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: 8
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
sylvrshadow, you bring up some very good points. If the Redskins decided to change their name under pressure, a lot of their fans might think it makes them look weak or something ... perhaps. Maybe they can just phase out their old symbols and phase in the new one. Or maybe they can change their name to "Bedskins"
or "Snakeskins" or "Buckskins". At least their 'nickname' could still be the "skins".

[edit on 16-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]


Why would people think the team was weak for changing the mascot?

I think it would make the team, and to a lesser extent the NFL, look good. Just as Tony Dungy leading the Colts to a Super Bowl victory made the league look good.

And, the fact that they have retired the mascot, and that other teams have changed their mascots, should show those who say "what's offensive about it" that enough people were indeed offended. Great find, shadow. I guess we'll have to wait and see if the pros start entertaining mascot changes.




posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Why would people think the team was weak for changing the mascot?


It's a possibility that some might think the team looks like it 'gave' under pressure, therefor appearing weak. It's just a speculation. There must be a downside to changing the mascot or they would have done it when people first started complaining. If there wasn't a downside, the teams would have changed easily, right? They've held out this long for some reason. Heck if I know what it is.



And, the fact that they have retired the mascot, and that other teams have changed their mascots, should show those who say "what's offensive about it" that enough people were indeed offended.


I have no doubt many were "offended". What I wonder is what's next on the list...



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
If there are any Illinois fans out there, this is what they need to do in protest. They all need to dress up as Indians and cheer on their team! Do it in mass! They are college students, right? They should know how to protest! Dress up as Indians and get a huge tomahawk chop going.

Can't stop anyone from dressing up as Indians in protest. It's part of our American heritage. Remember the Boston Tea Party? To protest King George's tax on tea, the settlers dressed up as Indians and tossed the tea into Boston Harbor. Come on Illinois, stand up against this injustice against your school!



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 08:42 PM
link   
You know something funny, I never really considered or thought about Tony Dungy being a black coach. I just thought hes a really good defensive coach who would fit really will in Indy since their offense was already set. I used to be a Tampa Bay fan and stopped caring after they fired Dungy. But it wasn't until the Super Bowl that I had to stop and segregate him from the other coaches, because of his blackness. Before everybody made a big deal he was just a really great coach.

The deal is about the mascot is you don't change your mascot. Unless you suck its bad mojo. It destroys tradition. To most Universities it is the same as the NCAA Banning Black University's from "Stepping" because it offends tap artist. It bullcrap from system that punishes school who mess up only after those players who cheated have graduated. Or they let the coach take a new job, after getting his old school in trouble. Or the fact that they fight to the death to not give the players any spending money. The NCAA is the most ridiculous organization of hypocrites. This is just another step towards their ulitmate stupidity.



posted on Feb, 16 2007 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Hi All,

Yep, the NAACP was a typo on my part... sorry about that.
I was reading another article where the NAACP was helping to push changing of mascots. (They are listed here as a group who endorse the retirement of Native Mascots. )



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 04:01 AM
link   
I've read your sources, sylvrshadow, and I thank you for posting them. They shed light on this issue and why it is important. I am glad that there are others who care about this issue and will work toward bringing dignity and humanity to another race of people. In the case of Native Americans, they have suffered more disrespect and inhumanity than the rest of us. And there should be a push to eliminate these mascots to show conscience and character when it comes to treatment in today's society.

One thing I still wonder is how people can laugh at this. This issue is not that funny, especially when it has to do with derogatory stereotypes. :shk:

[edit on 17-2-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by sylvrshadow
Hi All,

Yep, the NAACP was a typo on my part... sorry about that.
I was reading another article where the NAACP was helping to push changing of mascots. (They are listed here as a group who endorse the retirement of Native Mascots. )



For those who wondered why the NAACP would get involved, remember...

The "CP" in NAACP stands for colored people. Though we tend to equate NAACP with black, they have historically helped other non-white people as well. AND remember...

It was whites who made a big deal out of drawing color lines first. "White Man's Burden" comes to mind...



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
It was whites who made a big deal out of drawing color lines first. "White Man's Burden" comes to mind...


Here's how much this has to do with me. I have NO CLUE what you mean by "white man's burden". I've never heard of it before. If you want to blame this "white man's burden" thing on me (if it deserves blame, I don't know) because of the color of my skin, you go ahead. If you need that to fuel your anger, you go right on.

The mascot story is resolved, so if you need to keep this thread alive to keep your anger alive -- and your choice of methodology is to move in and start attacking the white people for the past again -- you go right ahead.

In fact, I suggest getting a punching bag and painting a big, pastey white face on it. That might help, too.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by truthseeka
It was whites who made a big deal out of drawing color lines first. "White Man's Burden" comes to mind...


Here's how much this has to do with me. I have NO CLUE what you mean by "white man's burden". I've never heard of it before. If you want to blame this "white man's burden" thing on me (if it deserves blame, I don't know) because of the color of my skin, you go ahead. If you need that to fuel your anger, you go right on.

The mascot story is resolved, so if you need to keep this thread alive to keep your anger alive -- and your choice of methodology is to move in and start attacking the white people for the past again -- you go right ahead.

In fact, I suggest getting a punching bag and painting a big, pastey white face on it. That might help, too.


Hey, I can't help that I know a lot of stuff across a wide range of topics.


"White Man's Burden" was a poem Rudyard Kipling (you probably don't know who that is either, I guess) wrote. The premise of the poem is that it was the white man's burden to civilize the rest of the savage, non-white people of the world (so about 80% of the world population was savage
). A number of whites with power at the time latched on to this poem.

So now I'm angry, eh? When I'm not even OFFENDED by these mascots, as I'm not a full-blooded Native American.
Yet, you said I'm angry. Well, time to turn the tables on YOU: you're guilty.

You're guilty about issues like this, so you fight tooth and nail on these forums to assauge your guilt. You are guilty, guilty, GUILTY. HA!


AND, the mascot issue is NOT resolved. In case you didn't know, the Washington Redskins had a crappy season last year; I don't know about the seasons of the Cleveland Indians or the Atlanta Braves, as I don't care much for baseball. The Kansas City Chiefs had a decent season, as they made it to the playoffs, but the Indianapolis Colts, whose run defense was abysmal most of the season, shut the monster running back Larry Johnson down, ending the Chiefs' Super Bowl bid.




posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
You're guilty about issues like this, so you fight tooth and nail on these forums to assauge your guilt. You are guilty, guilty, GUILTY.


What exactly am I guilty of, in your opinion?

What do you mean when you say "issues like this"? Native American Mascots? I've never even seen one (until someone posted a film clip here). How am I guilty of that?

Of what am I guilty?



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by truthseeka
You're guilty about issues like this, so you fight tooth and nail on these forums to assauge your guilt. You are guilty, guilty, GUILTY.


What exactly am I guilty of, in your opinion?

What do you mean when you say "issues like this"? Native American Mascots? I've never even seen one (until someone posted a film clip here). How am I guilty of that?

Of what am I guilty?


Sheeyit, I dunno.

Not my problem, so I don't care. You'll figure it out sooner or later...



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
So, you're just sure I'm guilty but you don't know what I'm guilty of?

Really intellignet stuff there, kid.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So, you're just sure I'm guilty but you don't know what I'm guilty of?

Really intellignet stuff there, kid.


No, not really. Actually...

That's intelligent stuff there, old lady.



posted on Feb, 17 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
You are guilty, guilty, GUILTY. HA!


Truthseeka ... seriously man ...


This subject is over. The Native American Mascots are becoming a thing of the past. Links have been posted showing that they are being replaced and/or retired. Any that are left will be gone sooner rather than later. (which, btw, I am glad to hear because I personally didn't like them)



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by truthseeka
It was whites who made a big deal out of drawing color lines first. "White Man's Burden" comes to mind...


Here's how much this has to do with me. I have NO CLUE what you mean by "white man's burden". I've never heard of it before. If you want to blame this "white man's burden" thing on me (if it deserves blame, I don't know) because of the color of my skin, you go ahead. If you need that to fuel your anger, you go right on.

The mascot story is resolved, so if you need to keep this thread alive to keep your anger alive -- and your choice of methodology is to move in and start attacking the white people for the past again -- you go right ahead.

In fact, I suggest getting a punching bag and painting a big, pastey white face on it. That might help, too.


Hey, I can't help that I know a lot of stuff across a wide range of topics.


"White Man's Burden" was a poem Rudyard Kipling (you probably don't know who that is either, I guess) wrote. The premise of the poem is that it was the white man's burden to civilize the rest of the savage, non-white people of the world (so about 80% of the world population was savage
). A number of whites with power at the time latched on to this poem.

So now I'm angry, eh? When I'm not even OFFENDED by these mascots, as I'm not a full-blooded Native American.
Yet, you said I'm angry. Well, time to turn the tables on YOU: you're guilty.

You're guilty about issues like this, so you fight tooth and nail on these forums to assauge your guilt. You are guilty, guilty, GUILTY. HA!


AND, the mascot issue is NOT resolved. In case you didn't know, the Washington Redskins had a crappy season last year; I don't know about the seasons of the Cleveland Indians or the Atlanta Braves, as I don't care much for baseball. The Kansas City Chiefs had a decent season, as they made it to the playoffs, but the Indianapolis Colts, whose run defense was abysmal most of the season, shut the monster running back Larry Johnson down, ending the Chiefs' Super Bowl bid.




Take caution, my friend. Answer BH carefully, or she and the others will complain about you too even despite the fact that she doesn't know about "white man's burden" and what it means. In fact, in her ignorance, she'll probably think that's another word against "white people" instead of accepting that it was a metaphor written by a white male. A European, White, Christian, English-speaking one. A famous one who had written "The Jungle Book" and "Kim" among other pieces of work.


At least she admits her ignorance here. She is very guilty for admitting it and doing nothing to remedy it. Not to mention being self-righteous about it.


(Ooops. Too many racial identity signifiers here. Sound the alarms. The phobics will go into "color" shock here.
)

[In fact, she might be tempted to reach for the "complaint" button after going into convulsions with all the "identity signifiers" being written. After all, ignorance might not be bliss after all.]

Other than that, all I can say is keep up the good fight. Someone needs to have the courage to fight for those who desperately need it.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   
I see your heads up, Ceci...

But I ain't worried about BH. She can say whatever she wants; I don't give a damn. I think you're right, though; I was clearly blasting all whites by mentioning "White Man's Burden."


So, I guess this is done, then? The Redskins, Chiefs, Braves, and Indians won't be playing any games next season? Sure...and Rick James is coming back to the world of the living to do part 2 of Charlie Murphy's Hollywood stories...



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 05:00 PM
link   
A topic like this is never done--when there are thoughtful people with a conscience discussing it. But when you get others solely concentrated on not being blamed for being racist or guilty, then....there's nothing really more to say. They're more obsessed with these two notions instead of really breaking into the subject matter. They're not going to care about anything else unless those two words (as well as "victim") slip up somewhere into their conversation.

I will continue to hope that topics like these will draw thoughtful, intelligent and caring people with a conscience who really want to exchange ideas about how to make things better. I certainly hope that this would be the case instead of people who want to make light of serious issues as these.

At least I hope that it is the thoughtful, caring ones that will discuss this issue instead of usual riff raff. Let's hope they actually know what dominant culture means.


But I'll put my money on Rick James.





[edit on 18-2-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Feb, 20 2007 @ 11:45 PM
link   
Is that I really don't have the right to say anything about anyone except the Cleveland Indians. I'm a fan...I probably shouldn't say that with the way they always blow the big one but. They have made on effort to try and change the mascot that was found offensive. I don't think the organization set out to be offensive. I think it was done to be funny to children, and that they neglected to realize who much it would really @#$#$ Indians.

In the end the Indians of North America will probably own us all after we go bankrupt in the Casino's. In that case turn about would be fair play. Just like Japan, who we rebuilt and is destroying us in technology.



posted on Feb, 21 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I wonder what will happen now. Should all traces of Native American mascots, symbols, team names be erased from the sports world? I wonder what those who wanted the Chief to "die" think about that... What's next? The Redskins, Indians and Seminoles names? Should they be changed?

Is every trace of mentioning anything to do with Native Americans in the sports world to be done away with?

After all:


Originally posted by truthseeka
"It is not, I repeat NOT, an honor to see football fans dressed in supposed Indian attire nor to hear them trumpeting some ludicrous war chant nor to see them mimic or ape our dress, culture, or person."


This will still be going on and people will still be offended... Are those who are so offended willing to go so far as to tell other people that they aren't allowed (by law?) to wear paint on their faces and chant what sounds like a "war chant" at the Cheifs and Braves games?

[edit on 21-2-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]




top topics



 
2
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join