Sorry, I should have been clearer. By borderline I did mean that it should be avoided.
Also sorry to see all the posters here trying to tell you how you should feel.
Its just a team name, it can be changed.
Do you support the ban of logos referring to natives in sports clubs?
- Thread starter Zaibetter
- Start date
Sorry, I should have been clearer. By borderline I did mean that it should be avoided.
Also sorry to see all the posters here trying to tell you how you should feel.
Its just a team name, it can be changed.
I'm not sure exactly what the issue is but I think it stems from the term "Indian". Natives don't consider themselves "Indian". That was a term given to them by Columbus who mistakenly thought he had landed in India.
Would re-naming the teams with "Native" suffice?
Then again, if there were problems with Tomahawk chop with the Atlanta Braves, then I don't know. One has to wonder about the level of liberal White people in all of this. They're good at inventing problems.
Would re-naming the teams with "Native" suffice?
Then again, if there were problems with Tomahawk chop with the Atlanta Braves, then I don't know. One has to wonder about the level of liberal White people in all of this. They're good at inventing problems.
1)The timing has no bearing on the merits of the argument.
2)The timing does give the move more exposure because of the playoffs. Nothing wrong with timing things to make it more effective.
3)As well, this issue/topic is nothing new. It has been brought up many times before.
Aside from these 3 points, good post.
Not saying I agree with a ban. Just pointing out the deficiencies of this particular line of reasoning.
it is false to say these protests only happen at playoffs.
people have been protesting redskins since the 70s. while some protests did occur during playoffs others did not.
cleveland is a small market so it is no surprise we dont hear much if at all anything here i toronto.
the spirit in which a name is chose is irrelevant. if i thought a basketball team should be called the darkies to pay tribute to all the grest black players of the past ut would still be wrong.
indian was a name incorrectly given to people of north america. from their perspective it is probably offensive to be referred to by thr name given to them by their oppressor.
as for a regular season blue jays cleveland game would not be watched by many people. you cant blame protrsters for picking high profile events i mean if you are doing something for free wouldnt you want your tine to be spent in the most effective way? during playoffs brigs national attentioncto the issue.
people have been protesting redskins since the 70s. while some protests did occur during playoffs others did not.
cleveland is a small market so it is no surprise we dont hear much if at all anything here i toronto.
the spirit in which a name is chose is irrelevant. if i thought a basketball team should be called the darkies to pay tribute to all the grest black players of the past ut would still be wrong.
indian was a name incorrectly given to people of north america. from their perspective it is probably offensive to be referred to by thr name given to them by their oppressor.
as for a regular season blue jays cleveland game would not be watched by many people. you cant blame protrsters for picking high profile events i mean if you are doing something for free wouldnt you want your tine to be spent in the most effective way? during playoffs brigs national attentioncto the issue.
imagine old black face movies with cannibals danci g around a pot.
or how about a bunch of asian dancing around bowing and say ah so.
mimicking a native stereo type is just wrong. especially since the chant is not even native words.
if there was a team paying tribute to asians and they chanted ching chang chong would thst be okay?
Matters little what you're ok with, Black Hawk is the name of an Indian chief. If natives find the name and image disrespectful you should learn to respect that.
Same thing with the name Braves their symbol is the tomahawk and at the games they do the chop while chanting. Names have changed over the years, let them change to exclude native themes.
as you pointed out it is just a name.
so why not change it. the redskins protest goes back to the 70s thats 30 plus years ago.
so it is not like this problem is new.
according ro wikipedia the cleveland issue has also bee since the 70s
Because in this overly politically correct world, someone will always take exception. Case in point, someone commented in another thread, that animals should also not be used. (E.g. Dolphins, Blue Jays, Sharks etc.) I'm surprised someone hasn't filed an injunction against the "Redblacks"!
Let's not be so petty, and get back to playing the game rather than fabricating issues that are completely unrelated.
Here is a link http://www.sportslogos.net/logos/list_by_team/57
By the way related to an other question
Louis Sockalexis
The saddest of these was the University of North Dakota's "Fighting Sioux" the image was respectful, about 3/4 of the State's Sioux supported the name and still the NCAA forced UND to give up the name and logo.
I think this is an other liberal bullshit. I think teams use that logo because it show respect for the Indians. The logo is a symbol for their power, their strength and their brave heart. I totally understand why these teams use an indian head.
This world is crazy.
The black hole is offensive too:
This world is crazy.
The black hole is offensive too:
What about a "white lie"???
I'm offended by that too. It implies all white people all liars
I'm not arguing against the concept of banning.
I just wanted to know what the speerchucker move looked like.
It all seems like a deceiving plan to rid any and all native symbolism. Most of the land was named by the natives it shouldn't come to a surprise or insult if something that is tied to the people the city's belong to. Political correctness is deceiving and self destructive, next they are going to call for all cities with native names to be changed sounding more american and less "offensive". Abolishing everything that is native just sounds like the nail in the coffin of that heritage.
The saddest of these was the University of North Dakota's "Fighting Sioux" the image was respectful, about 3/4 of the State's Sioux supported the name and still the NCAA forced UND to give up the name and logo.
But Camilla, can we all not agree that Indians logo was never meant to be insulting or mocking of Indian people?? Why would a pro baseball team try to make a mockery of their franchise, it makes no sense.
It would be the same as adopting the Mad cartoon logo
Exactly! If the argument has merit it should be raised at the earliest opportunity, not only when the greatest number of people are watching.
Thanks for supporting my point!
Cheers
So you say it is how we receive it that is important.
Then you ask why white perception is more important.
You are arguing against yourself in the same post.
I really don't understand how something could be considered "racist",...when there NEVER was any racist intention.
Yes calling native Canadians, Indians was incorrect,...but there was NEVER any intention of insulting.
The term Canuck was though to be originally derogatory, but people got over it,...and now people are proud to be called a Canuck.
Nobody is telling anybody how to feel, but don't call me a racist if I mistakenly call some one a North American Indian, there is no racist or insulting intent.
Latino's call "whites" Gringo's,...is that racist,...I don't personally give a shit.
FAST
PS: I probably burnt a bridge here,...but that wasn't intentional either,...:apologetic:
