It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What's up with the Native American mascots?

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
There is not an equal representation of sports mascots with racial epithets; only those slurs directed at Native Americans. Now why is that?


Native Americans were viewed as a fierce group of people. Strong. Independent. Fierce. They would go to war with anyone to protect their people and their 'turf'. (In general Native Americans didnt' practice land ownership, but you know what I mean)

If a stereotype of blacks is 'lazy', and the stereotype of Mexicans is 'lazy' ... then why would anyone want them to be their mascot? The stereotype of the old west Native American is very strong and shows no mercy, and that is much more appealing to a sports team than 'lazy'.

As far as the Irish goes ... there is the stereotype of 'drunk' but also of 'lucky'. American sports fans are fond of beer at games (we drink soda), and they are also glad when luck comes their way in a game, so I guess that explains the Irish Mascott.

I have no idea about the Hill-billy one.
I'm totally clueless as to why that's a mascot.

BTW ... the US Military has named all it's helicopters after Native American Indian tribes and war items. Some missiles too. (excuse spelling) Comanche. Tomohawk. Apache .... etc Just thought I'd mention that in the list of things named after Native Americans.




posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
How was that BH?


That was pretty good!
I like him, myself. I don't care that he makes fun of white people or how he thinks about us.
A. I have a sense of humor
B. What he says has some truth to it.
C. I'm not mired in a victim mindset.

That's how stereotypes are developed. They start out as truth! That's what a stereotype is. It's just when it's applied to ALL people of a race that it becomes dangerous or damaging.

You tell me there's no truth to the headstrong, loudmouth, overbearing black woman! There are plenty of black women like that. I know some! There's nothing wrong with recognizing that as long as it's not applied to all black women.


Originally posted by truthseeka
The white media created this problem.


There, there... Yes, it's all the white people's fault... That's right. There, there...



You had the "lazy Mexican" depictions, with them sleeping on the side of a building with a big sombrero on their heads.


Hey, I live in the DEEP Southwest. I have crossed the border many times. I encounter this every day!




What is the common thread in these stereotypes? White supremacy...


No. Truth. There is SOME truth to every stereotype. Even stereotypes of white people!




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



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
That's how stereotypes are developed. They start out as truth! That's what a stereotype is. It's just when it's applied to ALL people of a race that it becomes dangerous or damaging.

You tell me there's no truth to the headstrong, loudmouth, overbearing black woman! There are plenty of black women like that. I know some! There's nothing wrong with recognizing that as long as it's not applied to all black women.


I'm back.


A "stereotype" IS something that becomes applied to describe or portray an entire race/culture...of course there are plenty of people from any race who can be depicted and made fun of, without regards to their culture or race...but what about all of the movies depicting black people, the so-called "blaxploitation" flicks? All of the "black" movies I have ever seen do nothing but reinforce these stereotypes, that black people all come from the ghetto, commit crimes, kill each other, drink and smoke a lot, they all talk in ebonics, they all don't like white people, the parents are "headstrong, loudmouth, overbearing" black people, and the kids are unruly aspiring gang members.

The problem with stereotypes is that there are plenty of people out there who will look at this, watch these movies, and start to think that ALL of the people from that race/culture are like the ones portrayed in the movie. To an upper middle class white kid who goes to private schools and never meets any black kids, it would be hard to get any other impression of black people. I have seen other people with this kind of impression, because they just don't KNOW enough to realize that the stereotype doesn't apply to the whole group.

This same thing goes for native americans...if young children go off with their parents to basketball games, and they see some "indian chief" jumping and dancing around, doing a "war dance", then how are they ever supposed to realize that this doesn't represent the native american culture? They are too young, and they will probably never meet any native american kids in school to change their ideas.

You say that stereotypes are based on truth, but this isn't the case. Stereotypes are based on a perception of one group of people, in the eyes of those who don't truly know...who seek to make it truth, or inadvertently help it to become "truth". Stereotypes in themselves are still false, and these kind of stereotypes that are portrayed (the dancing indian) are only helping to reinforce stereotypes that, of course, do not apply to the whole group of people. It might be easy to realize this if you are an adult, but I think that it can have devastating consequences exposing children to these kinds of things, because of course they will be leading the future generation, and don't need to help divide people anymore.

Look at people today...the ones from my parents generation probably have quite a bit more "racist" ideas than the ones of my generation. Those in my grandparents generation, even moreso. This is based on my own experience, as well as things I have read of the overall perception that racism is starting to dwindle...yes, I have been told by older people in my family, or at least led to believe, that black people weren't as smart, or maybe were more dangerous...just simple comments that were made. My friends' parents have similar ideas as well. Most of my friends though, are not "racist" in the same way, and they don't have the same idea. My parents generation, and those before it, were exposed to much more negative images regarding "negroes" and also mexican people...minstrel shows, the media portraying them as being drug users, detriment to society, etc. This is evidence to me that the "stereotypes" are dangerous, and the better we will all be for now and in the future, if they disappear. At least in a mainstream sense. Of course there is room for laughing in the comedic domain, where comics make fun of EVERYONE.

Stereotypes are about perception, but not based on truth. Most white people I know, including myself, were raised to believe that policemen are some of the greatest people on earth. I would always smile whenever I saw a policeman as a kid, wave, and think what a great guy he is. This is because of my perception, what my parents told me, what I saw in the media. Black people on the other hand, seem to be raised to believe that policemen are out to get the minorities (this, coming from almost every black person I have ever met had this attitude, as well as writings, stories in the media representing the black community in the context of some of these police incidents). This perception is ALSO "based on truth" with stories of black people being beaten, killed, taken advantage of, etc (rodney king and so forth), just like my perception is "based on truth" with all policemen being heroes who are out to save all people equally, keeping us all safe, fairly. Of course neither of these stereotypes is anywhere close to "truth". I have known some police who have done great, heroic deeds. I have also heard stories from black classmates about having to deal with the police in negative ways constantly...one guy I knew said he had been pulled over 9 times in about 2 years time just for "routine traffic stops." On the other hand, most cops I have dealt with have been reasonably fair. The different stereotypes we have are based on our own perception, which is determined by what group you belong to.

If you are raised in a white family, you will end up with MUCH different views as people raised in a black family. There are still many white families who raise kids to believe that they are superior to other races. There are still many black families who raise kids to believe that they are superior, or that white people are "evil"...even an entire religion (Nation of Islam) was based on this...just like we still have the Ku Klux Klan too. It all goes back to the fact that stereotypes only serve to divide us, create conflict, and hinder our understanding of one another. These stereotypes can have a powerful, lasting effect on children, who have no other ideas to go by, in regards to their own perception of a different race or culture.

[edit on 15-2-2007 by Shoktek]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Welcome back, Shok!

And GREAT post, btw.
I'd like to add that stereotypes have a kernel of truth to them, in that there are some individuals within the stereotyped group who exhibit the stereotype.

HOWEVER, members of other groups can share the SAME STEREOTYPE! But, since they're not in that group, they don't get labeled as such. For example, you have white kids who are part of the gang culture, yet white kids aren't stereotyped as being thugs.

Just like the stereotype I saw earlier in this thread (the Native American warrior). This is used to explain/justify these mascots, and it's a BLATANT STEREOTYPE!!! How can one NOT see how this is offensive to some in the stereotyped group?



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shoktek
I'm back.



I'm Glad!




All of the "black" movies I have ever seen do nothing but reinforce these stereotypes...


I admit I haven't seen any of these so-called "black" movies that you're talking about. (I assume you're talking about the Martin Lawrence/Eddie Murphy type trash) I hate that crap. Not because I think it's offensive, but because it's stupid! I roll my eyes every time I see an ad for another stupid movie with an all-black cast that portrays black people as fitting the stereotype. Who are the actors that feed into this crap???

But I'll tell you what. Sidney Poitier is one of my all-time favorite actors and you would NEVER see him acting like a stupid stereotype in a movie. Talk to Halle Berry, Spike Lee, Tim Reid, Denzel Washington, Morgan Freeman, Samuel L. Jackson, James Earl Jones and a thousand more! They're not interested in adding to the stereotype. And for those who are, well, it's their own fault for spreading the ignorance! But we can't hold them responsible, now, can we? We all know it's the white man's fault!




The problem with stereotypes is that there are plenty of people out there who will look at this, watch these movies, and start to think that ALL of the people from that race/culture are like the ones portrayed in the movie.


Well, then the black actors who support this blaxploitation (learn a new word every day) should STOP it! They have the power to put an end to it NOW.



This same thing goes for native americans...if young children go off with their parents to basketball games, and they see some "indian chief" jumping and dancing around, doing a "war dance", then how are they ever supposed to realize that this doesn't represent the native american culture? They are too young, and they will probably never meet any native american kids in school to change their ideas.


And then so what? They go to their graves thinking the war dance is done in a particular way, but it's not???



Stereotypes in themselves are still false, and these kind of stereotypes that are portrayed (the dancing indian) are only helping to reinforce stereotypes that, of course, do not apply to the whole group of people.


As I have said, I live in the DEEP Southwest and Indians DO dance "like that". They have pow-wows and it's a HUGE deal. And they invite white people from far and wide to come and spend their money.


NAIA Pow-Wow
Contemporary Pow-wow



Look at people today...the ones from my parents generation probably have quite a bit more "racist" ideas than the ones of my generation.


I totally get this. And that's where I think education comes in. We (as parents and adults) have to be responsible for educating our children in spite of what they might see out there.

And if we're getting our education from the media, we're already totally screwed. We can't depend on TV and the movies (and basketball games) to educate our children. The fact that these stereotypes exist is all the more reason to take an active role in our children's education. If we're not going to educate our children, and we're going to depend on what they see to do that job, then we have no right to jump in and try to 'control' what they're exposed to so they're learn what we want them to learn.

Either we educate them or let the media do it. If we take the "hands-off" approach, we shouldn't bitch about the result.

I'm all for an education program that teaches children about the misconceptions of stereotypes the danger of stereotyping groups and different racial cultures, by the way. ALL for counter-measures to what you see as the damaging our youth with an Indian dance. In fact, I think it would be a great thing to concentrate on during White History Month...


I just don't support trying to protect everyone's feelings by controlling one's outside environment.



Of course there is room for laughing in the comedic domain, where comics make fun of EVERYONE.


So, if there was a man in blackface and a caricature of a chinese woman and a redneck with a jacked-up old pick-up out on the basketball court alongside the Chief, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now???

I don't believe that. This isn't about treating everyone equally.


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



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:08 PM
link   
This isn't about treating everyone equally. Thank you for saying that, BH. That is the problem of this entire thread.

White people have the corner market on being treated equally. So much so that for the request of small concessions, they balk at it and accuse the person of color of playing "the race card" (a concept not invented by people of color, btw.).

Native Americans (as well as other people of color) are not being treated equally. Their culture, history, social norms, spirituality and race are being made fun of by people who feel that "they shouldn't have any special treatment in terms of respect". I feel that if you truly think about what you said and concentrate on how people are hurt by the depiction of those stereotypes, I think your conscience and empathy for how people of color are sadly affected would be turned back on. It would be quite different from being glib and flippiant about it.

I'm just happy that there are people in the world who are sensitive and empathetic to how others hurt over these stereotypes. It's not about the victim mentality when alerting others to these things. It's about making others aware that it isn't all right to perceive these mascots as being authentic. It is also making others aware that that the mascots are insulting to Native Americans.

But, heck. As others make choices, there are some who make choices to not care and refuse to possess a conscience. Instead, they would rather not recognize or even empathize (by making their choice) that people are hurt over this.

And for those who demonstrate a lack of caring, it says a lot about character more than is being let on.

[edit on 15-2-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
White people have the corner market on being treated equally. So much so that for the request of small concessions, they balk at it and accuse the person of color of playing "the race card" (a concept not invented by people of color, btw.).


So, in your mind, it's the white people who are doing this? I'm not surprised... The truth is that the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has a diverse student body. It's not a bunch of white kids.

Just remember that the former real Chief of the tribe was honored by the dancing Chief.

It all depends who you talk to as to whether this is seen as offensive or not.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I totally get this. And that's where I think education comes in. We (as parents and adults) have to be responsible for educating our children in spite of what they might see out there.

And if we're getting our education from the media, we're already totally screwed. We can't depend on TV and the movies (and basketball games) to educate our children. The fact that these stereotypes exist is all the more reason to take an active role in our children's education. If we're not going to educate our children, and we're going to depend on what they see to do that job, then we have no right to jump in and try to 'control' what they're exposed to so they're learn what we want them to learn.


One of the two good history teachers I had in high school made sure to spend some time with us on "media awareness". He believed that it is one thing that is most lacking in our systems of education. Interestingly, the United States is one of the only modern/developed countries in which media awareness classes are not mandatory for k-12 schools. We hear all the time about how studies show that violence in the media makes kids more violent and desensetizes them to violence...same goes for sex, racism, or stereotypes of people that happens in the media. I'm not someone who believes in locking down on what is allowed on the public airwaves, and fully support the first ammendment...BUT, the human mind is not mature until at least 21 years of age, and I think that many of these things certainly have a profound, damaging effect on children.

When I was a kid, we had harmless video games like Mario Brothers, and watched cartoons like Tom and Jerry. Now I've got a younger brother playing "grand theft auto", "the godfather", and other games where you are encouraged to kill, rob, and hurt people, do/sell drugs, have sex, rape, etc. Of course this won't turn most kids into criminals, but I do believe it has permanent psychological effects at that age. And as for the actors being at fault for making those sterotypical "black" movies, yes, it is partly their fault...but of course those movies would never even have been considered for production if the big shots at the movie companies and in hollywood didn't think they were fine. I guess it's a matter of deciding if you think we should jsut "let everything go", and hopefully people will be ok, or if maybe we do need to control some things, because we know that they will be bad for our future...I personally would go for the first approach, if it weren't for the fact that children are being corrupted by these things every day. It's despicable to see cases where 10 year old Johnny decides to bring his dad's handgun to school in order to shoot some kids he doesn't like...because he had lots of practice doing it in video games. Also it's interesting that in many of these school shootings, the gunmen specifically targeted minorities (ie Columbine, blacks were on their hitlist)

[edit on 15-2-2007 by Shoktek]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   
HUH, So it is a "History" of whites making fun of other ethnic cultures... huh.. Never made that connection...

At least not when I watched

1. Deliverance
2. Beverly Hillbillies
3. Jeff Foxworthy
4. Larry the Cable Guy
5. Blue Collar Comedy Tour
6. Scary Movie
7. Any movie about degenerates in West Virginia
8. Hooper
9. Smoky and the bandit
10. Dukes of Hazard

I could go on and on, but I just can't seem to make the connection where white people only make fun of minorities...

HMMMMMM

Semper



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
(the Native American warrior). This is used to explain/justify these mascots,


I explained where it came from ... I did NOT justify it. That's two different things.


and it's a BLATANT STEREOTYPE!!!


No kidding. DUH!


That is what we were discussing. You wanted to know why the Native American Indians were used as mascots and not other ethnic groups. I gave you the reason - the stereotype of the strong, fierce Native American Indian who would fight for his people and his land (not that they believed in land ownership, but you understand what I'm saying).

That stereotype is appealing to a competitive sports team, rather than the other ethnic groups which have stereotypes as being lazy.



[edit on 2/15/2007 by FlyersFan]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 03:54 PM
link   

That stereotype is appealing to a competitive sports team, rather than the other ethnic groups which have stereotypes as being lazy.


Yeah, like the West Virginia Ned Beatty's

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry, could not resist...

What do some on here think we do? Sit around waiting for them to post and inform us? That we live to be educated by them? SHEESH

Common sense takes a strange turn for some


Semper



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
What do some on here think we do? ... That we live to be educated by them?


Yes, some think that we need to be edjumakated by them .

The truth behind some common Native American Indian Stereotypes –
www.bluecorncomics.com...

And from that site – stereotypes that some Native American Indians hold about white Americans –

Some Native stereotypes of Anglo-Americans:
1) Not trustworthy or back-stabbing
2) Speak with forked tongue
3) Materialistic and money hungry
4) Greedy — don't share with fellow man
5) Competition or power hungry
6) Evasive
7) Business oriented/selfish, self-centered
8) Narrow minded and prejudiced
9) Live by time clock
10) No respect for fellow man
11) Manipulate nature/have no respect for nature
12) Want others, especially minorities, to conform to their ideals
13) Fail to show equality in court
14) Hypocrisy in Christianity

Interesting that this Native American site admits that some Native American Indians also view people outside their race by stereotypes. It is an inescapable part of the makeup of everyone of every race to view people of other races through stereotypes. If anyone claims it's just a 'white thing' .. they are dead wrong.

Edited ONCE for spelling


[edit on 2/15/2007 by FlyersFan]



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Shouldn't we be asking the actual Native Americans instead of the self-proclaimed activists who speak FOR them?? And here I thought speaking for another race was frowned upon...



Here's the most important finding: "Asked if high school and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81 percent of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83 percent of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters, and symbols."

The poll also found that 75 percent of Native Americans don't think the use of these team names and mascots "contributes to discrimination." Opinion is divided about the tomahawk chop displayed at Atlanta Braves games: 48 percent "don't care" about it; 51 percent do care, but more than half of them "like it." The name "Redskins" isn't especially controversial either; 69 percent of Native Americans don't object to it. As a general rule, Indians on reservations were more sensitive about team names and mascots, but not to the point where a majority of them ever sided with the activists on these questions.


National Review Online

Local Native American leader opposes banning all Indian mascots from school: "I personally think it's an honor"

I understand that some Native Americans are offended, but that right there shows that the Mascot itself is not offensive in and of itself. People CHOOSE whether or not to be offended.

There are so many questions not answered and so many issues ignored here in this thread, I don't see any reason to go on. If you're going to disregard the EXCELLENT arguments that have been brought up, the discussion is pretty worthless.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Shouldn't we be asking the actual Native Americans ...


That's sorta like to what I said in my first post. If there are many Native American Indians who have a problem with it, or if there are tribal leaders who are banding together and making statements against it, then another look needs to be taken at those mascots. Otherwise ... don't worry about it.

From what I have just read about stereotypes, for the most part the Native American Indians think that the non-indians just look silly making whooping noises. I guess it was something that women indians did ... not grown men. (if I'm reading the sites correctly)



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Featured Topic

This thread has been selected as an AbovePolitics.com Featured Topic.

Applause worth 1500 PTS Points has been awarded for the original post.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Shouldn't we be asking the actual Native Americans instead of the self-proclaimed activists who speak FOR them?? And here I thought speaking for another race was frowned upon...

National Review Online

Local Native American leader opposes banning all Indian mascots from school: "I personally think it's an honor"

I understand that some Native Americans are offended, but that right there shows that the Mascot itself is not offensive in and of itself. People CHOOSE whether or not to be offended.


The second article you posted actually has some good arguments for the other side as well. The "poll" from the first article only included 352 Native Americans (who knows where or how they got the sample) out of at least 4.5 million who claimed heritage in the 2000 Census...an incredibly small, insignificant percentage of people. Obviously not enough to reflect the opinions of the whole group. Just something to think about when you use studies or polls.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   
I'm exhausted from a hard day of job interviews (wish me luck everyone!) so please forgive me if I am less coherent than usual.



Originally posted by jsobecky
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.

I agree that it's never good to jump to conclusions. However, there aren't very many California Towhee to be found in the Arctic circle.



Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
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.

Speaking only for myself, I don't think it is necessary to be extra careful to avoid causing offence. It is just my natural tendency to want those around me to feel comfortable and included. It is my opinion that being sensitive to the feelings of others can foster a happy, healthy society and that benefits everyone. I don't set out to look for things that someone might find offensive, but if it is brought to my attention that something I have done has caused offense, I most certainly want to hear about it. In many cases, accomodating their requests costs me very little and gives them a great deal. I look at it as sort of a societal cost-benefit ratio.


I believe it was FF who first brought up the idea of engaging your First Nations (Native Americans, for those who haven't heard me use that phrase before) about this topic and seeing how they feel about it. I think the very act of consulting with them would show that there is sensitivity to the issue. It may turn out that it is a very small group that is upset by this (I think you posted a link somewhere to this effect BH) and in that case, it would be a non-issue. Engaging them in the dialogue is what shows respect, in my opinion.

I'll shift to a somewhat similar situation that is occurring in my home province. I have found that sometimes it helps for me to use Canadian examples because people don't have the same emotional investment because it's not their country.

In our legislature, we have 4 murals that have been there since 1932 and to some, they are offensive.



It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Paint four murals under the dome of the B.C. legislature depicting bare-breasted native women hauling logs and fish for white men, another showing an Indian being punished before a colonial court, and a pair of landscapes celebrating white Europeans colonizing the new world as natives look on impassively from the background.

But 75 years after those paintings were unveiled as high-minded public art, illustrating "the historical qualities necessary for the establishment of a civilization," the B.C. Liberal government is quietly formulating a plan that could see the art removed from the legislature, or at least hidden from public view.

Paintings considered insensitive and racist

Should we leave these portraits up because they are part of the tradition of the legislature and to remove and preserve them might cause damage? Or should we respect the wishes of the First Nations peoples who want them removed? I'm all for taking them down because I don't think that art like that has any place in a government building in this day and age, but my opinion isn't the one that matters. The murals don't affect me one way or the other. After several years, the First Nations are being engaged in a dialogue to see how they feel about the murals and what they would like to see happen with them. Really, they are the only ones to whom the murals matter and if they want them gone, it's no skin off my nose.

After all, not everything is about me.


As for Dave Chappelle, I have never watched his show or seen his act. The only thing I have seen is the movie Half Baked, which was hilarious. I am unqualified to give an opinion on his act.

PS. Thank you for the lovely compliment Ceci.



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
That is what we were discussing. You wanted to know why the Native American Indians were used as mascots and not other ethnic groups. I gave you the reason - the stereotype of the strong, fierce Native American Indian who would fight for his people and his land (not that they believed in land ownership, but you understand what I'm saying).

That stereotype is appealing to a competitive sports team, rather than the other ethnic groups which have stereotypes as being lazy.
[edit on 2/15/2007 by FlyersFan]


This is like pulling teeth.

What part of "stereotype" are you missing?
Who cares if it's a positive stereotype, it's still a STEREOTYPE. Just like the "smart" Asian stereotype.

And on a side note, it's funny how people who were forced to work for FREE and those who choose to work hard at low paying jobs are stereotyped as lazy, but those who had the people working for free or take advantage of the cheap labor are not stereotyped this way...



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I can't find the site, but when I was looking for my original source online, I came across a Native American forum.

The people on there had similar views to Giago. I'll dig it up, if I can. And these were just regular joes like us here on ATS.

Regardless, though, "redskin" still is a racial slur...



posted on Feb, 15 2007 @ 09:45 PM
link   

When I was a kid, we had harmless video games like Mario Brothers, and watched cartoons like Tom and Jerry. Now I've got a younger brother playing "grand theft auto", "the godfather", and other games where you are encouraged to kill, rob, and hurt people, do/sell drugs, have sex, rape, etc. Of course this won't turn most kids into criminals, but I do believe it has permanent psychological effects at that age.

And rap music... don't forget the pervasive effects of rap.




And as for the actors being at fault for making those sterotypical "black" movies, yes, it is partly their fault...but of course those movies would never even have been considered for production if the big shots at the movie companies and in hollywood didn't think they were fine.

I guess the implication is that the "big shots" were named Goldwyn, Mayer, and Loew, eh?



It's despicable to see cases where 10 year old Johnny decides to bring his dad's handgun to school in order to shoot some kids he doesn't like...because he had lots of practice doing it in video games. Also it's interesting that in many of these school shootings, the gunmen specifically targeted minorities (ie Columbine, blacks were on their hitlist)

[edit on 15-2-2007 by Shoktek]

It goes a lot deeper than hand-eye co-ordination gained from playing video games. And the minority target argument doesn't hold water. There are unfortunately too many incidents to the contrary.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join