Hey everyone!
What do you all think about this:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Tuesday vetoed a bill that would have prohibited five high schools from using the nickname Redskins, considered by some American Indians to be a racial slur.
size=1[/size]
[size=1][/size]
My opinion:
I don’t see a major problem with it, but then again, I’m not native american. If this were offensive, local school board can vote to change it without having to have a law passed against it.
:nat:
A law might be a bit much, again, im not sure, as I am not AI, but if the American Indians do find it offensive, it should be taken off.
I do find it Ironic the Arnold, of all people is passing a law, esspecialy since his vocabulary ain’t the cleanest. I can almost picture him there: “Kome ohn! Pass dis law you gerhly men!”
I think Arnold is not going to pass the law, for he has or will veto it. At least that’s how I read it 
Oh right, nevermind, I didnt even read the first quote.
…then it makes perfect sense!
I don’t think sports names are to be taken as offense. But Im not AI. But here’s a way to look at it. Do people from the northern part of the US get offended because theres a team called the Yankees? Are names like Blue Devils, Fighting Irish, Giants, Raiders, Vikings, Pirates, and Celtics offensive.
Our school mascot is a devil. I don’t find it to be offensive at all. Some deeply religious Christians do, but not too many.
I am American Indian (a small percentage) and my father has a registration number with the Blackfoot Indian tribe in Montana. I personally don’t find names like redskins offensive. If anything, I find it a fitting tribute because I think football brings a tough waring aspect to the name. I think it is great that we have Americans cheering on Indians after the history America has had with Indians. I would have a problem if we named something wussy redskins like plush childrens toys or something…
Just before I moved from Phoenix, AZ there was a mountain that many people used for hiking called Squaw Peak that they changed the name to Piestua (sp?) Peek because some found the word squaw derogitory. Piestua was the name of a young Indian woman that died in the Iraq war. Now, I wonder how long people will remember that the name of the mountain is after an Indian, where I know people will think Indian when they hear Squaw.
I acctually find Native American a derogitory name. I personally have a lot of pride in the name Indian. I will sometimes say American Indian but that is just to distingush between Indians (cultures that were in America before Europe “found” it) and Indians (Kirupa type people from the country of India). I think everyone born in America is a native American. Indians are and should be remembered as a seperate nation of people, and I think the name Columbus gave worked for 500+ years why change it now…
For me I think the hyper-sensitivity to any images or symbols related to the American Indian is a direct result of the “crimes” committed against the cultures and the lack of awareness or acknowledgment of what was done. I know such things are always up for debate … but then again some still like to argue that the “Holocaust” never happened ??? It is my opinion that what has been done to the Native American Indian is nothing less than one of the greatests acts of genocide in modern history. The goverment continues to treat and care for these few surviving natives (under 3 million world wide!!!) like third rate citizens. I know this from experience. Our goverment has broken or fallen short on every pact/promise it has made with the American Indian. So back to the point of this thread, I also feel it is such a matter of perception … who is to judge such things ? I think individual communities should decide on such matters … I also feel on a national level that all surviving American Indians have the right to protest such use of symbols/images that they find derogatory. What has been done can not be undone. So my hope is that as americans we all can be honest with ourselves and others when it concerns the nature of what has been done the these cultures out the name of religion and freedom. It all came at the cost of the near complete genocide of a race of human beings. Sorry to go off on this but it is a topic that greatly impacts my life and the lives of many people that I love. It is what it is and we can only try to impact things in the moment inwhich we find ourselves. Awareness and Acknowledgment is my hope.
Those are very valid points sky, but I think it is not right to say that the government is treating Indians as third rate citizens. I think all Americans are treated equally. I will conceed that life on reservations is bad when related to that off the reservation, but I have to say that is the Indians fault. They have all the opportunities in America as every other non-Indian but choose to live in squaller on the reservation.
I do however agree that what America did to Indians in the past is nothing short or genocide. I also agree that it was morally wrong that America allowed white people to own black people. The point is both are not the case anymore. No one living today ever owned a slave. No one living today took part in the wiping out of Indian tribes. Laws today protect everyone equally and allow everyone equal opportunity. If Indians are living much below the poverty line that is not the fault of the governemnt, that is the fault of the people choosing to live that way.
well blindlizard i do think you are a little off base with this one …some pretty heavy idealism there … the reservations are a direct result of our goverment
using brute force to steal “land of value” and relocate and for many years restricting these people to these mostly harsh fruitless environments for decades. So to say it is all their fault is a little much when they did not create this environment. You do have a point people have choices but most people on reservations are very limited in these “choices and options” due to what the gov. did and perpetuated upon them. It is true the only ones that will help the american indian is the american indian.
So the goverment continues to provide food supplements specifically set aside for the native tribes to this day. Did you know that the meat they currently send is comprised of diseased bison removed from our national parks!!!
Yeah thats 2004 !!! not 1910 … These foods go to people like me when I lost my job and needed help. These foods go to people like my grandparents who struggle to make it each and every month! Good people who did all they could to contribute in best way they could for over 80 years. Some of your comments were the exact thing that I have issues with … I dont think you really understand how you just declaired some major stereotypes
about peolpe on reservations. Anyhow the tribes should not depend upon the goverment to fix their problems … I mean why would you trust someone who lied to you for hundreds of years…but the goverment is directly responsible and will be until it(our goverment) is no more.
So now I will make yet another sad attempt to acutally ref. the purpose of this thread !!!
Sports names and such related to native americans is all subjective just as so many things in life. I dont think you solve this with a blanket type decision like passing laws. I personally dont find most of these things in a negative way …
with exception maybe of the cleveland indians logo is a bit much for me … but thats my opinion. So there there! So peace out and lets all try and avoid the perpetuating of stereotypes!
You’re right, blindlizard, no one today has hurt the indians, but then again no one living today has really done much to correct the problems created by their ancestors. The most that’s come out of it is a short discourse in American public schools about how “awfully naughty” it was of the white man to have had killed those loveable “Native Americans.” Well, I guess there’s always Indian-owned casinos…
But as far as sports teams are concerned, I’d be more offended at the caricatures than I would the names themselves. Whenever I see the Cleveland Indians mascot, I can’t help but think of it as being the equivlant to this:
You know, except with a baseball team associated with it.
But as far as sports teams are concerned, I’d be more offended at the caricatures than I would the names themselves. Whenever I see the Cleveland Indians mascot, I can’t help but think of it as being the equivlant to this:
I guess that is the thing. Everyone sees everything diferently. You see a white erson making fun of a non-white and I see Indians being poertrayed in the same light as cowboys, and vikings, and lions, and bears, and patriots…
Ninety percent of American Indians say the name Washington Redskins does not offend them, according to a new national survey.
Only 9 percent of polled Indians say they find the name of Washington’s professional football team “offensive,” according to the results of the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey. The other 1 percent did not respond.
“I thought more people would have had” problems with the name, said Adam Clymer, political director of the survey, which questioned more than 65,000 Americans of all races and ethnic groups between Oct. 7, 2003, and Sept. 20, 2004.
[size=1]([/size][size=1]http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040925-121238-9407r.htm[/size][size=1])[/size]
[size=1](more of same)[/size]
Besides proving that there is a poll for almost anything, I guess the polled Native Americans don’t mind the term redskins 
I’m actually part native american (very little but still am), and i could care less :lol:
Just another thing for people to complain about.
Off topic:
how the hell do you write posts that long???
please explain…and i am not joking…how do u do it
[size=1][color=darkred]kirupa_edit: Too off-topic for this forum to ask such a question 
[/color][/size]
[size=1](If you are interested in a topic and you have a lot to say, it isn’t difficult to write a lot.)[/size]
When I told my wife about this thread the other day, and after she rideculed me for talking to my computer for hours about meaningless information, she said…who is complaining about the names, I bet it is white people. I think your poll there might prove that. Good old political correctness…
edit…
I just read the story, and noticed this
Vernon Bellecourt, president of the National Coalition on Racism in Sports and the Media, said he believes both the Anneberg and Sports Illustrated poll are “flawed.”
Am I the onlyone supprised that a National Coalition on Racism in Sports and the Media exists??
But, it all comes down to a case-by-case analysis. Arguing against the use of the name “Vikings” isn’t in the same ballpark as arguing over the name “Indians”.
When one thinks “American-Indian” they think of the depections in John Wayne movies, reservations, and casinos. All of these things exist in the modern mindset and can easily be attributed to a group of people. However, when one thinks “Vikings”, there is no modern context to place those of Nordic lineage in. One usually doesn’t immediately associate someone of Nordic descent with those blood-thirsty pillagers.
But, for me, the names themselves aren’t the biggest problem. Like I said in my previous post, the imagery is sometimes questionable.
[ot]If I remember correctly, some intramural basketball squad tried to parody the use of indian-themed team names by calling themselves the “Fighting Whities.” The image they used on their shirts was some generic clipart of a vanilla, non-offensive white man in a suit.
If the kids really wanted to get their point across, they would’ve used an image of a screaming Neo-Nazi as their mascot.[/ot]
:: Copyright KIRUPA 2024 //--