh Pederasts pennant in his room? Or hear him singing the fight song of the Nashville Nazis? Would you bring the family to the watch the Indianapolis Incest? Hopefully, you said "Of course not!" to at least one of the above. If you did, now you understand how I feel, because I believe demons and the Devil are worse than all of the above." And I'm the one not thinking?
irunfromclones: Again, this whole honor those peoples' warriors excuse is always used by everyone except the people supposedly being honored. Which brings me back to the quote from one of the guys behind U. Northern Colorado's "Fightin' Whites": "It's obvious some of the people are taking [the "Fightin' Whites" mascot] the way it's not supposed to be taken," VanIwarden said. "They think it's cool and we're honoring the white man." If VanIwarden wasn't so blinded by his zeal, he would realize he had just stumbled upon the reason people are so unyielding on this issue: They don't have the intention or belief that they are being discriminatory or bigoted, they think that it is an honor. As for your statement that "Any Native American will tell you that the term redskin, brave, or an insignia like the Cleveland Indians is as derogatory to us as nigger or little black sambo is to blacks," I personally know an Indian that doesn't care a whit. I suppose his opinion doesn't count because he's not a "real" Indian according to some people in the same way that in the eyes of jerks like Harry Belafonte, Colin Powell is not a "real" black man.
Hey math66 that's uncalled for
chris2sy: And I'm the one not thinking? That's right, Chris. Because if you were, you would have figured out that when discussing teams named "Devils" and "Demons," I was talking about how I could not bring myself to wear apparel which honors the intrinsically evil. Never did I suggest that the Tampa Bay ownership be pressured to change the name from "Devil Rays." I notice both you and irunfromclones left unaddressed my opinion on the reason there why there are countless Indian-themed mascots, but not black or Jewish.
Hey Smithee, thanks for the list of schools. I can't wait for the International Society of Trolls to come out and file a lawsuit against Trinity Christian! Maybe the Vatican will rail against the use of the names Angels, Cardinals, Friars, Deacons, Preachers, Prophets and Saints. Damn, I can't even call anyone a Wahoo anymore. Oh well, Bush is on. Gotta go listen to what this Devil-Demon is up to.
I've tried sarcasm, but some of you guys just don't get it, do you? It's as simple as asking the group of people in question "Are you offended by this term/depiction?" If the answer is yes, or even mostly yes, then no amount of justification along the lines of "Well, personally I don't find it offensive to call you that" or "Don't be so sensitive" or "It's our history/tradition" will work. It's about respect for other human beings.
Nice list. Here are some matchups I'd like to see: Blueboys vs. Nads Rainbow Warriors vs. Flying Queens Black Squirrels vs. White Mules Mastadons vs. Camels Flames vs. Wonderboys Flying Dutchmen vs. Fighting Irish Minutemen vs. Minutewomen Little Giants vs. Jumbos Johnnies vs. Little Johns Wasps vs. wait I'm a WASP Jennies vs. Jimmies Get rid of Chief Wahoo, Redskins etc. If you want to get rid of honoring the names of tribes, be prepared to rename hundreds of cities. Ottawa, Cheyenne, Sioux City, on and on. What happened to "No offense," "None taken?"
If you want to get rid of honoring the names of tribes, be prepared to rename hundreds of cities. If you honestly think naming a city (location, town, area, whatever) after the tribe that lived there is as equally offensive as having a white kid dressed up in fake Indian garb and prancing around the field, then I really don't think there is much room for discussion on this topic. [Regarding Fighting Whiteys] They don't have the intention or belief that they are being discriminatory or bigoted, they think that it is an honor. No, that's simply people looking at satire straight in the face and not comprehending it. Or, understanding the satire and being college-aged frat boys and thinking it would be funny to wear it in an ironic sense. Or, they are have some racial equality issues they need to work through.
i am so sick and tired of this crap everyone tryin to sue somebody, someone being offended by whatever. As a matter of fact i am going to complain tommorow at the local school that not only is their bulldog mascot offensive so is their athletics department, they stink, they wouldn't know what a victory was if it hit them in the face.
It's as simple as asking the group of people in question "Are you offended by this term/depiction?" If the answer is yes, or even mostly yes, then no amount of justification along the lines of "Well, personally I don't find it offensive to call you that" or "Don't be so sensitive" or "It's our history/tradition" will work. I can't argue against someone being offended by something no matter how innocent(or bigoted) it is, but how many people have to be offended by a team name before it should be changed? Should we change a name because 10 people found it offensive? 1000 people? Where do you draw the line because there's always going to be some people who are offended by just about anything. I'm not saying it's wrong to feel offended but at what point should a university or the NCAA act on it? I have such mixed feelings on this. Personally I can't see the problem with having a team named after your nationality(go Flying Dutchmen/Vandals) but that's just my opinion and if someone is offended thats their right.
Now, THINK, people: what do all of those nicknames have in common? They appear to be have been chosen not to demean the namesakes, but to honor those peoples' warriors and to inspire their fighting spirit in the athletes that wear the school's name. No matter how many times you tell other people to THINK, people, your argument will still be extremely weak. Chief Wahoo, the term Redskins and the caricature Chief Illiniwek were not chosen to honor anything. They were picked because it seemed harmless at the time -- they didn't consider the implications of depicting Native Americans in demeaning fashion, and now some sports fans think their traditions are more important than the traditions of these people. It's inexcusable. The NCAA has the right to decide where it will hold its own postseason tournaments. If it wants to exclude schools with racially inappropriate mascots, how is this not the organization's right? Illinois suing the NCAA to demand different tournament rules is like me suing all the kids who never invited me to their birthday parties.
How is Illinois' mascot any more or less offensive than Florida State's? The message coming from the NCAA is now completely convoluted. "We find the use of Indian mascots offensive unless the offended tribe is not, in fact, offended or is able to make money off of the deal."
This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. No where have I heard the Native American tribes all over the country complaining about the colleges. I would think that it would be an honor that an institution would want to use your heritage to personify their school. (As with Florida State, the Seminole Indians are proud for them to use their names.) If a tribe complains then the NCAA should take a look at THAT INDIVIDUAL SCHOOL, but a blanket ban is stupidest thing in the world. Where does it end??? Why doesn't NOtre Dame have to change their name to keep from offending Irish descendants OR what about Duke/Arizona State -- the "Devil" could offend the Christians, let's make them change their names. THis is absurd.
No where have I heard the Native American tribes all over the country complaining about the colleges. Really? "Members of the Spirit Lake Sioux tribe recently presented a resolution demanding modification of the University of North Dakota's Fighting Sioux logo. Tribal members said the school's Indian-head emblem is "dishonorable and an affront to the dignity and well being" of its community. Their formal opposition was issued on the same day North Dakota appealed to the NCAA to remove them from the list of schools with Native American mascots that have been deemed hostile and offensive." (from here) (In the same article, it's pointed out that the mascot representation of the Seminoles is inaccurate as well. The Seminoles never wore war paint, and probably didn't ride appaloosa horses.) How about an official policy statement from the National Congress of American Indians? Just because you haven't been paying attention or don't know anything about it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Hey the Seminoles have a LICENSING AGREEMENT with Florida State. If they are not representing the Seminlole's accurately then they have legal recourse and do not need the NCAA. Have any of you PC folk seen the Chief at a Uof I game? Who gave the NCAA the authority to issue PC utimatums to public universities? The U of I is governed by trustees elected by the citizens of Illinois. From a legal viewpoint the U of I is the State of Illinois. Can the NCAA tell the State of Illinois how to run the state's business?
How is Illinois' mascot any more or less offensive than Florida State's? Could everyone who is going to jump in with their smoking gun in these Native American mascot threads do some reading/ research first? The Seminole Nation has made an explicit agreement with FSU to allow use of the mascot.
Hey the Seminoles have a LICENSING AGREEMENT with Florida State. So, it's not really the FSU honouring the Seminoles, it's more of FSU paying the Seminoles to use them as mascots (albeit, incorrectly). That would probably be a point AGAINST using native logos/mascots. Who gave the NCAA the authority to issue PC utimatums to public universities? Actually, the universities gave the NCAA authority over almost all matters pertaining to sports. This is a sports logo/mascot, so I'm guessing they've got some authority on the matter.
If you honestly think naming a city (location, town, area, whatever) after the tribe that lived there is as equally offensive as having a white kid dressed up in fake Indian garb No, that's not what I said. I said get rid of the offensive, (Redskins), the stereotypical (Chief Wahoo) etc. It seems to me that political correctness seems to snowball. If you go to the Cherokee Ntl. Forest, for a few bucks you can have your picture taken with a real Indian dressed up in fake Indian garb. To me that's more disturbing than some school mascot. Note to self: To avoid legal problems, invite Rcade to all B-day parties.
If you go to the Cherokee Ntl. Forest, for a few bucks you can have your picture taken with a real Indian dressed up in fake Indian garb. To me that's more disturbing than some school mascot. If it's a real native American, how is it "fake" garb? But if it's not a real native American, then I wholeheartedly agree. Nevertheless, you have to start somewhere (see previous comments about not ignoring smaller issues because bigger issues are unresolved).
Is it a real poncho, like a Mexican poncho or is it a Sears poncho?
If it's a real native American, how is it "fake" garb? It was a true native American, this is him , guess by default his garb has to be real. The scene however, is surreal, note the bitchin' camaro as part of the ambiance. I was left with the impression that the people who paid for a picture, thought he actually slept in the teepee.
tron7: I can't argue against someone being offended by something no matter how innocent (or bigoted) it is, but how many people have to be offended by a team name before it should be changed? Should we change a name because 10 people found it offensive? 1000 people? Where do you draw the line because there's always going to be some people who are offended by just about anything. I'm not saying it's wrong to feel offended but at what point should a university or the NCAA act on it? Exactly. I would like to see a group of Irish people hold a protest of Notre Dame's depiction of a jig-dancing leprechaun with a violent streak in front of NCAA HQ just to see the double-standard exposed.
grum@work: (In the same article, it's pointed out that the mascot representation of the Seminoles is inaccurate as well. The Seminoles never wore war paint, and probably didn't ride appaloosa horses.) Tell me why you think the Seminoles don't give a rip about such inaccuracies.
grum@work: (In the same article, it's pointed out that the mascot representation of the Seminoles is inaccurate as well. The Seminoles never wore war paint, and probably didn't ride appaloosa horses.) Tell me why you think the Seminoles don't give a rip about such inaccuracies. Huh? I'm not sure what you are asking me about here. I don't know if the existing Seminoles care about the inaccuracies. Maybe they do and FSU doesn't want to change them. Maybe they don't care because they want the licensing money instead. Or maybe they've only licensed the name, and have no control over the mascot/logo. I just wanted to point out the supposed "honouring" of the Seminoles wasn't very accurate to begin with.
Should we change a name because 10 people found it offensive? 1000 people? Where do you draw the line because there's always going to be some people who are offended by just about anything Agreed it's a judgement call, but ultimately it's a lot easier to change offensive nicknames for sporting teams than to change people's minds. i am so sick and tired of this crap everyone tryin to sue somebody, someone being offended by whatever. As a matter of fact i am going to complain tommorow at the local school that not only is their bulldog mascot offensive so is their athletics department, they stink, they wouldn't know what a victory was if it hit them in the face Logical fallacy alert!
I notice both you and irunfromclones left unaddressed my opinion on the reason there why there are countless Indian-themed mascots, but not black or Jewish.: I submit that if blacks and Jewish people were admired throughout our nation's history rather than feared and/or demeaned, there would be sports teams named after them. Are we talking about the same country here? Native Americans were feared as savages and demeaned as uncivilized from the very first contact with whites. How many "black or jewish "massacres" of white people have there been written about? The most you can say is that unlike the others, the native americans fought back with great skill and determination. If you honored that by calling a team the Washington Choctaw, or the Atlanta Cherokee, then we would have no problem with that.
If you honored that by calling a team the Washington Choctaw, or the Atlanta Cherokee, then we would have no problem with that. Are you native american or are you just speaking for them?
