Chicago Blackhawks Logo has to go?

[Billy B]

I'm still trying to understand why I don't have any problem with the Blackhawks nickname and identity but I totally abhor the Washington Redskins identity and find their usage borderline racist. I wonder why that is so. I must be missing something

Well, the Blackhawks are named after a specific person (indirectly, but still) and the Redskins is a pretty racist term. I think both logos are respectable as far as Native American logos go, but the actual team names are where the big difference is.

[powersurge]

I'm still trying to understand why I don't have any problem with the Blackhawks nickname and identity but I totally abhor the Washington Redskins identity and find their usage borderline racist. I wonder why that is so. I must be missing something

Well, the Blackhawks are named after a specific person (indirectly, but still) and the Redskins is a pretty racist term. I think both logos are respectable as far as Native American logos go, but the actual team names are where the big difference is.

Hmmm...could be...thanks for pointing that out. I'm still confused whether or not I'm still harboring some prejudice against the team for kicking the Bear's ass in 1987 as opposed to something else.

[TrueYankee26]

I'm tired of seeing all the indian logos become ditched, it's not even offensive.

[RedSox44]

I'm still trying to understand why I don't have any problem with the Blackhawks nickname and identity but I totally abhor the Washington Redskins identity and find their usage borderline racist. I wonder why that is so. I must be missing something

Well, the Blackhawks are named after a specific person (indirectly, but still) and the Redskins is a pretty racist term. I think both logos are respectable as far as Native American logos go, but the actual team names are where the big difference is.

I like the Redskins' logo, hate the name. It is racist, at least in my opinion. I also don't like "Indians" for a team name, but names like "Blackhawks", "Fighting Sioux", "Seminoles", etc. I feel are honoring the local Native American tribes in the region.

[max]

I found that frothy modern reference to that term, "that which is politically correct®," for which JohnnySeoul has been searching. I found it a couple years ago printed on the top of a receipt outside "Illegal Immigrant Homo Sacer Post Office And Quick Stop" resting two miles outside the Cheyenne River Lakota Reservation at Howes, South Dakota. Charles Sanders Peirce reads:

"WHEN LISTENING TO A LOCAL POPULATION OF DOGS, ONE DOG BARKS, THEN ANOTHER; DOES THE SECOND BARK CARRY THE FIRST'S GENERATIVE OPPOSITION, THE STRUCTURE OF THE SECOND NECESSARILY GENERATING ITS OWN NEMESIS?"

Try to find that one paragraph in your 19th century European Philosophy books written by Peirce about dilettantes. Something about...

Keep typing

Keep typing

Keep typing

Take action*

Keep typing

Keep typing

Keel over

Topic changes?

*All action is based on belief.

[max]

"Should I give them a medal for perspiring too?

No, that's for you

your prerogative, residual

purchase of public space"

[Joshawaggie]

I think max might be dfwabel's brother.

[MaBaoLuo]

Hey,

Aside from the native indian issue, I spotted last year a player in a garage league wearing a Blackhawks jersey that was totally wicked, the Indian was like under acids or something, eyes popping out of the holes and stuff. But still very clearly the Blackhawks old man, same colours, same all.

I cant track it back. Nothing on google, nothing at the jerseys stores.

Has any of you heard of it? Any link to help me find it?

[9erssteve]

I'm still trying to understand why I don't have any problem with the Blackhawks nickname and identity but I totally abhor the Washington Redskins identity and find their usage borderline racist. I wonder why that is so. I must be missing something

Could it be perhaps that one is a literal translation of a tribe name and the other a moniker created by white settlers to describe the natives?

The whole issue bugs the heck out of me. To simply dismiss or ignore an areas history or heritage by saying that it's not PC or it's racist is far more offensive to me than using the name of local tribes or peoples. Provided the imagery is not offensive (ie just a stereotypical image) and those being represented have no issues why shouldn't a team pay it's respects to those who lived in the area before them and created it's heritage?

Provided the name is GENUINE, I dont have a problem with it, and dont see why others should have either.

9erssteve

[BigBubba]

I agree with powersurge. Personally, I see nothing wrong with the Blackhawks' or Sioux's logos or names. But the Indians' (with beet red skin, used under the now-pollitically incorrect name) or the Redskins' names (Indians logo I detest, Redskins I have nothing wrong with) are just ridiculous. Let's be honest: If I had a team and called them the Los Angeles Chinese with a picture of a man with lemon-yellow skin and really thin eyes, would that be acceptable? Or If they were called the Yellowskins? What if I did that to blacks? Called them the Negroes, made the logo pitch black, would that be fine? I don't think so. So can someone with another perspective please explain to me why it is (I don't want to sound argumentative, I just want another perspective)?

[Dedalvs]

Quoting because I think this is a fair summary of the major cases:

- The Chicago Blackhawks have a PC-approved name and logo.

- The Washington Redskins have a PC-approved logo, but the name is definitely not PC and probably should be changed.

- The Cleveland Indians' name is borderline at best, but the logo is not PC and also more than likely should be changed.

It's not the Redskins logo that wants changing* but the name. (And just to be clear, it's Chief Wahoo, not the script "Indians".) I'd also add to that the Braves name and logo is perhaps borderline (with "Braves" plus the tomahawk), but that an overwhelming majority probably find it acceptable.

* Though, in my opinion, every incarnation of the Redskins logo with the human head is strange. There are realistic/somewhat stylized feathers coming off of the yellow circle, but then the head in the middle also has feathers?different feathers which are likewise realistic and somewhat stylized, but in different colors. It's kind of like having a logo that's a polaroid of a logo which itself is a polaroid.

[Gothamite]

I think that's a fair summary.

[Morgan33]

I can't believe this thread I started during the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals is still going. Especially considering how ridiculous and self serving the original article is.

[tubby34]

Screw it, I'm going to start a hockey team with the redskins name, chief wahoo logo and a scalped head as the secondary. Miami Redskins sounds good, but I'll have the newspapers call us the "fightin' injuns".

Then we can all agree the real skins, Indians and blackhawks are ok and I'm just a prick.

[Chazberg]

If the Blackhawks dump a logo, it should be the stupid shoulder patch alarm clock one. There's nothing sacred about an original six logo, but this is probably the least offensive Native American-related identity in sports.

The the best secondary logo in sports IMHO. And how on earth does it look like an alarm clock?

[nmsuaggie]

I've always thought that the Blackhawks need to have a third jersey with the shoulder patch on the crest and the Indian head on the shoulders. Is there anyone who would like to see that?

[SenatorJake]

I've seen many First Nations people here in Ottawa wearing Blackhawks paraphernalia over the years.

[Graysmith]

I've seen many First Nations people here in Ottawa wearing Blackhawks paraphernalia over the years.

That's what I've always wondered. I can understand that Native Americans are upset over the Indians logo or the Redskins name, they have all the right to be, but are they truly offended by any team bearing an Native American-related name? Like already mentioned, the Blackhawks name and logo are not offensive. If I were Native American I'd probably be proud that part of my ancestry is being remembered and recognized as long as it's done with respect.

[JTernup]

Quoting because I think this is a fair summary of the major cases:

- The Chicago Blackhawks have a PC-approved name and logo.

- The Washington Redskins have a PC-approved logo, but the name is definitely not PC and probably should be changed.

- The Cleveland Indians' name is borderline at best, but the logo is not PC and also more than likely should be changed.

It's not the Redskins logo that wants changing* but the name. (And just to be clear, it's Chief Wahoo, not the script "Indians".) I'd also add to that the Braves name and logo is perhaps borderline (with "Braves" plus the tomahawk), but that an overwhelming majority probably find it acceptable.

* Though, in my opinion, every incarnation of the Redskins logo with the human head is strange. There are realistic/somewhat stylized feathers coming off of the yellow circle, but then the head in the middle also has feathers?different feathers which are likewise realistic and somewhat stylized, but in different colors. It's kind of like having a logo that's a polaroid of a logo which itself is a polaroid.

How on earth is braves and a tomahawk borderline. That is absolutely PC overboard, you know there is a minor league team called the Lugnuts. A common profiling of hispanics is that they are mechanics and mechanics use lug nuts for work just like Indians used tomahawks. Oh no! If you want to you can find racism in everything.

[DrJack]

I completely agree with the notion that the Blackhawks logo needs to go. Recist Native American imagery no longer has any place in sports. Its the 21st century and these teams need to get with the times. I find it disgusting that the Blackhawks, Redskins, Indians, etc. haven't changed yet despite years and years of cries from the Native American community for change.

I can back up my argument with facts, sources, and evidence, but I have to work early and don't really feel like typing it all out. Maybe tomorrow. For now, just take my opinion as one vote for the change.