Recommended Posts

Gee, I wonder where this thread is headed...

 

 

IBTL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, out of all the exploitive Native American names/imagery in sports, the Atlanta Braves are by far the LEAST "damaging", so I don't get what the problem is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 29texan said:

Honestly, out of all the exploitive Native American names/imagery in sports, the Atlanta Braves are by far the LEAST "damaging", so I don't get what the problem is.

 

I agree with your assessment. However, the problem is that "least damaging" is like "least pregnant."  It's either damaging or it isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2017 at 7:32 AM, Limon_Jello said:

I foresee the tomahawk being phased out in time.  No Braves logos on the surrounding facade of SunTrust Park have a tomahawk.  Heck, even the big neon tomahawk in the new ballpark doesn't seem to work in the games I've been to this year.  The chop, however, is still alive and well.  I think the current digs are top notch, though I'd love to see the 80s unis make an appearance.  

There's a huge tomahawk logo made of Lego on the wall near the main clubhouse store and one of the most popular caps is the new one with only a tomahawk on it from spring training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, leopard88 said:

 

I agree with your assessment. However, the problem is that "least damaging" is like "least pregnant."  It's either damaging or it isn't.

 

Ok - it isn't. Moving on..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Botiger said:

There's a huge tomahawk logo made of Lego on the wall near the main clubhouse store and one of the most popular caps is the new one with only a tomahawk on it from spring training.

I think the point made on the lack of tomahawk in the ballpark* is that no more permanent features (i.e., expensive to undo) include the tomahawk.  That could indicate that the team is prepared for the possibility that the tomahawk is going to be phased out.  They can pretty easily get rid of the legos.  A six-figure scoreboard wordmark would be pretty expensive if there's concern that it could be taken down in five years.  This does not necessarily mean the tomahawk's going away.  It could mean they are prepared for the possibility that they could eventually retire it. And, of course, it could mean nothing.

 

*Which I am going to on Saturday; looking forward to another notch on my MLB belt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-05-15 at 5:48 PM, oldschoolvikings said:

 

Is there any more embarrassing way to try to hide the fact you feel defensive and insecure about something than forced laughter?

Not sure what you're trying to imply. I actually laughed at this thread.

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, OnWis97 said:

I think the point made on the lack of tomahawk in the ballpark* is that no more permanent features (i.e., expensive to undo) include the tomahawk.  That could indicate that the team is prepared for the possibility that the tomahawk is going to be phased out.  They can pretty easily get rid of the legos.  A six-figure scoreboard wordmark would be pretty expensive if there's concern that it could be taken down in five years.  This does not necessarily mean the tomahawk's going away.  It could mean they are prepared for the possibility that they could eventually retire it. And, of course, it could mean nothing.

 

*Which I am going to on Saturday; looking forward to another notch on my MLB belt!

No, there's still a giant tomahawk neon sign in right field. We've started a new tradition of "starting the chop" pre-game. It's not going away because it's not a problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, AstroBull21 said:

Fire departments are typically known as "(insert city name)'s Bravest", so maybe modifying the tomahawk into a firefighters axe could work IF change would be made.

 

Now that the greatest hits seem to have been played on the whole native imagery thing, back to the thought experiment aspect.

 

This would be the direction to me. Maybe even drop the S and just go to Atlanta Brave (or Atlanta's Bravest if they want to go full firefighter). Downside to Brave: sounds a little minor league. Upside: opens up military imagery as a direction as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BlazerBlaze said:

No, there's still a giant tomahawk neon sign in right field. We've started a new tradition of "starting the chop" pre-game. It's not going away because it's not a problem. 

Well, as I said, I've never been there so I took at face value the statement that there were no large tomahawks.  

 

And I tend to agree.  It's not going anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlazerBlaze said:

SJW are making up things to be insulted by. The tomahawk? So now we're going to ban the rally cry of FSU and the Bravos? How about we clean up the actual racist behavior like shouting N***** at black players in Boston?

 

In just three sentences we have an ad hominem and a red herring. So well played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the Blackhawks ever going to get rid of the tomahawks on their shoulder patch?  Nope.

 

Atlanta's tomahawk isn't going anywhere either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BlazerBlaze said:

Not sure what you're trying to imply. I actually laughed at this thread. 
 

 

Well, I don't feel like I was "implying" anything... I was just pretty much straight up saying.

 

You started your initial post with an all-caps, 32 character "BWAHAHA..."  To most adult eyes, this doesn't read as "I think this is funny", it reads as "I desperately need you to believe I think this is funny".

 

 

To be honest, I've never given much thought to the Braves identity, and I can't really gather up enough energy to care one way or the other.  But every time one of these threads start up, it always goes the same way.  Somebody brings up the Fighting Irish, somebody else brings up the idea that a nickname is a "great honor", and then someone drops the mic with "never gonna change!"

 

The ridiculous hypocrisy of someone claiming that others are oversensitive, while they themselves are getting completely bent out of shape about this issue always makes me want to instantly take the opposite side.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now I am desperately sorry that I broke the internet rules of how to express laughter. :rolleyes:

Look at this picture of Turner. The tomahawk wasn't in any grand showcase there either. 

 

braves.jpg

 

The right field restaurant is called the "chop house" and its so popular that it made it's way into Suntrust in an expanded form. So point out whatever internet protocol infraction that you want, but the tomahawk, the chop, and the Braves branding isn't going anywhere.


Who wants to play count the tomahawks?

041417Bravesdishes25.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aaaaaanyway, the key point on the question of the tomahawk is simply that it appropriates Native imagery.  While one could try to rank which appropriations are worse than which others, by the standard of morality no appropriation is acceptable.

That said, I don't really think that all existing examples must be changed, the only egregious examples requiring immediate change being the Indians' logo and the Redskins' nickname.  The nicknames and logos of the Braves, Chiefs, and Blackhawks can probably remain as examples from an earlier time (and the tomahawk could qualify for retention under that argument, in comparison to the Chiefs' arrowhead); but no new names or logos of this type should ever be allowed on any level of sport, except of course if done by or explicitly approved by Natives themselves.

 

Or maybe the Braves can move to Atlantis and replace the tomahawk with a trident, as modelled here by Hank Aaron XXIV on Futurama.

 

 

Image result for atlantis braves futurama

 

 

An interesting addendum to this question is the matter of the Edmonton Eskimos.  After the Eskimos won the Grey Cup in 2015, there was a surge in conversation about the nature of their name, and the degree of offence that it gives to the Inuit.  (The team's logo has no Inuit-related imagery.)  I haven't heard much followup on that; but, considering Canada's relatively decent latter-day cultural and legal norms on matters concerning the Inuit (as compared to the U.S. and Native Americans), I would not be surprised if some change of Edmonton's name were to eventually happen.

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mod edit

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mod edit

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mod edit

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mod edit

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mod edit

Edited by Ice_Cap
nuking the "SJW" discussion...won't lead anywhere positive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now