*Trigger Warning* Per the New York Times...
- Thread starter 57stratdawg
- Start date
I don't have the source right off, but indigenous people/American Indians/Native Americans preferred the term "American Indian" over "Native American", though it was split like 55/45. Per the Smithsonian, "In the United States, Native American has been widely used but is falling out of favor with some groups, and the terms American Indian or Indigenous American are preferred by many Native people." My understanding was that the term Native American came out of some wokeness in the 60s. "American Indian and Native Alaskans" it's what's used in most of the academic papers I work with
The logical answer if to change it to the Barves.
Just eliminate the hatchet. You gotta be brave to drive through Atlanta to go to a game
Ok, thank you for citing this as it helped me go back and see that pain specifies 'live mascot'.
PETA couldnt care less that we are the Bulldogs and we could continue being Bulldogs. We would just no longer have a live mascot. That is quite different from the initial point of this thread since we would stay the Bulldogs.
My view- I couldnt care less if we have an actual bulldog. If most of our fanbase wants the dog, then cool. If most of our fanbase thinks it is a bad idea and we shouldnt have a live mascot, then cool. I wouldnt think twice either way. Part of that is because its a dog that is already domesticated. If it were a Bengal tiger or a damn bear is on campus and never displayed at games since thats quite frightening to the animal, is it the best idea to have said animal? Maybe if I were an alum of LSU or Baylor, I would find it more of an issue.
Memphis just announced they would no longer have a live tiger after the most recent one died. Baylor has a couple of bears from somewhere out West. LSU has a tiger. etc etc.
Is Memphis a 'cu-ck' for choosing to no longer force a tiger to sit thru crowd noise in a cage behind glass thru at football games?
I have no idea why Memphis chose to no longer keep a live tiger. My guess is they realized its a lot of damn work for very little payoff, but perhaps it was because they suddenly thought its dumb to force a caged wild animal to sit and watch bad football.
Last edited:
This seems to have quickly turned into a PETA bashing thread.
Ill say it clearly- In general, I dont give a 17 about PETA. I dont follow what they happen to think on any given topic and I dont financially support them.
From what I have read, thru them being in the news time to time, is that they do not want to completely eliminate the owner-pet relationship.
https://www.peta.org/issues/animal-companion-issues/companion-animals-faq/
First FAQ
But the world that we live in is far from perfect, and domestic cats and dogs are not capable of surviving on their own, so it is our responsibility to take the best possible care of these animals. Please be assured that PETA does not oppose kind people who share their lives and homes with animal companions whom they love, treat well, and care for properly.
I used to do travelling work and was sent for an assignment in the Navajo nation (Western NM, Arizona, southern Utah). A large majority of them were Redskin, and Cleveland indian fans...probably 70-80%. I thought it was a bit insensitive and dumb for the teams to be 'redskins' and 'indians' but they didn't seem to care, and in fact really love it. If it was up to me I would say poll the native populations. If they don't seem to have a problem with it then keep it. I don't, however, want a bunch of Becky's and Karen's feel they need to speak on their behalf.
I don't really care either way about the "offensiveness" of the term itself as some kind of slur... Not my fight and if it offends others in that way I will let them make the argument. I just think it's stupid that someone along the way didn't make the correction.
It reminds of a girl I worked with years ago. She was an engineer from Oregon and moved to Texas to work for my team and we had a guy in our ops department named Rafael. I made some comment about Rafael being Mexican and could help her learn what all the best dishes at the Mexican restaurants would be... She turned me in to HR. It was a big to do. She said I should have referred to him as latino or hispanic.
In the weeks of HR crap that followed I finally won the day with the facts. I called Rafael Mexican because he is Mexican... Born in Mexico, proud of Mexico, has a tattoo of the flag of Mexico, and was in the US working with a green card. My argument was simple and backed up by Rafael...
Canadian, American, English, and every other caucasian implied nationality is never considered racist or insensitive as a term, but if you use Mexican, Japanese, or Chinese to accurately identify what nationality a person is you raise eyebrows. Identifying someone's nationality is not intolerant in any fashion.... Intolerance is the idea that someone would be offended by their own nationality.
We all had to do some extra training because of the ordeal and Little Miss Muffet shortly transferred her *** back to Oregon. Overall it was a great exercise in the inferred racism of the politically correct police that have never actually spent time around people who don't look like them. The fact someone thinks the term Mexican is offensive is obtuse in of itself.....
Now if Rafael had been Puerto Rican and I called him a Mexican I would have been canned and Rafael may have kicked my ***. It would have been ignorance on my part.
From my take, the Cleveland Indians should keep the name and change the logo... For accuracy sakes. Here's an Indian logo.
View attachment 18941
As an aside, I understand that it would be impossible to use nearly any caricature as logo/mascot these days, but if that last one offended you that says a lot about you. It's no more offensive than this....
View attachment 18942
Also, teams use indian, sorry, native american mascots in a historically based caracature fashion as is done with so many other mascots like vikings, knights, 49ers, cowboys, fighting irish, quakers, minutemen, demon deacons, cavaliers, boilermakers, sooners, miners, and so many more. Why are native americans the only group offended? Nobody is suggesting that modern native americans are like that any more than any of these other groups are. If anything it is complementary of some aspect of their character. After all, NOBODY ever chooses a mascot to make fun of them.
Not sure why you're being downvoted for this statement. We had a doctor from India in our clinic ask us a could years when Cleveland was in the post-season, why America had a baseball team called 'indians'. It was incredibly awkward verbalize it to someone from India.
The native Americans aren’t offended. People with too much time on their hands and nothing in life to be proud of are offended by this.
The braves should be the bandits after what happened on and after November 3rd.
Oh the irony of a trigger warning thread
On changing a name to remain overtly, futilely PC.
How about the Atlanta armed robbers. Feels like it fits the town.
On changing a name to remain overtly, futilely PC.
How about the Atlanta armed robbers. Feels like it fits the town.
Last edited:
My wife is an American Indian. I just told her about this thread and I asked her if she's offended if I call her "Indian". She said "no", because as she said...….she's an Indian. Also, my guy friends refer to her as Pocohontas. She digs it.
I cant tell you why team names for one group is deemed offensive and team names for other groups arent deemed offensive.
Perhaps its because Native Americans were continually promised peace and met with violence. Promised land and met with forced moving. etc etc.
Conversely, I am not aware of Boilermakers having a long established history of oppression and mistreatment by those in power.
I can tell you that 'Sooner' and 'Boomer Sooner' are definitely controversial terms and there have been multiple pushes for those terms to be removed at OU.
Boomers were people who supported opening the lands for expansion(Native American lands) and Sooners were people that straight up just stole land and claimed it as their own before the expansion was officially opened.
A massive university named themselves after land thieves, so yeah its been a topic of discussion for a number of years.
A large bike race held in Stillwater each year was renamed last year for this very reason- it was called 'Land Run 100' for years and is now called 'Midsouth' since 'Land Run' isnt exactly something to proudly name a race.
I really cant say why some groups are offended while other arent though. My honest guess is that if the mascot represents an historically oppressed group that is still marginalized, then the mascot may be controversial. If the mascot represents a group that is historical to the area but not well known as an oppressed group, then the mascot wont be controversial(Vikings, Steelers, Boilermakers, etc).
Well in many cases these mascots are pretty generalized descriptors like braves, warriors, or chiefs that I cannot understand why they are offensive. You mention past oppression as a reason why some native americans are offended. That sounds to me more like being motivated by retaliation more than offense. Especially since, as I said, a mascot is not meant to be derogatory but complimentary. You confirm that yourself with your sooner story. The term sooners is not offending actual sooners but offending some oklahomans by identifying them with sooners or glorifying sooners whom they consider to be bad people.
Last edited:
I don’t really care if Cleveland changes the name from Indians or not, but there is a huge difference in the caricature of the logo the Indians used to have and how the Vikings are displayed for Minnesota. One is meant to look as goofy as possible.
I am just spitballing as to why some may be offended by certain mascots and team names. Its more than most on here do, which is dig in their heels and refuse to even consider a different viewpoint.
Changing the Indians name doesnt seem to affect anyone here, yet so many are up in arms over it. I havent seen anyone admit they are a fan of the team, nobody has said they live in Cleveland even.
They are just guesses and I have repeatedly said I am no expert and am just listing possible reasons that I could see being arguments.
I disagree that mascots are complimentary. They can be complimentary, but they can also be goofy as 17. They can absolutely be caricatures instead of honest representations.
Changing mascots from Native American terms/names has been going on for the last 50 or more years. When Philly's Warriors moved to California back 5 decades ago, they dropped the Native American mascot and picked the Golden State Bridge instead.
This **** isnt some new issue. How is it still a big deal after 50 years of seeing it change at the high school, college, and pro levels? St Johns, Stanford, Washington Football, U of Illinois(kinda), Cornell, and a **** ton of programs/teams across the country have all changed.
These mascots dont look like compliments to me, but maybe its just my skewed perspective.***
View attachment 18944
View attachment 18945
View attachment 18946
Nobody is asking the one question that matters....
What impact does this have on the Major League movies?
Will they go back and revise the dialogue and uniforms, like when Spielberg changed the machine guns in E.T. into walkie talkies? Because that **** will not stand...
What impact does this have on the Major League movies?
Will they go back and revise the dialogue and uniforms, like when Spielberg changed the machine guns in E.T. into walkie talkies? Because that **** will not stand...
I'll bet the American Indians would be all for keeping the name if the team owner would give them a cut of the "Indian " merchandise sales.
Latest
-
01
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Bye Week Checklist: What Needs Work?
-
02
Maroon and White Football
Mississippi State Bye Week Watchlist
-
03
Maroon and White
Mississippi State Basketball tipoff times finalized
-
04
Rivals Basketball Recruiting
Mississippi State, Maryland & UCF talking visits with 4-star forward K'Nard Callendar
-
05
Maroon and White Football
"Fine line": Mississippi State HC Jeff Lebby speaks on managing health and preparation