What's up with the Native American mascots?

Now that this thread has got back on topic I would like to contribute, all I am saying is that the native americans got "broke over like a shotgun" if you will when Europeans came to this country. They had everything but a understanding of ownership. If you want to make a respectfull mascot call a team the "codetalkers" after the Navaho's that went to fight along side us in WW2.

I am not saying that all mascots are offensive but there are some that native americans don't like and if they voice their views about not liking the way they are portrayed then yes, we should have enough respect for what they did during the war to change it, even if it costs the redskins 5 million dollars.

Rename it after the Navaho tribe and show some respect for them, maybe even invite a few of the elders out to show respect, maybe let them do their dance like it's made to be done at halftime. All these guys have is small plots of land where they can set up casino's and sell cheap cigarettes. Americans took them for 99.997% of what they had and they still have the respect to fight when called upon, even if they were called upon by the people who liked to kill them. That says a lot and for people to say the Indians should quit complaining about their race, they are the minority. I will say this though, they can teach us the best lesson learned, when we segregate we loose! If all of the tribes would have banned together we would have had a hard fought acquisition of the U.S. maybe even would not have had it.

Well, maybe white men don't like the way they are portrayed in TV commercials and sitcoms as the plodding, dull breadwinner. Should the TV industry be forced to change the way they portray them?

People are way too sensitive and weak; they look for reasons to be offended.

Learn to laugh at yourself and the world; you'll live longer.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Well, maybe white men don't like the way they are portrayed in TV commercials and sitcoms as the plodding, dull breadwinner. Should the TV industry be forced to change the way they portray them?

People are way too sensitive and weak; they look for reasons to be offended.

Learn to laugh at yourself and the world; you'll live longer.

Well maybe if white men would not have came here they would not have that problem.

Originally posted by shizzle5150
Well maybe if white men would not have came here they would not have that problem.

Too bad, so sad. Live in your fantasy world where you were so spiritual amd serene. Forget about the way that tribes fought and massacred each other before the white devil came to town.. it helps to perpetuate your myths.

jso, you have the too bad so sad part right. Were you rooting for custard???

Custard? I like that on my ice cream.

Maybe you meant Custer?

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by shizzle5150
Well maybe if white men would not have came here they would not have that problem.

Too bad, so sad. Live in your fantasy world where you were so spiritual amd serene. Forget about the way that tribes fought and massacred each other before the white devil came to town.. it helps to perpetuate your myths.

If you would have paid attention you might have noticed I said the segregation of tribes was their downfall, and please let me know what "myth" I am dealing with in respect to native americans loosing all their land, and if I were a gambling man I would guess that you are sitting on the land that they once held sacred. And I can only wish to sit in a land as "spiritual and serene" as it was before skyscrapers came to town. If you want to sit and pretend like our government did no wrong go ahead but, they are not myths they are heritage and I will thank you to address them as such. Are your beliefs "myths" to you????

I think that if these names are offensive to people, the respectful thing to do would be to change the names. Just because they are traditional doesn't mean things can't change. I can think of two 'traditional names' in Canada that got changed because they were offensive - Nigger Bay and Chink Lake. Should we have hung onto these names just to prove some kind of point?

Change can be good if it makes a group of people feel like they are respected members of society.

Yes I said custard..... you know a desert topping but still tastes like crap. Was custer your desert?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


The mascots bring me no joy, I don't watch them, I don't watch sports.

I'm sorry to say this, but I was not referring to you when I posted my earlier reply. However, in response to your comment, I do watch sports. I am a very big football and basketball fan.

And I do not find a sense of humor in watching mascots that knowingly degrade a race of people. I find it sad that some (not you, BH--the people who actually watch sports) do.

I feel bad for people who are 'hurt' regardless the reason.

If you don't watch sports, then you really don't know what is at stake here, do you?

This is not meant to be sarcastic, but it pertains to the question whether you know exactly how collegiate and professional sports sometimes work when it comes to what the crowd does. For example, in a rivalry game the crowd on opposing sides gets really nasty towards one another--especially when it has to do with mascots. And when there is a de-sensitization about the derogatory nature of Native American names and mascots which embody them, well...what do you think might happen?

That doesn't mean, though, that everyone should act in a way as to be sure not to 'hurt' or offend anyone else.

Respectfully asking, how do you know for sure?

They're not really being 'hurt', they're taking offense.

Respectfully again, how do you know? Were the words written by Barbara Munson not enough to convince people that there are some Nations of Native Americans who are very hurt by how their culture and history has been denigrated in sports?

They're making a choice to take offense.

The people who are defiling and defaming Native American ways are also making a choice by knowingly belittling the Native American culture, race, social norms, spirituality and history without a sense of conscience.

Having a man in an outfit dance doesn't 'hurt' anyone.

Watching film of Al Jolson sing and do his "Mammy" act (in the movie, The Jazz Singer [1929] ) wasn't just offensive; seeing how others have mimicked his racially derogatory act throughout popular culture hurts me because they are knowingly making fun of African Americans like myself and many others without having a conscience regarding undermining our humanity.

And I'm sure that there are many Native Americans who are just as hurt when they watch people stand up in the stadium seats and do the tomahawk chop. Not to mention witnessing the mascot mimic and pantomine what he thinks a Native American might do. Some of which have voiced their concerns via sources to say so.

In my point of view, I beg to differ.

But then again, you never know how much it hurts until it hits you personally.



[edit on 15-2-2007 by ceci2006]

Originally posted by Duzey
I think that if these names are offensive to people, the respectful thing to do would be to change the names. Just because they are traditional doesn't mean things can't change. I can think of two 'traditional names' in Canada that got changed because they were offensive - Nigger Bay and Chink Lake. Should we have hung onto these names just to prove some kind of point?

Change can be good if it makes a group of people feel like they are respected members of society.

Thank you for saying that, Duzey. I am glad that you responded to this because this is the crux of the entire argument right here.

Again, I am glad that your insight and your sensitivity has graced this topic.

Originally posted by shizzle5150

Originally posted by jsobecky

Originally posted by shizzle5150
Well maybe if white men would not have came here they would not have that problem.

Too bad, so sad. Live in your fantasy world where you were so spiritual amd serene. Forget about the way that tribes fought and massacred each other before the white devil came to town.. it helps to perpetuate your myths.

If you would have paid attention you might have noticed I said the segregation of tribes was their downfall, and please let me know what "myth" I am dealing with in respect to native americans loosing all their land, and if I were a gambling man I would guess that you are sitting on the land that they once held sacred. And I can only wish to sit in a land as "spiritual and serene" as it was before skyscrapers came to town. If you want to sit and pretend like our government did no wrong go ahead but, they are not myths they are heritage and I will thank you to address them as such. Are your beliefs "myths" to you????

Segregation? When were they all one big happy family? And when in history did they not fight amongst each other?

These are the myths I speak of.

I am making no apologies for anyone; don't put words in my mouth. People are too quick to paint their world as a Garden of Eden that the evil White Man destroyed. It didn't really go down that way, is what I'm saying.

Originally posted by Duzey
I think that if these names are offensive to people, the respectful thing to do would be to change the names. Just because they are traditional doesn't mean things can't change. I can think of two 'traditional names' in Canada that got changed because they were offensive - Nigger Bay and Chink Lake. Should we have hung onto these names just to prove some kind of point?

Change can be good if it makes a group of people feel like they are respected members of society.

Well, Duzey, I would tend to agree with you there. Those two examples are blatant. But there is always the possibility that the lake was named after the distinctive call of the California Towhee, which sounds like "chink", so maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Women have said that porn offends them.

It's massively offensive AND studies have shown that porn does indeed play a role in many violent crimes against women. Porn addiction is also a known fact. BUT it's a big $$$ industry so good luck getting those putting it out (pardon the play on words) to be 'nice' and stop making it. They have a right to make it, but it is definately NOT a healthy thing for the people who look at it and it's not healthy for the country in general.

Originally posted by truthseeka
Do you blame porn stars like Jenna Jameson for offending women?

Yes. I blame them AND those that buy into the porn market.

If porn was so degrading to women, women like Jenna Jameson wouldn't live in huge mansions from doing porn.

OF COURSE they would. There are people out there that will degrade themselves, and everyone else, just to get $$$.


That being said .... if a Native American mascot is offensive to Native Americans and they wish it to be discontinued then it would be a good thing for the sporting industry to take another look at those mascots to see if they are really offensive and/or really necessary. If just a few radical chronic-whiners are complaining but the vast majority of the Native American population isn't, then it just means that those few complainers are not representative of Native Americans and they have their own problems or their own agenda and the sporting industry should leave the mascots alone. If there is an organized or large scale complaint put out by the Native American community, or the heads of their tribes, then definately the sporting industry should take a serious look at changing their mascots.

Having a team named 'Chicago Blackhawks' ... shouldn't be a problem.

Having a team named 'Red Skins' with war whooops and war paint ... I can see how that might be a problem.

It's not that hard to change mascots. People get used to the new ones rather quickly. It doesn't need to be done if just a few people with their own agenda want it done. It DOES need to be looked at if there are official complaints from tribal leaders, etc.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Check out these Mascot Costumes.

There's Billie the Hillbilly, Colonial Boy, Conquistador, Madcap Leprechaun, Victor Viking, Roman, Frontiersman and more. There's even an American Eagle!

You raise an interesting point. These show people from different walks of life. It would be interesting to see how many mascots were left if we were to be rid of all of those that could potentially insult people.

If the Hillbillies all get together and sign a petition to be rid of Billie the Hillbilly then he'd have to go! If the Americans of Irish ancestory want the Leprechaun to go ... then that would have to go as well.

BTW ... I am of Irish ancestory (among other things) and don't find the Leprechaun to be insulting.

Hey Hey Hey!!!

If the Hillbillies all get together and sign a petition to be rid of Billie the Hillbilly then he'd have to go! If the Americans of Irish ancestry want the Leprechaun to go ... then that would have to go as well.

I am from West Virginia originally you know!!!

Stop offending me!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Now that is one interesting culture. I go back there once or twice a year, I miss the mountains, but it really is like going into another country. At least coming from where I am now.

To "on topic" my thoughts on this; why in the world would I take offense at humor in anyway? I take no more offense at Jeff Foxworthy when he makes fun of my "folks" then Blacks do at Chapell. So why be hypocritical when someone "not" a hillbilly makes fun??

Semper

Basically, each of us can and do find different things insulting or offensive. But that's not the issue, as I see it.

There seem to be two groups of thought. One group (me, jso, etc) thinks that people are looking for things to choose to be offended by and that even if people are offended, they should realize that we can't change the world around to make sure that no one is offended by stuff out there. We advocate "growing a thick skin" or else turning away and not supporting something you don't like because people are different and the world is full of possible causes of offense. We also strongly support Free Speech.

The other group (ceci, TS, Duzey, etc) seems to think (correct me if I'm wrong) that when it comes to race, people should be extra careful about their actions as to not cause offense to other people. And when it's brought up as offensive, the offenders should change their behavior so as to be less offensive. You advocate appealing to the "thinner of skins" so they won't be offended and everyone can just be happy and get along.

I have no problem with people changing their behavior to appeal to other people. But ONLY if they want to. They shouldn't be forced to be "respectful" of race, when every other subject in the world is up for grabs as far as causing offense.

I still haven't gotten the answer to what's so special about race that Dave Chapelle and Carlos Mencia can make fun of any race on TV in front of millions of people and they're thought of as some kind of geniuses, but take it to the basketball court and all of a sudden it's some kind of assault on humanity.

Why aren't people attacking Chapelle, Mencia and others? Why aren't you attacking the roadside stores with Big Indians that are seen by millions? Where's the outrage about the Chinese Food signs? These are thought of as Americana...

But put an Indian together with a basketball court and you've got yourself a lawsuit...

Why must everything be stripped of any 'color' (pardon the pun) to become a pastey, bland, white rice diet for the eyes and ears of the American people as to not offend anyone? There's always going to be SOMETHING that offends people. Where do we stop appeasing the thinnest of skins? With race? When there is no more offensive action about race will people finally be happy? No. My guess is that they won't.



[edit on 15-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]

Well, BH...

The white media created this problem. Had they not have made fun of basically all non-white people they've had significant contact with, this would likely not be as much of an issue.

You had Tonto as being a little slower and subservient to the Lone Ranger. You had minstrel depictions of us (black Americans) EVERYWHERE in the media up until the first half of the 20th century. You had the Asian stereotypes I mentioned. You had the "lazy Mexican" depictions, with them sleeping on the side of a building with a big sombrero on their heads.

What is the common thread in these stereotypes? White supremacy, which is how the Europeans went around stealing from most everyone else in the world (after the Moors initiated the European Renaissance in Portugal and Spain, mind you). But that's a bit of an aside.

The reason Dave Chappelle and Carlos Mencia don't compare is that they make fun of EVERYONE. There is not an equal representation of sports mascots with racial epithets; only those slurs directed at Native Americans.

Now why is that?

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Why aren't people attacking Chapelle,

The guy isn't entertaining at all. I saw him on that Bravo show .. he said 'i've been dancing for white people for ___ years'. He couldn't just say 'i've been dancing for ___ years'. He HAD to make it sound like he was a slave-boy or something. I really don't like the guy at all.

How was that BH?

Originally posted by FlyersFan
I saw him on that Bravo show .. he said 'i've been dancing for white people for ___ years'.

He IS funny. And what he said there was funny cuz it's true (Homer Simpson reference).