New Cleveland Indians unis coming....

[cappital92]

Seriously man, what he said. It's a sports team. Nobody's life or liberty are at stake.

The point is, it is stupid to say that you can't or shouldn't be offended by racism if it's not directed against your particular ethnic group. Which is exactly what the original poster said. If that were the case, only perceived slights against the majority group would be acknowledged as bad. Which as actually the way the U.S. is heading these days, with all the anti-PC sentiment.

Anti-PC? I was in a Boy Scouts-like organization run by the YMCA called Indian Guides until four years ago. For some odd reason(we didn't do anything that would be offensive to Native Americans,we just had campfires and gave out plastic bearclaws for good deeds), they changed the name to Adventure Guides. Now that's my story of how something close to me was changed by PC. Not saying it's a good or bad thing, but to say that the country is anti-PC is crazy. If you go to Europe, they're no bounds what-so-ever. People need to look at more than their own spectrum before throwing mud at each other.

[cappital92]

So, anyway, what would you name the Cleveland Indians? River Flames? Drew Careys? Art Modells?

Here is an idea, how bout the Cleveland cappital92isaragingA-Holes ?? That has a nice sound to it, huh??!?

idiot......

Can't take a joke?

[HatManTC]

i know wiki isnt the most reliable source in the world. but this sums out a sad truth

According to polling results published in Sports Illustrated, "Although most Native American activists and tribal leaders consider Indian team names and mascots offensive, neither Native Americans in general nor a cross section of U.S. sports fans agree."[9]. According to the article, "There is a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this issue."[9]

9. ^ a b S.L. Price & Andrea Woo, "The Indian Wars", Sports Illustrated, March 4, 2002, pp 66-71

back on subject(yet again another indians thread jacked by the overly PC crowd.) i like the new look. cant wait to see it on the diamond this coming up summer.

[gosioux76]

i know wiki isnt the most reliable source in the world. but this sums out a sad truth

According to polling results published in Sports Illustrated, "Although most Native American activists and tribal leaders consider Indian team names and mascots offensive, neither Native Americans in general nor a cross section of U.S. sports fans agree."[9]. According to the article, "There is a near total disconnect between Indian activists and the Native American population on this issue."[9]

Yeah? Well tell that to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in North Dakota, whose refusal to endorse the Fighting Sioux moniker will force my alma mater, the University of North Dakota, to change its name in three years.

[jhans203]

I just wanted to add my two cents...well it will probably be more like a quarter...but regardless. I just organized a week long of events at my school, Southern Utah University...here is a link to my school's newspaper coverage of the week (take the article for what its worth). Our main focus was the use of the nickname Redmen at the local high school Cedar High. We had a number of Awareness Activities and the general feeling was that there needs to be a change. We have a local tribe whose headquarters are in Cedar City. It's been such a touchy subject in years past no one wants to touch...so why not a College Student who loves logos and mascots?

But, my general feeling is that each Native American nickname must be examined on a individual basis. Names like Utah Utes, Florida State Seminoles, Central Michigan Chippewas are alright, because they have the backing of the local tribes. I believe schools need the permission to use the nickname like in the case with Fighting Sioux and Fightin' Illini. Nicknames like Indians, Redskins, Redmen, and Savages should not be used. They are perpetuating a stereotype that Natives are these tomahawk carrying, feather and buckskin wearing people...in reality many tribes don't wear feathers and carry tomahawks.

On the cases of the Cleveland Indians and Washington Redskins, I find both offensive. I don't think there is really anything that can be done with the nicknames, because of the money and professional politicking associated with it. Chief Wahoo and the term Redskin is unforunate and it is unforunate that people find nothing wrong with the images and names.

I guess thats my quarter worth on the issue. There is more behind an image than just tradition. We as Americans (not just Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, etc....but as Americans) need to look at this issue carefully, before opening our mouth with our opinion.

[02Rover]

So, anyway, what would you name the Cleveland Indians? River Flames? Drew Careys? Art Modells?

Here is an idea, how bout the Cleveland cappital92isaragingA-Holes ?? That has a nice sound to it, huh??!?

idiot......

Can't take a joke?

Sure I can take a joke, but its just not funny coming from a Baltimore fan.

[sappy13]

Which stereotype does Chief Wahoo perpetuate? Serious question. I never thought of it as particularly offensive. It's just a silly cartoon. Looking at it doesn't make me want to hate, degrade, mock, or assault Native Americans. It just is what it is.

Sorry, but you are associating yourself with a very commonly used ignorant argument in defense of these logos and nicknames.

Unless you want to appear to sound ignorant...I'd do some reading about the nature of these logos/nicknames and the reason why they are offensive to that particular group of people. Just because its a 'silly cartoon' to you doesn't mean everyone thinks the same thing. There's plenty of info on this subject on the internet, I'd recommend that you read it to understand what the real issue is...if you so feel inclined to. I'd suggest that everyone does. Its not a black and white issue like many people are trying to make it....or a 'silly' issue like some want to trivialize it as.

Not all nicknames and logos are offensive....but many are. The problem is that if you make it all or nothing, you create resentment among groups of people on both sides of the issue. Don't know if compromise is possible, but I think it may be a start.

Listen, I'm not trying to talk down to you or insult you, I'm just letting you know that this argument is the ignorant.....even if you don't realize it.

Oh professor, I wish we could all be as enlightened as you. If you believe that an Indian's sense of self-worth will be increased because a team changes its nickname or mascot, then you're the one who is ignorant. If someone is offended by the actions or policies of a business entity, then you voice your displeasure by not supporting that business. If you don't like Cleveland's nickname and logo, then don't buy their merchandise or attend their games. There are plenty of TV shows, music, and music videos that are offensive to a large segment of the population that transcend all ethnic groups. And what is the liberal response, "turn the channel, don't buy the record" etc, etc. Liberals like yourself are the first to cry "censorship" when an individual or small group voice their displeasure in regards to, for example, the sexual content or violence of one of the mediums mentioned earlier. By seeking to eliminate Indian nicknames and logos you're trying to impose your own form of censorship.

Last I checked, and I'm no constitutional scholar, no where in the Bill of Rights or Constitutiuon does it guarantee ones right not to be offended.

And the Fighting Irish analogy is a legitimate one. Besides Chief Wahoo, what other Indian- themed logo can compare to the drunken little fighting Irishman cartoon? Speaking of "offensive" stereotypes, what about the Minn Vikings? The name congures up

images of rape, pillage, and murder all committed by one group of people. Hell, their mascot that roams the sidelines does all he can to perpetrate the image. Where's the outrage among the Scandinavian community?

Changing names and logos changes nothing. Want proof, look no further than the idiotic name change of the Washington Bullets to the Wizards. They and so-called Black leaders and community activists were under the illussion that changing the name could somehow result in less gun-related crimes in DC. That worked out real well. Last I heard, the DC council was trying to rescind the 2nd admendment.

You can change all the names and logos you want, but Indians will still have their grievances and hatreds for whites and liberals will continue to make whitey feel guilty about this country's history.

[sappy13]

Which stereotype does Chief Wahoo perpetuate? Serious question. I never thought of it as particularly offensive. It's just a silly cartoon. Looking at it doesn't make me want to hate, degrade, mock, or assault Native Americans. It just is what it is.

Sorry, but you are associating yourself with a very commonly used ignorant argument in defense of these logos and nicknames.

Unless you want to appear to sound ignorant...I'd do some reading about the nature of these logos/nicknames and the reason why they are offensive to that particular group of people. Just because its a 'silly cartoon' to you doesn't mean everyone thinks the same thing. There's plenty of info on this subject on the internet, I'd recommend that you read it to understand what the real issue is...if you so feel inclined to. I'd suggest that everyone does. Its not a black and white issue like many people are trying to make it....or a 'silly' issue like some want to trivialize it as.

Not all nicknames and logos are offensive....but many are. The problem is that if you make it all or nothing, you create resentment among groups of people on both sides of the issue. Don't know if compromise is possible, but I think it may be a start.

Listen, I'm not trying to talk down to you or insult you, I'm just letting you know that this argument is the ignorant.....even if you don't realize it.

Oh professor, I wish we could all be as enlightened as you. If you believe that an Indian's sense of self-worth will be increased because a team changes its nickname or mascot, then you're the one who is ignorant. If someone is offended by the actions or policies of a business entity, then you voice your displeasure by not supporting that business. If you don't like Cleveland's nickname and logo, then don't buy their merchandise or attend their games. There are plenty of TV shows, music, and music videos that are offensive to a large segment of the population that transcend all ethnic groups. And what is the liberal response, "turn the channel, don't buy the record" etc, etc. Liberals like yourself are the first to cry "censorship" when an individual or small group voice their displeasure in regards to, for example, the sexual content or violence of one of the mediums mentioned earlier. By seeking to eliminate Indian nicknames and logos you're trying to impose your own form of censorship.

Last I checked, and I'm no constitutional scholar, no where in the Bill of Rights or Constitutiuon does it guarantee ones right not to be offended.

And the Fighting Irish analogy is a legitimate one. Besides Chief Wahoo, what other Indian- themed logo can compare to the drunken little fighting Irishman cartoon? Speaking of "offensive" stereotypes, what about the Minn Vikings? The name congures up

images of rape, pillage, and murder all committed by one group of people. Hell, their mascot that roams the sidelines does all he can to perpetrate the image. Where's the outrage among the Scandinavian community?

Changing names and logos changes nothing. Want proof, look no further than the idiotic name change of the Washington Bullets to the Wizards. They and so-called Black leaders and community activists were under the illussion that changing the name could somehow result in less gun-related crimes in DC. That worked out real well. Last I heard, the DC council was trying to rescind the 2nd admendment.

You can change all the names and logos you want, but Indians will still have their grievances and hatreds for whites and liberals will continue to make whitey feel guilty about this country's history.

[SabreGuy]

It's arguments like the one that took place over the last 2 pages of this thread that occasionally make me shy away from letting people know I'm a Cleveland Indians fan. Personally, I have nothing against the name Indians nickname or the Chief Wahoo logo (though I have to admit the smaller cap logo looks MUCH sharper than the giant mega-chief ever did, but that's another argument for another time) and I kind of like it for its cheesy grin in a sea of über-tough sports logos. But when the arguments heat up like this, it's when I realize that there's no real defensible argument for keeping the Chief around. It always boils down to "it's been like that for decades, so why should we change? Everyone ELSE is too PC, we're just fine." But in reality all that says is "the world is changing, and we're too stubborn to follow suit." And that's just not a position I'm comfortable taking.

If I had my druthers, the name would stay, and the logo would change... but most of all we'd stop coming up with excuses for a caricature based on an antiquated stereotype.

back on subject... i like the new look. cant wait to see it on the diamond this coming up summer.

Completely agree. Can not WAIT to see them in action. I also can't wait till I start seeing that block C cap in stores.

[leopard88]

Why is it that nobody is offended by the Notre Dame fighting Irish? Their mascot is a little drunk Irish guy ready to throw down, presumably at a pub after he's been overserved. This is more of a stereotype than any Native American team logo.

The difference between the Fighting Irish and the various Native American names and logos is that the Fighting Irish nickname was adopted by a primarily Irish institution, not selected by primarily white owners and college administrators. Notre Dame co-opted what had been intended as a disparaging name and adopted it as a symbol of pride, much like the gay community has co-opted the term "queer." Given that history, it is difficult to compare the two situations.

_________

Just so it doesn't sound like I made that up:

Notre Dame Athletic Website

_________

On topic: I really like the new alts. They have something of a simple, timeless quality to them. I can almost picture Bob Hope in one.

[OnWis97]

Political Correctness running amok on this thread. Here is another example where an honorable name had to be elminated because of whiny PC losers with nothing better to do:

Pekin Community High School teams were officially known as the Pekin Chinks until 1982 when the school administration changed the mascot to the Pekin Dragons. An earlier attempt was made by a visit of the Chinese-American groups to change the name from Chinks during the 1974-1975 school year, this was voted down by the student council; the event received national attention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekin,_Illinois

I hear that they used to promote some stereotypes with their mascot as well. So what? It was tradition. It had been like that for years.

(Just to be sure...I was being sarcastic and would be nothing but embarrassed to go to a school with that name).

[powersurge]

Which stereotype does Chief Wahoo perpetuate? Serious question. I never thought of it as particularly offensive. It's just a silly cartoon. Looking at it doesn't make me want to hate, degrade, mock, or assault Native Americans. It just is what it is.

Sorry, but you are associating yourself with a very commonly used ignorant argument in defense of these logos and nicknames.

Unless you want to appear to sound ignorant...I'd do some reading about the nature of these logos/nicknames and the reason why they are offensive to that particular group of people. Just because its a 'silly cartoon' to you doesn't mean everyone thinks the same thing. There's plenty of info on this subject on the internet, I'd recommend that you read it to understand what the real issue is...if you so feel inclined to. I'd suggest that everyone does. Its not a black and white issue like many people are trying to make it....or a 'silly' issue like some want to trivialize it as.

Not all nicknames and logos are offensive....but many are. The problem is that if you make it all or nothing, you create resentment among groups of people on both sides of the issue. Don't know if compromise is possible, but I think it may be a start.

Listen, I'm not trying to talk down to you or insult you, I'm just letting you know that this argument is the ignorant.....even if you don't realize it.

Oh professor, I wish we could all be as enlightened as you. If you believe that an Indian's sense of self-worth will be increased because a team changes its nickname or mascot, then you're the one who is ignorant. If someone is offended by the actions or policies of a business entity, then you voice your displeasure by not supporting that business. If you don't like Cleveland's nickname and logo, then don't buy their merchandise or attend their games. There are plenty of TV shows, music, and music videos that are offensive to a large segment of the population that transcend all ethnic groups. And what is the liberal response, "turn the channel, don't buy the record" etc, etc. Liberals like yourself are the first to cry "censorship" when an individual or small group voice their displeasure in regards to, for example, the sexual content or violence of one of the mediums mentioned earlier. By seeking to eliminate Indian nicknames and logos you're trying to impose your own form of censorship.

Last I checked, and I'm no constitutional scholar, no where in the Bill of Rights or Constitutiuon does it guarantee ones right not to be offended.

And the Fighting Irish analogy is a legitimate one. Besides Chief Wahoo, what other Indian- themed logo can compare to the drunken little fighting Irishman cartoon? Speaking of "offensive" stereotypes, what about the Minn Vikings? The name congures up

images of rape, pillage, and murder all committed by one group of people. Hell, their mascot that roams the sidelines does all he can to perpetrate the image. Where's the outrage among the Scandinavian community?

Changing names and logos changes nothing. Want proof, look no further than the idiotic name change of the Washington Bullets to the Wizards. They and so-called Black leaders and community activists were under the illussion that changing the name could somehow result in less gun-related crimes in DC. That worked out real well. Last I heard, the DC council was trying to rescind the 2nd admendment.

You can change all the names and logos you want, but Indians will still have their grievances and hatreds for whites and liberals will continue to make whitey feel guilty about this country's history.

Wow.....thats all I have to say.

Wow. Sadly, Your post says it all my friend. No need to respond.

[CharlieHog]

There is a high school in Red Mesa, Arizona, which is a Navajo Nation reservation, and their high school mascot is the Redskins.

[sealbrownandorange]

It seems to me that the Dolans have been subtly phasing out Chief Wahoo over the past few seasons - or at least providing enough alternate logos to try and satisfy both camps. I personally don't care what the team does with the Chief. I have been hoarding Chief Wahoo gear for some time now. I'm sure that there are many more fans like myself that will make sure that Chief Wahoo is perpetually associated with this team, even if it is unofficial.

[rams80]

Political Correctness running amok on this thread. Here is another example where an honorable name had to be elminated because of whiny PC losers with nothing better to do:

Pekin Community High School teams were officially known as the Pekin Chinks until 1982 when the school administration changed the mascot to the Pekin Dragons. An earlier attempt was made by a visit of the Chinese-American groups to change the name from Chinks during the 1974-1975 school year, this was voted down by the student council; the event received national attention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekin,_Illinois

I hear that they used to promote some stereotypes with their mascot as well. So what? It was tradition. It had been like that for years.

(Just to be sure...I was being sarcastic and would be nothing but embarrassed to go to a school with that name).

I'm sure I've said this before, but when my (then) high school's primarily African American team played them in the Sectional Final 5-6 years ago, they had a tar baby hanging in the student section.

You can also see "Chinks" stuff floating around locally even today if you really look out for it.

[OnWis97]

Political Correctness running amok on this thread. Here is another example where an honorable name had to be elminated because of whiny PC losers with nothing better to do:

Pekin Community High School teams were officially known as the Pekin Chinks until 1982 when the school administration changed the mascot to the Pekin Dragons. An earlier attempt was made by a visit of the Chinese-American groups to change the name from Chinks during the 1974-1975 school year, this was voted down by the student council; the event received national attention.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pekin,_Illinois

I hear that they used to promote some stereotypes with their mascot as well. So what? It was tradition. It had been like that for years.

(Just to be sure...I was being sarcastic and would be nothing but embarrassed to go to a school with that name).

I'm sure I've said this before, but when my (then) high school's primarily African American team played them in the Sectional Final 5-6 years ago, they had a tar baby hanging in the student section.

You can also see "Chinks" stuff floating around locally even today if you really look out for it.

I lived in Peoria for two years. I saw one very old guy wearing a "Pekin Chinks" jacket at a Peoria store. I think I may have seen one other thing, but I don't remember what it was.

[BallWonk]

It's arguments like the one that took place over the last 2 pages of this thread that occasionally make me shy away from letting people know I'm a Cleveland Indians fan. ... If I had my druthers, the name would stay, and the logo would change... but most of all we'd stop coming up with excuses for a caricature based on an antiquated stereotype.

That's too bad. You shouldn't feel ashamed to support the Indians because of the name. You should feel ashamed to support the Indians because they stand in the way of the Twins winning the division ...

On a serious note, I agree with you completely. The name "Indians" is one of the most defensible such names, given the specific history of the team. I'm a pretty strong supporter of efforts to get rid of questionable Native American-related team names, but I'm cool with the Indians. So keep the name, but relegate Chief Wahoo to a status more like the Padres swinging friar (or less). Personally, I think the best possible Indians cap logo would be the old 1970s summer-camp-style angular C with Chief Wahoo's feather on the left side, as if the C itself were wearing Chief Wahoo's headdress. You keep a strong Native American theme but without the Indian Sambo cartoon. I mean, really, if you made an equivalent caricature of a big-lipped, wide-nosed black face, or a hook-nosed Jew, or a slanty-eyed, buck-toothed, big underbite Chinese face, not one parent in fifty would even think of letting his child wear a hat or a t-shirt with that logo. Obviously, nobody wears Chief Wahoo with the kind of bigoted intent that it would take to wear a Chief Wahoo equivalent of any other race today, but the logo is really the only problem the team and its fans have mounting a sound defense of the "Indians" name.

I'd still rather the team were named the Spiders or the Jumbos (Grover Cleveland's nickname), but "Indians" would be third on my list if the team were being named today, given the quite respectable provenance of the name in Cleveland. Unlike most other Native-related nicknames, which mostly just aren't very good nicknames regardless of so-called "PC" concerned. I mean, you've got the whole state of North Dakota and its history to draw from, and the best you can come up with is "Fighting Sioux"? That's just lazy.