Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can see where both sides are coming from. I don't see many mascots left in this country that are offensive except to a very small segment of the PC crowd. But, there are a few. I for one wish that the Washington Redskins would change their name. No, it is not a huge issue, but nevertheless I do think that is one that many would agree is at least somewhat offensive.
My problem with this whole issue comes from who instigates the uproar. An example would be the University of Utah Utes. Until 1972 they used a dual nickname of Redskins and Utes. The Redskin name was dropped and with permission from the Ute Tribal Council they became known as only the Utes.
In 1996 the university added a mascot, again with permission from the Ute Tribal Council, of a red tailed hawk a bird indigenous to the state of Utah.
End of story and all lived happily ever after.....except that there are still those from the ultra PC group that is comprised of mainly white liberal elitists that are still on a guilt trip that don't think this is good enough. So they still push for what they feel is a less offensive nickname.
Sometimes these do-gooders and their agendas cause nothing but tension and conflict where non existed before.
I agree with you. Most of the protest by Native American organizations I believe is aimed at some professional sport teams. It may have quite a bit to do with the fact that it's more of a marketing issue.
I don't think the issue should become a "Michael Stivic pissing contest", or a platform for a "look what I've done" spot-light by the PC crowd, which as you have stated stirs up trouble where it may not exist.
Also, I wouldn't rule out the possibility that it may of been one or two teams that caused considerable amount of offense by their nickname and mascot, which boiled over into protest on other teams that may not seem quite as offensive, and may not of stirred up as much protest. In other words, if it hadn't been for teams like the Washington Redskins, maybe the Kansas City Chiefs who don't use a caricature of a character would not of been protested, at least not to the degree it probably is by it's inclusion with the Redskins and Cleveland Indians.
This whole subject is foolish. Consider the fact that the Minnesota Vikings have fans who come to games in all sorts of Viking attire. Minnesota has many descendents of Scandinavian countries and it just seemed to fit. Isn't it interesting that this situation is exactly the same as teams with Indian names but it's not considered offensive? This is political correctness that's gone way too far. There are real problems that Native Americans have to deal with in our nation, this just doesn't happen to be one of them.
I think CelticLady1's and Colometer's balanced approach should be well noted. While I respect your opinion, My question I guess to you and some other's would be, who are you complaining about? White liberal PC activists, or the actual Native Americans themselves that protest the usage?
And, if the subject is foolish, given that a team owner will gladly change their mascot at the drop of a hat once t-shirt sales go down, isn't it somewhat foolish to insist on hanging on to certain nicknames, especially "Redskins"? As far as most team owners are concerned, time honored tradition means nothing.
Isn't the purpose in naming a team, to give the impression that the team is strong, brave, fearless, winners, warriors? Perhaps even implying ferocity & in no way will this A-1 team back down. If so, then naming a team after anyone is a complement, yeah?
Errol Flynn was portrayed as a verile swashbuckler in the movies, John Wayne a cowboy who couldn't loose, etc. Would it be an insult to their heirs, heritage, religion or place of birth to call a team the Fighting Flynn's or the Winning Wayne's? I don't think so. So, unless I'm missing a very important point & please correct me if I'm wrong as I'm willing to learn, the teams names are used to portray winning qualities & to honor those qualities. Am I off the mark here? No offense to anyone named Mark...
I heard a quote from a Native American spokesman in regards to this very issue who said "What part of 'ouch' do they not understand". In other words, what difference does it make whether it was meant to be a compliment or not.
However, although there's different interpretations of what "Redskin" means, one of them is of an Indian who has been 'scalped'. This in itself has brought offense to the usage of that name. Where's the honor in that?
My question I guess to you and some other's would be, who are you complaining about? White liberal PC activists, or the actual Native Americans themselves that protest the usage?
Both, this is not an issue that a serious minded person would become involved with. The people who oppose these team names are apparently not able to debate any issues that have any substance so they make alot of noise about something that doesn't matter. There's nothing insulting about any of these names. In fact they should be taken as a compliment. As someone else mentioned, a team name is supposed to represent power and strength. No one would call their team The Mice or The Nerds. This argument is ridiculous.
I heard a quote from a Native American spokesman in regards to this very issue who said "What part of 'ouch' do they not understand". In other words, what difference does it make whether it was meant to be a compliment or not.
However, although there's different interpretations of what "Redskin" means, one of them is of an Indian who has been 'scalped'. This in itself has brought offense to the usage of that name. Where's the honor in that?
Greetings Martin -
Good point, thank you. I'd not before known about that particular meaning & yes, the name Redskin itself can definitely be viewed as perjorative when using it to describe someone who is Native American. If scalping is the issue, then pioneers scalped by natives could be referred to as Redskins, too, yes? Or, were they never? Perhaps when people protest, giving the exact names that are bothersome, rather than an across the board protest would be more helpful, because I, for one, am a bit confused on the issue.
For example, is the word Chiefs being protested? I'm not sure it's insulting to call someone or a team chief (it means they are the boss, like a warrior chief, yes?). Again, am I missing something? If instead of Redskins, the name of the team were changed to Cherokees or Mohawks, is that appropriate in your view, or no Native names should be used at all? If the answer is no, then are you protesting all races/cultures' names being used to represent teams, like Vikings & Celtics? Do you feel these names are perjorative & should be protested by those folks whom the teams are named after? I'm trying to understand what exactly you or the Native American community finds insulting, so need to comprehend the issue.
I'm also admittedly confused on the Indians' team. I've heard several Native Americans refer to themselves as Indian, so am I welcome to say that, too, or only if Native American? Why are they referring to themselves this way, if it's not deemed appropriate to use by the rest of their community? I admit I'm missing something, but please tell me what it is. Similarly, my Chinese acupuncturist refers to himself as Oriental. I was told by others to say Asian. I don't honestly know which I'm supposed to be saying & certainly don't want to outright offend anyone.
Re: "In other words, what difference does it make whether it was meant to be a compliment or not."
I'm sorry, but I didn't imply this nor did I overtly state it, so I believe you may have misunderstood or else I wasn't clear. I'm trying to understand what is not complimentary in regard to the OP. I'm willing to consider all sides, so if I'm off the mark here, please tell me so, as I'm willing to be corrected & learn. Please continue with the comments. This is how we learn. I'm listening...
Good point, thank you. I'd not before known about that particular meaning & yes, the name Redskin itself can definitely be viewed as perjorative when using it to describe someone who is Native American. If scalping is the issue, then pioneers scalped by natives could be referred to as Redskins, too, yes? Or, were they never? Perhaps when people protest, giving the exact names that are bothersome, rather than an across the board protest would be more helpful, because I, for one, am a bit confused on the issue.
For example, is the word Chiefs being protested? I'm not sure it's insulting to call someone or a team chief (it means they are the boss, like a warrior chief, yes?). Again, am I missing something? If instead of Redskins, the name of the team were changed to Cherokees or Mohawks, is that appropriate in your view, or no Native names should be used at all? If the answer is no, then are you protesting all races/cultures' names being used to represent teams, like Vikings & Celtics? Do you feel these names are perjorative & should be protested by those folks whom the teams are named after? I'm trying to understand what exactly you or the Native American community finds insulting, so need to comprehend the issue.
I'm also admittedly confused on the Indians' team. I've heard several Native Americans refer to themselves as Indian, so am I welcome to say that, too, or only if Native American? Why are they referring to themselves this way, if it's not deemed appropriate to use by the rest of their community? I admit I'm missing something, but please tell me what it is. Similarly, my Chinese acupuncturist refers to himself as Oriental. I was told by others to say Asian. I don't honestly know which I'm supposed to be saying & certainly don't want to outright offend anyone.
Re: "In other words, what difference does it make whether it was meant to be a compliment or not."
I'm sorry, but I didn't imply this nor did I overtly state it, so I believe you may have misunderstood or else I wasn't clear. I'm trying to understand what is not complimentary in regard to the OP. I'm willing to consider all sides, so if I'm off the mark here, please tell me so, as I'm willing to be corrected & learn. Please continue with the comments. This is how we learn. I'm listening...
I apologize if that last statement came off brash. I basically meant that irregardless of the original intent of why a team chose a name, in the specific case of Native American organizations that have voiced their protest, it doesn't matter what the intent was. The offense is still there.
I'm going to step out on a limb and say that the name "Redskins" was the main team originally that has caused the issue. The name itself has an extremity to it as has been mentioned, and there was also attempted law suits. There may of been others in regards to pro teams, but I'm not sure though. I believe that all pro sports teams that have Native American nicknames have been protested to some degree. The Kansas City Chiefs do not use any type of human caricature like the Washington Redskins, Atlanta Braves, and Cleveland Indians do. They use an arrow head as a symbol. If they had been the only sports team to of utilized an American Native nickname, there is a possibility that there may not of been quite the protest there currently is.
One thing to consider is, from here on in, any new pro sports franchise will not create a mascot related to Native Americans, whether it be the NFL, Arena Football, or professional Lacrosse. One can of course can illuminate the obvious reason for this, but it also is an indication that irregardless of how many claim this whole thing to be silly, apparently it's not silly enough to avoid doing again. Basically, the main reason teams like the Redskins won't change their name is for marketing reasons, not because they have strong convictions that there's nothing wrong with it.
Some of the problems, as I understand it, and makes sense to me, is these depictions of warriors in war paint is not only giving a false rendition of what a Native American really is, in some cases it even affects Native American children. In other words, I've heard tell that these images not only from sports teams, but what's taught in school, affect the cultural understandings of Native American children. So, there's an issue of cultural preservation that's being threatened. So, I don't personally buy the notion that this issue is irrelevant in light of what one would say is more important issues.
What puzzles me is, how do these Native Americans get lumped in the same basket as White Liberal PC activists?
As far as what term to use for Native Americans, to be honest, I do try and use terms I've gathered to be considered the most appropriate. I do this at the risk of sounding like the much dreaded "kumbaya singing liberal". But, I think there's a good practical reason for "Native American" in that, I won't mix them up with someone from India. I personally think that the term "Indian" should of been dismissed once it was found out that Columbus made a snafu.
As far as what term to use for Native Americans, to be honest, I do try and use terms I've gathered to be considered the most appropriate. I do this at the risk of sounding like the much dreaded "kumbaya singing liberal". But, I think there's a good practical reason for "Native American" in that, I won't mix them up with someone from India. I personally think that the term "Indian" should of been dismissed once it was found out that Columbus made a snafu.
Actually, I liked your whole post, but I wanted to specifically address this point you made. I use both "Native American" and "Indian". I spent a number of my growing-up years on the Reservation, in Wyoming, so it's habit, to use the term "Indian". At that time, they generally referred to themselves that way. My granddad used it, and he was half-Seminole. Nowadays, from the things that I have heard and read, it seems both terms are used. Some Indians prefer that term, and some Native Americans prefer that one. Many of them prefer the name they have for their own tribe. I think it just depends on who you're around. Russell Means, a Lakota activist, and movie actor, made a statement that anyone born in the United States, is a Native American. Other NA's/Indians wouldn't agree with that. Like I said, I guess it depends on who you're around.
I apologize if that last statement came off brash. I basically meant that irregardless of the original intent of why a team chose a name, in the specific case of Native American organizations that have voiced their protest, it doesn't matter what the intent was. The offense is still there.
Greetings Martin -
Thank you for your reply. No apology necessary. I didn't find it brash, only that we perhaps misunderstood each other. Good point, I agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Karadagian
I'm going to step out on a limb and say that the name "Redskins" was the main team originally that has caused the issue. The name itself has an extremity to it as has been mentioned, and there was also attempted law suits. There may of been others in regards to pro teams, but I'm not sure though. I believe that all pro sports teams that have Native American nicknames have been protested to some degree. The Kansas City Chiefs do not use any type of human caricature like the Washington Redskins, Atlanta Braves, and Cleveland Indians do. They use an arrow head as a symbol. If they had been the only sports team to of utilized an American Native nickname, there is a possibility that there may not of been quite the protest there currently is.
I don't remember caricatures/mascots of teams as I'm not an avid sports fan, particularly in RE: to football. I'll have to search for them before I post again. But, I can understand completely desiring they not be used, if they're derogatory & insulting in any way.
As an aside, there is a hideously ugly caricature of a leprachaun in Boston near one of the tunnel/highway entrances (sorry, I forget which one) that I've often felt doesn't best represent the Irish, especially since they were referred to & ridiculed as monkeys (you can see this referred to in newspaper clippings at that time) when they first emigrated to America. I don't know exactly what it's supposed to represent (the people themselves or just an ugly little trollish fantasy creature), but if you search through old newspapers at that time, it's quite astounding how the drawings of the Irish are portrayed as 1/2 human & 1/2 monkey, similar to this caricature. They're as offensive & similar to the caricatures of African Americans you see from that same time period, to give you a visual. A non-Irish friend gave me a sweatshirt with this caricature & underneath it the words "Boston Irish" were written, & since in this case it was a representation of the people themselves, I found it embarassing, discarded it & was unsure why she'd given it to me in the first place. Any people being depicted or represented in this way is unnecessary, so I do understand your points & agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Karadagian
One thing to consider is, from here on in, any new pro sports franchise will not create a mascot related to Native Americans, whether it be the NFL, Arena Football, or professional Lacrosse.
Help me understand this. Going back to my previous post, are you saying no images/names at all should be used in reference to Natives? Calling a team the Cherokees or Mohawks is not appropriate? Do the names Vikings/Celtics bother you, as well, as not being respectful to these groups of people?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Karadagian
Some of the problems, as I understand it, and makes sense to me, is these depictions of warriors in war paint is not only giving a false rendition of what a Native American really is, in some cases it even affects Native American children. In other words, I've heard tell that these images not only from sports teams, but what's taught in school, affect the cultural understandings of Native American children. So, there's an issue of cultural preservation that's being threatened.
I understand & wonder in which context this is being taught in school? When pioneers first arrived this was the image they saw, or these images represent the community now? Again, help me understand, please.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Karadagian
So, I don't personally buy the notion that this issue is irrelevant in light of what one would say is more important issues. What puzzles me is, how do these Native Americans get lumped in the same basket as White Liberal PC activists?
I agree with you & hope you're not addressing me as saying/thinking these things, as I'd never invalidate another's opinion nor use name calling to dismiss others. It serves no purpose & is not in my vernacular. Points can always be made with respect, without name calling, as we've both done here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Karadagian
Anyway, I appreciate your being open.
The feeling's mutual, thank you. I enjoy dialogue. Looking forward to your next post... VV
Actually, I liked your whole post, but I wanted to specifically address this point you made. I use both "Native American" and "Indian". I spent a number of my growing-up years on the Reservation, in Wyoming, so it's habit, to use the term "Indian". At that time, they generally referred to themselves that way. My granddad used it, and he was half-Seminole. Nowadays, from the things that I have heard and read, it seems both terms are used. Some Indians prefer that term, and some Native Americans prefer that one. Many of them prefer the name they have for their own tribe. I think it just depends on who you're around. Russell Means, a Lakota activist, and movie actor, made a statement that anyone born in the United States, is a Native American. Other NA's/Indians wouldn't agree with that. Like I said, I guess it depends on who you're around.
Greetings Celtic -
Thank you for your input, but this post confuses me more. My SIL refers to herself as Indian, but I do know others who take offense to it. Particularly in a situation where several names can be used for one group, it's hard if one's not part of that group, to know what to say to avoid offending anyone, or public humiliation, as I've seen in a few cases. It's hard to always know whom one's around, so in your opinion, is it better for a non-Native to say Native American?
To Anyone -
This may sound off-topic, but, stick with me as I believe it relates. I think part of the issue can become sticky when one thinks that everyone should be privvy to all the in's & out's of their culture. I don't necessarily mean Native. I'm 4 nationalities, 3 of which are obscure & have worldwide populations of under 5-million, 1-million & 1/2-million. I'm often asked "What's that?" when reciting my nationality. It does register with me that people say "what" & "that" in reference to people, rather than "Who are they?", but I don't want to make assumptions & I'm well traveled enough to know that a small portion of people don't know, will never know & don't care about other cultures. I also have experienced eyerolls after trying to explain where my folks come from & there's little understanding on the other person's part, as if my culture doesn't matter. So be it. What can I do? As someone wisely told me yesterday, I can't change anyone & some don't wish to listen or learn new things. Point taken.
I think each one of us needs to remember that we can't know everything about every culture, or religion, for that matter, so calm dialogue is what's necessary, for which I'm appreciative of Martin & others here. I see people in my neighborhood who are from Africa, donned in the traditional dress of their culture who speak little to no English. Since there are 100 African countries, I can't always know which country they're from & details about each individual's culture. Nor can I identify them by their language. I feel the same way if someone refers to one who is Scottish as Irish. I can clearly tell the difference, but others, not exposed to those cultures may not, even referring to them as "Sell-tic" rather than "Kell-tic". Some don't know that Celtic doesn't refer only to Irish, others think it includes English & that Welsh are English. Fine. I'd be too exhausted to stop people everytime I hear a sexist comment, racist remark (no matter which race is making the offensive remark), derrogatory statement about about someone's reputation, character or nationality, etc. I don't enjoy hearing "All men/women are...", "All white/black people are...", "All Italians/English are..." & like statements, but I hear them regularly, as do many of us & just do my best to not engage in such banter.
This is my opinion & it may only be part of the issue, but I think these problems will always exist when a country like America is comprised of hundreds of different nationalities, religions & languages. There are hundreds of Protestant religions, the majority of which I know little about. Do most of us, whether Protestant or not? We are a true melting pot & some things won't blend together well, even just personlaity-wise, but, also by choice due to preconceived notions, prejudices or different personality types living in close proximity (a loud family living next to those who prefer quiet, a family with kids living next to those who have none, night-owls living next to those in bed by 9pm, etc.). The other element is that many of us have families that are straight off the boat (I'm first born), so are trying to assimilate, but sometimes struggle to do so. Families like us often have 1 foot in this country & 1 in the "old country", or countries in my case. Others of course, don't want to & will never assimilate & nothing will change that. In any event, there will be times when toes are stepped on, intentionally & unintentionally, as I've experienced many times. Who hasn't stuck their foot in their mouths? Who hasn't been affronted in 1 way or another? A forgiving spirit is often times necessary & a desire to stand up for oneself with dignity & respect is oh, so important in times when someone must be confronted. I think dismissive "get over it" statements, some of which I see often on this site, only show someone who lacks compassion. I do, also think that those who expect everyone to understand them, as I've often seen on this site too, is also not compassionate. No one can know everything, but we can all learn something. Entire groups of people are also not responsible for another group's distress, no matter how you slice it - men/women, younger/older, southerners/northerners, one culture/another culture.
I'm learning alot from people who are kind enough to share their thoughts & ideas & are tolerant of my inability to know everything. Thanks for that.
Have fun... VV
Last edited by Baltic_Celt; 05-19-2007 at 02:20 AM..
Reason: Additions & clarification
Thank you for your input, but this post confuses me more. My SIL refers to herself as Indian, but I do know others who take offense to it. Particularly in a situation where several names can be used for one group, it's hard if one's not part of that group, to know what to say to avoid offending anyone, or public humiliation, as I've seen in a few cases. It's hard to always know whom one's around, so in your opinion, is it better for a non-Native to say Native American?
Well, personally, I use Indian more than Native American, but again, my take on it may be a bit different, since my granddad was half-Seminole, and I spent time on the Reservation, as I said before. I guess if I was at a powwow, for example, I would use the name of the tribe(s) at the event, (presuming that I knew them), but I wouldn't have any particular qualms saying Indian. If you saying it in the right context, for the right purpose, I really don't think most of them would think much about it. If one is just not sure how the NA/Indians they are with, would care to be addressed, I suppose the best thing, would be to ask, if a good moment arises. I agree that sometimes it is hard to know which way to step. We just have to make the best decision we can, at any given moment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
