Moderators: peeker643, swerb, pup, paulcousineau
by motherscratcher » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:21 pm
by skatingtripods » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:31 pm
motherscratcher wrote:Just so he doesn't feel like he's alone on an island, I'm pretty much right with 7foot3 on this. Not that most of you didn't already know that.
I was just hoping this thread wouldn't be this again.
by motherscratcher » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:39 pm
by skatingtripods » Fri Feb 22, 2013 7:52 pm
motherscratcher wrote:I just wanted to see what people thought a good new name might be if it came to that.
by motherscratcher » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:46 pm
skatingtripods wrote:motherscratcher wrote:I just wanted to see what people thought a good new name might be if it came to that.
OK, but why do you not like the Indians name? We've already established that they're phasing out Chief Wahoo, so if that was the problem, they're combating it that way.
Just curious what bothers you about the name.
by swerb » Fri Feb 22, 2013 8:55 pm
motherscratcher wrote:skatingtripods wrote:motherscratcher wrote:I just wanted to see what people thought a good new name might be if it came to that.
OK, but why do you not like the Indians name? We've already established that they're phasing out Chief Wahoo, so if that was the problem, they're combating it that way.
Just curious what bothers you about the name.
Maybe it is all PC bullshit.
by peeker643 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:00 pm
7foot3 wrote:peeker643 wrote:Not talking about the local nine. Talking about how "Fighting Irish" is different because you say it is.
Well, I am Irish and I'm offended as hell. And so are 15% of my Irish-American club buddies and we want that shit changed. Now what?If Snoop organizes a group and they want everyone else to call them that, then I'm fine with that.
You are. Many won't be.
It's not the issue that I'd like to go away, ignore and die quietly. It's the people who ignorantly talk about it and write about it that I'd like to go away. Especially those who are hypocritical in what they say, what they write and how they live. And those are many.
I'm pretty comfortable that this white suburban male has an open mind and practices pretty much what he preaches and has taught his kids the same.
And I'll tell you this: If everyone everywhere, and including on this board, was as racially tolerant and open minded AS THEY CLAIM TO BE, and if everyone in the country and on these boards who claims to see people for their actions and their character as opposed to their skin color, race wouldn't be an issue in this country. It wouldn't be an issue on the boards. It wouldn't be the messy little pile you tried to avoid or had to step lightly around.
Again, tired of hearing the arguments about the Chief or the Irish or the Redskins. A disgustingly large percentage of the people who make the argument don't live up to their public positions or harbor their own biases and prejudices about someone else.
Hypocrisy rules.
The Fighting Irish isn't different just because I say it is. It actually is, and I explained already. You just don't like what I had to say, so you come up with some ridiculous example to attack instead.
Nope- it's not ridiculous. Any chance a group of Irish way back when called themselves that in the same way that some African- Americans call each other the 'N' word? And that large percentages of those same groups are offended by it?
If you are legitimately offended, then say so, and actually do something about it. But you don't get to pretend that there aren't deeper issues at hand than just somebody being offended by the team name and logo.
I've never tried to change your, or anyone else's position on this issue. I get why people want to keep the name and the logo. All I've said is that they were pretty clearly chosen with a racist sentiment, and why wouldn't we want to disassociate with that?
I don't care about the name or the logo. At all. Not whether it stays and not whether it goes. I'd also opine that the entire country was founded and it's constitution written based on the sentiment of racists and misogynists. Maybe the time and attention spent on Chief Wahoo and Redskins would be best served in addressing those issues that still exist. Sports will follow.
And you're right, people are always carrying prejudices. It's hard to avoid. But, I don't see how that should prevent us from at least trying to avoid them. Perfect and better aren't at odds.
Which is exactly why I'll try and make sure my little corner of the world is squared away before I worry about anyone else's. The issue is systemic. It goes away when generations grow up color-blind and with generation after generation having been taught about respect for individuals and other cultures and the differences that, while they may be visible, shouldn't be divisive. BTW, I think in a few more generations this is all (or mostly moot). The blending of races, creeds and colors will make it so. But IMO it won't be accelerated by force of will or shitty articles. YMMV.
by peeker643 » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:10 pm
motherscratcher wrote:
At the very least, if the name is changed and the Chief is relegated to history's dustbin, Peeker won't have to read about it any more. And he won't have to pretend like he doesn't care even though he's pretty clearly on one side. And he wont have to make any more posts about how either everything is racist or nothing is racist.
Do it for Peeker, dude. Won't somebody think of Peek?
by motherscratcher » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:24 pm
peeker643 wrote:motherscratcher wrote:
At the very least, if the name is changed and the Chief is relegated to history's dustbin, Peeker won't have to read about it any more. And he won't have to pretend like he doesn't care even though he's pretty clearly on one side. And he wont have to make any more posts about how either everything is racist or nothing is racist.
Do it for Peeker, dude. Won't somebody think of Peek?
I honestly don't care, Mo. Seriously. "Shoremen" is fine. So is "Pierogis", "Walleye", "Clambakes", and anything else. Steal the "Captains" from the minor league affiliate and make that the nickname.
It really doesn't matter.
by pup » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:25 pm
by motherscratcher » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:27 pm
pup wrote:The Fanatics
After all this time, i finally figured out Moscratch's problem with me. Probably subconscious and all, but those 4 times his old man came home and said "god damn, that kid kicked our ass again" probably stuck.
by pup » Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:28 pm
motherscratcher wrote:pup wrote:The Fanatics
After all this time, i finally figured out Moscratch's problem with me. Probably subconscious and all, but those 4 times his old man came home and said "god damn, that kid kicked our ass again" probably stuck.
Yup. I knew you were an asshole long before you knew I knew.
by Dellucci TailGator » Tue Feb 26, 2013 3:44 pm
by danwismar » Tue Feb 26, 2013 4:42 pm
by peeker643 » Tue Feb 26, 2013 5:19 pm
danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.
Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.
by 7foot3 » Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:00 pm
danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.
Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.
by motherscratcher » Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:51 pm
7foot3 wrote:danwismar wrote:To me the whining about Wahoo (or other sports team names or logos) is an example of posturing about symbolism over doing something of substance (which requires effort or dollars or something harder than typing on a keyboard) It's a pose...one struck by people more concerned with thinking well of themselves than out of any concern for the actual minority group on whose part they claim offense.
Give a shit about native Americans? Then volunteer...or donate...or drop a grand or two in their tax-free casinos...something real, in other words. The Wahoo could go away tomorrow, and the real lives of native Americans would not be positively impacted in the slightest.
So, if one doesn't volunteer or donate, they can't go "this is probably wrong, and we should back away from it?" I get what you and peeker are saying, and I'm really not trying to change your minds, but we're still making perfect and better enemies here.
And I'm scratching my head at the condescending nature you take towards people who are embarrassed by racist logos or names. Going "that was really dumb, we shouldn't do that anymore" isn't worthy of criticism.
by aclayman » Tue Feb 26, 2013 7:58 pm
by e0y2e3 » Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:29 pm

by Rat_Tail » Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:36 pm
by aclayman » Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:51 pm
Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?
by motherscratcher » Tue Feb 26, 2013 9:14 pm

by danwismar » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:00 am
by Rat_Tail » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:17 am
aclayman wrote:Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?
Yes, because that is the cause of the people who prefer the Block C caps. We want Chief Wahoo BANNED. And anyone seen wearing his likeness will be moved into special "camps" isolated from proper, politically correct Americans. We will call them Reservations or something to be ironic.
by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:06 am
by 7foot3 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:08 am
Rat_Tail wrote:aclayman wrote:Rat_Tail wrote:Chief Wahoo is no different than Super Mario. Should we ban that too?
Yes, because that is the cause of the people who prefer the Block C caps. We want Chief Wahoo BANNED. And anyone seen wearing his likeness will be moved into special "camps" isolated from proper, politically correct Americans. We will call them Reservations or something to be ironic.
Well you obviously don't want it around anymore.
If the time comes where fans can't buy gear with Wahoo on it that's a ban whether you want to call it one or not.
Wahoo is one of the few MLB logos that isn't just a letter. Replacing it with a block C is lazy and lame.
by Dnthateonthepronk » Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:51 am

by RickNashEquilibrium » Wed Feb 27, 2013 12:23 pm
by googleeph2 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:14 pm
7foot3 wrote: suburban white male who only cares how racism affects them individually and after thinking about it for no more than two seconds realizes they're fine, and wonders why everyone else shouldn't be fine as well.
by peeker643 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:23 pm
googleeph2 wrote:7foot3 wrote: suburban white male who only cares how racism affects them individually and after thinking about it for no more than two seconds realizes they're fine, and wonders why everyone else shouldn't be fine as well.
When you bring it to the level of stereotyping someone while assuming you know them, you might get away with it once. I dropped it up above, but now you are repeating yourself. You made your point without the personal attacks.
by googleeph2 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:33 pm
peeker643 wrote: I just can't get past the fact that so many who say the right things often are caught up or exposed for doing the wrong things.
by peeker643 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:36 pm
googleeph2 wrote:peeker643 wrote: I just can't get past the fact that so many who say the right things often are caught up or exposed for doing the wrong things.
This is what I don't get bent about. Nobody is perfect. Often it's just them being human, not hypocritical. Lines can be crossed though, of course.
The descent of debate into a personal attack is something I have little patience for.
It's often hypocritical. (joke)
by smalls1129 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:41 pm
by e0y2e3 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:13 pm

by skatingtripods » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:50 pm
e0y2e3 wrote:Drawing a caricature of a race and tagging it as identifiable as that race is racism and it has absolutely nothing to do with considering Indians savages. I suggest you re-read what Andrew wrote, because he lays this out clear as day.
7foot3 wrote:The Indians' name was chosen because white people, at that time, thought of Native Americans as subhuman savages, "on the warpath all the time, and eager for scalps to dangle at their belts". Surely you can see the difference.
7foot3 wrote:That is a quote, taken directly from a local paper in 1915, when they changed the name to Indians. The term "Indians" was also supposed to imply "speed and fight", again take straight from the paper.
by smalls1129 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 3:53 pm
by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:41 pm
Of course, it didn't hurt that the new name also happened to reinforce the image of Natives as anachronistic savages, the ballclub a fearsome force to be reckoned with. "In place of the Naps, we'll have the Indians, on the warpath all the time, and eager for scalps to dangle at their belts," wrote the Cleveland Leader in announcing the name change on January 17, 1915. In fact, none of the reports from the four daily Cleveland newspapers even mentions Sockalexis, but each is replete with negative stereotypes.
by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 10:46 pm
by danwismar » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:43 pm
by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:44 pm
by e0y2e3 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:47 pm

by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:48 pm
by leadpipe » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:49 pm
danwismar wrote:It's easy for me to remember (in the 60's....70's even?)the regular use in PD and Press headlines of the word "scalp" as a substitute for "beat"...as in "Indians Scalp Orioles 6-3"
Any modest winning streak, and they were said to be "on the warpath"
An in-game rally was an "Indian uprising"
You still hear the latter two from time to time...not so much in the newspapers though.
by danwismar » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:52 pm

by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:53 pm
leadpipe wrote:danwismar wrote:It's easy for me to remember (in the 60's....70's even?)the regular use in PD and Press headlines of the word "scalp" as a substitute for "beat"...as in "Indians Scalp Orioles 6-3"
Any modest winning streak, and they were said to be "on the warpath"
An in-game rally was an "Indian uprising"
You still hear the latter two from time to time...not so much in the newspapers though.
Remember this one at the start of a rally -
"Open the casino, the Tribe's in business!!!"
I just made that one up.
But I do remember back in the "Braves on TBS" days, that everytime a Brave hit a tater at home, Chief Nakahoma would come out of his teepee behind the fence and do a ridculously offensive war dance.
Anyways, the Chief is pretty offesnsive, and I'm assuming he'll be phased out. But it will be in principle only, cause he'll be produced nearly as much on "throwback" gear as he is now. ILO.
by googleeph2 » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:54 pm
danwismar wrote:It's easy for me to remember (in the 60's....70's even?)the regular use in PD and Press headlines of the word "scalp" as a substitute for "beat"...as in "Indians Scalp Orioles 6-3"
Any modest winning streak, and they were said to be "on the warpath"
An in-game rally was an "Indian uprising"
You still hear the latter two from time to time...not so much in the newspapers though.
by motherscratcher » Wed Feb 27, 2013 11:55 pm
by pod2dawg » Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:44 am
by skatingtripods » Thu Feb 28, 2013 12:32 pm
Return to Cleveland Indians & MLB
Users browsing this forum: motherscratcher, skatingtripods and 10 guests