CS85

Chief Wahoo Departs: Indians remove logo from brand in 2019

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Norva said:

Long overdue.

 

I think one reason logos like this have survived so long over other caricatures like Sambo, is that Native Americans are so marginalized in society that you can spend your whole life without seeing one or hearing from any of them. They have historically been brutalized and to this day are still pushed to the very edge of society and taken advantage of time and again by the US government, you can't claim to 'honor' them with sports teams while largely ignoring their very existence.

It depends on where you live. I've lived near Indian Territories for much of my life (Oneida and Menominee).  This doesn't change the topic, just offering another view.

1 hour ago, Gothamite said:

 

I understand there's still a small but vocal number of Marquette alums who are upset about the change.  But that could be because the university mishandled it from the start - losing the "Warriors" nickname when there was absolutely no reason to.  And the less said about their stupid and aborted "Marquette Gold" nickname the better.

This seems to be mostly mock indignation at this point. I find as many Badger fans poking at the nickname as I do real Marquette fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

They're on a completely different playing field.  

 

Again, I think that's largely due to the First Nations having been removed from our society.  Few of us interact with them on a regular basis, so the slurs don't seem as "real" to us.

 

I for one have been wondering if I should be typing the word.  I'm certainly not comfortable with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another angle to come at the Washington football club: 

 

"Redskin" is an obvious relic of a time that routinely demeaned and denegrated indigenous Americans. 

That a Simpsons episode put it in the dictionary of evil, old man C. Montgomery Burns as "usually taken to be offensive" 20 years ago should be a hint. 

166582.jpg

So aside from whether its been re-purposed matters less than "Is using a slur to refer to our multi-billion dollar franchise the decent thing to do?

It's just unseemly. It's a reminder of a bad time and while I'm not for forgetting the past, I am all for not letting it dictate the present. Let it pass on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, the admiral said:

No, the way I remember it, they had been the Golden Eagles for 10 or 15 years, then decided one day they'd just be the "Gold," shortly after Cuse because just the Orange. Then they backpedaled in the face of public opinion and went back to being the Golden Eagles.

Nope. They went from Warriors to Gold. Then backpedaled after Gold got panned.

 

[rimshot]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting that this has evolved into a discussion about the Redskins.  But since we're on that:

 

Remember that they started out as the Boston Braves, taking the name of the their landlords at Braves Field, the Boston Braves (NL).  Upon moving to Fenway, they changed the name likely as a means to not promote the team that they just were part of, and more to fit in with the Sox.  The theory goes that they kept the Native imagery as a means to "honor" a coach that was supposedly part Sioux (funny how this parallels the story about the Indians).  But it seems that the owner wanted to avoid confusion with the baseball Braves but keep the imagery.  This is why he didn't go to Indians because of some random baseball team in Cleveland.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/1933-news-article-refutes-cherished-tale-that-redskins-were-named-to-honor-indian-coach/2014/05/28/19ad32e8-e698-11e3-afc6-a1dd9407abcf_story.html?utm_term=.b6c2b765c871

 

Quote

The edition includes a short Associated Press dispatch quoting Marshall saying: “The fact that we have in our head coach, Lone Star Dietz, an Indian, together with several Indian players, has not, as may be suspected, inspired me to select the name Redskins.”

Instead, Marshall explains, he gave up “Braves” to avoid confusion with a Boston professional baseball team of the same name. He apparently picked the Redskins name so he could keep the existing Native American logo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Carolingian Steamroller said:

Here's another angle to come at the Washington football club: 

 

"Redskin" is an obvious relic of a time that routinely demeaned and denegrated indigenous Americans. 

That a Simpsons episode put it in the dictionary of evil, old man C. Montgomery Burns as "usually taken to be offensive" 20 years ago should be hint. 

166582.jpg

So aside from whether its been re-purposed matters less than "Is using a slur to refer to our multi-billion dollar franchise the decent thing to do?" 

It's just unseemly. It's a reminder of a bad time and while I'm not for forgetting the past, I am all for not letting it dictate the present. Let it pass on.

 

Yeah, I'm usually a traditionally-minded guy where sports identities are concerned.  But not everything from the past is worth perpetuating today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the numbers department, there are 42 million African Americans in this country, and somewhere around 5 million Native Americans.

 

Thanks wiki. Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Nope. They went from Warriors to Gold. Then backpedaled after Gold got panned.

 

[rimshot]

 

Ummm. I was there. It was spring 2005. It was Golden Eagles when D-Wade was on the team. Years after switching from Warriors to Golden Eagles, with fan opinion still luke warm on the Golden Eagles, they tried to zest it up by switching to Gold. THAT's when campus went crazy. It was the name going from something "meh-ok" to horrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Again, I think that's largely due to the First Nations having been removed from our society.  Few of us interact with them on a regular basis, so the slurs don't seem as "real" to us.

 

I for one have been wondering if I should be typing the word.  I'm certainly not comfortable with it.

 

That's probably true.  But still doesn't address the fact that no high school would ever name their team the n-words.  Again, different tiers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Redskins and N***** grew out of different climates. If there were as few African Americans as there are American Indians, to the point where they're almost treated like they're extinct or unicorns or mythological, and if we'd spent the past 100 years normalizing the use of the N word for a sports team's name then there'd probably be a sports team called the N******. 

 

The only example I can think of is Africentric High School in Columbus, Ohio is called the Nubians and they used to have a large Africa decal on their football helmets. That's cool because they're celebrating their own heritage. If my high school in mayonnaise-white Dublin, Ohio were called the Nubians? Not cool at all.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

 

I can appreciate what you're saying and it makes sense to me.  I think those are valid points.  But using the n-word example, would a predominantly African american high school ever adopt that name for their sports teams?  There's no way.  My main point is, I realize that both are slurs but I think the comparisons end there.  It's apples and oranges in my opinion.  There's a reason we're all openly typing redskin, but not typing out the n-word.  They're on a completely different playing field.  

Very true. Nobody in their right mind would touch the N-word for a team. I’m black and I don’t type it because I know the censor would catch it anyhow. I guess that’s the problem. They are on a different playing field, but I do have to question why a little.

 

Is it because the number of Natives to argue against it are so small that a narrative created by a racist white owner could stand the test of time thus far? A team called the N-words wouldn’t stand because black people wouldn’t have it, we have voices in high places, and have the numbers. I don’t know that can be said for Natives.

 

You aren’t wrong, and going back to my last post, maybe it has evolved so far it doesn’t sting for that high school or others. Just like there are some black people that don’t mind their white friend using the word because he is “down.” I’m not one those along with countless others. It seems like for that link you posted there are a few in the other direction. That’s all I’m getting at. This is healthy though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DC in Da House w/o a Doubt said:

That's probably true.  But still doesn't address the fact that no high school would ever name their team the n-words.  Again, different tiers.  

 

Can't help but wonder if that's partially due to the NFL team repeatedly bringing the name into our living rooms.  We just may be inured to it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Carolingian Steamroller said:

 

Ummm. I was there. It was spring 2005. It was Golden Eagles when D-Wade was on the team. Years after switching from Warriors to Golden Eagles, with fan opinion still luke warm on the Golden Eagles, they tried to zest it up by switching to Gold. THAT's when campus went crazy. It was the name going from something "meh-ok" to horrible. 

Yeah - my bad. I was just going for the cheap joke and didn't bother making sure facts were correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

I was just going for the cheap joke and didn't bother making sure facts were correct.

board slogan (or at least my slogan)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sec19Row53 said:

Yeah - my bad. I was just going for the cheap joke and didn't bother making sure facts were correct.

 

1 minute ago, the admiral said:

board slogan (or at least my slogan)

 

Probably not a good one to live by. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Lee Noire said:

Very true. Nobody in their right mind would touch the N-word for a team. I’m black and I don’t type it because I know the censor would catch it anyhow. I guess that’s the problem. They are on a different playing field, but I do have to question why a little.

 

Is it because the number of Natives to argue against it are so small that a narrative created by a racist white owner could stand the test of time thus far? A team called the N-words wouldn’t stand because black people wouldn’t have it, we have voices in high places, and have the numbers. I don’t know that can be said for Natives.

 

You aren’t wrong, and going back to my last post, maybe it has evolved so far it doesn’t sting for that high school or others. Just like there are some black people that don’t mind their white friend using the word because he is “down.” I’m not one those along with countless others. It seems like for that link you posted there are a few in the other direction. That’s all I’m getting at. This is healthy though.

It’s a numbers game. African-Americans, for as bad as they’ve had it, weren’t pushed to the brink of extinction via state-sponsored genocide like Natives were. 

 

The result is that, following emancipation, the black community had the numbers and visible leaders to pressure society towards meaningful change. 

Natives lacked those numbers and visible leaders. They’re just now able to raise awareness because social media has helped amplify the voices of people who would otherwise still be marginalised. 

 

If you had a pro sports team named the “N**gers”? You can bet the Civil Rights movement would have rightfully swept that away. 

Natives lacked the ability to make that impact. At least until recently. Now? “Redskins” is only normalised as a result of the team having its moniker blared into living rooms annually. Which it was only able to do for so long because Natives lacked the numbers to push for meaningful change. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Bill81361 said:

Would you be offended by the name without the logo?  Again, since I won't claim to speak for everyone, I think most would agree the "Red Sambo" logo was a terrible stereotype.  

I mean this is where the comparison breaks down. 

“Indians” was never meant as a slur. It was an incorrect descriptor for a group of people that gained traction, but no one ever used it to be a slur in and of itself. 

Meanwhile? “Jew” has been used by hate groups as a slur in and of itself. So whether “Jews” would be an ok name depends on context. And I’m not comfortable letting a non-Jew decide if it’s offensive or not in this hypothetical scenario. 

 

Now if someone wanted to name a team “the Maccabees” and used a respectful depiction of Judah the Maccabee? I would likely be ok with that. That’s more of a Chicago Blackhawks-type of situation though. 

I certainly wouldn’t be ok with my ethnicity being depicted like how the Indians have depicted Natives for decades via Chief Wahoo though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Gothamite said:

 

Can't help but wonder if that's partially due to the NFL team repeatedly bringing the name into our living rooms.

 

 

Right? The NFL team existing for all these years has normalized the use of something that shouldn't have been normalized. If they'd been called the Washington Savages way back when instead we'd probably have a bunch of high schools past and still present called the Savages. The DC football team's had a very real influence on what we've grown up accepting. If they'd chosen to name themselves the Washington Warriors maybe this could've been avoided. 

 

That leads to the point Admiral is making that the meaning of "Washington Redskins" has evolved to mean a football player from Washington and I see his point, but just the fact that it's still being debated about as a racist term kind of disproves that it's fully shifted meaning and still holds some bad connotations. Am I wrong there? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn’t there a poll that said something like 90% of Natives didn’t find the Redskins name

racist? I get changing Wahoo. It was wrong to depict a Native American in that light. But changing the name from Indians would upset me and many others. That is the team’s history and that is their team. Same thing goes for the skins. I wouldn’t change the name. Like the FSU Seminoles or the UU Utes. If the people you are repersenting okay with it, why change it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, McCarthy said:

Am I wrong there? 

Not at all. 

I think Admiral’s arguing what could happen has already happened. 

 

So long as the name is paired with a logo depicting a Native person? It’s kind of hard to claim “Redskins” just means “someone employed by Dan Snyder to play pro football.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cardsblues02 said:

Wasn’t there a poll that said something like 90% of Natives didn’t find the Redskins name

racist? I get changing Wahoo. It was wrong to depict a Native American in that light. But changing the name from Indians would upset me and many others. That is the team’s history and that is their team. Same thing goes for the skins. I wouldn’t change the name. Like the FSU Seminoles or the UU Utes. If the people you are repersenting okay with it, why change it?

 

This American Psychological Association study, which says that they negatively impact the mental health of marginalized peoples. Here's a basic summary from the article.

 

Quote

Research has shown that the continued use of American Indian mascots, symbols, images and personalities has a negative effect on not only American Indian students but all students by: 

  • Undermining the educational experiences of members of all communities-especially those who have had little or no contact with indigenous peoples. The symbols, images and mascots teach non-Indian children that it's acceptable to participate in culturally abusive behavior and perpetuate inaccurate misconceptions about American Indian culture.
  • Establishes an unwelcome and often times hostile learning environment for American Indian students that affirms negative images/stereotypes that are promoted in mainstream society.

According to Stephanie Fryberg, PhD, University of Arizona, this appears to have a negative impact on the self-esteem of American Indian children, "American Indian mascots are harmful not only because they are often negative, but because they remind American Indians of the limited ways in which others see them. This in turn restricts the number of ways American Indians can see themselves."

  • Undermines the ability of American Indian Nations to portray accurate and respectful images of their culture, spirituality and traditions. Many American Indians report that they find today's typical portrayal of American Indian culture disrespectful and offensive to their spiritual beliefs.
  • Presents stereotypical images of American Indians. Such mascots are a contemporary example of prejudice by the dominant culture against racial and ethnic minority groups.
  • Is a form of discrimination against American Indian Nations that can lead to negative relations between groups.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.