No more offensive Cleveland logo

[Danchat]

 

The Fighting Hawks...ugh...

That's exactly what I was thinking. I am a big UND fan and I was ticked off when they were forced to remove the Fighting Sioux name. From the games I've been to, the people honored the Sioux and I cannot remember a single time where the name was spat upon or made fun of. They will always be the Sioux to me.

 

But the two situations aren't exactly the same and I can understand why the Indians are removing their logo.

 

Now, if only they could replace the old logo with a new one with actual an actual Indian, like Viswanathan Anand (former chess world champion)

[Nine of twelve]

FWIW ... https://www.dailynorseman.com/2010/6/27/1540257/what-does-skol-mean

From the link:

And if it is just a myth, as many claim, well, it's one hell of a myth, and until someone can prove to me they DIDN'T drink from the skull of a vanquished opponent, then By God, they did.

 

In other words, it's such a great story that you want so badly to be true that it must be true. Yeahright.

[Nine of twelve]

Spartans are actual people.  Not that most modern Spartans know or care about the football team. So are:

 

Scots (Alma College & Macalester College) and Fighting Scots (Edinboro University of PA, Gordon College, Ohio Valley U, Wooster), Swedes (Bethany College), Dutch (Central College) & Flying Dutchmen (Hope College & Lebanon Valley College), Chippewas (Central Michigan), Hustlin' Quakers (Earlham), Fighting Quakers (Wilmington College), and Quakers (U Penn), Tejanos (El Paso Community College), Seminoles (FL State), Fighting Illini (Illinois), Ragin' Cajuns (Louisiana Lafayette),  Highlanders (MacMurray College, NJIT, Radford U), Choctaws (Miss. State), Pygmies (NM Minning & Tech), Fighting Irish (Notre Dame),  Texans (Tarleton State U), Tribe (William & Mary)

 

and I am not including names such as Mountaineeers, Pioneers, Cowboys, Majors, Senators, Colonels, Packers, Lumberjacks 49ers, Vikings, Trojans, Rebels etc that refer to specific groups of people albeit some historic and some occupations.

 

To me "Indian" as a mascot or nickname is about as offensive as "Scot" or "Quaker".  Same thing.  Pygmies is probably more offensive than all three...

Quakers is not a race of people. It would be about like Notre Dame calling themselves the fighting Catholics.

[Nine of twelve]

The Fighting Hawks...ugh...

And it's still better than what they had before.

[Thrylos]

 

Quakers is not a race of people. It would be about like Notre Dame calling themselves the fighting Catholics.

 

Indians technically is not a race of people.  It is the collective name given to the many Nations of pre-Columbian Americans. 

 

Also, I would suspect that some Catholics might object if their religion is used as a Mascot...

[jimmer]

 

That's exactly what I was thinking. I am a big UND fan and I was ticked off when they were forced to remove the Fighting Sioux name. From the games I've been to, the people honored the Sioux and I cannot remember a single time where the name was spat upon or made fun of. They will always be the Sioux to me.

 

But the two situations aren't exactly the same and I can understand why the Indians are removing their logo.

 

Now, if only they could replace the old logo with a new one with actual an actual Indian, like Viswanathan Anand (former chess world champion)

How

About

We

Keep

Sioux

[3balls2strikes]

 

Obvious move for all human beings. Now if that degenerate NFL team could follow suit.

 

Obviously talking about the team with the name "Vikings." Why would anyone name their team after a gang of murdering, thieving thugs who raped and pillaged innocent villages throughout northern Europe. The Vikings most likely also killed every Native American village they encountered when they visited North America. It makes no sense to honor and name a team after the Vikings and turn around and bitch and complain about the complimentary act of naming a team after Indians. 

[darin617]

The sad part is that the Indians will be in rebuilding mode after free agency begins to destroy their fine team they had.

[Thrylos]

 

The sad part is that the Indians will be in rebuilding mode after free agency begins to destroy their fine team they had.

 

Sad for whom?

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's not just about race vs sub-culture, it's about respect. You could offensively represent any group of people if you tried. Depicting Vikings and Spartans as warmongering mascots is accepted because their descendants don't have a connection to their history, having long since assimilated into the world around them (usually after being conquered). Yankee is just an informal term for American and isn't used in a derogatory sense (unless it's by a Southerner still carrying a grudge against the North).

 

Chief Wahoo needs to go because it's a cartoonishly ridiculous way to depict a Native American. The name...I see a good argument to change it because there isn't a credible history of it honoring or respecting anyone. Same with "Redskins", a word with a complicated history but that was still strongly used as a slur for a period and isn't honoring anyone. But it seems counterproductive to remove all Native American references from sports and other areas just because they're tied to a particular race.

 

I disagree.  Those references are largely there because of a long-standing cultural belittling of Native Americans. 

 

They used a cartoonishly insulting logo because the term "Indian" has long been associated with a litany of cartoonish portrayals.  I don't care how "honored" we try to make the groups feel using their names, the basis for their choice as a nickname was pretty much never in good faith.  

 

If we want to show some actual good faith there are host of ways we can do that without dressing up mascots and selling merchandise.  

[darin617]

 

Sad for whom?

Cleveland fans. Changing of the guard coming soon. That's another reason why I am against Yu Darvish signing. Twins would be better served trading for a younger pitcher they can control.

[Riverbrian]

 

That's exactly what I was thinking. I am a big UND fan and I was ticked off when they were forced to remove the Fighting Sioux name. From the games I've been to, the people honored the Sioux and I cannot remember a single time where the name was spat upon or made fun of. They will always be the Sioux to me.

 

But the two situations aren't exactly the same and I can understand why the Indians are removing their logo.

 

Now, if only they could replace the old logo with a new one with actual an actual Indian, like Viswanathan Anand (former chess world champion)

 

I've been living in Grand Forks since 1990. I've been handling the Public Address for the UND football team since around that time. Maybe 10 years plus of P.A. work with the UND basketball team and a couple of seasons with the hockey team. It was pretty close to two decades of screaming "Here Come Your Fighting Sioux" into the microphone for me. 

 

To me... It was simply the name of the team that I was proud of. 

 

Any hint of disrespect never entered my mind nor would I ever want it entering my mind. It was simply the name of the team. It was the debate that made me think about the possibility of respect or disrespect and the controversy made life miserable at times. 

 

Personally... I found the whole debate heartbreaking. 

 

The complications that arose were overbearing!

 

From the two tribes themselves being split on the subject. The Spirit Lake Tribe voted to keep the name, the Standing Rock Tribal council refused to let a vote take place.  The other complications, that beautiful arena being built, the NCAA pressure of sanctions, the lawsuits, the injunctions, the settlements, the donor base threats, the logo, the protests, the petitions and perhaps the most amazing thing of all... The North Dakota Senate passing a LAW that was subsequently signed by the Governor of North Dakota that the University be forced to keep the nickname despite the NCAA threatening to not allow home playoff games. 

 

While all of this was happening... Fine upstanding people who I respect were acting like losing the nickname was the end of the world. Fine upstanding people who I respect were acting like keeping the nickname was effecting the very future of the oppressed. Both sides of the discussion were embellishing the impact to express themselves at overly emotional levels.

 

There were times when I felt like the only sensible person in a 100 mile radius. 

 

Why was I sensible (debatable I know). I did my best to keep perspective.

 

It was simply the name of the team that I cheered for. Nothing more... Nothing Less.

 

I loved the nickname and was OK letting it go because it was the only way for the controversy to end and the controversy was turning good upstanding people completely upside down. 

 

Whenever someone tried to suck me into the debate and they tried... I responded the same way every time.

 

"50 years from now... nobody is going to care". Fighting Sioux will be a futurepedia entry that our great great grandchildren might find an interesting conversation starter at parties. "Did you know that UND used to be called the Fighting Sioux?". 

 

Chief Wahoo? 50 Years from Now... Nobody will care.

 

Life Goes On. 

 

[Nine of twelve]

Chief Wahoo? 50 Years from Now... Nobody will care.

 

Life Goes On.

The reason nobody will care 50 years from now is because the logo is properly (and belatedly) being put on the scrap heap of history now. Leave the logo in place and it's a sore that will continue to fester.

[slash129]

 

The reason nobody will care 50 years from now is because the logo is properly (and belatedly) being put on the scrap heap of history now. Leave the logo in place and it's a sore that will continue to fester.

 

Don't worry ... There will be 'collectors' with Chief Wahoo hats on the mantle next to the Sambo axel grease cans and Coon Chicken restaurant menus

[gunnarthor]

I'm glad they are getting rid of him, it's taken far too long.

https://www.fastcodesign.com/3019811/american-indians-counter-racist-iconography-with-racist-baseball-caps

[PseudoSABR]

Unless the team name is Crackers, white guys don't really get to determine what is offensive, save for actual empathy (not faux butthurtness).   

 

Your childhood nostalgia for your favorite sports team is not as culturally significant as the name of another's  people.  The cost of accepting a sports team named after an actual living group of people--with a real history that isn't all that favorable to the dominate group--is that history is obscured by the team name.  

 

The entire of term of Indians is ridiculous, based on misnomer of the first colonial expeditions to what they believed was east asia.  That many Native Americans prefer the term Indian, is not because the name honors them, it is because the name incorporates the affect of colonialism on their people, which is, unfortunately, part and parcel with their personhood.   I think Sherman Alexie made the point well in this very accessible poem (just one guy's perspective, but it sure rings true, no?). 

 

 

[nicksaviking]

Spartans are actual people. Not that most modern Spartans know or care about the football team. So are:

 

Scots (Alma College & Macalester College) and Fighting Scots (Edinboro University of PA, Gordon College, Ohio Valley U, Wooster), Swedes (Bethany College), Dutch (Central College) & Flying Dutchmen (Hope College & Lebanon Valley College), Chippewas (Central Michigan), Hustlin' Quakers (Earlham), Fighting Quakers (Wilmington College), and Quakers (U Penn), Tejanos (El Paso Community College), Seminoles (FL State), Fighting Illini (Illinois), Ragin' Cajuns (Louisiana Lafayette), Highlanders (MacMurray College, NJIT, Radford U), Choctaws (Miss. State), Pygmies (NM Minning & Tech), Fighting Irish (Notre Dame), Texans (Tarleton State U), Tribe (William & Mary)

 

and I am not including names such as Mountaineeers, Pioneers, Cowboys, Majors, Senators, Colonels, Packers, Lumberjacks 49ers, Vikings, Trojans, Rebels etc that refer to specific groups of people albeit some historic and some occupations.

 

To me "Indian" as a mascot or nickname is about as offensive as "Scot" or "Quaker". Same thing. Pygmies is probably more offensive than all three...

The Vikings were named BY a Scandinavian community. The Fighting Irish were named BY Irish Catholics. I'd gues many of those names were named BY or FOR the communities they are found in. Show me a school or sports team that was created BY Natives FOR Natives and I'll agree, the name should stick. Also most of these examples listed here are occupations not ethnicities, I'd hope people understand the difference between something you choose to do and something you do not choose to be.

 

If the Twins were a culturally offensive name and had to be changed, I'd get over it in about five minutes. I cheer for the team, not the logo. What's wrong with people that they wrap themselves up with a stupid mascot so tightly that they act like changing it will destroy their life?

[slash129]

 

 What's wrong with people that they wrap themselves up with a stupid mascot so tightly that they act like changing it will destroy their life?

 

Perhaps they're just tired of being members of the most whiney, thin-skinned, easily offended society in the history of the world ... The stupid mascot is just the straw, even if legitimately offensive

[theBOMisthebomb]

It is the right decision. Our society has evolved beyond this type of logo. Now, get rid of the nickname for the Cleveland baseball team and the Washington, DC football team. Some things are wrong and need to be changed.

[slash129]

Our society has evolved beyond this type of logo.

Not really ... The fans at any Indians game far outnumber the uniformed representatives ... After reading Twitter and watching news videos covering the change, it sounds like a lot of them plan to make it a point to don Chief Wahoo regularly

[olivia11]

I think what's big here is MLB and Manfred officially saying that the logo was inappropriate:

"the logo is no longer appropriate for on-field use in Major League Baseball".

 

That's a huge step.  Next step would be not televising fans dressed as "Chief Wahoo", etc.  But, coming out and saying it is inappropriate, rather than something like "in need of an update" sends a pretty clear signal of what MLB wants to happen with the Cleveland baseball team in the near future.

[Monkeypaws]

 

Indians technically is not a race of people.  It is the collective name given to the many Nations of pre-Columbian Americans. 

 

Also, I would suspect that some Catholics might object if their religion is used as a Mascot...

[ashbury]

Perhaps they're just tired of being members of the most whiney, thin-skinned, easily offended society in the history of the world ... The stupid mascot is just the straw, even if legitimately offensive

Easily offended, by the legitimately offensive? Sometimes a person has gotta take a stand, man.

[slash129]

Easily offended, by the legitimately offensive? Sometimes you gotta take a stand, man.

I was just trying to come up with a reason why someone would get all wrapped up in a mascot retirement. If they're constantly bombarded with this is offensive and that is offensive, they get worn down. They decide to take a stand, even though the timing lines up with a trivial mascot retirement.

[Taildragger8791]

 

 

If you're trying to point out something offensive about the swinging friar logo or the team name then you're going to have to explain it, because I don't see it. Padres were named for the Spanish friars (fathers) who founded San Diego. The logo doesn't depict an exaggerated racial caricature. I'm not aware of any controversy surrounding the team name, logo, or history.

[ashbury]

I was just trying to come up with a reason

I went back to change the wording to be less likely to be taken personally, but not in time to help, it turned out. Sorry.

[Mike Sixel]

Why would anyone be angry about a logo or even a team name? Would the Twins not be the same team if they changed logos? Oh, wait, they have changed hats, and uniforms.....and still you root for them......

[Cast of Thousands]

 

The point, for those who may struggle with logic, is that nobody names something as an insult. Naming a baseball team "Indians" is a great honor to Indians. It's showing them utmost respect to name something after them. 

 

For every person complaining about the name Indians, they better be equally complaining about the name Vikings and the crowd chant celebrating drinking out of a murdered opponent's skull (skol). You want offensive? That is offensive.

It brings tears to my eyes what massive and monumental relief and good this will bring to the Native American community.  Clearly the good this will do for those folks is immeasurable.  They have suffered long enough!!

[Dantes929]

 

The Vikings were named BY a Scandinavian community. The Fighting Irish were named BY Irish Catholics. I'd gues many of those names were named BY or FOR the communities they are found in. Show me a school or sports team that was created BY Natives FOR Natives and I'll agree, the name should stick. Also most of these examples listed here are occupations not ethnicities, I'd hope people understand the difference between something you choose to do and something you do not choose to be.

If the Twins were a culturally offensive name and had to be changed, I'd get over it in about five minutes. I cheer for the team, not the logo. What's wrong with people that they wrap themselves up with a stupid mascot so tightly that they act like changing it will destroy their life?

I look at a stat like 80% of Native Americans are not offended by the term Indian and 20% are and I wonder if that 20% is taking it all too seriously but I am a German whose family moved here a 100 years ago and give very little thought to any of my ancestors beyond my parents so I know I just can't relate to that kind of heritage ownership.   But what I REALLY don't understand is the other side of the coin.   If you are not Native American, or specifically a member of the Sioux tribe why would you take such issue with a sports team that stops using either as a mascot?    You really need to step back and just ask yourself.   "Why do I care".     My college changed its mascot and I gave it less than 5 minutes. thought.   The same would hold true for any of the teams I have played on or followed.    I am not a Crusader, a Raider, a Viking, a Redman or a Twin.    I love the Twins and like the history and reason for the name but even if it wasn't deemed culturally offensive I wouldn't spend any time protesting a change.     I kind of like names that draw on history or geographical significance but don't insist on it.   If the Golden Gophers changed their name to the Gray Squirrels how does that change any one's lives.  

 

What's wrong with people that they wrap themselves up with a stupid mascot so tightly.

 

Just felt like that needed to be said again.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Why would anyone be angry about a logo or even a team name? Would the Twins not be the same team if they changed logos? Oh, wait, they have changed hats, and uniforms.....and still you root for them......

 

To further this point: I'm pretty sure the Timberwolves are on their 6th logo in the last 7 years.  Or something damn close to that.  I didn't see anyone lying in the street over any of those changes.

 

It ends up being about the principle of the thing, but the principles are all misguided.  Our long-standing, demeaning treatment of Native Americans is long overdue for some reversal.