Page 2 of 2 [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

OliveOilMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere

30 Mar 2012, 6:53 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
What do you think of Indians (Native American type) as school or sports mascots?

I thought of starting this thread while posting something in the Stats forum, so I did.

My kid's high school mascot is the Choctaws, and they have a big statue of a Choctaw Indian in the entrance to the school in traditional clothing with feathered head dress and a tomehawk. They have tomahawks painted in the parking lot pointing direction insead of arrows. They did have to give up the having a guy dressed up as one as a mascot at football games because of some law, but otherwise, they are still the Choctaws.

I've heard of people protesting using Indians as mascots, and some people saying that it's harmless. Most people down here are part Indian, in fact I haven't met anybody from here who isn't. My great grandmother was full blooded Indian and it's never bothered me at all. Most people down here, it doesn't bother.

I can see how some people would see it as bad though. Having the Southside Italians, or the Roosevelt Swedes, or the Jackson Heights Jews wouldnt make very much sense, but I think thats because those are just regular people, where the Indian mascots that are used are not the regular people today who are Indian, but the Indian Chief from the Old West.

What do you think?



Native Americans are not Indian. You see, Indian is a nationality and not a racial taxon. And furthermore, native americans have no geographical or genetic relationship to India whatsoever! They came here from Siberia and are most closely related to east asians.


I do wonder what people would think if an actual Indian were used as a mascot for a sports team.


It's just a word that's been used for years and most people know the difference between American Indian and Asian Indian. I'm very aware that they aren't related to India and I'm aware of why they are called that.

I think i mentioned something about how using other ethnicities would be odd as a mascot because they are just regular people. Using an Asian Indian would fall under the examples I gave, I suppose.



I associate the word "asian" with mongoloid peoples. So I simpy use Indian(occasionally with the qualifier "east") but never refer to native americans as indians/american indians. That term needs to be eliminated. Not for the sake of political correctness, but for the sake of facts.


Most of the Indian (as in from India) people I know prefer the term Asian. It threw me too when I first heard it, but it's common use. I've also heard people use the two terms "Woo Woo Indian" and "Head Dot Indian". I just say Indian and people usually know which I mean by the context. If I have to explain I say "American Indian" or "Indian from India".


_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA. ;-)

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com


OliveOilMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere

30 Mar 2012, 6:56 pm

LKL wrote:
Quote:
Having the Southside Italians, or the Roosevelt Swedes, or the Jackson Heights Jews wouldnt make very much sense, but I think thats because those are just regular people, where the Indian mascots that are used are not the regular people today who are Indian, but the Indian Chief from the Old West

That is the crux of the problem right there. The peoples used as mascots (a category mostly composed of animals, btw) are almost exclusively peoples who were extremely oppressed and/or discriminated against when the team was named, some of them to the point of having been subsumed inot the main culture and/or no longer existing.

Do you think that the 'Choctaw' mascot represents you, individually, your race? Or do you think it represents them, those other guys that we beat and sent to reservations?


I'm not Choctaw, I'm part Cherokee. I think it represents the idea of an Indian warrior. Very fierce. Most of us from Alabama, when studying Alabama history in school have heard lots and lots about Indians here. We have learned about them for years and it's a huge part of Alabama history, and most people in the state are part Indian of some sort. Lots of our towns have Indian names too, and rivers, etc. I think they tend to use them because they represent part of Alabama's past to lots of people. And because most everybody here shares that heritage, it's something most of us have in common.


_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA. ;-)

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com


OliveOilMom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2011
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,447
Location: About 50 miles past the middle of nowhere

30 Mar 2012, 7:08 pm

Jacoby wrote:
Joker wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
It depends on the depiction really. The Washington Redskins is obviously the most offensive but is the one least likely to change. Marquette University's old mascot was the Warriors and it depicted a Native American warrior, something I didn't find offensive at all in comparison, and they went so far to completely change the name of the team as well as the mascot.

As long as the depiction is done in a derogatory way then I think it's okay. There are other team names and mascots that depict other people historical or not. Spartans, Trojans, Vikings, Irish, Knickerbockers, Celtics, Cajuns, Quakers, Aztecs, etc.


I am Cherokee and do not find the washington redskins masscot offensive at all.


do you find any depictions of Native Americans to be offensive tho?

I think if you were going to offended by any, that would be the one.


I'm part Cherokee and I don't find any of them offensive. I'm half Italian and I don't find the Sopranos or the Godfather or Goodfellas offensive. I'm part Irish and I don't find Lucky Charms offensive. I'm part Scottish and I don't find Trainspotting offensive. In other words, I'm aware that there are some people who are like the stereotypes and in the media you want to find something interesting to people. A regular Cherokee guy going to work and coming home and watching the news and doing stuff with his kids will not be interesting, although that's what you will most likely find when you find a Cherokee. Same with Italians, Irish, etc. In fact I am a member of one of the Cherokee tribes here in Alabama. We pay a fee once a year and there are events we go to or classes we can take etc. Everybody there is just a normal person, even those who are full blooded or close to it. Without a stereotype, they wouldn't be interesting at all. Whats interesting about a bunch of people at a tribal gathering who are sitting around in lawn chairs with coolers of beer, tea and cokes and are listening to the ball game on the radio and cooking burgers and hot dogs on the grill?

If you have a tv show, a movie, a book, etc, you want your Indian character to look and sound like we think they would. You want them to have some sort of mystic thing about them. Just like you want your Italian character to have some attributes that are stereotypical. Unless it's not central to the plot and in which case their ethnicity is not a plot device. Their ethnicity may just be an interesting fact about them, and they show no stereotypical qualities because the movie, show, book etc is focused on other qualities they have which are central to the plots.

I don't see why people spend so much time getting worked up over stereotypes.


_________________
I'm giving it another shot. We will see.
My forum is still there and everyone is welcome to come join as well. There is a private women only subforum there if anyone is interested. Also, there is no CAPTCHA. ;-)

The link to the forum is http://www.rightplanet.proboards.com


Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

30 Mar 2012, 7:11 pm

OliveOilMom wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
Joker wrote:
Jacoby wrote:
It depends on the depiction really. The Washington Redskins is obviously the most offensive but is the one least likely to change. Marquette University's old mascot was the Warriors and it depicted a Native American warrior, something I didn't find offensive at all in comparison, and they went so far to completely change the name of the team as well as the mascot.

As long as the depiction is done in a derogatory way then I think it's okay. There are other team names and mascots that depict other people historical or not. Spartans, Trojans, Vikings, Irish, Knickerbockers, Celtics, Cajuns, Quakers, Aztecs, etc.


I am Cherokee and do not find the washington redskins masscot offensive at all.


do you find any depictions of Native Americans to be offensive tho?

I think if you were going to offended by any, that would be the one.


I'm part Cherokee and I don't find any of them offensive. I'm half Italian and I don't find the Sopranos or the Godfather or Goodfellas offensive. I'm part Irish and I don't find Lucky Charms offensive. I'm part Scottish and I don't find Trainspotting offensive. In other words, I'm aware that there are some people who are like the stereotypes and in the media you want to find something interesting to people. A regular Cherokee guy going to work and coming home and watching the news and doing stuff with his kids will not be interesting, although that's what you will most likely find when you find a Cherokee. Same with Italians, Irish, etc. In fact I am a member of one of the Cherokee tribes here in Alabama. We pay a fee once a year and there are events we go to or classes we can take etc. Everybody there is just a normal person, even those who are full blooded or close to it. Without a stereotype, they wouldn't be interesting at all. Whats interesting about a bunch of people at a tribal gathering who are sitting around in lawn chairs with coolers of beer, tea and cokes and are listening to the ball game on the radio and cooking burgers and hot dogs on the grill?

If you have a tv show, a movie, a book, etc, you want your Indian character to look and sound like we think they would. You want them to have some sort of mystic thing about them. Just like you want your Italian character to have some attributes that are stereotypical. Unless it's not central to the plot and in which case their ethnicity is not a plot device. Their ethnicity may just be an interesting fact about them, and they show no stereotypical qualities because the movie, show, book etc is focused on other qualities they have which are central to the plots.

I don't see why people spend so much time getting worked up over stereotypes.


Now that I am older and wiser it doesn't bother me it takes a lot to rattle my cage these days.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

30 Mar 2012, 7:59 pm

I'm Irish on my mothers side and the Notre Dame mascot is an Irish leprechaun. I guess I should feel offended, insulted, marginalized, etc.......



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

30 Mar 2012, 8:00 pm

Raptor wrote:
I'm Irish on my mothers side and the Notre Dame mascot is an Irish leprechaun. I guess I should feel offended, insulted, marginalized, etc.......


Ha we Irish have always been the butt of most jokes :lol: I find the idea of some one getting upset over any masscot to be a giant waste of time.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

30 Mar 2012, 8:48 pm

Joker wrote:
Raptor wrote:
I'm Irish on my mothers side and the Notre Dame mascot is an Irish leprechaun. I guess I should feel offended, insulted, marginalized, etc.......


Ha we Irish have always been the butt of most jokes :lol: I find the idea of some one getting upset over any masscot to be a giant waste of time.


I was being sarcastic.....



Joker
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Mar 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,593
Location: North Carolina The Tar Heel State :)

30 Mar 2012, 8:53 pm

Raptor wrote:
Joker wrote:
Raptor wrote:
I'm Irish on my mothers side and the Notre Dame mascot is an Irish leprechaun. I guess I should feel offended, insulted, marginalized, etc.......


Ha we Irish have always been the butt of most jokes :lol: I find the idea of some one getting upset over any masscot to be a giant waste of time.


I was being sarcastic.....


I was telling a joke :wink:



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 70
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,189
Location: temperate zone

31 Mar 2012, 7:28 am

AspieRogue wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
OliveOilMom wrote:
What do you think of Indians (Native American type) as school or sports mascots?

I thought of starting this thread while posting something in the Stats forum, so I did.

My kid's high school mascot is the Choctaws, and they have a big statue of a Choctaw Indian in the entrance to the school in traditional clothing with feathered head dress and a tomehawk. They have tomahawks painted in the parking lot pointing direction insead of arrows. They did have to give up the having a guy dressed up as one as a mascot at football games because of some law, but otherwise, they are still the Choctaws.

I've heard of people protesting using Indians as mascots, and some people saying that it's harmless. Most people down here are part Indian, in fact I haven't met anybody from here who isn't. My great grandmother was full blooded Indian and it's never bothered me at all. Most people down here, it doesn't bother.

I can see how some people would see it as bad though. Having the Southside Italians, or the Roosevelt Swedes, or the Jackson Heights Jews wouldnt make very much sense, but I think thats because those are just regular people, where the Indian mascots that are used are not the regular people today who are Indian, but the Indian Chief from the Old West.

What do you think?



Native Americans are not Indian. You see, Indian is a nationality and not a racial taxon. And furthermore, native americans have no geographical or genetic relationship to India whatsoever! They came here from Siberia and are most closely related to east asians.


I do wonder what people would think if an actual Indian were used as a mascot for a sports team.


It's just a word that's been used for years and most people know the difference between American Indian and Asian Indian. I'm very aware that they aren't related to India and I'm aware of why they are called that.

I think i mentioned something about how using other ethnicities would be odd as a mascot because they are just regular people. Using an Asian Indian would fall under the examples I gave, I suppose.



I associate the word "asian" with mongoloid peoples. So I simpy use Indian(occasionally with the qualifier "east") but never refer to native americans as indians/american indians. That term needs to be eliminated. Not for the sake of political correctness, but for the sake of facts.


Right point, wrong place to bring it up.

Whatever the H you call them - is it right to use them as mascots for sports teams ( either by schools or by pro teams ?)- THAT is the question.

Everyone knows that Choctaws dont come from India.
Blame Christopher Columbus, not olive oil mom, for this flaw in the English Language.

But since youve brought that seperate issue up- I not only agree with you-it happens to be one of my axes as well!

And, like you said, its not for "political correctness' but for accuracy.

Its a cumbersome PIA to have to specify which kind of "Indian" you're talking about. You have to say "east" Indian, or "Asian" Indian- if you're talking about folks from Bangalore.

Some people even use the phrase "red dot or feather?" to ascertain which kinda of "indian" you're talking about.

I dont like "native american" because every american who isnt an immigrant is a "native american" because they were born here including White mostly German backgrounded folks like me.

I favor "indigenous American" for a number of reasons including the fact that you dont have to change the initials on their luggage (so to speak)-well you have to flip the AI to IA, but thats all.

Back to the original question: we dont have a team called "the Minnesotta Swedes", but we do have a team called "the Minnesotta Vikings". Other ancient warriors, like Spartans and Trojans, get used a team names. And there are the Boston Celtics, Notre Dame"s "Fighting Irish", and the Montreal Canadiens. Are those that different from Redskins, and Braves, and so forth?