http://www.mauricereeves.com/images/redskins.jpg
Washington Redskins

http://www.athlonsports.com/images/articles/Cleveland%20Indians10.png
Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo

http://www.hdbeat.com/images/2005/09/Fighting%20Irish%202.jpg
Norte Dame Fighting Irish

These are among many mascots, logos and symbols are major sports teams that some want banned.  What I don't get is this: with so many problems in the world today, why do so many focus of little things like this they can get changed, especially when they're in such a small minority who even give these things second thoughts much less really be offended by them.  What is with people?

Thoughts?

I think there's more important things in the world than sports team logos and these people need to quit whining about them, and as an Indians fan chief wahoo must stay!

I think the whole thing is ridiculous! We are getting way to PC for our own goods!! ::) ::)

You know what really pisses me off?


"Unpolitically" isn't a word.

The mascot at my local high school is "The Demon" -- a cute little red devil.  Someone asked me, "As a Christian, is it uncomfortable for you that the mascot of your children's school is a devil?  Don't you think that gives a wrong impression to the children?"  I looked at her and said, "huh?"  

I told her no.  I don't think it gives any impression.  I don't think anyone thinks that hard about it and I certainly do not worry.  The little devil is cute and I would not participate in any kind of effort to have it changed.

I wish people would chill.  I have not grown up thinking all indians had red skin and carried tomahawks because some mascot was sketched that way.  Most people are not that gullible.

I think the whole thing is ridiculous! We are getting way to PC for our own goods!! ::) ::)


Yeah.  Now there's an issue!  ;)

(it should be "politically incorrect" yes? ... sorry, it's the editor in me)

(it should be "politically incorrect" yes? ... sorry, it's the editor in me)



Right.  The emphasis is not on the political-ness of the word/phrase/idea/image, but the correctness of it.  Therefore, the negation should be on the "correct", not the "political".

Right.  The emphasis is not on the political-ness of the word/phrase/idea/image, but the correctness of it.  Therefore, the negation should be on the "correct", not the "political".


Thanks for the grammar lesson...

Thanks for the grammar lesson...



Someone else pointed it out.  I was merely concurring.

all I am saying is that it seems that this country is getting way to politically correct when it comes to not wanting offend this person or that person....I mean, I can see it to an extent, but they have a way of taking things too far.

regarding the grammar....it never was my forte' in high school or college...I was much more of a literature kinda person. ;)

Someone else pointed it out.  I was merely concurring.


But no, it was a good point you pointed out.

'Unpolitically' correct sports term...that doesn't make any sense...Well it means its non-political and correct. But correct with regards to what? lol. Makes no sense at all.

But no, it was a good point you pointed out.

'Unpolitically' correct sports term...that doesn't make any sense...Well it means its non-political and correct. But correct with regards to what? lol. Makes no sense at all.


This is really the last thing I will post about this but...I love wordplay.  So I'm sure the starter of the thread was saying "Un 'politically-correct' " which would be correct.  And to be honest, I wouldn't have even noticed it until Sister Morph pointed it out.  All meant in fun of course  :)

"Unpolitically" isn't a word.


Big deal.

No one will take the word "ain't" away from southerners.

But if it will get the thread back on topic, consider it fixed.

Big deal.

No one will take the word "ain't" away from southerners.

But if it will get the thread back on topic, consider it fixed.



I don't hear a lot of Southerners use the word ain't.  Granted I've only lived down here for 5 years, but still.



To talk about the topic the thread.................who cares.  The only people who get offended are people who choose to be.  It's not inherently offensive.

No one will take the word "ain't" away from southerners.



My father was a southerner and he never used "ain't", and we were never allowed to use "ain't".  A lot
of people in all sections of this country use it, it isn't a southern thing, It is a lack of education thing.
("I aksed him, and he ain't!")  ::)

To talk about the topic the thread.................who cares.  The only people who get offended are people who choose to be.  It's not inherently offensive.


I agree.  Although, to be fair, I can see how some groups -- like American Indians -- might just be so tired of being stereotyped that they want it all stopped.  If they had more equity in day to day life, they probably wouldn't care about the symbols of sports teams.

(Now, being Norwegian, I've never had a problem with the Vikings.  But no one has ever rejected me due to my Viking status  ???)

My father was a southerner and he never used "ain't", and we were never allowed to use "ain't".  A lot
of people in all sections of this country use it, it isn't a southern thing, It is a lack of education thing.
("I aksed him, and he ain't!")  ::)


Not at all.

Go to England and see how many people say "Ain't". The vast majority I will assure you.

You know what really pisses me off?


"Unpolitically" isn't a word.


If my name was GWB2004, at this point I'd be doing anything to try and distract people from my namesake, including bringing up an old rightwing saw irrelevant to all pertinent issues in current events!

If "unpolitically" isn't a word, make it one!
Doubleplus good
Doubleplus ungood

Anyway, I'm always surprised Cleveland hangs on to that mascot. It not only plays on a sick racist stereotype, it makes that ballclub look dated and out of touch!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/04/elefant.gif


My father was a southerner and he never used "ain't", and we were never allowed to use "ain't".  A lot
of people in all sections of this country use it, it isn't a southern thing, It is a lack of education thing.
("I aksed him, and he ain't!")  ::)

I think GWB meant something in re: "Southerners" more along the lines of "Ain't today, ain't tomorrow, and ain't forevever!"
;)

Isn't this kind of similar to people on the right who find flag-burning offensive and want it banned?

Isn't this kind of similar to people on the right who find flag-burning offensive and want it banned?


Errr.. no.

Explain please.

I'm curious as to how you've linked them.

Errr.. no.

Explain please.

I'm curious as to how you've linked them.


In both cases, some people are seeing an image that offends their sensibilities, and they want it removed.

With flag-burning, it offends their patriotism, and with these sports team logos, it offends their sensitivity over racial stereotypes.

In both cases, some people are seeing an image that offends their sensibilities, and they want it removed.

With flag-burning, it offends their patriotism, and with these sports team logos, it offends their sensitivity over racial stereotypes.


Fair, fair.

But with the flag, it's a symbol that represents the whole nation and the principals that it was built on.

ummmmm.....GWB IS a "Southerner".....he's in your neck of the woods, if memory serves ;)



I was talking about people who I see every day.......where I live.  Not someone from Texas I've never met and never plan to meet.

Fair, fair.

But with the flag, it's a symbol that represents the whole nation and the principals that it was built on.


But in a free and non-totalitarian society, national symbols shouldn't be accorded any more respect or protection than any other kinds of symbols(I'll towel myself off with the flag if I wanna!)

And in both cases, it still comes down to an issue of censorship and thought-control.

Not someone from Texas I've never met and never plan to meet.


I think she means we both live in the state of Georgia.

A good deal of people I know use the word "ain't", but I shouldn't call it a southern thing.  It's used almost everywhere now.

But in a free and non-totalitarian society, national symbols shouldn't be accorded any more respect or protection than any other kinds of symbols(I'll towel myself off with the flag if I wanna!)

And in both cases, it still comes down to an issue of censorship and thought-control.



National symbols should be accorded respect.  They are symbols of this country, and if you respect the country, you should respect that which represents it.........like the flag.  Why else do you think people who dissent with our government choose to burn the flag?  Do you see them going to hunt a bald eagle to kill?  See anyone trying to knock down the Statue of Liberty? 

If I knew someone who was wiping their ass with the flag (not saying this is you, just anyone in general), I'd smack the hell out of them. 

I think she means we both live in the state of Georgia.



Where I live in Georgia, there aren't a lot of real "southerners".  We're all northern transplants up here.  My entire subdivision is NY, Boston and Chicago.

Anyway, I'm always surprised Cleveland hangs on to that mascot. It not only plays on a sick racist stereotype, it makes that ballclub look dated and out of touch!


Big deal.  91% of American Indians are not offended by it, so why should you be?

Is it not an improvment though if you're offended by these things over the old logo:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/68/OldClevelandIndiansLogo.jpg

Or this one:

http://zoom.cafepress.com/0/932070_zoom.jpg

;)

National symbols should be accorded respect.  They are symbols of this country, and if you respect the country, you should respect that which represents it.........like the flag.  Why else do you think people who dissent with our government choose to burn the flag?  Do you see them going to hunt a bald eagle to kill?  See anyone trying to knock down the Statue of Liberty? 

If I knew someone who was wiping their ass with the flag (not saying this is you, just anyone in general), I'd smack the hell out of them. 


Hunting bald eagles is cruel to animals. And the Statue of Liberty is public property, so damaging it would be a crime. But if I happen to own a flag(went to the store and paid for it with my own money, and all), it's mine, and I ought to be able to do whatever I want with it.

And if anyone slapped me, they'd find themselves in jail on assault charges.

Hunting bald eagles is cruel to animals. And the Statue of Liberty is public property, so damaging it would be a crime. But if I happen to own a flag(went to the store and paid for it with my own money, and all), it's mine, and I ought to be able to do whatever I want with it.

And if anyone slapped me, they'd find themselves in jail on assault charges.



Then you should also understand why people would find what you're doing offensive and reprehensible.  I was raised to respect the flag; that may not be the same for others.

ummmmm.....GWB IS a "Southerner".....he's in your neck of the woods, if memory serves ;)

Heh heh, "neck," a big red one!
;)


Big deal.  91% of American Indians are not offended by it, so why should you be?



I don't know where you're getting the 91% figure, don't much care either. The Cleveland Indians logo does not "offend" me. I didn't mean to imply that it did. I said the logo should embarrass the Cleveland ballclub because it's so retro and silly-looking. If your 91% figure is accurate, I suppose it is only because the logo is too absurd for Native Americans to take seriously. I would figure Cleveland would want a noble and powerful looking Indian warrior as their moscot, not a clownish one.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/08/rainfro.gif

Man, I don't get why people are bothered... how powerful of a hate symbol these mascots are!

Heh heh, "neck," a big red one!
;)

I don't know where you're getting the 91% figure, don't much care either. The Cleveland Indians logo does not "offend" me. I didn't mean to imply that it did. I said the logo should embarrass the Cleveland ballclub because it's so retro and silly-looking. If your 91% figure is accurate, I suppose it is only because the logo is too absurd for Native Americans to take seriously. I would figure Cleveland would want a noble and powerful looking Indian warrior as their moscot, not a clownish one.
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/08/rainfro.gif


No we love Chief Wahoo, lol.  :)

My father was a southerner and he never used "ain't", and we were never allowed to use "ain't".  A lot
of people in all sections of this country use it, it isn't a southern thing, It is a lack of education thing.
("I aksed him, and he ain't!")  ::)


Danoota...

Were y'all allowed to say, well, "y'all" ? 

???

http://www.hdbeat.com/images/2005/09/Fighting%20Irish%202.jpg
Norte Dame Fighting Irish

These are among many mascots, logos and symbols are major sports teams that some want banned.  What I don't get is this: with so many problems in the world today, why do so many focus of little things like this they can get changed, especially when they're in such a small minority who even give these things second thoughts much less really be offended by them.  What is with people?

Thoughts?


I can see some Native American people being upset with Chief Wahoo, the picture does look somewhat disrespectful.  I mean, what if George Bush decided to get back into pro baseball and started a team called the Houston Negroes, and the mascot was this guy with huge lips, big white teeth, and a massive 'fro shuffling does the street? 

As opposed to, let's say, the Houston Satchells, whose mascot would be a respectful rendition of Satchell Paige.  Big difference.

Now as to the "Fighting irish", as a person of largely irish descent I never saw it as derogatory.  I always saw it as referring to the team (and I guess, the Irish) as tenacious, which is a good thing.  Now if the mascot was holding a bottle of Jameson in one hand that would be a horse of a different color.

So for *some* of the Indian mascots and team logos, I think it is reasonable for Native Americans to be upset.  :-\\

I can see some Native American people being upset with Chief Wahoo, the picture does look somewhat disrespectful.  I mean, what if George Bush decided to get back into pro baseball and started a team called the Houston Negroes, and the mascot was this guy with huge lips, big white teeth, and a massive 'fro shuffling does the street? 

As opposed to, let's say, the Houston Satchells, whose mascot would be a respectful rendition of Satchell Paige.  Big difference.

Now as to the "Fighting irish", as a person of largely irish descent I never saw it as derogatory.  I always saw it as referring to the team (and I guess, the Irish) as tenacious, which is a good thing.  Now if the mascot was holding a bottle of Jameson in one hand that would be a horse of a different color.

So for *some* of the Indian mascots and team logos, I think it is reasonable for Native Americans to be upset.   :-\\

I don't mean no Jimmy The Greek inference here, but you know what some people call "The Fighting Irish"? "The Angry Africans"! Haw haw haw!
That's exactly my point, we would not tolerate a Steppin Fetchit mascot for a team called the "Houston Jigaboos,' yet the Redskins play on!
Ironically, the entertainment that presents the MOST negative stereotypes of African Americas is rap music. There is not a single racist attitude against Blacks that rap does not exploit. Very sickening indeed!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/07/pimpflash.gif

The thing that pi$$es me off about all of this is that a majority of the people who want them changed are not even Indian/Irish/whatever.



Well, then how 'bout these mascots:

New Jersey White Devils

Arizona Aryans

Jamestown Jews

so when  the Jamestown teams plays in Arizona, the Aryans' cheerleads will chant:

LET'S BURN THE JEWS!!! ARYANS BURN THE JEWS!!! GO GO GO!!!!!

LET'S BURN THE JEWS!!! ARYANS BURN THE JEWS!!! GO GO GO!!!!!


Hahahahah ;D

Hahahahah ;D


Please do not feed Star70.

Please do not feed Star70.

:D :D :D

I can see some Native American people being upset with Chief Wahoo, the picture does look somewhat disrespectful.  I mean, what if George Bush decided to get back into pro baseball and started a team called the Houston Negroes, and the mascot was this guy with huge lips, big white teeth, and a massive 'fro shuffling does the street? 

As opposed to, let's say, the Houston Satchells, whose mascot would be a respectful rendition of Satchell Paige.  Big difference.


Now what if it was called the "New Orleans Satchmo's"?  Would your image (minus the afro) be appropriate then?  Of course, the mascot would have to be seen playing a trumpet, with his eyes bugging out of his head.  In fact, I admire Satchmo so much that I would switch from the Angels to the Satchmos if it ever came to be.