Author Topic: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...  (Read 29892 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #90 on: December 16, 2020, 08:25:51 AM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23322
  • Tommy Points: 2509
Weren't black people given a name hundreds of years ago that is still offensive and considered racist?

Slurs are different in kind.  Nobody uses “Indian” as a pejorative.
That word used for black people wasn't considered a pejorative for a couple centuries.

Also, yes, some people do use Indian as a pejorative.

Who?  Who is going around sneering the term “Indian” at people as a slur or insult?  You’d think they’d be using one of the other slurs or stereotypes.  It’s probably about as common as racists using “Black” or “Latino” as a pejorative.  It’s just a description with no hateful connotation.

As for how groups determine what names they can and can’t go by, a lot of it seems nonsensical to me.  “Queer” was acceptable, then not acceptable, now acceptable again.  “Retarded” became offensive, to the point that medical journals had to stop using a diagnosis.  The NAACP refers to “colored” people, a term that can’t be used.  But “person of color” is now a preferred moniker.  At what point is it arbitrary?  Why not base “offense” on intent, rather than nonsense standards?  Call out the actual racists, not the “micro aggressors”.

Intent is definitely a factor, but a person can always claim lack of intent (no offense intended, but...) and go ahead and be offensive. I think being reasonably thoughtful and informed about what others find offensive is something that matters in society if we value respect and getting along with one another.

One of the more frustrating moments for me is when I am bothered by something and someone says "that shouldn't bother you".  It's not that I wouldn't eventually conclude sometimes that I'm making a bigger deal out of something than I ought to -- but that's really my decision and my process.  I'd rather someone acknowledge (respect) that I'm bothered and let me work it out.   

I think it's a false claim that when a person or group complains about something that they find offensive that this means they are professional complainers or that they are stuck in a victim mindset.  It's entirely possible for someone to be offended by things like the branding of "Indian" as a caricature and yet be productive, determined, responsible, contributing member of society.  Voicing sensitivity about something does not mean a person or group is stuck or fixated in negativity and a mindset of victimhood. 

That said, no doubt there are those who use victimhood to rationalize their own depressive mode of existence.  Use it as a way to explain why nothing ever goes their way.  In fairness, there are those who do face piles of barriers and obstacles, and though these things may be true victim mindset surely doesn't help.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #91 on: December 16, 2020, 09:01:39 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58554
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
It's entirely possible for someone to be offended by things like the branding of "Indian" as a caricature and yet be productive, determined, responsible, contributing member of society.

To be clear on my argument, I’ve got no issue with those who don’t like seeing their culture / image turned into a caricature.  Wahoo is a visualization of that that clearly plays up stereotypes.  That logo should have been gone years ago.

But the term Indian isn’t pejorative.  It’s not the equivalent of “savages”, “injuns”, or “redskin”.  It’s been in the nomenclature for 500+ years.  If somebody in 2020 now says they’re offended by it, I suspect they’re a person who goes looking for offense.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #92 on: January 01, 2021, 09:12:59 AM »

Offline dannyboy35

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1939
  • Tommy Points: 104
... the Indians are no more.

Personally, I never found “Indians” to be offensive.  Chief Wahoo, yes.  Seeming slurs like “Redskins”, yes.  But names like “Seminoles”, “Sioux”, and the more general “Indians” weren’t inherently offensive to me.

"Indians" is offensive (regardless of sports teams) because we aren't people from India.

Eh.  Aboriginal people are going to be given names by settlers.  It’s been 500 years.  I’m sure the original settlers in Ireland didn’t initially want to be called “Irish”, either.

If that type of thing is taking up space in somebody’s head, they’re doing life wrong.

  Yeah, and it’s better take that Aboriginal people’s ancestors get a chance to change it. If it offends even a. Mall portion everyone knows it’s the right thing to do. No big deal as long as they do it. People putting up a stink about it I would say they got way too  much time .
  They should be happy. New name without any weirdness to it. New logo, new unis. Pretty cool.
 I agree with pretty much e ergo e though that Redskins is next level and really pretty embarrassing it existed so long. 

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #93 on: January 01, 2021, 09:24:53 AM »

Offline Birdman

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9170
  • Tommy Points: 412
Got Washington Foitball Team, now be Cleveland Baseball Team
C/PF-Horford, Baynes, Noel, Theis, Morris,
SF/SG- Tatum, Brown, Hayward, Smart, Semi, Clark
PG- Irving, Rozier, Larkin

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #94 on: January 01, 2021, 10:49:39 AM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23322
  • Tommy Points: 2509
Quote
It's entirely possible for someone to be offended by things like the branding of "Indian" as a caricature and yet be productive, determined, responsible, contributing member of society.

To be clear on my argument, I’ve got no issue with those who don’t like seeing their culture / image turned into a caricature.  Wahoo is a visualization of that that clearly plays up stereotypes.  That logo should have been gone years ago.

But the term Indian isn’t pejorative.  It’s not the equivalent of “savages”, “injuns”, or “redskin”.  It’s been in the nomenclature for 500+ years.  If somebody in 2020 now says they’re offended by it, I suspect they’re a person who goes looking for offense.

I don’t think Indian is necessarily pejorative.  But I suspect that there are Native/Indigenous Americans who have had a different experience with the word than I have. 

The use of the term Indian, the caricature mascots, the stereotypic memorabilia (tomahawks), the war chants, war paints, headdresses,   the tomahawk chop - it’s s package deal.   If you aren’t the “Indians” you aren’t chanting, war dancing, whooping, or chopping. 

I guess among the differences between Indians and the example of Fighting Irish is the presence of mass mocking stereotypes associated with fandom and merchandising with every “Indian” named team.  Additionally, I think it is pretty obvious that team’s named for other races/ethnicities who’ve experienced stereotyping would be inappropriate - Brooklyn Jews?  San Francisco Orientals (used here for analogous passé term)?