Author Topic: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...  (Read 29900 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #75 on: December 15, 2020, 05:55:40 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #76 on: December 15, 2020, 06:45:13 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?


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 #77 on: December 15, 2020, 06:48:25 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #78 on: December 15, 2020, 07:03:42 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.

Again, I can have an opinion on the feelings of others.  Not all feelings or “offense” are valid.  It’s perfectly fine for me to feel that some of our professional whiners, snowflakes, safe spacers and buttercups in our society should buck up and address real issues.

Blaming trauma from 120 years ago for one’s current plight is certainly a pillar of victim culture, but I’m not sure it’s a particularly valid excuse.  American Indians aren’t the only people who were victims of a colonial genocide.  It sucks, but I would assume that they’ve got bigger issues than a name foisted upon them 528 years ago.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2020, 07:09:24 PM by Roy H. »


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 #79 on: December 15, 2020, 07:28:33 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.

Again, I can have an opinion on the feelings of others.  Not all feelings or “offense” are valid.  It’s perfectly fine for me to feel that some of our professional whiners, snowflakes, safe spacers and buttercups in our society should buck up and address real issues.

Blaming trauma from 120 years ago for one’s current plight is certainly a pillar of victim culture, but I’m not sure it’s a particularly valid excuse.  American Indians aren’t the only people who were victims of a colonial genocide.  It sucks, but I would assume that they’ve got bigger issues than a name foisted upon them 528 years ago.

A well-reasoned argument.  Name calling.  Well done, sir.

So when someone drives up onto your lawn and destroys your fence, and maybe over your foot, you will let them decide just how much damage has been done, right?   And it's okay if they call you names as they drive away because they have an 'opinion' that you should get over it.

120 years ago?   528 years ago?  Get educated sir, on what currently is happening to indigenous people in this country and maybe you would have an informed opinion, instead of just an opinion.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #80 on: December 15, 2020, 07:48:09 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.

Again, I can have an opinion on the feelings of others.  Not all feelings or “offense” are valid.  It’s perfectly fine for me to feel that some of our professional whiners, snowflakes, safe spacers and buttercups in our society should buck up and address real issues.

Blaming trauma from 120 years ago for one’s current plight is certainly a pillar of victim culture, but I’m not sure it’s a particularly valid excuse.  American Indians aren’t the only people who were victims of a colonial genocide.  It sucks, but I would assume that they’ve got bigger issues than a name foisted upon them 528 years ago.

A well-reasoned argument.  Name calling.  Well done, sir.

So when someone drives up onto your lawn and destroys your fence, and maybe over your foot, you will let them decide just how much damage has been done, right?   And it's okay if they call you names as they drive away because they have an 'opinion' that you should get over it.

120 years ago?   528 years ago?  Get educated sir, on what currently is happening to indigenous people in this country and maybe you would have an informed opinion, instead of just an opinion.

We are a society based upon:

1.  Property rights;
2.  Freedom of speech
3.  Freedom of intellectual thought

Me disagreeing with a ridiculous point of view is hardly the same as destroying property and inflicting personal injury.  That’s just not a logical argument.

And yes, 528 years is plenty of time to get over the grief of being called an Indian. 


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 #81 on: December 15, 2020, 08:07:12 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.

Again, I can have an opinion on the feelings of others.  Not all feelings or “offense” are valid.  It’s perfectly fine for me to feel that some of our professional whiners, snowflakes, safe spacers and buttercups in our society should buck up and address real issues.

Blaming trauma from 120 years ago for one’s current plight is certainly a pillar of victim culture, but I’m not sure it’s a particularly valid excuse.  American Indians aren’t the only people who were victims of a colonial genocide.  It sucks, but I would assume that they’ve got bigger issues than a name foisted upon them 528 years ago.

A well-reasoned argument.  Name calling.  Well done, sir.

So when someone drives up onto your lawn and destroys your fence, and maybe over your foot, you will let them decide just how much damage has been done, right?   And it's okay if they call you names as they drive away because they have an 'opinion' that you should get over it.

120 years ago?   528 years ago?  Get educated sir, on what currently is happening to indigenous people in this country and maybe you would have an informed opinion, instead of just an opinion.

We are a society based upon:

1.  Property rights;
2.  Freedom of speech
3.  Freedom of intellectual thought

Me disagreeing with a ridiculous point of view is hardly the same as destroying property and inflicting personal injury.  That’s just not a logical argument.

And yes, 528 years is plenty of time to get over the grief of being called an Indian.

Property rights?   You bring up property rights in a discussion about indigenous people?

So many self-serving ironies here, in this discussion.

NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #82 on: December 15, 2020, 08:38:16 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

Decide for yourself.  You have no right to decide for others -- who, I might add, are experiencing the social, physical and economic trauma of what has been done to them as a people right now, not in some distant past.

Again, I can have an opinion on the feelings of others.  Not all feelings or “offense” are valid.  It’s perfectly fine for me to feel that some of our professional whiners, snowflakes, safe spacers and buttercups in our society should buck up and address real issues.

Blaming trauma from 120 years ago for one’s current plight is certainly a pillar of victim culture, but I’m not sure it’s a particularly valid excuse.  American Indians aren’t the only people who were victims of a colonial genocide.  It sucks, but I would assume that they’ve got bigger issues than a name foisted upon them 528 years ago.

A well-reasoned argument.  Name calling.  Well done, sir.

So when someone drives up onto your lawn and destroys your fence, and maybe over your foot, you will let them decide just how much damage has been done, right?   And it's okay if they call you names as they drive away because they have an 'opinion' that you should get over it.

120 years ago?   528 years ago?  Get educated sir, on what currently is happening to indigenous people in this country and maybe you would have an informed opinion, instead of just an opinion.

We are a society based upon:

1.  Property rights;
2.  Freedom of speech
3.  Freedom of intellectual thought

Me disagreeing with a ridiculous point of view is hardly the same as destroying property and inflicting personal injury.  That’s just not a logical argument.

And yes, 528 years is plenty of time to get over the grief of being called an Indian.

Property rights?   You bring up property rights in a discussion about indigenous people?

So many self-serving ironies here, in this discussion.

You’re the one who made the strange, silly analogy.

As for American Indians:

1.  They’re not indigenous to North America.  They migrated here. 

2.  Many tribes were warlike and conquered territories.  Some attacked European settlers without provocation.  Hell, they even took slaves and committed war crimes.  Like all history, there’s a lot of grey area;

3.  None of this has anything with modern day people being upset about a name given to them by explorers 528 years ago.


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 #83 on: December 15, 2020, 08:42:54 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
Weren't black people given a name hundreds of years ago that is still offensive and considered racist?

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #84 on: December 15, 2020, 08:49:04 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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. 

Anything can be twisted into something offensive.  I mean, you didn’t capitalize “black”.  I’m sure you’ve offended somebody.


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 #85 on: December 15, 2020, 08:54:20 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 48120
  • Tommy Points: 8794
  • President of Jaylen Brown Fan Club
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.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #86 on: December 15, 2020, 09:05:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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”.



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 #87 on: December 16, 2020, 07:46:07 AM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
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”.

Please.  Just stop.  You are just digging yourself into a deep hole. 

Stop deciding for others whether they should feel offended.   It doesn't portray you in the light you think it does.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #88 on: December 16, 2020, 08:17:27 AM »

Online Kernewek

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3800
  • Tommy Points: 263
  • International Superstar
... 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.

I love how you get to decide what someone else can be offended by.  Makes life very convenient.  If I adopt the same philosophy, that frees me up to say all kinds of things about you, right?  And you don't get to decide whether you are offended.  You are just doing life wrong.

The fact that some other people may not be offended by a name given to them has pretty much nothing to do with whether some other people are offended by a different name given to them.

Yes, I’m entitled to an opinion about the viewpoints of others.  I think that anybody still hung up on a name given by colonizers 528 years ago has exceedingly thick skin.

My Irish ancestors were pillaged by Vikings.  They were ransacked by the English.  They had their Gods, land and language stripped from them.  The same is true of millions of people.  The very inspiration for the “Celtics” that we follow were essentially the victims of a genocide.

I can’t imagine spending my life outraged by the injustice of it all.  Should the team name “Vikings” offend me?  “Saxons”?  Or should I get over it and deal with issues that are actually important?

A key difference here is that (unless I'm misreading your post) you're not Irish*, and you're not being actively treated like dirt by your government today in the same way that Native Americans are.


*Obviously you have relatives who were/are part of the Irish diaspora, depending on when they left and how many generations it's been. I'm not trying to imply the opposite.
Man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much—the wheel, New York, wars and so on—whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time.

But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man—for precisely the same reasons.

Re: Cleveland Indians are dropping their name...
« Reply #89 on: December 16, 2020, 08:24:29 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58561
  • Tommy Points: -25634
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
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”.

Please.  Just stop.  You are just digging yourself into a deep hole. 

Stop deciding for others whether they should feel offended.   It doesn't portray you in the light you think it does.

I don’t care what “light” I’m portrayed in.  I think most “offense” is fake outrage.  Being called an Indian (under Federal law, even) isn’t in the top 500 things a truly oppressed or disadvantaged person should be worrying about.  Of course they’re entitled to their “offense”, and I’m entitled to think it’s stupid.


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