PDA

View Full Version : Braves Replace "Screaming Savage" ST Hat


Foulke You
02-12-2013, 03:20 PM
They made the right choice. Some logos are best left in the past:

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/mlb-big-league-stew/braves-backtrack-won-t-screaming-savage-batting-practice-151232239--mlb.html

doublem23
02-12-2013, 03:29 PM
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/the-hater/2013/feb/11/braves-cave-pc-police-ditch-screaming-indian-logo/

Domeshot17
02-12-2013, 03:45 PM
Tough to discuss this without getting it roadhoused.

BringBackBlkJack
02-12-2013, 03:54 PM
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/the-hater/2013/feb/11/braves-cave-pc-police-ditch-screaming-indian-logo/

I am fast becoming a huge fan of "The Hater". The AJC's sports columns are usually painfully lackluster.

Red Barchetta
02-12-2013, 04:04 PM
Have the new SOX BP/Spring Training caps gone onsale yet? I didn't see it on the official site. They look nice matched up with the black jerseys based on the photos released today from inside the clubhouse. I'm hoping this will be my new favorite cap. I really liked the similar styled BP cap from a few years ago, except the mesh fabric was not as nice as the new ones.

I also like the revised Braves cap. I'm still warming up to all the alternate logos and white crowns. I'm glad the SOX kept their caps simple, although I wonder how the Diamond SOX or the Flying SOX would have looked.

Tree Hate Me
02-12-2013, 04:23 PM
It's a good thing they didn't go with this screaming savage either. Braves fans under the age of 20 just wouldn't get it.

ohiosoxfan
02-12-2013, 04:32 PM
It's a good thing they didn't go with this screaming savage either. Braves fans under the age of 20 just wouldn't get it.

Now if you could have just photoshopped his head on a cap, it would have been a classic!

Thome25
02-12-2013, 04:46 PM
I disagree with the over-sensitive people who bitch and moan about this ****ing nonsense.

It is an honor for Native Americans to be used as sports teams' nicknames/logos.

Teams use Native American names and imagery because in the past they were strong, fierce, and brave warriors.

I have especially disagreed with Paul Lukas of ESPN/ Uni Watch over this issue.

Edit: I can understand the outrage over the Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo logo and The Washington Redskins' name but, for folks to be upset over the names and imagery of ALL of these teams is just ridiculous.

If they ever mess with the Blackhawks name or logo I'll be the one who's outraged.

Tree Hate Me
02-12-2013, 04:46 PM
Now if you could have just photoshopped his head on a cap, it would have been a classic!

I'll leave that to someone else with more time and energy.


Speaking of offensive mascots, did anyone read Mike Florio's recent column calling for RGIII to use his influence to put an end to the name "Redskins"?

doublem23
02-12-2013, 04:51 PM
I disagree with the over-sensitive people who bitch and moan about this ****ing nonsense.

It is an honor for Native Americans to be used as sports teams' nicknames/logos.


Just to point out, a lot of people who are "over-sensitive" and "bitch and moan" are actual Native Americans who do not feel any sense of honor to be used as a sports mascot.

Big Daddy Drew over at Deadspin, who probably nobody would ever describe as overly sensitive, weighs in: http://deadspin.com/5983475/washington-redskins-proudly-defend-their-name-in-the-dumbest-way-possible

Thome25
02-12-2013, 04:55 PM
Just to point out, a lot of people who are "over-sensitive" and "bitch and moan" are actual Native Americans who do not feel any sense of honor to be used as a sports mascot.

Big Daddy Drew over at Deadspin, who probably nobody would ever describe as overly sensitive, weighs in: http://deadspin.com/5983475/washington-redskins-proudly-defend-their-name-in-the-dumbest-way-possible

Point taken but, there are also alot of Native Americans who see the honor and dignity of some of the sports teams names.

vinny
02-12-2013, 04:56 PM
I am fast becoming a huge fan of "The Hater". The AJC's sports columns are usually painfully lackluster.

Fact. Bring back "the Nose"! (If he's still alive, I think he last wrote for the Constitution in the mid 80s)

mrfourni
02-12-2013, 04:58 PM
Just to point out, a lot of people who are "over-sensitive" and "bitch and moan" are actual Native Americans who do not feel any sense of honor to be used as a sports mascot.

Big Daddy Drew over at Deadspin, who probably nobody would ever describe as overly sensitive, weighs in: http://deadspin.com/5983475/washington-redskins-proudly-defend-their-name-in-the-dumbest-way-possible

As an Illinois alum, I'm probably a bit biased, but IMO there is a difference between naming a team after an Indian tribe, or naming a team the "Braves", and naming a team the "Redskins" or using the goofy Cleveland Indians logo.

doublem23
02-12-2013, 05:04 PM
Point taken but, there are also alot of Native Americans who see the honor and dignity of some of the sports teams names.

That is true. Like just about everything else in life, the answer is somewhere in the grey middle, not in the extreme white or black sides.

I know you have said you don't like Paul Lukas's views on the subject, and I respect that, but I think this is a pretty sane, rational piece:

http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/fandom/post/_/id/12057/time-to-rethink-native-american-imagery

Tree Hate Me
02-12-2013, 05:11 PM
I imagine the Redskins would get a lot of flak from their older fans if they were to change the name....but if they do it right think of all the money they can rake in from selling their new apparel.

As someone on Deadspin commented they could just offer to tweak the meaning of "redskins" and put an Idaho potato on their helmets.

asindc
02-12-2013, 05:26 PM
I imagine the Redskins would get a lot of flak from their older fans if they were to change the name....but if they do it right think of all the money they can rake in from selling their new apparel.

As someone on Deadspin commented they could just offer to tweak the meaning of "redskins" and put an Idaho potato on their helmets.

You don't have to imagine. Many of the older fans would throw a fit. The passion regarding the name is such that if you are not a 'skins fan, you are better off not commenting on the issue here. For the record, some former players called for a name change while they were still playing.

Thome25
02-12-2013, 05:34 PM
I imagine the Redskins would get a lot of flak from their older fans if they were to change the name....but if they do it right think of all the money they can rake in from selling their new apparel.

As someone on Deadspin commented they could just offer to tweak the meaning of "redskins" and put an Idaho potato on their helmets.

Given the location of the Redskins in Southern Maryland /Northern Virginia , they could change their name to "Rednecks" and no one would notice.

Thome25
02-12-2013, 06:58 PM
Have the new SOX BP/Spring Training caps gone onsale yet? I didn't see it on the official site. They look nice matched up with the black jerseys based on the photos released today from inside the clubhouse. I'm hoping this will be my new favorite cap. I really liked the similar styled BP cap from a few years ago, except the mesh fabric was not as nice as the new ones.

I also like the revised Braves cap. I'm still warming up to all the alternate logos and white crowns. I'm glad the SOX kept their caps simple, although I wonder how the Diamond SOX or the Flying SOX would have looked.

They're on sale here:

http://mshop.mlb.com/product/index.jsp?productId=18738236

They now come in actual sizes rather than small-medium, medium-large, and large-extra large.

They also look big and boxy like the authentic in-game caps.

Both are also let down.

Bob Roarman
02-12-2013, 08:10 PM
I disagree with the over-sensitive people who bitch and moan about this ****ing nonsense.

It is an honor for Native Americans to be used as sports teams' nicknames/logos.

Teams use Native American names and imagery because in the past they were strong, fierce, and brave warriors.

I have especially disagreed with Paul Lukas of ESPN/ Uni Watch over this issue.

Edit: I can understand the outrage over the Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo logo and The Washington Redskins' name but, for folks to be upset over the names and imagery of ALL of these teams is just ridiculous.

If they ever mess with the Blackhawks name or logo I'll be the one who's outraged.

Haha, wow, yeah that's sort of a huge leap there, not assuming but telling Native Americans that they should be proud to be, essentially, a brand. Holy ****.

CoopaLoop
02-12-2013, 08:32 PM
It is an honor for Native Americans to be used as sports teams' nicknames/logos.


I would love to hear an explanation for this sentence.

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2013, 08:54 PM
Without trying to be too political, which is difficult in a thread like this, my thoughts on this are like this. While some depictions of Native Americans or use of Native American names in sports are racist (Chief Wahoo for example, or the team name "Redskins"), I think that not every example of using native American imagery is racist. I have always found the Blackhawks logo to be a respectful depiction of a noble Native American warrior, specifically of Black Hawk. I think though that some people go too far, Paul Lukas is becoming one of them, in the assertion that all tribal imagery be removed. Sports Illustrated had a poll in 2002 that showed that 83% of Native Americans said they did not object to nor did they want teams to stop using Native American imagery in sports. A lot of people, Paul Lukas included, have cited some flaws in that poll and perhaps there are some but they also seem to dismiss that poll in an attempt to have it fit in with their own narrative. I wish SI or ESPN would run another poll now to remedy some of the flaws with the old one and maybe see if Native Americans find SOME logos offensive and not others.

Bob Roarman
02-12-2013, 08:59 PM
Without trying to be too political, which is difficult in a thread like this, my thoughts on this are like this. While some depictions of Native Americans or use of Native American names in sports are racist (Chief Wahoo for example, or the team name "Redskins"), I think that not every example of using native American imagery is racist. I have always found the Blackhawks logo to be a respectful depiction of a noble Native American warrior, specifically of Black Hawk. I think though that some people go too far, Paul Lukas is becoming one of them, in the assertion that all tribal imagery be removed. Sports Illustrated had a poll in 2002 that showed that 83% of Native Americans said they did not object to nor did they want teams to stop using Native American imagery in sports. A lot of people, Paul Lukas included, have cited some flaws in that poll and perhaps there are some but they also seem to dismiss that poll in an attempt to have it fit in with their own narrative. I wish SI or ESPN would run another poll now to remedy some of the flaws with the old one and maybe see if Native Americans find SOME logos offensive and not others.

For me a lot of it depends on that individual team's relationship with and portrayel of whatever given Native American tribe or Indian they are using as a logo or name. Like, the Redskins? Yeah **** that. That's a disgrace. There is no comparision with an organization like that to, say, the Blackhawks.

RKMeibalane
02-12-2013, 09:22 PM
Haha, wow, yeah that's sort of a huge leap there, not assuming but telling Native Americans that they should be proud to be, essentially, a brand. Holy ****.

I would love to hear an explanation for this sentence.

These responses remind me of the infamous rant (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=36888&highlight=jeremyb1) by jeremyb1, self-appointed leader of the "stat-geeks."

Red Barchetta
02-12-2013, 09:46 PM
They're on sale here:

http://mshop.mlb.com/product/index.jsp?productId=18738236

They now come in actual sizes rather than small-medium, medium-large, and large-extra large.

They also look big and boxy like the authentic in-game caps.

Both are also let down.


Thanks! $35.00! The price went up. They do look a little more boxy so I think I will wait until they hit the stores so I can try one on first. I hope they have the lower crown.

In looking at the product description, they indicate that this is the game 59Fifty cap. Perhaps that's why the caps have actual sizes. I wonder if the SOX are adding this cap as an alternate cap for games? Perhaps they are wearing it with the black jerseys/road uniforms? The higher price would justify that.

...or maybe the desciption is incorrect.

Edit - The SOX have it up on their website store (MLB). Looks like it is a 59Fifty, but they indicate that it is for batting practice. I wonder if the 39Thirty caps are being discontinued?

http://shop.mlb.com/product/index.jsp?productId=18738236&cp=1452347.1452702.709744

CoopaLoop
02-12-2013, 10:06 PM
These responses remind me of the infamous rant (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=36888&highlight=jeremyb1) by jeremyb1, self-appointed leader of the "stat-geeks."

i don't see the parallel.

johnnyg83
02-12-2013, 10:07 PM
I like the name Braves. I think if the imagery and logos were done correctly it could actually be a positive (a la The Courageous).

Am I naive?

Bob Roarman
02-12-2013, 10:51 PM
These responses remind me of the infamous rant (http://www.whitesoxinteractive.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=36888&highlight=jeremyb1) by jeremyb1, self-appointed leader of the "stat-geeks."

What? This is nothing at all like that. Not one bit. No one is making up the fact that lots of Native Americans are offended by offensive logos parodying them and their heritage and customs, not to mention using derogatory racial terms and images as sports team names and mascots. Is EVERY Native American outraged about EVERY single example of it? No, like I said, it's a case on case basis. But to have someone say they should be "honored" just to be included in the wonderful world of sports in that way, **** that. What's more important, being respectful to these people or ****ing sports? It's not surprising because people gotta have their sports. It wouldn't be the end of my world if the Blackhawks changed their name/logo because they were disrespectful of it.

But this is good though, very illuminating, posts like these. Nice to know what kind of people we're dealing with by being this honest.

Railsplitter
02-12-2013, 10:55 PM
I've seen the circa 1970 Braves logo before, but it seemed to me laughing, not screaming.

WhiteSox5187
02-12-2013, 11:13 PM
I've seen the circa 1970 Braves logo before, but it seemed to me laughing, not screaming.

Yea, that's always the impression that I got too.

RKMeibalane
02-12-2013, 11:22 PM
i don't see the parallel.

Well...

What? This is nothing at all like that. Not one bit. No one is making up the fact that lots of Native Americans are offended by offensive logos parodying them and their heritage and customs, not to mention using derogatory racial terms and images as sports team names and mascots. Is EVERY Native American outraged about EVERY single example of it? No, like I said, it's a case on case basis. But to have someone say they should be "honored" just to be included in the wonderful world of sports in that way, **** that. What's more important, being respectful to these people or ****ing sports? It's not surprising because people gotta have their sports. It wouldn't be the end of my world if the Blackhawks changed their name/logo because they were disrespectful of it.

But this is good though, very illuminating, posts like these. Nice to know what kind of people we're dealing with by being this honest.

I said I was reminded of the thread jeremyb1 started, not that it was exactly like it. I made the comparison because thome25 seemed to be trying to speak for Native Americans as though they're incapable of speaking for themselves, just as jeremyb1 was doing with Shingo.

Nellie_Fox
02-13-2013, 01:02 AM
As someone on Deadspin commented they could just offer to tweak the meaning of "redskins" and put an Idaho potato on their helmets.
Redskin potato:

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4875737939509579&pid=15.1

Idaho potato:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4579569918412146&pid=15.1

/pedantry

ComiskeyBrewer
02-13-2013, 01:16 AM
As someone on Deadspin commented they could just offer to tweak the meaning of "redskins" and put an Idaho potato on their helmets.

I've been saying put a redskin potato on the helmet for a while now. You get to keep the name and color scheme, you can still call them the skins, and you can keep the "R" they use as an alt logo. You only have to remove the indian head logo. That, or change everything to something like the Senators with no connection to the past.

DSpivack
02-13-2013, 01:45 AM
Redskin potato:

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4875737939509579&pid=15.1

Idaho potato:

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4579569918412146&pid=15.1

/pedantry

I've been saying put a redskin potato on the helmet for a while now. You get to keep the name and color scheme, you can still call them the skins, and you can keep the "R" they use as an alt logo. You only have to remove the indian head logo. That, or change everything to something like the Senators with no connection to the past.

"Hail to the Tubers! Hail Victory..."

ComiskeyBrewer
02-13-2013, 02:05 AM
"Hail to the Tubers! Hail Victory..."

You could make this guy your mascot(obviously changing the helmet logo). Still better than the Bills mascot.

http://www.posterchase.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/w/a/washington-redskins-mr-potato-head-toy-nfl-football.jpg

Thome25
02-13-2013, 05:26 AM
I would love to hear an explanation for this sentence.

All of the explanation that you need is in the post that you quoted.

Thome25
02-13-2013, 05:31 AM
Haha, wow, yeah that's sort of a huge leap there, not assuming but telling Native Americans that they should be proud to be, essentially, a brand. Holy ****.

This whole issue goes a lot further back than that.

Some teams named themselves after native Americans because they epitomize bravery, honor, and were fierce warriors and that's what they wanted their sports team to represent.

This was before branding was a concern. Selling apparel and merchandise with Native Americans on it wasn't big business when these teams named themselves. I'm going way back to the beginning when I talk about honoring Native Americans by naming your sports team after them.

Edit: But, it's a good thing you mentioned branding because IMO that's the issue in play here. IMO this is more about money than it is dignity. This was always an issue but, it became bigger as the business of selling team-themed merchandise became bigger.

Is it because branding gave this issue more recognition? Or is it because those involved wanted a piece of the pie too? Maybe one or the other. Maybe both. Maybe neither. But, it is a factor IMO.

How over-sensitive the world has become is painfully aggrivating at times. This is just one of many examples of that.

But, where does this end?

Does PETA get involved next and say that teams named after animals must go?

Do French Canadians stand up and cry that the name "Montreal Canadiens" must go?

Do some Americans stand up and say that they take offense to the name "New York Yankees" and demand a name change?

The bottom line is, someone is always going to take offense to everything.

Do the opinions of the few outweigh the opinions of the many?

If done tastefully and respectfully (Blackhawks, Illini, Warriors, Seminoles, Chiefs, Braves etc. etc. etc.) and NOT in a racist way (Chief Wahoo logo and Redskins name) then I don't see the problem and IMO those against it look more like whiners than people standing up for an injustice.

Thome25
02-13-2013, 05:33 AM
Well...



I said I was reminded of the thread jeremyb1 started, not that it was exactly like it. I made the comparison because thome25 seemed to be trying to speak for Native Americans as though they're incapable of speaking for themselves, just as jeremyb1 was doing with Shingo.

Incapable of speaking for themselves? Jesus no one is on ****ing trial here. I speak for no one but myself.

It's called my opinion.

cub killer
02-13-2013, 06:47 AM
This is a very touchy issue. After all, they were decimated and had their land taken from them. Some say that this isn't the usa, this is still native land that just happens to be illegally occupied by the white man. Can you argue against that?

Let's say if Scotland gets invaded by England, and now Scotland is no longer Scotland, but now just part of England. And then the English make a team called the Scots right in Glasgow, England. What do you think the reaction would be?

The white man conquered the red man in a very brutal, some say shameful, way. These logos are a reminder of that.

Thome25
02-13-2013, 07:16 AM
This is a very touchy issue. After all, they were decimated and had their land taken from them. Some say that this isn't the usa, this is still native land that just happens to be illegally occupied by the white man. Can you argue against that?

Let's say if Scotland gets invaded by England, and now Scotland is no longer Scotland, but now just part of England. And then the English make a team called the Scots right in Glasgow, England. What do you think the reaction would be?

The white man conquered the red man in a very brutal, some say shameful, way. These logos are a reminder of that.

This is where I disagree. The tasteful names and logos were done as a tribute to Native Americans and their strength and heritage. Not the other way around.

Bob Roarman
02-13-2013, 07:44 AM
Well...



I said I was reminded of the thread jeremyb1 started, not that it was exactly like it. I made the comparison because thome25 seemed to be trying to speak for Native Americans as though they're incapable of speaking for themselves, just as jeremyb1 was doing with Shingo.


Ahhh, well then I apologize. Just seemed like you were on the other side of that.

Domeshot17
02-13-2013, 08:57 AM
First, despite widespread myth, it is not a screaming Indian, but a smiling/laughing one.

Second, since posters in this thread have come out and said Native Americans should speak for themselves, one did:

http://www.macon.com/2013/01/05/2306186/braves-should-bring-back-indian.html

Atlanta might just be best ditching the Indian theme all together. Gone are the tomahawk chop, chief noc-a-home and others. Change the tomahawks to Halligan Bars and Axes and keep the name Braves as a tribute to firefighters.

Thome25
02-13-2013, 09:03 AM
First, despite widespread myth, it is not a screaming Indian, but a smiling/laughing one.

Second, since posters in this thread have come out and said Native Americans should speak for themselves, one did:

http://www.macon.com/2013/01/05/2306186/braves-should-bring-back-indian.html

Atlanta might just be best ditching the Indian theme all together. Gone are the tomahawk chop, chief noc-a-home and others. Change the tomahawks to Halligan Bars and Axes and keep the name Braves as a tribute to firefighters.

I agree with this article 100%.

Thanks for posting it.

kittle42
02-13-2013, 10:00 AM
You could make this guy your mascot(obviously changing the helmet logo). Still better than the Bills mascot.

http://www.posterchase.com/media/catalog/product/cache/1/image/5e06319eda06f020e43594a9c230972d/w/a/washington-redskins-mr-potato-head-toy-nfl-football.jpg

/thread. :D:

Nellie_Fox
02-13-2013, 11:53 AM
Folks, this is heading into the political. No more discussion of who stole what from whom, and who's occupying land illegally.

TheVulture
02-13-2013, 08:30 PM
Hopefully, Notre Dame is next. I'm not half leprechaun, you bastards!!

CoopaLoop
02-14-2013, 12:20 AM
All of the explanation that you need is in the post that you quoted.

I am never going to pretend that I know what a Native American is thinking about mascots being used in sports. As a white man, I have no idea.

But I am damn sure I am never going to say THEY SHOULD BE HONORED by it. The arrogance and ignorance in that statement is overwhelming.

doublem23
02-14-2013, 08:55 AM
Some teams named themselves after native Americans because they epitomize bravery, honor, and were fierce warriors and that's what they wanted their sports team to represent.

I don't doubt there is some or a lot of truth to this statement. I'm sure back in the 1920s people maybe did feel like they were honoring Native Americans by naming their teams after them, but times change. At the same time it was OK to name your high school the Redskins, it was probably OK to call an African-American man on the street a "Negro." Things change, the path of human history is always moving toward being more accepting and more respectful towards other people.

Does PETA get involved next and say that teams named after animals must go?

The fact that you just compared Native Americans to bears, birds, or rodents really underscores the argument against your case.

Do the opinions of the few outweigh the opinions of the many?

That is such a god damn cop out. Sometimes, people want certain things done simply because they're right. Do you think the majority of baseball players, fans, or owners wanted Jackie Robinson to break the color barrier in 1947? Do you think he was welcomed with open arms at every opposing city? No, he was hated, by white folks who felt he was destroying the "tradition" of their pure game.

If done tastefully and respectfully (Blackhawks, Illini, Warriors, Seminoles, Chiefs, Braves etc. etc. etc.) and NOT in a racist way (Chief Wahoo logo and Redskins name) then I don't see the problem and IMO those against it look more like whiners than people standing up for an injustice.

I think it's an awfully slippery slope to start saying Team A, B, and C are honoring Native Americans in a tasteful manner but Team X, Y, and Z are being totally racist. It doesn't seem to hurt that the teams you root for are all "tasteful," either.

SephClone89
02-14-2013, 10:10 AM
Thanks for this thread--I've been teaching about things like Native American assimilation attempts in mission schools in the late 19th century, etc...so I'm havin ga discussion in my American History class on this issue, based around the Paul Lukas article.

Thome25
02-14-2013, 01:04 PM
I am never going to pretend that I know what a Native American is thinking about mascots being used in sports. As a white man, I have no idea.

But I am damn sure I am never going to say THEY SHOULD BE HONORED by it. The arrogance and ignorance in that statement is overwhelming.

I'm sorry that you feel that way. Nevermind pure logic. Nevermind that most Native Americans themselves are more than fine with the use of their imagery.

You think I'm wrong and I think you're wrong so lets just agree to disagree.

Thome25
02-14-2013, 01:07 PM
I don't doubt there is some or a lot of truth to this statement. I'm sure back in the 1920s people maybe did feel like they were honoring Native Americans by naming their teams after them, but times change. At the same time it was OK to name your high school the Redskins, it was probably OK to call an African-American man on the street a "Negro." Things change, the path of human history is always moving toward being more accepting and more respectful towards other people.



The fact that you just compared Native Americans to bears, birds, or rodents really underscores the argument against your case.



That is such a god damn cop out. Sometimes, people want certain things done simply because they're right. Do you think the majority of baseball players, fans, or owners wanted Jackie Robinson to break the color barrier in 1947? Do you think he was welcomed with open arms at every opposing city? No, he was hated, by white folks who felt he was destroying the "tradition" of their pure game.



I think it's an awfully slippery slope to start saying Team A, B, and C are honoring Native Americans in a tasteful manner but Team X, Y, and Z are being totally racist. It doesn't seem to hurt that the teams you root for are all "tasteful," either.

I'm not going to touch this with a ten foot pole.

I'll end with the fact that I have already stated my opinions on this matter several times in this thread. No point in going around in circles with it.

I'll also say that I respect your opinion on this matter as well as the opinions of my fellow boardmembers in this thread.

asindc
02-14-2013, 01:09 PM
I'm sorry that you feel that way. Nevermind pure logic. Nevermind that most Native Americans themselves are more than fine with the use of their imagery.

You think I'm wrong and I think you're wrong so lets just agree to disagree.

That notion is disputed by some Native Americans.

RKMeibalane
02-14-2013, 01:28 PM
I am never going to pretend that I know what a Native American is thinking about mascots being used in sports. As a white man, I have no idea.

But I am damn sure I am never going to say THEY SHOULD BE HONORED by it. The arrogance and ignorance in that statement is overwhelming.

I completely agree with this. It's never appropriate for someone who isn't part of a particular group to speak for that group as though the people in it can't speak for themselves.

RKMeibalane
02-14-2013, 01:37 PM
I'm sorry that you feel that way. Nevermind pure logic. Nevermind that most Native Americans themselves are more than fine with the use of their imagery.

You think I'm wrong and I think you're wrong so lets just agree to disagree.

Are you Native American? Do you have some sort of special insight into how people of this group think, act, or feel?

DSpivack
02-14-2013, 01:54 PM
I completely agree with this. It's never appropriate for someone who isn't part of a particular group to speak for that group as though the people in it can't speak for themselves.

I don't know about that, I speak for doctors in Madison, Wisconsin and say that they should never utter the phrase "M.Jeff" again. :tongue:

spawn
02-14-2013, 01:56 PM
Nevermind that most Native Americans themselves are more than fine with the use of their imagery.


Do you have anything that supports this?

WhiteSox5187
02-14-2013, 02:08 PM
Do you have anything that supports this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy#Public_Opinion_ Surveys

Stunningly according to that section a 2004 poll of 768 Native Americans found that 91% of them found the name "Redskins" acceptable. :o:

They also cite a "near total disconnect" between Native American activists and the general Native American population.

asindc
02-14-2013, 02:17 PM
I'm sorry that you feel that way. Nevermind pure logic. Nevermind that most Native Americans themselves are more than fine with the use of their imagery.

You think I'm wrong and I think you're wrong so lets just agree to disagree.

That notion is disputed by some Native Americans.

Do you have anything that supports this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_mascot_controversy#Public_Opinion_ Surveys

Stunningly according to that section a 2004 poll of 768 Native Americans found that 91% of them found the name "Redskins" acceptable. :o:

They also cite a "near total disconnect" between Native American activists and the general Native American population.

That same article cites to a 2001 poll in which 81% of Native Americans polled found the use of Native American images and names for sports teams to be offensive. Thus, there seems to be continued dispute on this issue.

spawn
02-14-2013, 02:26 PM
Ok, if this discussion is to continue, it needs to be done over a PI. We've long ago crossed into a political discussion.