Jump to content

Cleveland Scene Article on Chief Wahoo


mania

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 278
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Whether you care about the racism or not, you would think that you would want to drop the 97 year association with Indians anyway because it's generally an association with losing.

Great, wear the name with pride even though it is attached to only 2 world Series titles and 5 pennants in over 90 years and no trophy since 1948.

Maybe go back to Spiders and just start over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference between those with European decent and those of Irish decent. If a logo depicting a Frenchman as a baguette eating fairy god mother was created by an Englishman it would be offensive. There is no wiggle room in that debate. Unless a man of Irish decent created the logo for those of Irish decent then it is not the same thing.

Just because it's used by a generic continent and made by a generic continent doesn't qualify it for exception.

Hehe, this just proves the problem that comes with using the Fighting Irish logo in this discussion, because it's apples and oranges when compared to Wahoo.

You have two races of people. Whites (or Caucasians, Europeans, whathaveyou) and Native Americans (Natives, Indians, American Indians, whathaveyou). Both races are broken up into many nationalities and ethnicity. The Irish are a sub-group of whites while the Sauk, for example, are a sub-group of Native Americans.

The Fighting Irish logo draws its imagery from a sub-sect of a larger race. Chief Wahoo, however, attempts to draw imagery from a generic image from an entire race. It's all in the names of the teams, after all. Fighting Irish (an ethnicity within the larger white race) and Indians (a name that can be used to describe an entire race).

So you really, the only way to fairly compare the Fighting Irish logo to the Indians' Chief Wahoo is to view the subject matter of the Fighting Irish logo as European/Caucasian/white rather then just Irish. After all Wahoo is just supposed to be an Indian/Native American, not any one specific sub-group of that race.

The Fighting Irish logo draws on European stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's fine.

Chief Wahoo draws on Native stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's not fine.

Besides, the Fighting Irish logo is ultimately irrelevant to this discussion. The discussion is about Chief Wahoo, not the Notre Dame logo.

So lets discuss Wahoo without trying to move the goalposts.

How is he not racist? How is he not offensive? To me he looks no different from this, this, or this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there EVER been one of these discussions where somebody didn't drag out the Notre Dame logo to try to confuse and derail the argument?

At the very least, get the terms right... Notre Dame's logo is an ethnic depiction/stereotype... Cleveland's is a straight up racial depiction / stereotype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there EVER been one of these discussions where somebody didn't drag out the Notre Dame logo to try to confuse and derail the argument?

It's the go-to argument, it seems. Can't win the argument? Mention Notre Dame's logo.

At the very least, get the terms right... Notre Dame's logo is an ethnic depiction/stereotype... Cleveland's is a straight up racial depiction / stereotype.

Which is essentially what I said, yes. You've hit the nail on the head as to why the two are apples and oranges.

It's hard to compare the two as-is. You have to look at the Notre Dame logo as simply Caucasian rather then just Irish if you want to compare it against the over-all racial nature of Chief Wahoo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there EVER been one of these discussions where somebody didn't drag out the Notre Dame logo to try to confuse and derail the argument?

Nope.

But maybe that's not surprising, Wahoo is so offensive that its defenders are left with little more than a combination of red herrings and appeals to tradition.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there EVER been one of these discussions where somebody didn't drag out the Notre Dame logo to try to confuse and derail the argument?

Nope.

But maybe that's not surprising, Wahoo is so offensive that its defenders are left with little more than a combination of red herrings and appeals to tradition.

Crappy tradition, maybe. The Indians won their two World Championships before they put Wahoo on their caps. Wahoo only represents a 64+ year title drought. You'd think Cleveland fans would want to ditch him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference between those with European decent and those of Irish decent. If a logo depicting a Frenchman as a baguette eating fairy god mother was created by an Englishman it would be offensive. There is no wiggle room in that debate. Unless a man of Irish decent created the logo for those of Irish decent then it is not the same thing.

Just because it's used by a generic continent and made by a generic continent doesn't qualify it for exception.

Hehe, this just proves the problem that comes with using the Fighting Irish logo in this discussion, because it's apples and oranges when compared to Wahoo.

You have two races of people. Whites (or Caucasians, Europeans, whathaveyou) and Native Americans (Natives, Indians, American Indians, whathaveyou). Both races are broken up into many nationalities and ethnicity. The Irish are a sub-group of whites while the Sauk, for example, are a sub-group of Native Americans.

The Fighting Irish logo draws its imagery from a sub-sect of a larger race. Chief Wahoo, however, attempts to draw imagery from a generic image from an entire race. It's all in the names of the teams, after all. Fighting Irish (an ethnicity within the larger white race) and Indians (a name that can be used to describe an entire race).

So you really, the only way to fairly compare the Fighting Irish logo to the Indians' Chief Wahoo is to view the subject matter of the Fighting Irish logo as European/Caucasian/white rather then just Irish. After all Wahoo is just supposed to be an Indian/Native American, not any one specific sub-group of that race.

The Fighting Irish logo draws on European stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's fine.

Chief Wahoo draws on Native stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's not fine.

Besides, the Fighting Irish logo is ultimately irrelevant to this discussion. The discussion is about Chief Wahoo, not the Notre Dame logo.

So lets discuss Wahoo without trying to move the goalposts.

How is he not racist? How is he not offensive? To me he looks no different from this, this, or this.

The issue isn't exactly wahoo vs. the Irishman. It's what's good for the geese should be good for the gander. The same passion that is used to eradicate wahoo should be used to eliminate the Irish logo in one foul swoop.

The fact you seem to think europeans made it so it's okay for Europeans is irrelevant.

A racist logo is a racist logo regardless of who designed it. Spike Lee can create a racist cartoon with a character in black face, big red lips and dimwitted and it's still racist.

The race of its creater is irrelevant, which is what the bigger issue. Those who support wahoo point to tradition and an over PC community and want to take a stand somewhere. Those who support the Irish logo point to its creators and say its okay, their Irish too.

Ever heard of the "Jew Can Sam" video? Look it up. Just because your of that race doesn't make it ok.

If something is perceived to be offensive to one percent of a culture then it is offensive. There is no line to be blurred. Be it semantics or not, there is no person in this country that deserves to feel he is of a lower class or part of a stereotype persisted by anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, not even close. You appear to be trying to confuse the issue, which is the third tactic and the one I forgot to mention.

Wahoo isn't a symbol from Native American folklore. He's a person. Notre Dame's leprechaun is more akin to the Seahawks and Canucks logos, which means that until somebody seriously suggests their elimination the leprechaun is irrelevant to this conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has there EVER been one of these discussions where somebody didn't drag out the Notre Dame logo to try to confuse and derail the argument?

Nope.

But maybe that's not surprising, Wahoo is so offensive that its defenders are left with little more than a combination of red herrings and appeals to tradition.

Never said the logo wasn't offensive, I'm saying the Irish logo should be held in the same regard and your statement proves how ignorant most are to others viewpoints.

Call it white smoke or red herrings, but at the end of the day those who fight for one cause should be fighting for them all together.

No one cause should be dismissed just to make a point about another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, not even close. You appear to be trying to confuse the issue, which is the third tactic and the one I forgot to mention.

Wahoo isn't a symbol from Native American folklore. He's a person. Notre Dame's leprechaun is more akin to the Seahawks and Canucks logos, which means that until somebody seriously suggests their elimination the leprechaun is irrelevant to this conversation.

Do not include a bird and compare it to a depiction of a human that can be identified in everyday life. That's insulting.

Johnny Canuck is recognized worldwide by their fans as a symbolism of their team and city and has no racial connotation other then "he's a lumberjack". Canuck is a term Canadians use with pride. I've never met an Irishman who has call himself a "fighting irishman".

Wahoo is supposedly a symbol of history, which is more ten folklore. The logo should be changed however folklore or historical precedence is a weak leg to stand on.

Wahoo is a name given by sportswriters, so I'm going to call him the "Indian" from here on out.

The Indian is meant to honor Sockalexis, (sp?) a actual living person, not a fictional character or prop (Seahawks).

Regardless of the origin, both logos are demeaning. To say one is more demeaning then the other and deserves to be removed while the other should stay is insulting to an entire race of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference between those with European decent and those of Irish decent. If a logo depicting a Frenchman as a baguette eating fairy god mother was created by an Englishman it would be offensive. There is no wiggle room in that debate. Unless a man of Irish decent created the logo for those of Irish decent then it is not the same thing.

Just because it's used by a generic continent and made by a generic continent doesn't qualify it for exception.

Hehe, this just proves the problem that comes with using the Fighting Irish logo in this discussion, because it's apples and oranges when compared to Wahoo.

You have two races of people. Whites (or Caucasians, Europeans, whathaveyou) and Native Americans (Natives, Indians, American Indians, whathaveyou). Both races are broken up into many nationalities and ethnicity. The Irish are a sub-group of whites while the Sauk, for example, are a sub-group of Native Americans.

The Fighting Irish logo draws its imagery from a sub-sect of a larger race. Chief Wahoo, however, attempts to draw imagery from a generic image from an entire race. It's all in the names of the teams, after all. Fighting Irish (an ethnicity within the larger white race) and Indians (a name that can be used to describe an entire race).

So you really, the only way to fairly compare the Fighting Irish logo to the Indians' Chief Wahoo is to view the subject matter of the Fighting Irish logo as European/Caucasian/white rather then just Irish. After all Wahoo is just supposed to be an Indian/Native American, not any one specific sub-group of that race.

The Fighting Irish logo draws on European stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's fine.

Chief Wahoo draws on Native stereotypes, but it was created by people of European descent to be used by people of European descent. That's not fine.

Besides, the Fighting Irish logo is ultimately irrelevant to this discussion. The discussion is about Chief Wahoo, not the Notre Dame logo.

So lets discuss Wahoo without trying to move the goalposts.

How is he not racist? How is he not offensive? To me he looks no different from this, this, or this.

The issue isn't exactly wahoo vs. the Irishman.

You made it that when you brought in a logo that had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

It's what's good for the geese should be good for the gander. The same passion that is used to eradicate wahoo should be used to eliminate the Irish logo in one foul swoop.

That's a rather black and white (pardon the unintentional pun) viewpoint to take, actually. It's rather noble, to want to see racism eliminated in all of its forms, I'll give you that, but it's also rather blind to the sheer complexity that is the race issue.

You can't just say "all of this is bad, regardless of context." Context and historical agency matter, and for better or worse they make things not so clear cut.

A logo that draws on stereotypes for white people, made by white people, for an organization of white people just isn't as offensive as a logo that draws on stereotypes of Natives that was made by white people for an organization of white people.

Yes, ideally we shouldn't tolerate stereotypes anywhere, but the world's more complex then that. There are sociological and historical factors that go into the fact that the Fighting Irish logo isn't as bad as the Notre Dame logo.

Ever heard of the "Jew Can Sam" video? Look it up. Just because your of that race doesn't make it ok.

What does that have to do with....anything? At all? I have no idea what that video is, who made it, or why.

Like you bringing up the Fighting Irish logo this is clearly an attempt to move the goal posts.

So lets get back on track. How is Wahoo not racist?

Never said the logo wasn't offensive...

Oh. Ok then. You agree Wahoo's offensive. End of discussion then. If you want to go on about Notre Dame's logo start another thread.

We should be able to discuss whether or not Wahoo is offensive without dragging other logos into the discussion. If there's enough to be said about another logo then it should have its own thread. Hopefully we can discuss that without dragging Wahoo into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So lets get back on track. Focus on the issue at hand. The issue being Chief Wahoo. How is that logo, the central topic of discussion, not racist?

Check out the video to see the backlash the creators faced in creating it, it eliminates the "European/European" debate we were having"

As far as the Indian is concerned, I haven't once said he wasn't racist today. I simply argued how is the Irishman not in the same discussion as far as racism in sportslogos, trying to figure out how he consistently gets a free pass.

Both are racist, I just don't understand why others would argue the Irishman isn't

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you care about the racism or not, you would think that you would want to drop the 97 year association with Indians anyway because it's generally an association with losing.

Great, wear the name with pride even though it is attached to only 2 world Series titles and 5 pennants in over 90 years and no trophy since 1948.

Maybe go back to Spiders and just start over.

Let's petition the Cubs to change their name too if winning (or lack thereof) is the rationale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

]

Answering a question with another--unrelated--question is not answering the original question at all; it's deflecting.

No, answering a topic with a like topic related question is a discussion for a discussion board.

Noting that their is a difference between Irish and Indians is deflecting.

To form a opinion one must generate a thought provoking process to ensure the attention. Asking a question such as mine attempts to draw out the questioneers motive.

Motive is key.

So is a discussion on the proper use of Your, you're and you are.

Sorry, but wrong answer.

If you refuse to answer the question, but instead bring up a different scenario, you're still not answering the question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether you care about the racism or not, you would think that you would want to drop the 97 year association with Indians anyway because it's generally an association with losing.

Great, wear the name with pride even though it is attached to only 2 world Series titles and 5 pennants in over 90 years and no trophy since 1948.

Maybe go back to Spiders and just start over.

Let's petition the Cubs to change their name too if winning (or lack thereof) is the rationale.

Actually, I agree with the sentiment here. Whether or not Cleveland has won with that logo is not relevant. And you don't want that criteria used for whether or not the Redskins should change their name, because they've had a winning history with that name.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.