You guys know how I feel about the use of Native American names, logos, and mascots in sports.
The biggest offender - the Washington R*dskins is still around, but hopefully in my lifetime their name will be discontinued as well.

Now regarding this specific case, why were they only asking the Sprirt Lake and Standing Rock Sioux bands for their approval? There are dozens of Sioux bands in the area and their voices should have been heard too.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5068989

Court, board decide to retire nickname

MAYVILLE, N.D. -- A state Supreme Court ruling and a Board of Higher Education decision have retired for good the University of North Dakota's Fighting Sioux nickname after a four-year legal battle.

The court ruled Thursday that the board had the authority to dump the nickname at any time. The court rejected an appeal that sought to delay action.

A motion later Thursday at the board's regularly scheduled meeting in Mayville to reconsider its vote in May to retire the nickname died after nobody seconded it.

Claus Lembke, the board member who made the failed motion, said the board was "giving in to a minority of people on the issue."

Board president Richie Smith had said before the vote that he thought no further action was required to retire the nickname.

Board member and university alumnus Grant Shaft said afterward that he believes most people are tired of the controversy.

"I think people have moved to the point, for a number of reasons, that they wanted this to move along," Shaft said.

UND president Robert Kelley, who was hired in part to help the school in its transition from Division II to Division I athletics, said he's looking forward to managing the nickname transition.

"It's hard sitting on your hands waiting for a deliberate process to run its course, not knowing what the outcome would be," Kelley said after the board meeting. "Now that we have a decision from the state board, we can move ahead."

In their ruling, the justices said the board had the authority to change the nickname before a Nov. 30 deadline set in a settlement with the NCAA. A group of eight Spirit Lake Sioux tribal members who want the school to keep the nickname were seeking to have the court bar any decision before the deadline.

The state Supreme Court said nothing in the settlement prevents the board from making a decision before the deadline.

Supporters believe the logo shows pride and tradition. But the NCAA considers the nickname "hostile and offensive" and said UND cannot host postseason events without approval from the state's two Sioux tribes. Under the settlement, the board and UND agreed to begin retiring the nickname if they couldn't obtain permission from the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock Sioux tribes by Nov. 30.

Spirit Lake tribal members have voted to support the nickname, but the Standing Rock tribal council has resisted calls for it to change its bylaws to allow a vote on the issue.

A district judge dismissed the Spirit Lake members' lawsuit in December. The state Supreme Court agreed to hear an expedited appeal after UND officials pleaded with the board to decide the issue quickly so the school could pursue admission to the Summit League.

Summit League president Tom Douple has said UND won't be considered for admission until the school finds a solution that makes the NCAA happy.

The Spirit Lake members' attorney, Patrick Morley, didn't return a call Thursday seeking comment.

Shaft said he doesn't think it'll make a difference if Standing Rock decides to support the logo.

"With the makeup of the board right now, I don't think we have the opportunity to bring it back for reconsideration," Shaft said.


Copyright 2010 by The Associated Press

Otherwise you get dumb shit like Marquette changing their name when literally no one was mad.Then being the Gold for 10 minutes
____________________


Quarterback
Winner
Hero

Everyone thought they were going to announce a return to the Warriors, and then . . . . Gold.

http://graphics2.jsonline.com/graphics/sports/mu/img/may05/students504.jpg

The giant 5-year-old is my favorite.

Classic shit, should have won 8 pulitzers

Plus, there are times when ppl are offended for no good reason. I mean, know the word niggardly sounds bad but get a dictionary nga..

lol
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

One tribe certainly doesn't seem to think so..

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

I kind of don't get it either. On one hand you have the blatantly offensive Washington team name and the Cleveland mascot but then you have something that seems to be remembering the spirit of a nation.

Now, I don't know what their logo looks like but I would be more concerned with that than a named like the Fighting Sioux.

It would be like if all Irish people rose up and called for Notre Dame to discontinue the use of Fighting Irish. It would lessen the spirit of both the University and the purpose of honoring the spirit of the heritage of Irish people.

I feel like it's kind of the same thing for American Indians.

Get rid of offensive nicknames and depictions and focus on honoring the heritage...so people have a problem with the SDSU teams being called the Aztecs?

It was basically the Chicago Blackhawks logo, then they changed it to a more cartoonish logo (but not cartoonish in a bad way like Cleveland, cartoonish like more abstract.) Then they changed that to a more realistic, kind-of-offensive logo at the behest of the UND athletic department's nazi overlord.

Don't make assumptions about something you obviously are not well read upon. Also, what makes you think that the mascot was created to honor a nation of peoples? This was the same time they were forcing us on reservations and stealing our children to be sent away to boarding schools. This was the same time they were terminating the sovereign status of many tribal nations.
Go google "Suzan Shown Harjo" and read about the efforts of Native American peoples to get these mascots retired.

I mean, if they were the "Savage Sioux" or "Pussy Sioux" etc.. I could see an issue. When will the Irish get upset about Notre Dame?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


XBox 360 Live gamertag - Keystonejenks

and while i think Fighting Sioux is one of the more mild names, and it doesn't come with a particularly offensive mascot (i think), its still named after a group that is largely unrepresented by the college, and the word fighting invokes stereotypes. While you could argue the same about Notre Dame, it is largely an Irish, Catholic college, and Irish aren't considered a minority like they used to be (thus, they mostly don't have to fight said stereotype any longer). Plus, whereas some Native Americans are offended by the team names, and most seem indifferent, as far as I can tell Irish people LOVE the name.

I think when people make "fighting" out to mean something stereotypical is just a cop out and reaching at that point. I mean what about the term "warriors?" Now there are offensive names such as Redskins and Redmen.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


XBox 360 Live gamertag - Keystonejenks

>I think when people make "fighting" out to mean something
>stereotypical is just a cop out and reaching at that point.


it's not "making it out" to be stereotypical, that IS a stereotype of the group. thos names didn't come out of thin air, they have deep roots in how this country views/viewed native americans. and as far as those types of names go, if said group is still oppressed and not every one in said group is exactly on board with the name and still has to deal with those stereotypes... well, i think its time to change the name.

I
>mean what about the term "warriors?"

this one depends on the logo though. GS was able to keep their tradition because they changed their logo to be MUCH more ambiguous after the move from philly:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/58/PhiladelphiaWarriors.png

something like Redsk*ns or Fighting Sioux is far too direct.

so was everyone at that time in history, anyone who survived. to me fighting sioux makes a helluva lot more sense than fighting irish (maybe starving irish more apropos?) but since the irish take that to be funny i don't really care.

it's not just that they "fought" people or were hunter-gatherers, the perception was that they were savages.

and as far as Fighting Irish goes, if this were 100 years ago and the Irish were still largely discriminated against, rather than being considered a part of the majority like they are today, then yeah, it would be offensive. Irish people largely don't have to deal with those stereotypes, and when they do it's not in a "they're being held back" kind of way. Not to mention the history of Irish-American relations is not anywhere near as painful, so it's not a parallel.

why should people censor themselves and shift to less bold or less fitting language and symbolism to avert the ignorance of others?

is that a possible interpretation? sure. is it an accurate one? no. was it the one intended by the university? no. is the symbolism behind the logo and chants of the school consistent with something dehumanizing? i do not believe so, the fighting sioux and the chicago blackhawk are two of the only respectable Indian-related mascots going IMO. maybe some of those small Minnesota schools, i am not really familiar with their use or continued of Indian American symbols.

as far as the Notre Dame thing, way to jump into an Olympics of misery when i was not comparing the two from anything other than a linguistic basis. the irish were not really known as great warriors or hunters and got the fighting bit attached to them for the innocent reason that any team puts fightin' in front of their name and the not so innocent reason that they had a reputation as belligerent lushes. but i don't really care to dwell on that, very much a peripheral discussion.

>
>as far as the Notre Dame thing, way to jump into an Olympics
>of misery when i was not comparing the two from anything other
>than a linguistic basis. the irish were not really known as
>great warriors or hunters and got the fighting bit attached to
>them for the innocent reason that any team puts fightin' in
>front of their name and the not so innocent reason that they
>had a reputation as belligerent lushes. but i don't really
>care to dwell on that, very much a peripheral discussion.
>

to the people actually comparing the 2, i know you weren't actually doing that.

and yeah, i'm Irish, so I've heard/talked about all this.

if they are going to use the name, they should do more to celebrate and include the culture. honestly, if they are going to inhabit the land they should do those things but that is a standard that is simply not in place anywhere.

but the use of the name is innocent IMO (yes, i know, the origin, in fact i know the EXACT three reasons cited for the use of the tribe's name), the logo/mascot are careful to avoid denigrating the people, and the tribe has been involved at various times to make sure that things stay on the up and up.

It's certainly not as despicable as the R*dskins, but it's still bad. All Native American mascots need to be retired. When these white schools were coming up with these names, they didn't ask us. We are people, not mascots! It's dehumanizing. I can think of a million ways you can honor Native Americans and creating a sports mascot is not one of them.

I guess I just don't see how this is offensive particularly if there was no intention to offend. Everyone is with you on the Washington(NFL) & Cleveland(MLB). However, I don't think anyone has an issue w/ the Chicago Blackhawks or it's never really brought up in these discussions. I don't see how it's any different.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

And not all Spirit Lake tribal members have the same opinion. They took a vote and I believe about 1/3 of the tribal members voted to do away with the mascot.
And like I said, Spirit Lake is just one of many, many Sioux tribes.

And you honestly think Native American mascots were created back in the early to mid 20th century by white people to honor Native Americans?
If you really think that, wake the fuck up!

Again, I don't know the history behind the mascot/name but if you have evidence that it was intentionally created to insult NAs that's something altogether different. It's one thing to be sensitive to others but the idea that people always have to cater to another groups sensitivities is over the top.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

You lack the understanding and compassion to understand that turning a people who this country has committed genocide against into a mascots is harmful. The American Psychogical Association ruled that ALL American Indian mascots should be retired because of the the harmful psychological affects it has on children.
http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/indian-mascots.aspx

Do better.

I'm just reading what's in the article so no need to get heated or defensive. You just have to understand that other people may be aware of all those things & simply not have an issue with it.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

lol
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

is dehumanizing

Cmon

overflowing even

Fantastic

There, now I'm comparing Native Americans to DIRTY LAUNDRY

Way to take my response way out of context, but hey, do you.

and i bet you're white too

race or ethnicity as a sports team mascot except the Fighting Irish. Why should a marginalized group of ppl such as Native Americans be used as sports symbols?

Schools the NCAA committee identified as likely having offensive ethnic mascots included:
Alfred University (Saxons), Arkansas, Little Rock (Trojans), Cleveland State (Vikings), Edinboro University (Fighting Scots), Gordon College of Ga. (Highlanders), Gordon College of Mass. (Fighting Scots), Hofstra (Flying Dutchmen), Idaho (Vandals), Iona (Gaels), Iowa Central (Dutch), Louisiana Lafayette (Ragin' Cajuns), Luther College (Norse), Maryville College (Fighting Scots), Michigan State (Spartans), Monmouth College (Fighting Scots), New Mexico Tech (Pygmies), Northern Kentucky (Norse), Notre Dame (Fightin' Irish), Ohio Valley University (Fighting Scots), Portland State (Vikings), Southern Cal (Trojans), UNC-Greensboro (Spartans) and Wooster College (Fighting Scots).

Political Correctness at its finest

>Schools the NCAA committee identified as likely having
>offensive ethnic mascots included:
>Alfred University (Saxons), Arkansas, Little Rock (Trojans),
>Cleveland State (Vikings), Edinboro University (Fighting
>Scots), Gordon College of Ga. (Highlanders), Gordon College of
>Mass. (Fighting Scots), Hofstra (Flying Dutchmen), Idaho
>(Vandals), Iona (Gaels), Iowa Central (Dutch), Louisiana
>Lafayette (Ragin' Cajuns), Luther College (Norse), Maryville
>College (Fighting Scots), Michigan State (Spartans), Monmouth
>College (Fighting Scots), New Mexico Tech (Pygmies), Northern
>Kentucky (Norse), Notre Dame (Fightin' Irish), Ohio Valley
>University (Fighting Scots), Portland State (Vikings),
>Southern Cal (Trojans), UNC-Greensboro (Spartans) and Wooster
>College (Fighting Scots).
>
>Political Correctness at its finest
>


Seriously? New Mexico Tech...Pygmies??? I'm sorry but without looking that up that seems out of nowhere..

Their Mascot? A knight in a suit of armor

I wonder if they were worried that the "Dutchmen" would offend The Dutch, or just Women

and were they worried about offending after school miscreants with spray paint cans and too much time on their hands when it came to the Idaho "Vandals"?


>>Schools the NCAA committee identified as likely having
>>offensive ethnic mascots included:
>>Alfred University (Saxons), Arkansas, Little Rock (Trojans),
>>Cleveland State (Vikings), Edinboro University (Fighting
>>Scots), Gordon College of Ga. (Highlanders), Gordon College
>of
>>Mass. (Fighting Scots), Hofstra (Flying Dutchmen), Idaho
>>(Vandals), Iona (Gaels), Iowa Central (Dutch), Louisiana
>>Lafayette (Ragin' Cajuns), Luther College (Norse), Maryville
>>College (Fighting Scots), Michigan State (Spartans),
>Monmouth
>>College (Fighting Scots), New Mexico Tech (Pygmies),
>Northern
>>Kentucky (Norse), Notre Dame (Fightin' Irish), Ohio Valley
>>University (Fighting Scots), Portland State (Vikings),
>>Southern Cal (Trojans), UNC-Greensboro (Spartans) and
>Wooster
>>College (Fighting Scots).
>>
>>Political Correctness at its finest
>>
>
>
>Seriously? New Mexico Tech...Pygmies??? I'm sorry but without
>looking that up that seems out of nowhere..

like "why not banish the Saxons???" so they made a decision to use a broad brush.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

Mascot

I thought you were smarter than that

But here ya go

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=1461775&mesg_id=1461775&page=#1462081

and you are making the stupid analogies and getting pissy a lot in here.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

>and you are making the stupid analogies and getting pissy a
>lot in here.


You're posting MIGHTY EMO today Jerz

leads to using a broad brush. When does the shit stop?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

there's a unique historical and positive link between the two?

doesn't seem all that bad, in the end. oh noos, when will this end?!?!

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

If they kept the name, the controversy would drag on forever, like the article mentioned. Get rid of it, and you don't have to deal with it anymore.

Plus, you can have some contest for a new name and logo, and everybody will get excited about it and buy new merchandise, and the school will make some money. And the people who didn't want it changed can cling to their old stuff and grumble about generally, and that'll keep them happy.

AND then the school can do something to support local tribes more meaningful than just the sports mascot. Everyone wins.

there are a variety of considerations here and your argument here is that some people are pissed and there is a buck in assuaging them so why not do it?

corporatism at its finest!

well the problem with that, beyond the fact that some Sioux and some NDU alumni/students/employees are actually offended by the REMOVAL of the name, is that there is probably not a buck in it for the university to change the name.

they have about 2500 logos in their hockey arena alone, that stuff all cost money to produce and wasnt produced that long ago. it is expensive to change your school's logos and colors and do you really think a hockey school with its nearest "major" city being freakin Winnipeg has the marketing buck to foot that bill?

it also gets complicated with the arena funding, they got $100M from a rich alumnus who played hockey there and he was clearly in favor of keeping the name. while this may diminish the integrity of their argument, it certainly strengths it from a "practical" standpoint that a provision of his endowment was the indefinite use of the name Fighting Sioux.

this is a complicated mess, basically you have some Sioux vs other Sioux, some Sioux vs the school, the school vs the NCAA, cultural sensitivity vs economic interests, the school vs the Board of Higher Education, Spirit Lake vs the Board of Higher Education ... lots of battles over one name.

I ask because I'm suggesting doing something nice for a largely powerless, voiceless people, and you're talking about the necessity of appeasing billionaire alumni. So what's "corporatism," again?

>well the problem with that, beyond the fact that some Sioux
>and some NDU alumni/students/employees are actually offended
>by the REMOVAL of the name,

Some people are pretty sure blacks shouldn't be allowed to vote, that Jews control the world financial system, and that all Muslims should be wiped off the planet in a nuclear attack. Some people think all kinds of stupid shit. Doesn't make it right. 'Cism is 'cism.

>they have about 2500 logos in their hockey arena alone, that
>stuff all cost money to produce and wasnt produced that long
>ago. it is expensive to change your school's logos and colors
>and do you really think a hockey school with its nearest
>"major" city being freakin Winnipeg has the marketing buck to
>foot that bill?

I read somewhere online that the UND athletic department has a total budget of just under $7 million, of which a massive $1.8 million goes to hockey. Sounds like they have a couple of bucks to spend on...signage, essentially.

>it also gets complicated with the arena funding, they got
>$100M from a rich alumnus who played hockey there and he was
>clearly in favor of keeping the name.

Fuck him.

>while this may diminish
>the integrity of their argument, it certainly strengths it
>from a "practical" standpoint that a provision of his
>endowment was the indefinite use of the name Fighting Sioux.

And: fuck him. A university is either a slave to big money or it isn't. This is good opportunity to demonstrate independence and progressiveness.

>this is a complicated mess, basically you have some Sioux vs
>other Sioux, some Sioux vs the school, the school vs the NCAA,
>cultural sensitivity vs economic interests, the school vs the
>Board of Higher Education, Spirit Lake vs the Board of Higher
>Education ... lots of battles over one name.

So?

>I ask because I'm suggesting doing something nice for a
>largely powerless, voiceless people, and you're talking about
>the necessity of appeasing billionaire alumni. So what's
>"corporatism," again?

Whose motion did they deny!?! Which of the two groups being consulted as per the terms of the lawsuit OPPOSES the use of the name? How is this being done as something "nice" for these people?

The "corporatism" is in your thinking. It's a big deal to a handful of people that we can appease and quiet and in the process make a buck at it. That line of thinking, like the one taken by the board of higher ed, puts the bottom line first and the concerns of the groups at hand in a peripheral position.


>>well the problem with that, beyond the fact that some Sioux
>>and some NDU alumni/students/employees are actually offended
>>by the REMOVAL of the name,
>
>Some people are pretty sure blacks shouldn't be allowed to
>vote, that Jews control the world financial system, and that
>all Muslims should be wiped off the planet in a nuclear
>attack. Some people think all kinds of stupid shit. Doesn't
>make it right. 'Cism is 'cism.

So you are the fucking racism police now? YOU and not the two tribal councils involved in the process get free reign to compare a fucking logo to denying someone the right to vote, exist or participate fully in property ownership? Cmon dude, shit I thought Harmonia was reaching with her comparisons to grave robbing and genocide but at least those are somewhat pertinent.

Guess what, dude, the Sioux swore in the university president as an honorary member when the name was adopted and they've participated in the design of most of the things associated with it including the logo and fight songs.

So far in this post we have had Harmonia and Will (why?) offer guestimates as to the percentage of support but little in the statements of the two entities at issue here or the media coverage over the past ten years backs their estimates. It sounds like there is, if anything, a majority falling into the support/indifference category. There is already both a spoken agreement AND a legal agreement in place to continue negotiating until November, so why is some knee-jerk response from internet nerds and a council worried that they won't get their way through a FAIR process superseding that?


>>they have about 2500 logos in their hockey arena alone, that
>>stuff all cost money to produce and wasnt produced that long
>>ago. it is expensive to change your school's logos and
>colors
>>and do you really think a hockey school with its nearest
>>"major" city being freakin Winnipeg has the marketing buck
>to
>>foot that bill?
>
>I read somewhere online that the UND athletic department has a
>total budget of just under $7 million, of which a massive $1.8
>million goes to hockey. Sounds like they have a couple of
>bucks to spend on...signage, essentially.

That's a nice way to back out of a thoughtless statement you made. Do they have the money? Sure, any university HAS the money, but you proposed it as a way to make money on the new merchandise. As it stands, the change is essentially a divestment, not an investment as you presented it. Also, if you see the structure of the arena, you will see it's not that simple. The logo at the main entrance means they'd have to rip out the entire floor in the most traveled part of the arena. More to the point, they are not removing shit, the operators of the arena just issued a statement.


>>it also gets complicated with the arena funding, they got
>>$100M from a rich alumnus who played hockey there and he was
>>clearly in favor of keeping the name.
>
>Fuck him.

Easy for you to say when he didn't give you the largest endowment in the history of the university. Really this is not as big of a concern as it seemed initially in reviewing the stipulations of the donation, it was more of a statement than a direct contingency and the arena operators say that any tacit or secret statements thereof are overstated (they do not exist).


>>while this may diminish
>>the integrity of their argument, it certainly strengths it
>>from a "practical" standpoint that a provision of his
>>endowment was the indefinite use of the name Fighting Sioux.
>
>And: fuck him. A university is either a slave to big money or
>it isn't. This is good opportunity to demonstrate
>independence and progressiveness.


They have an argument in principle, too, and it's supported by alumni and American Indians. The NCAA and the state board of higher ed are not innocent either, this is just a PR move by the NCAA that has no regard for nuance or local interest and the state board is looking for a feather in its cap here.


>>this is a complicated mess, basically you have some Sioux vs
>>other Sioux, some Sioux vs the school, the school vs the
>NCAA,
>>cultural sensitivity vs economic interests, the school vs
>the
>>Board of Higher Education, Spirit Lake vs the Board of
>Higher
>>Education ... lots of battles over one name.
>
>So?

Who cares what the First Nation people and the university think is an issue that is supposedly a conflict between the two groups? I mean is that a serious question!?!

The main problem I have here is that the board of higher ed is robbing the two tribal councils of a golden opportunity to negotiate aid and awareness by way of an agreement with the university. Everyone is losing here and time will prove me right if this BS decision stands.

>Whose motion did they deny!?! Which of the two groups being
>consulted as per the terms of the lawsuit OPPOSES the use of
>the name? How is this being done as something "nice" for
>these people?

I can only assume that's the assumption in play here.

>The "corporatism" is in your thinking. It's a big deal to a
>handful of people that we can appease and quiet and in the
>process make a buck at it. That line of thinking, like the
>one taken by the board of higher ed, puts the bottom line
>first and the concerns of the groups at hand in a peripheral
>position.

Wait--you're the one trumpeting the $100 million building, aren't you? Or is that particular number not reflected in your "bottom line?" Seems like my bottom line is a whole bunch smaller than yours.

>So you are the fucking racism police now? YOU and not the two
>tribal councils involved in the process get free reign to
>compare a fucking logo to denying someone the right to vote,
>exist or participate fully in property ownership? Cmon dude,
>shit I thought Harmonia was reaching with her comparisons to
>grave robbing and genocide but at least those are somewhat
>pertinent.

I made no comparison whatsoever. My point was, and is, that people think stupid shit all the time, and that what's right has little to with their stupid shit. Do you disagree on this point?

>Guess what, dude, the Sioux swore in the university president
>as an honorary member when the name was adopted and they've
>participated in the design of most of the things associated
>with it including the logo and fight songs.

Whether you like it or not, the logo is evidently offensive to enough people that legal action occurred. Now, it baffles me why someone like you, who presumably has no vested interest in UND athletics outside of watching them play hockey now and again, and who very possibly has never even been to the state of North Dakota (I never have...most people never have), would argue so vehemently in favor of keeping the mascot. So why, then? Why do you care so much? This seems really, really important to you: why?


>That's a nice way to back out of a thoughtless statement you
>made. Do they have the money? Sure, any university HAS the
>money, but you proposed it as a way to make money on the new
>merchandise.

Sure. It is. It will be. Damn good hockey team; I bet they sell plenty of merch.

>As it stands, the change is essentially a
>divestment, not an investment as you presented it. Also, if
>you see the structure of the arena, you will see it's not that
>simple. The logo at the main entrance means they'd have to rip
>out the entire floor in the most traveled part of the arena.

Yeah, that'll take at least a couple of days.

>More to the point, they are not removing shit, the operators
>of the arena just issued a statement.

Well, it's final, then. A statement was issued. Final.

>Easy for you to say when he didn't give you the largest
>endowment in the history of the university. Really this is
>not as big of a concern as it seemed initially in reviewing
>the stipulations of the donation, it was more of a statement
>than a direct contingency and the arena operators say that any
>tacit or secret statements thereof are overstated (they do not
>exist).

I have no interest in exploring contingencies.

>They have an argument in principle, too, and it's supported by
>alumni and American Indians. The NCAA and the state board of
>higher ed are not innocent either, this is just a PR move by
>the NCAA that has no regard for nuance or local interest and
>the state board is looking for a feather in its cap here.

I have very little interest in exploring motives either. Really only interested in consequences.

>Who cares what the First Nation people and the university
>think is an issue that is supposedly a conflict between the
>two groups? I mean is that a serious question!?!

Again: change the name, the controversy eventually goes away. Leave it, and it remains forever. You seem to be in favor of keeping the controversy around. That is the practical consequence of your belief--that's what you think is best. Yes, it's that simple.

I am saying the exact OPPOSITE of that, that there are a variety of perspectives within the Native American community on this issue and the two tribal councils should have THEIR WISHES respected to continue to work toward a resolution on this issue, trilaterally with the two councils and the university.

Further, the people celebrating this decision are trying to apply a blanket standard to all First Nation people or at least saying that those who object, even if not a majority or plurality, should have the final say. So, no, I am basically stating the OPPOSITE of your inference that I somehow think all people in a given group should be a monolith with a single opinion.

>>Whose motion did they deny!?! Which of the two groups
>being
>>consulted as per the terms of the lawsuit OPPOSES the use of
>>the name? How is this being done as something "nice" for
>>these people?
>
>I can only assume that's the assumption in play here.

Why? What evidence is there to suggest that this change was initiated by American Indians? Those who petitioned did so eleven years ago and today the two most encompassing groups in the area are not opposed to the use of the name.

>>The "corporatism" is in your thinking. It's a big deal to a
>>handful of people that we can appease and quiet and in the
>>process make a buck at it. That line of thinking, like the
>>one taken by the board of higher ed, puts the bottom line
>>first and the concerns of the groups at hand in a peripheral
>>position.
>
>Wait--you're the one trumpeting the $100 million building,
>aren't you? Or is that particular number not reflected in
>your "bottom line?" Seems like my bottom line is a whole
>bunch smaller than yours.

No, dude, are you fucking stoned? Is your short term memory even worse than mine? You said they could PROFIT from the name change. I said they could NOT do that, in large part because of the expense of doing so and their lack of revenue from merchandise overall.

I am not "trumpeting" the $100M, what I am saying is that the university and arena operators would face unforeseen costs they can't recoup and beyond the obvious they have a very wealthy donor who obviously favored the continued use of the name.

This would be an issue at Oklahoma State or Oregon or anywhere else and I said if anything it TAINTS the university's position to some degree. However, that does not change the history of the name or the involvement and cooperation between the First Land people and the school. I understand at times that may have been inadequate and this settlement is a perfect time to address those concerns. Those options have now been eliminated.

>>So you are the fucking racism police now? YOU and not the
>two
>>tribal councils involved in the process get free reign to
>>compare a fucking logo to denying someone the right to vote,
>>exist or participate fully in property ownership? Cmon
>dude,
>>shit I thought Harmonia was reaching with her comparisons to
>>grave robbing and genocide but at least those are somewhat
>>pertinent.
>
>I made no comparison whatsoever. My point was, and is, that
>people think stupid shit all the time, and that what's right
>has little to with their stupid shit. Do you disagree on this
>point?

You lumped disenfranchisement, religious persecution, the denial of rights and a lust for genocide with a mascot, dude, or were those just coincidental examples?

People think dumb shit all the time, yes, and as I've made clear in this post I would err AGAINST the practice of American Indian mascots as a whole. I do not think a single formula applies to all situations. It is not a terribly complicated argument.

>>Guess what, dude, the Sioux swore in the university
>president
>>as an honorary member when the name was adopted and they've
>>participated in the design of most of the things associated
>>with it including the logo and fight songs.
>
>Whether you like it or not, the logo is evidently offensive to
>enough people that legal action occurred. Now, it baffles me
>why someone like you, who presumably has no vested interest in
>UND athletics outside of watching them play hockey now and
>again, and who very possibly has never even been to the state
>of North Dakota (I never have...most people never have), would
>argue so vehemently in favor of keeping the mascot. So why,
>then? Why do you care so much? This seems really, really
>important to you: why?

Because of the motivation here, it is NOT a matter of offense, it is a matter of larger bodies interfering with local politics to improve their appearance. I actually think the NCAA acted fairly here, I am rather suspicious of the motivation of the Board of Higher Education however.

Obviously I do not care that William & Mary is doing the same thing, I've named several uses of American Indian symbols I'd like to see done away with immediately. This is not a matter of hating Indians (who could? Maybe Dale Gribble and even he loves them!) or wanting to exploit them, this is a matter of something decent becoming a casualty of an effort to eradicate something ugly IMO.

>>That's a nice way to back out of a thoughtless statement you
>>made. Do they have the money? Sure, any university HAS the
>>money, but you proposed it as a way to make money on the new
>>merchandise.
>
>Sure. It is. It will be. Damn good hockey team; I bet they
>sell plenty of merch.

Yes, college hockey is all over Eastbay, Foot Locker and every mall and mail order catalog in America. Do a little research, you will find you are not correct.

>>As it stands, the change is essentially a
>>divestment, not an investment as you presented it. Also, if
>>you see the structure of the arena, you will see it's not
>that
>>simple. The logo at the main entrance means they'd have to
>rip
>>out the entire floor in the most traveled part of the arena.
>
>Yeah, that'll take at least a couple of days.

Is the Board of Higher Ed writing the check and doing the work?

>>More to the point, they are not removing shit, the operators
>>of the arena just issued a statement.
>
>Well, it's final, then. A statement was issued. Final.
>
>>Easy for you to say when he didn't give you the largest
>>endowment in the history of the university. Really this is
>>not as big of a concern as it seemed initially in reviewing
>>the stipulations of the donation, it was more of a statement
>>than a direct contingency and the arena operators say that
>any
>>tacit or secret statements thereof are overstated (they do
>not
>>exist).
>
>I have no interest in exploring contingencies.
>
>>They have an argument in principle, too, and it's supported
>by
>>alumni and American Indians. The NCAA and the state board
>of
>>higher ed are not innocent either, this is just a PR move by
>>the NCAA that has no regard for nuance or local interest and
>>the state board is looking for a feather in its cap here.
>
>I have very little interest in exploring motives either.
>Really only interested in consequences.
>
>>Who cares what the First Nation people and the university
>>think is an issue that is supposedly a conflict between the
>>two groups? I mean is that a serious question!?!
>
>Again: change the name, the controversy eventually goes away.
>Leave it, and it remains forever. You seem to be in favor of
>keeping the controversy around. That is the practical
>consequence of your belief--that's what you think is best.
>Yes, it's that simple.

Controversy is not the worst thing in the world, there are a bunch of sad sacks in this world who would ditch something they believe because of fear or dissent and they are weak minded.

They were thinking about changing the name years ago, but the nazi fetishist booster (as in used to throw Hitler themed parties on the fuhrer's birthday and owned a lot of memorabilia) who built their hockey arena said he'd take all the money back if they ever changed it.

They lost all credibility when they decided to keep the name only to appease that piece of shit.

1: The very people who are supposed to be offended by this nickname, aren't. And don't want the change

2: "Fighting" anything is not offensive. Not a chance in hell this happens in South Bend

> A group of eight Spirit Lake Sioux
>tribal members who want the school to keep the nickname were
>seeking to have the court bar any decision before the
>deadline.

>
>Supporters believe the logo shows pride and tradition. But the
>NCAA considers the nickname "hostile and offensive" and said
>UND cannot host postseason events without approval from the
>state's two Sioux tribes. Under the settlement, the board and
>UND agreed to begin retiring the nickname if they couldn't
>obtain permission from the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock Sioux
>tribes by Nov. 30.
>
>Spirit Lake tribal members have voted to support the nickname,
>but the Standing Rock tribal council has resisted calls for it
>to change its bylaws to allow a vote on the issue.


NCAA Makin these decision on behalf of the minority group simply because it's fuckin up they money, when the indians aint even offended

I mean, its a win for cultural sensitivity, maybe.

But ain't no rights being transferred here.

*shrugs*

I'm all about cultural sensitivity and correctness, though.

But honestly, change the Cleveland Indian logo, change the Washington
Redsk*ins, and I'm good. Then we can get to fixing diabetes in
NA communities. Or maybe, we can get to work on the epidemic and
keep the names. I'm not quite sure how much I give a fuck.

And you know there has been a long fight to retire the Cleveland Indians and Washington R*dskins mascots. But it's harder with the professional organizations versus colleges.
I feel like so many out there who have been fighting this battle feel empowered by this news.

private entities so that's a losing battle unless it starts to lose them money.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

but yeah, no rights were transferred here and Native American's didn't get shit from this. The cleveleand logo and name and the Redskins logo and name need to go.

I am sorry but you can read in this very terse article that the local Sioux have never really been in favor of changing the nickname.

It's not Redskins, it doesn't have a big, retarded, smiling tobacco Indian as the logo, it's the native people of that land and they have been involved in designing the logo and other aspects of the program's use of their name, symbolism, etc.

This is the NCAA playing PC police and sticking its finger in the chest of the school and the First Land people of the Dakotas.

There is NOTHING WRONG with the Fighting Sioux and there is nothing wrong with the Chicago Blackhawks logo. Go ahead, ask me if I think Jewish symbols and Jews should be used in similar contexts, YES, I do. I am proud that Ajax (Dutch football club) has a bit of that carry over from ages ago and I actually collect really old stuff from when there were Jewish Fives in the streets of NYC and Philly and various clubs that used the star of David.

If something is being used tastefully, with pride and with respect to the history of the region and/or franchise, there is nothing wrong with that. This is just further obsessiveness by a bunch of clueless "officials" who think they can create a search engine for racism and stomp it out. This is not a joyous day for the Sioux people, it's a sad one. This does nothing to change the legacy of persecution they faced or face. And it certainly has nothing to do with "rights," these people are just as fucked as they were yesterday unfortunately.

that they could keep the name if they made some mostly symbolic gestures towards sensitivity (like having all incoming freshmen take a Native American history course or some shit) and the school couldn't even keep that agreement.

And some of the area tribes didn't care, others wanted them to change.

And there is more than one Sioux tribe in the area

I understand that they had time to secure full support from all the tribes to prevent this and that in addition to the politics of the NCAA and the now-settled suit between the school and them there was also the issue of Englestad money.

But to me there is a significant enough split on this that it should be treated very carefully by the NCAA.

As for the symbolism, we are just going to agree there I think. I do not think a mascot is something animal or absurd, it can be many different thing and part of that tradition has been cultural symbols. Some of them have been grossly insensitive and should be done away with in the name of respect and good taste, but that does not apply in all cases.

a vote.

Welcome to tribal politics 101!

And there are more than 2 Sioux tribes in the area.

>a vote.
>
>Welcome to tribal politics 101!
>
>And there are more than 2 Sioux tribes in the area.

well, if this if the use of the name Sioux for the hockey team is not deemed a pressing issue worthy of a vote, isn't that akin to endorsement?

in October of last year.

not easy to sift through all this shit, some of the people writing about it seem more clueless than i am.

and how many did they need per terms of the settlement?

in october at least two gave consent to extend the use of the name, Spirit Lake (obviously) and, yes, Standing Rock.

i could not get a figure on how far that puts them, i know several years ago there was a petition against the continued use of the name but the total numbers were conflated since different types of organizations were on the board.

that have combined populations like a mix of Sioux, Chippewa, Assiniboine, etc.
Then of course the many Sioux tribal members who were forced off the reservations during the relocation days and live in cities like Chicago, San Francisco, Minneapolis, etc.

how many groups were named in the suit or considered to be significant enough to proffer their consent or non-consent?

this is all a response to the settlement between the university and the NCAA but i cannot find much concrete on the decision apart from what i'd already read about gaining formal consent from local tribes to continue the use of the nickname.

Spirit Lake, whose stance has been made quite clear and Standing Rock, who seem to have wavered but generally supported the continued use of the name.

It appears Standing Rock they had a change in leadership and that where before they were steadfastly opposed at the top level to the use of the name, the new leadership was more open to discussion.

In any event, the leaders at Standing Rock actually agree with my position, that this is something that requires tact, nuance and lengthier discussion between Spirit Lake, Standing Rock, NDU and other interested parties perhaps, certainly not some homogenized effort by the NCAA to cover its ass against accusations of racism.

Their statement was a preference for "open dialogue as opposed to a stipulated arrangement under deadline.” I am not saying unequivocally that the name needs to stand, that is largely up to the local Sioux, but I do not think there is an impasse that requires immediate action for any other reason that the imposed, largely arbitrary legal exigency resulting from action between NDU and NCAA as well as Spirit Lake and the Board of Higher Education in North Dakota.

This article in the NYT does a brilliant job of summarizing the recent developments IMHO
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/09/us/09nickname.html

get the fuck outta here!

look who was motioning to keep the nickname, here's a hint, they were not cowboys.

in the first place


But they didnt. Nor did they vote to get rid of it. White PC NCAA Suits did

all in order to protect their money

and your argument went right out the window

Now, as an Irish catholic boy from Boston, I think i'll write a strongly worded email to the University of Notre Dame...

Do you support my stance?

Spirit Lake is not the only local Sioux tribe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

Fighters who are less than human. All people see when they see that mascot is a drunken fighting animal

It's clearly got to have some sort of psychological effect on children
especially considering the history of disenfranchisement and prejudice against my people in this country,

http://static.open.salon.com/files/fighting-irish1237053582.gif

=


http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4891509/2/istockphoto_4891509-fighting-irish.jpg





http://www.art-posters.net/00585.jpg



SO


Harmonia

Are you on board with my fight?

>Fighters who are less than human. All people see when they
>see that mascot is a drunken fighting animal
>
>It's clearly got to have some sort of psychological effect on
>children
>especially considering the history of disenfranchisement and
>prejudice against my people in this country,
>
>http://static.open.salon.com/files/fighting-irish1237053582.gif
>
>=
>
>
>http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/4891509/2/istockphoto_4891509-fighting-irish.jpg
>
>
>
>
>
>http://www.art-posters.net/00585.jpg
>
>
>
>SO
>
>
>Harmonia
>
>Are you on board with my fight?

I would think that a team named the "Fighting Sioux" would be a positive thing as it kind of makes people sit back and wonder and discuss the NATION, instead of this political correctness debate.

I feel like a name like that brings awareness to the tribe rather than degrading it. Due to the times we live in (as opposed to back in the day), people are way more inquisitive and have a better sense of historical context.

This doesn't seem to be the same case as the Indians and Redskins.

In fact, my family is Crow and I ride with those that fight for American Indian rights.

And there are a million ways to honor them.
But turning a people into a sports mascot? Nope.
Look at the ignorance in this post. People think Spirit Lake is the only Sioux tribe.
In fact, the word Sioux isn't even appropriate. And if you need me to explain that to you, then I guess the term "Fighting Sioux" didn't do enough to teach you that.

more native american history

rather than about the logical discussion of Political Correctness Vs actual social change

That's kind of how its turning out to be....i mean instead of explaing shit she is just like no you're wrong blah blah blah

Most people are trying to add to the debate and learn a little something about the "Sioux" but apparently we are not in tune with the necessary books and non white teachings to ever understand how the "Fighting Sioux" makes the tribe cry themselves to sleep...

AND IM SYMPATHETIC TO THE CAUSE...

Much of it is disguised and normalized and hidden behind things like "oh, we're really honoring you"
I'm concerned about the extremely high suicide rates on Indian reservations. I'm concerned about Indian youth who are not proud to be Indian.
Mascots are dehumanizing, especially when used by the majority against a persecuted minority.
Many of you guys see this strictly through a sports lens. What I'm telling you is that this has much larger implications for Indian people that goes beyond sports.

>Mascots are dehumanizing, especially when used by the majority
>against a persecuted minority.

http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=1461775&mesg_id=1461775&page=#1461939

>
>>Mascots are dehumanizing, especially when used by the
>majority
>>against a persecuted minority.
>
>http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=8&topic_id=1461775&mesg_id=1461775&page=#1461939
>
>
>

Redskins will probably never change, the Indians I think will change their logo to dump that ridiculous grinning Indian but I doubt the name changes.

I think it's reasonable to ask for the grinning Indian and the tomahawk chop to go from Atlanta and FSU.

Chief Wahoo gotta go. Period.

They could keep the "Indians" name if they changed him to look more like Dhalsim or some shit.

>Chief Wahoo gotta go. Period.
>
>They could keep the "Indians" name if they changed him to look
>more like Dhalsim or some shit.




_______________________________

www.giftofvision.org

spin cycle;
2Pac - Me Against The World
AZ- Doe Or Die
Madlib - Blunted In The Bomb Shelter
Royce 5'9 - Street Hop
P Brothers - The Gas

I mean it was more enviro friendly, but parking was a bitch


_______________________________

www.giftofvision.org

spin cycle;
2Pac - Me Against The World
AZ- Doe Or Die
Madlib - Blunted In The Bomb Shelter
Royce 5'9 - Street Hop
P Brothers - The Gas

>I mean it was more enviro friendly, but parking was a bitch

http://www.formspring.me/jfa

bin's super soulful song of the week (4/1 update): http://tinyurl.com/y8utast

I never figured out the skulls on the neck (or why he has no pupils for that matter) and what fire and flames have to do with yoga.

he does say "Namaste" though.

actually, if they took this dude:

http://newsrealblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/cnn_sanjaygupta.jpg

and turned his smiling face into a logo, he would look more like a "Cleveland Indian".

>I never figured out the skulls on the neck (or why he has no
>pupils for that matter) and what fire and flames have to do
>with yoga.
>
>he does say "Namaste" though.



and several of them do practice animal sacrifices/supposed witchcraft or black magic but I have no idea where they got the idea of human skulls


lol i mean it does look more menacing than a goat or a chicken skull though..so I guess thats what they were doing for







_______________________________

www.giftofvision.org

spin cycle;
2Pac - Me Against The World
AZ- Doe Or Die
Madlib - Blunted In The Bomb Shelter
Royce 5'9 - Street Hop
P Brothers - The Gas

>Chief Wahoo gotta go. Period.
>
>They could keep the "Indians" name if they changed him to look
>more like Dhalsim or some shit.

http://www.tonic.com/file/48188/

For those who don't want to offend...here's some background before commenting

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mi%27kmaq


Here is me
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crow_Nation

Indian mascots affect all Indian children and communities.

A very famous Mi'kmaq woman died on the Pine Ride (Oglala Lakota Sioux) Reservation in the 1970s while fighting for Indian rights. We support each other.

vote against it


>Indian mascots affect all Indian children and communities.
>
>A very famous Mi'kmaq woman died on the Pine Ride (Oglala
>Lakota Sioux) Reservation in the 1970s while fighting for
>Indian rights. We support each other.

You mean "Pine Ridge"?

Yeah, some of us non indian folks are capable of reading and learning too


Even if we dont agree with this bullshit when its convenient PC stance

Could you get every African-American person to agree upon desegregation or not use the n word. But if there was a team with the N word in it I guess you could have this same debate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

Mi'kmaq's aren't Seminole either, are you upset that they endorsed the Florida State mascot? Going to go ride on them?


Look, I think that the catch-all racist terms that don't reference a single tribe (Rdskins, Indians, even my beloved Braves) are worthy of pan-Indian discussion and action. But if a team references one singular tribe or nation, and that tribe or nation is okay with it, that should be the end of discussion. The Sioux obviously don't share the same opinion on this particular instance as you do.


By your rationale, people in Quebec should be furious about the Vancouver Canucks.

Indian mascots is a pan-Indian issue simply because it is. I don't know how to make you realize that, except come walk in my shoes for a few weeks.

And again, ONE Sioux tribe supported it. Spirit Lake does not speak for all Sioux peoples. In fact that vote didn't speak for all Spirit Lake people. A majority supported it, but I believe about 1/3 were against it.

>Indian mascots is a pan-Indian issue simply because it is.

While I understand the idea that it dehumanizes the American Indian in various ways if handled inconrrectly (ie Redskins) I don't see how a schools overall mascot is ALWAYS a dehumanizing thing.

Put it this way. UMASS honors their heritage/region by naming their STATE university the Minute Men.

West Virginia honors the Mountaineers

Honestly, would it be different if the mascot was simply the Sioux and not the Fighting Sioux?

Why can't North Dakota be simply honoring the region/heritage of said region?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

All things Cajun sort of fall under Indian American names, no?

and the response will be that it's not up to you, the sports fan or the white or black american or whatever, but in this case it was not up to the first land people either.

that is not to say that they unanimously supported the use of it, harmonia is estimating a split of say 2/3s against and 1/3 for and from any source you have a significant divide, but it is to say that the internal politics of those tribes were given only a small role in this dispute.

On one hand, if the American Indian population was as sizable as a major religious group, I would tend to agree with B9 that the landscape is far too diverse to allow the issues of one tribe, sect, etc to become the broader business of everyone with a minimal connection to that group.

But given the size of the American Indian population and similar treatment since the colonization of the United States, I can see the necessity and, to some degree, the validity of that kind of solidarity.

That said, I still think this is something that has been decided with limited regard for the nuance of the issue locally. Even if the tribes opposed it unanimously, that was not really what prompted action here. This was part of a nation-wide program that included respect for local politics as an afterthought it seems. There was an extension given to negotiate consent with the tribes but it was brief and likely would have been extended again if a truly amicable solution was the goal of the NCAA.

That said, the school is no angels either, they haven't always held up their end of bargains with the Sioux and they are trying to keep the name not only for tradition but also because a provision of HUGE funding they received (eight figures) was the indefinite retention of the name.

While that makes since, this wasn't brought up earlier and so this topic got out of hand.

Instead of talking about or being taught about the REAL ISSUES here, we're here bullshitting about a mascot...there are bigger things to worry about.

Instead most of these posts/posters were simply dismissed as being ignorant and stupid which wasn't any help to bring any type of understand to the topic.

Shit was annoying.

I am not Sioux, therefore I cannot really understand the pain that the mascot had caused apparently; however I am interested in the topic and would've liked to be schooled on the going on due to the fact that I have American Indian in my bloodlines

And honestly, I am trying to be respectful about this because I know a boat load of native people and have been to native functions, reservations and communities and have a deep respect and concern for the issues that face the various tribes.

Singular-referential names should be between the referenced tribe to decide and be outraged about, otherwise, where does one tribe's sovereignty stop?

You are not Sioux. You are not Seminole. But you are Native, and the all-encompassing names should very well be in play. Otherwise, I think you are endorsing a singular vision of tribal culture that all the nations have resisted for centuries.

I mean, are you mad that the Anadarko high school teams are known as the Warriors? They have a student population of 60% natives.
What about the Rainbow Warriors in Hawaii?

I agree, while I feel like other tribes should definitely monitor the situation, I also feel like singular named mascots are good for the specified tribe

San Diego State Aztecs is another example

in Florida (of several) and many more are in Oklahoma. either way, a majority of people voted for George Bush, but that shouldn't define my own political views as an American.

i don't think anyone is saying either position is *invalid*

and voted 18-2 in favor of the name. They believe in representative politics and they were okay with it, that should be the end of anyone's concern (other native tribe's included, unless something untoward was happening).

I guess we'll just differ. Shit, if they called a local sports team the Fighting Susquehannock that'd be cool with me as long as they didn't give us some BS mascot.

I'm of two thoughts of this.

1. Certain terms ARE offensive R*dskins, Redmen (which has been changed) those were derogatory terms

2. If you're simply using a tribal name Black Hawk, Sioux, Illini,Seminol, etc... I have no issue as long as you don't trivialize them like the Indians did for years with their mascot.

There are battles to be fought, I just don't think this is one of them.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


XBox 360 Live gamertag - Keystonejenks

I totally agree...if this were the Redskins changing their name i'd be all stoked but it's not

& that was a school built for NAs. I don't think the term Braves in itself is offensive.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

Term yes, but remember that old braves logo

http://images.paraorkut.com/img/pics/images/a/atlanta_braves-12598.jpg

Where's the firewater with that shit?

http://www.und.edu/org/bridges/indianprograms.html

yet some of you want to act like everyone's on board with this.

The Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux and Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation (one group as far as I know) for sure have been against it.

Standing Rock was initially among those who denounced the nickname but seems to have reversed over time.

I don't know how many total tribes there are though, that would be interesting to see and also if the terms of the NDU-NCAA lawsuit (NDU sued the NCAA over name-related sanctions and the two sides settled) provided that they secure unanimous consent or a majority. All questions I hope Harmonia can answer when she is done swatting flies all over the thread.

>
>Standing Rock was initially among those who denounced the
>nickname but seems to have reversed over time.
>

this change of stance, as I think you know based on the 2nd paragraph, seems to have come with some concessions that they considered fair, so while I'm glad the university has made strides, that doesn't mean the name SHOULD stay, and I don't put much weight in that stance. this is the same way people always point to the statistic where only a small percentage of Native Americans think these team names ought to be changed. that raises a few questions:

1) Are the other people SUPPORTIVE of the names or are they just indifferent? Maybe they're offended but not to the point of outrage?

2) In the same way that you and I are not well-versed in Native American history, maybe a lot of the respondents to the poll just don't pay attention to sports and so it just doesn't phase them. This sounds weird, but we're also looking at this from our own bias of sports being a huge part of our lives. Some people just couldn't care less about anything associated with sports, and does that make them more or less likely to be against the names? Could go either way really, or there could be no difference.

3) What exactly is an acceptable percentage of Native Americans being offended by a team name (whether all or specific team names) and why?

>this change of stance, as I think you know based on the 2nd
>paragraph, seems to have come with some concessions that they
>considered fair, so while I'm glad the university has made
>strides, that doesn't mean the name SHOULD stay, and I don't
>put much weight in that stance. this is the same way people
>always point to the statistic where only a small percentage of
>Native Americans think these team names ought to be changed.
>that raises a few questions:

well i think there is a level of support in this instance, the tribes have been consulted in the design of the team's logo and other aspects of the use of their symbols by NDU. the support both ways--against the continued use and for it--suggests that there is not a ton of indifference and i would not interpret indifference either way. it could mean tacit opposition, it could mean faint support, it could mean genuine indifference. who here is in a position to tell?

i am not especially well versed in First Land legacy or American Indian history or whatever the preferred nomenclature may be but i am not completely ignorant. yes, i happen to know more about this situation because it relates to an ongoing debate in sports but it's not as though i unequivocally support this sort of thing, in fact i generally oppose it. i see this and the blackhawk as two exceptions where the symbolism does not seem all that offensive and i actually think they are proud representations. further, they are great logos, the blackhawk logo is easily the best in all of sports IMO and i am not ashamed to say that tradition is important to me. not more important than a people or sensitivity to them--the 'Skins and Indians logos are also old-line, I do not support them--but enough to point it out as a secondary issue.

the thing with percentages, majorities and pluralities is always a tricky question that i'd like to see settled among the tribes. unfortunately, they have the least clout here as this was a dispute between the NCAA and NDU, the big-money players here, so i'm content to leave that up to the more or less arbitrary governance of a judicial or legislative body (the way these tough questions are generally settled anyway)


>1) Are the other people SUPPORTIVE of the names or are they
>just indifferent? Maybe they're offended but not to the point
>of outrage?
>
>2) In the same way that you and I are not well-versed in
>Native American history, maybe a lot of the respondents to the
>poll just don't pay attention to sports and so it just doesn't
>phase them. This sounds weird, but we're also looking at this
>from our own bias of sports being a huge part of our lives.
>Some people just couldn't care less about anything associated
>with sports, and does that make them more or less likely to be
>against the names? Could go either way really, or there could
>be no difference.
>
>3) What exactly is an acceptable percentage of Native
>Americans being offended by a team name (whether all or
>specific team names) and why?
>

In the meantime, some links:

American Psychological Association recommend the retirement of ALL Native American mascots:
http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/indian-mascots.aspx

Team Spirits: The Native American Mascots Controversy:
http://www.amazon.com/Team-Spirits-American-Mascots-Controversy/dp/0803277989/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270840385&sr=8-8

Playing Indian:
http://www.amazon.com/Playing-Indian-Yale-Historical-Publications/dp/0300080670/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1270840433&sr=8-1

In Whose Honor:
http://www.jayrosenstein.com/pages/honor.html

Suzan Shown Harjo:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzan_Shown_Harjo

Charlene Teters:
http://www.charleneteters.com/Welcome.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlene_Teters

Vernon Bellecourt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vernon_Bellecourt

National Coalition on Racism in Sports & Media
http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/

American Indian Movement
http://www.aimovement.org/

and the American Indian Movement's response to the NCAA ruling:
http://aimggc.blogspot.com/

do you support my movement to get rid of the Fighting Irish or not?

with this following someone around with a dumb question like it's hot shit.

ND's history as a catholic institute (the term Fighting Irish was penned by Catholics in response to being mocked by protestants in the US for their religion. It was rebellious, not oppressive in its nature as a term) makes it an aboslutely meaningless comparison. Native American alumni of UND aren't the ones who coined and supported the name.

http://www.collegefootballhistory.com/notre_dame/history.htm


-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

shes sidestepping because she knows if she answers the way she feels, she proves that there are 2 sides to stories like this, and shes a hypocrite

and also that there are bigger fish to fry and celebrating bullshit PC "wins" like this really doesnt do anyone any good

except her because she can gloat

also, I didnt bother reading anything in your post other than the subject. Didnt need to

and to speak of hypocrisy...LMAO.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

and yet, neither of those correlate to hypocrisy

But a solid rebuttal on your part

>But a solid rebuttal on your part

>I didnt bother reading anything in your post other than the subject. Didnt need to

hmm...these don't quite vibe, do they? The history of irish and native americans is not parallel. in one particularly important example, the history of native american mascot monikers for teams was a decision made by non-native americans for teams of not native americans. that's not exactly the case with the fighting irish.

oh, and writing that line about not bothering to read something = anger/rage.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

being right enrages me

using the old "honky = n----" technique. but thanks for showing us (again) why the "progressive" Northeast is filled with ignorant white people like yourself.

>using the old "honky = n----" technique. but thanks for
>showing us (again) why the "progressive" Northeast is filled
>with ignorant white people like yourself.

>using the old "honky = n----" technique. but thanks for
>showing us (again) why the "progressive" Northeast is filled
>with ignorant white people like yourself.


_______________________________

www.giftofvision.org

spin cycle;
2Pac - Me Against The World
AZ- Doe Or Die
Madlib - Blunted In The Bomb Shelter
Royce 5'9 - Street Hop
P Brothers - The Gas

http://www.formspring.me/MrSabur
http://cockygold.com/ (updated daily)
Get 25% off www.karmaloop.com w/ rep code JR9103 SALE!!!!

http://i41.tinypic.com/a9l2lj.gif

.

No one has posted anything to show that the name Fighting Sioux is in anyway meant to be derogatory or offensive. Also, as the article showed, there's not even a consensus among the Sioux about the matter. His point was to verify if she would maintain a consistent position about the issue which shows that it's about principle. At the very least, I'd expect someone to say I am against it across the board regardless of what race or ethnicity is offended.




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

>No one has posted anything to show that the name Fighting
>Sioux is in anyway meant to be derogatory or offensive. Also,
>as the article showed, there's not even a consensus among the
>Sioux about the matter. His point was to verify if she would
>maintain a consistent position about the issue which shows
>that it's about principle. At the very least, I'd expect
>someone to say I am against it across the board regardless of
>what race or ethnicity is offended.
>
>
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
><---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end
>in 2012!!!!
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

at the jump, instead of vice versa.

2nd. the fighting irish is not offensive. it's like the ajax signs: the alumni themselves (largely irish at the times) used it to make fun of the anti-irish and anti-catholic views of the times. it's a terrible comparison.

3rd. The importance of being sensitive to potentially offending a group in this way should be proportional to the history of oppression and offense. In other words, americans should feel most justified mocking white people, and if we were to create an entire hierarchy, native americans would be right next to black people as groups not to be remotely offensive to.

4th. Principles are not black or white by nature. The idea that one cannot make a principled stand without also disliking the name fighting irish is the product of a lazy and dumb concept of what is and is not "principled."

5th.I expect people to fight for their own self-interest and then the self-interest of groups they belong to...so I give much more of a shit about what happens to Jews than I do what happens to Hindus (sorry guru) in the US because I'm Jewish. A similar argument stands to reason for why Harmonia should care about native american names and say i don't give a fuck about irish names until after we deal with the much more historically inappropriate native american names.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

>at the jump, instead of vice versa.
>
>2nd. the fighting irish is not offensive. it's like the ajax
>signs: the alumni themselves (largely irish at the times) used
>it to make fun of the anti-irish and anti-catholic views of
>the times. it's a terrible comparison.
>
>3rd. The importance of being sensitive to potentially
>offending a group in this way should be proportional to the
>history of oppression and offense. In other words, americans
>should feel most justified mocking white people, and if we
>were to create an entire hierarchy, native americans would be
>right next to black people as groups not to be remotely
>offensive to.
>
>4th. Principles are not black or white by nature. The idea
>that one cannot make a principled stand without also disliking
>the name fighting irish is the product of a lazy and dumb
>concept of what is and is not "principled."
>
>5th.I expect people to fight for their own self-interest and
>then the self-interest of groups they belong to...so I give
>much more of a shit about what happens to Jews than I do what
>happens to Hindus (sorry guru) in the US because I'm Jewish. A
>similar argument stands to reason for why Harmonia should care
>about native american names and say i don't give a fuck about
>irish names until after we deal with the much more
>historically inappropriate native american names.
>
>-----------
>mas que un club
>
>08-09 Survivor Champion.
>
>"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But
>I'm special and different." (c) Walleye
>
>"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are
>Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.


_______________________________

www.giftofvision.org

spin cycle;
2Pac - Me Against The World
AZ- Doe Or Die
Madlib - Blunted In The Bomb Shelter
Royce 5'9 - Street Hop
P Brothers - The Gas

>at the jump, instead of vice versa.


Y, because you say so? Some Sioux don't even find it offense. I mean, what if I think your screenname is offensive to black people? You gotta prove it's not? - lol. Why would someone using a name that's not overtly offensive to begin with have to prove it's not. This has nothing to do with what the name is but rather the presupposition that because whites came up with it then it's by definition racist. That's an incredibly simplistic and racist construction in itself.


>2nd. the fighting irish is not offensive. it's like the ajax
>signs: the alumni themselves (largely irish at the times) used
>it to make fun of the anti-irish and anti-catholic views of
>the times. it's a terrible comparison.

I don't think either is offensive but the NCAA disagrees. Maybe they're are some Irish Catholics who work for the NCAA who find it offensive.

>3rd. The importance of being sensitive to potentially
>offending a group in this way should be proportional to the
>history of oppression and offense. In other words, americans
>should feel most justified mocking white people, and if we
>were to create an entire hierarchy, native americans would be
>right next to black people as groups not to be remotely
>offensive to.


What, so black people reserve the right to be more racist and/or less sensitive to whites because of the history in this country (nevermind not all whites owned slaves, blacks were slaves, etc)? That's how the shit never dies. Everyone needs to be just as sensitive towards others as they're asking/expecting everyone else to be towards them or it's hypocrisy plain & simple.

>4th. Principles are not black or white by nature. The idea
>that one cannot make a principled stand without also disliking
>the name fighting irish is the product of a lazy and dumb
>concept of what is and is not "principled."

No.. If you're against it, you're against it across the board. That's a principled position. All of this maneuvering and unwillingness to be consistent is the problem.


>5th.I expect people to fight for their own self-interest and
>then the self-interest of groups they belong to...so I give
>much more of a shit about what happens to Jews than I do what
>happens to Hindus (sorry guru) in the US because I'm Jewish. A
>similar argument stands to reason for why Harmonia should care
>about native american names and say i don't give a fuck about
>irish names until after we deal with the much more
>historically inappropriate native american names.
>

I never said she had to fight for someone elses cause as passionately as her own. I said I'd expect her to say she's against it no matter what race or ethnicity is offended.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

>Y, because you say so? Some Sioux don't even find it offense.

that's not important. it's the question of if enough are offended or hurt.

>I mean, what if I think your screenname is offensive to black
>people? You gotta prove it's not? - lol.

If a black person could make a legit argument at all about how it might be, then yeah. Harmonia's presenting such a case in this example.

Why would someone
>using a name that's not overtly offensive to begin with have
>to prove it's not.

ignorance is not an excuse for doing wrong.

>is but rather the presupposition that because whites came up
>with it then it's by definition racist. That's an incredibly
>simplistic and racist construction in itself.

no, it's based on the fact that such representations of native americans purely as warriors and savages without a civilization has a long history as a dominant frame of their society.

>Maybe they're are some Irish Catholics who work for the NCAA
>who find it offensive.

Then the fact that the term was made by catholics for catholics would be a stronger argument than their claims of offense.

>What, so black people reserve the right to be more racist
>and/or less sensitive to whites because of the history in this
>country (nevermind not all whites owned slaves, blacks were
>slaves, etc)?

I'm saying jokes and terms at a groups expense are much more problematic when its to a historically oppressed group. Honky jokes are not as offensive as N*gger jokes are. Both terms are offensive to their groups, but we don't treat the terms equally. not all offensiveness is equal.

oh, and owning slaves and being slaves aren't the only way racism works in society to oppress.

That's how the shit never dies. Everyone needs
>to be just as sensitive towards others as they're
>asking/expecting everyone else to be towards them or it's
>hypocrisy plain & simple.

Everyone needs to be sensitive. Yet here people are, not being sensitive to Harmonia? lol.

>No.. If you're against it, you're against it across the board.
>That's a principled position. All of this maneuvering and
>unwillingness to be consistent is the problem.

I am against any ethnic mascot unless it has a history of always honoring that group. sharp enough for you? to others in here, that's seeing shades of gray.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

a) i mean it's not like its just ONE person offended, even if its a small percentage of the Native American population that want to change the names, that still seems like enough to me, given the history involved, the passion with which they feel that way, and the fact that its just a name and in the end wouldn't hurt anyone if it WAS changed.

b) the sioux tribes that have been more supportive of the name seem to have been against it at one point and then they were brought into the fold more as far as logo design, curriculum, and other concessions the university made. that doesn't necessarily mean the university has never offended these groups and is not offending any other sioux tribes. that a council voted that way almost strikes me as a "well, they scratched our back" sentiment.

c) while these things can go too far, such as the case with marquette (warriors would probably be fine with a fairly nondescript logo such as what golden state changed to), marquette is also a perfect example of how a concession was eventually made and everyone moved on relatively happy. you don't hear of people in droves not supporting the team anymore because the name wasn't changed back to warriors. they weren't necessarily jumping for joy, but it is STILL their team. if it means so much to some in the offended groups, and all those supportive of the name have is "but this has ALWAYS been the name" then i'm inclined to side with the ethnic group.

basically, the tradition of an ethnic group >>>>>> the tradition of a sports team. the fans will get over it, it may take a while, but it'll happen.

>a) i mean it's not like its just ONE person offended, even if
>its a small percentage of the Native American population that
>want to change the names, that still seems like enough to me,
>given the history involved, the passion with which they feel
>that way, and the fact that its just a name and in the end
>wouldn't hurt anyone if it WAS changed.

that seems like enuff to you.. ok and?


>b) the sioux tribes that have been more supportive of the name
>seem to have been against it at one point and then they were
>brought into the fold more as far as logo design, curriculum,
>and other concessions the university made. that doesn't
>necessarily mean the university has never offended these
>groups and is not offending any other sioux tribes. that a
>council voted that way almost strikes me as a "well, they
>scratched our back" sentiment.

"seem to have been".. yeah ok.. Bottom line is if it was that big of a deal they wouldn't be so easiuly presuaded. Maybe they just don't care as much as the political correct police force does.


>c) while these things can go too far, such as the case with
>marquette (warriors would probably be fine with a fairly
>nondescript logo such as what golden state changed to),
>marquette is also a perfect example of how a concession was
>eventually made and everyone moved on relatively happy. you
>don't hear of people in droves not supporting the team anymore
>because the name wasn't changed back to warriors. they weren't
>necessarily jumping for joy, but it is STILL their team. if it
>means so much to some in the offended groups, and all those
>supportive of the name have is "but this has ALWAYS been the
>name" then i'm inclined to side with the ethnic group.
>
>basically, the tradition of an ethnic group >>>>>> the
>tradition of a sports team. the fans will get over it, it may
>take a while, but it'll happen.


The point is people can be offended by a lot of things. That doesn't mean that you're some kind of racist, sexist, homophobe, etc because you don't accommodate their request particularly @ your own detriment.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

>
>"seem to have been"..

ok, "were," is that a better word? there was about to be a lawsuit, right?

yeah ok.. Bottom line is if it was that
>big of a deal they wouldn't be so easiuly presuaded. Maybe
>they just don't care as much as the political correct police
>force does.

once again, that was only one of many sioux tribes, and also the only reason the university has held on to the name this long is a white guy said he would pull away a bunch of money if they did.

and this argument also reminds me of a white person saying "It's okay, I can say that, I have a friend who is (insert whatever group they probably just offended here)."

>
>The point is people can be offended by a lot of things. That
>doesn't mean that you're some kind of racist, sexist,
>homophobe, etc because you don't accommodate their request
>particularly @ your own detriment.
>
>

no, and i generally agree with your point, but at the same time people seem to be all too dismissive of changes like these just for the sake of it. they seem to prefer yelling out terms like "overly PC" and "slippery slope" without even considering another options or points of view. if we just took that side all the time then nothing would change.

and what exactly is the detriment here?

I honestly never thought this would happen

I mean

They got the Badlands, Deadwood, and the B***K hills(racist ass name for a forest btw)

and the B***K hills(racist
>ass name for a forest btw)

hundreds of years later and we've still got the latter immigrants to America telling Native Americans what is offensive and what's not.

the whole "but the Tribe gave it the OK!" doesn't fly with me either. it's often just one tribe of several who give the endorsement (and from what I understand, many of those leaders are being influenced in other ways). and either way, their opinion shouldn't be all-inclusive.

HOW DARE YOU TRY TO BE MORE SENSITIVE!!!!

-----------
mas que un club

08-09 Survivor Champion.

"I mean, I can pigeonhole people because I'm close-minded. But I'm special and different." (c) Walleye

"on the other hand 100% of the Islamic terrorists are Muslims." A f*cking congressman. smh.

NEXT THEY'LL TK YR JOBS!!!!

this has nothing to do with sensitivity, lmao @ minorities or anyone with any sense of decency of any race propping up the NCAA--the nation's largest sharecropping system--of being some egalitarian outfit.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

The Original Poster is guilty of the same shit man.

She is coming from a different tribe telling everyone in here that we all should be behind this...sorry some people have differing opinions, some of which belong to a tribe and some don't

I speak for those who are not making fun of the topic just trying to get a better understanding and not being told that they're ignorant or idiots.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

this particular issue affects Native Americans as a whole from self-identity to the continued fight for the existence of NAs as a community with any power.

and that is not unusual. there are two perspectives here and just like any other debate that is a public issue literally everyone is entitled to an opinion if not some say.

i think it's way more ignorant than even some of the shit mcdeezjawns is saying to believe that an individual or even a particular group adequately represents all American Indians.

because it's a small group it's easier to let slide than say someone discussing the "Muslim perspective" (which, astonishingly, we still hear), but it's still not the case.

Plurality names should be handled (in my opinion) differently than singular referential names. As to your supposition that those supporting the name aren't or shouldn't speak for the whole, tribal politics is often more inclusive and representative than many subcultures due to the importance of strong central voices v US Government policy.

- as for the mascot names which are not inherently offensive, I wish it could stay so simple. however, it seems that in too many cases even a reverential name turns backwards after awhile: "Seminoles" seems fine on its own, but having drunk white people do a tomahawk chop and mock chant during the fourth quarter comes off as obscene.

- now I can definitely see where a mascot name might be a proper homage. case by case basis, and if the NCAA is overstepping their bounds in such instances, that seems unfortunate.

- my opinion towards tribal endorsements is based on the fact that the Native American population is so small to begin with. if Asian Americans for Equality cosigned some racist Abercrombie shirt because it promotes Buddhism, I could be on some "fuck that" and organize a mall protest with my fellow paper-cut-eye friends. same for the NAACP.

tribes seem a bit different in that regard, because dissenting voices have fewer outlets to be heard. so I hold caution towards taking their majority vote as a free license to don a feather.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Acrcm09NDdE

>- as for the mascot names which are not inherently offensive,
>I wish it could stay so simple. however, it seems that in too
>many cases even a reverential name turns backwards after
>awhile: "Seminoles" seems fine on its own, but having drunk
>white people do a tomahawk chop and mock chant during the
>fourth quarter comes off as obscene.

Well I cannot speak for everyone but I mentioned the tomahawk chop (in both Tallahassee and Atlanta) as something that had to go. That does not mean that Seminole does also, and the Seminole people seem to agree (or at least their representation/leadership does).

There are, however, no such concerns at NDU, the artwork, chants and other traditions have been constructed in concert with locals.

A big part of the problem is that few of us were familiar with details here. Even someone who follows race in sports, college hockey, etc, wasn't really equipped to deal with this and even the original poster does not REALLY know the specifics here. If she did, she'd know how many organizations actually mattered and how they stood, it's pretty obvious she does not. To be fair neither did any of us, but none of us have quite as strong of an opinion either (though some come too close!).

This is something that has been handled internally and now a larger governing body is getting involved and fucking it up. This sounds pretty familiar.



>- now I can definitely see where a mascot name might be a
>proper homage. case by case basis, and if the NCAA is
>overstepping their bounds in such instances, that seems
>unfortunate.

See above, obviously we agree and I would go a step further and say that this is such a case.

>- my opinion towards tribal endorsements is based on the fact
>that the Native American population is so small to begin with.
>if Asian Americans for Equality cosigned some racist
>Abercrombie shirt because it promotes Buddhism, I could be on
>some "fuck that" and organize a mall protest with my fellow
>paper-cut-eye friends. same for the NAACP.


>tribes seem a bit different in that regard, because dissenting
>voices have fewer outlets to be heard. so I hold caution
>towards taking their majority vote as a free license to don a
>feather.

this particular story is fairly well documented though, i have read a few things on it in the past and it didnt take much stone turning to find several perspectives this morning.

what's PC and what's not a big deal. Switch places and tell me how you feel.

I've had people tell me what is and is not offensive vis-a-vis Israel, the Holocaust, etc. Sometimes I agree with them, sometimes I do not. They are always entitled to their opinion. They also entitled to be called dumb fucks if they act that way and that is what makes this country fucking spectacular.

is only a problem when they disagree with it. - lol
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<---- but but but the Mayan Calendar said the world will end in 2012!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJjQMwEjC1I

and i considered it my duty to argue with him. although i think i more just scratched the surface on why he's bad at comedy rather than why he's bad for America.

Women's Pro Basketball Team.


The logo will be blankets and Thunderbird.Who's with me?
____________________


Quarterback
Winner
Hero

nm

____________________


Quarterback
Winner
Hero

nm

i hate when schools make these switches and then choose the most pussified name possible to avoid any possible future controversy. how come just cause you can't be the Indians anymore you gotta become the Green Flash or some gay shit.

I skimmed through some of the replies, but this shit got way out of hand.

I'll try to compile and summarize some more of my thoughts.

First of all, when you take Native American mascots out of context and history, you really do a great injustice. This is why I especially linked up the book "Playing Indian" because if you read that and I hope you all will read that, you will understand where this racist notion of white people dressing up and taking on Indian identity comes from. White people have been appropriating Indian culture since the Pilgrims dug up Wampanoag graves.
Have any of you bothered to ask yourself why in this country, Native American people have been singled out and targeted as sports mascots? I'll tell you why. During the late 19th, early 20th century Native American people were thought of as a doomed and vanishing race. Of course our numbers dwindled because we were colonized, killed off, forced onto reservations, had our children stolen, and told being Indian was savage. The common notion of the "Vanishing Indian" (google that) was that there was nothing that could be done about our race "disappearing".
But guess what? Despite the U.S. government's actions, we are still here. We are not a people of the past stuck in 18th or 19th century stereotypes.
Stereotypes and dehumanizing a people as a mascot does not honor them. Especially when it's a group whose history most people in this country and abroad are largely ignorant about.
Often times when I see Native people show support for these mascots, they do it because they feel that if the "Fighting Sioux" was not the name, no one would know about the Sioux. That is truly sad. These people are afraid that their white neighbors don't know about them and they are probably right. Think about it - Imagine if you felt that if it wasn't for a college team's mascot, your peoples history and culture would be wiped out from mainstream America? We need to combat these stereotypes with education and making sure Native American people have the authority to tell their own history. Mascots do not accurately tell the history and culture of Native American peoples. The Sioux mascot does not tell the accurate history and culture of those people. In fact, the word Sioux is not something they use. That is a term that was forced upon them by white people. Instead, Sioux people are Oglala Lakota, or Sisseton Wapheton or Hunkpapa Lakota, etc.
Anyways back to the history and contextualization - look at Hollywood Westerns and how Native peoples were portrayed. These mascots do the same thing. I know it feels better to be able to think that "Fighting Sioux" is honorable, but you're playing revisionist history.
And it's silly that some people on here are arguing that this is not a pan-Indian issue when the American Indian Movement has taken a strong stance against mascots. The American Indian Movement has fought for the rights of Native peoples all across the country and still does so today. Native Americans from tribes across the country have come together to support the retirement of Indian mascots.
Where do you think the NCAA even first got a hold of this topic? It was the tireless efforts of Native American activists to bring light to this issue. Who first brought this issue to national arena? No it wasn't white liberal guilt, it was Native American people!

I really hope if you actually care about this issue you will read some of the links I supplied above.

Here are some additional ones:

http://www.racismagainstindians.org/UnderstandingMascots.htm
^^^^ this really breaks down what's wrong with presenting Native peoples as stereotypes and mascots

http://honorindians.com/category/indian-mascots/
^^^ A Native American scholar has a blog about how you can honor Native peoples


Also, do we really want our sports arenas to be the place where we honor an oppressed group's culture? We all post on OK Sports and I hope all of us have been to sporting events. We know what happens there - lots of drinking, cheering, booing, name calling, and overall excitement. Is this really the appropriate mainstream context for honoring culture?
We're better off as a society moving forward from this and doing what's right to honor the first peoples of the country.

And regarding the Sioux people. This is from wikipedia : a list of reservations with Sioux people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sioux#Reserves_and_First_Nations
Only one Sioux band had its people vote on the mascot issue. 67% were in favor. None of the Sioux people living in any other community has been able to vote on the Fighting Sioux mascot. The Chairman for the Standing Rock Sioux reservation was initially against the mascot, but then he lost his seat and the next chairman was in favor of it. So far that chairman has not had the tribe vote on the issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sioux#Reserves_and_First_Nations
So, there are 32 Sioux reservations (some share reservations with other tribes). But only 1 Sioux nations has been given the opportunity to vote on the issue. Hmmmmm........
Also please remember most of these reservations are the most impoverished places in this country (see Pine Ridge). So not many have the resources, time, and money to duke it out with big and rich universities.

Are any of you familiar with how the Unites States ripped off Native peoples for their land? Do any of you know about how they got Native peoples to sign treaties? If so, you will see how eerily similar this is to getting the "approval" from one band of Sioux.

Here is a list of schools that have banned Native American mascots up to 2007. This issue will not go away anytime soon:
1969, Oct. 12 – Dartmouth College, originally founded to educate American Indians, changes from the Indians to Big Green.
1971 – Marquette University (WI) abolishes Willie Wampum mascot.
1971 – Mankato State College (Minn) drops Indian caricature mascot.
1972, March 2 – Stanford University changes from Indians to Cardinal and drops Prince Lightfoot mascot.
1972 – Dickinson State University (ND) changes from Savages to Blue Hawks.
1973 – University of Oklahoma drops Little Red mascot.
1973 -- Eastern Washington University changes from Savages to the Eagles.
1978 – Syracuse University (NY) drops Saltine Warrior mascot.
1980 – Southern Oregon State University drops Red Raiders motif.
1987-88 – St. John’s University (NY) drops caricature logo and mascot.
1988 – Siena College (NY) changes from Indians to Saints.
1988 – Saint Mary’s College (Minn) changes from Red Men to Cardinals.
1989 – Montclair State College (NJ) drops nickname and mascot.
1989, Oct. 13 – Bradley University (IL) drops mascot and replaces Indian caricature logo.
1991, Feb. – Eastern Michigan University changes from Hurons to Eagles on recommendation of a state civil rights commission.
1992 – Naperville Central High School (IL) drops nickname Redskins.
1992 -- Simpson College (IA) changes from Redmen to Storm.
1993 – Arkansas State University drops Runnin’ Joe mascot.
1993 - Arvada High School (CO) changes from Redskins to Reds.
1993, April 9 – University of Wisconsin passes a resolution refusing to play non-conference games against teams with Indian nicknames.
1993, Nov. 2 – Bradley University (IL) adopts Bobcats mascot and drops all Indian references in its logo, but keeps nickname Braves.
1994, April – University of Iowa bans the University of Illinois mascot, Chief Illiniwek and announces it won’t schedule games with teams with Indian mascots.
1994, May 2 – Juanita College (PA) changes from Indians to Eagles. According to committee chair Charles C. Brown, Jr., “the utilization of a cultural stereotype as a mascot is inconsistent with the educational mission of the college.”
1994, May 3 – Marquette University (WI) changes from Warriors to Golden Eagles.
1994, June 6 – St. John’s University (NY) changes from Redmen to Red Storm.
1994, Dec. 8 – University of Southern Colorado drops Indian mascot after 57 years.
1994 (?) – Montclair State College (NJ) changes from Indians to Red Hawks,
1996, March 31 – Newton High School (Conn) announces they will drop their Indian mascot.
1996, July 3 – University of Tennessee-Chattanooga drops mascot, Chief Moccanooga.
1996, Sept. 26 – Miami of Ohio University votes 7-1 to drop nickname Redskins after being used for 68 years.
1997 -- Marist High School (IL) changed from Redskins to Redhawks.
1998, March 20 – Yakima Valley Community College (WA) drops Indian nickname.
1998, April 7 – Federal judge in Los Angeles upholds district policy banning Indian mascots at all of its schools.
1998, April 22 – Southern Nazarene University (OK) changes from Redskins to Crimson Storm. According to the school’s president “with the increased attention in the country to do it, we just did not want to be the last to make a change, and I feel eventually most schools with that kind of mascot or nickname will do.”
1999. March 5 – Indiana University of Pennsylvania announces it will retain nickname Indians, but change mascot to a black bear.
1999, March 5 – Erwin High School, Asheville, NC discontinues calling girl’s teams Squaws, but retains Warriors nickname.
1999 – Since 1991, 25 Wisconsin schools have eliminated Indian mascots or nicknames; 43 remain.
1999, June – Seattle University (WA) changes from Chieftains to Redhawks and drops its Indian head logo.
2000, Sept. 22 – Scarborough (Maine) High School drops nickname Redskins.
2000, Oct. 17 – Niles West High School (IL) drops nickname Indians.
2001, May 10 – Southwestern College (CA) changes mascot from Apache to Jaguar.
2001. May 21 – Woonsocket High School (SD) votes to drop Redmen nickname and mascot by 3-2 board vote.
2001. May 25 - San Diego State University (CA) drops Montey Montezuma mascot.
2001. May 27 – Parsippany High School (NJ) changes from Redskins to Redhawks.
2001, June 10 – Saranac Lake High School (NY) changes from Redskins to Red Storm by 6-1 school board vote.
2001, June 13 – Canastota High School (NY) drops Indian mascot by 6-0 board vote.
2001, June 20 – Ball-Chatham school board (IL) votes 5-2 to get rid of Indian mascots and nicknames in district schools. Chatham Glenwood High School changes to Titans from Redskins, and Glenwood Junior High no longer Braves.
2001, July 11 --West Seattle High School (WA) drops nickname Indians.
2001, July 19 – Georgetown High School (SC) drops Waccamaw Warriors symbol.
2001, July 25 – Maryland State School Board passes resolution opposing Indian mascots by 10-2 vote.
2001, August – Bloomington High School (IL) drops Red Raiders nickname.
2001, August 15 – Colgate University drops word “Red” from “Red Raiders” nickname.
2001, August 29 -- Montgomery School Board (Maryland), largest school system in the state, bans Indian mascots, logos, and nicknames by 7-1 vote. Included is Poolesville High School, which was the Indians. Montgomery Village Middle School had voluntarily stopped using the nickname Warriors.
2002, Feb. 25 – Milford High School (MI) drops Redskins.
2004, July 6 – Ottawa Hills High School (MI) drops Indian mascot.
2004, July 12 – Rice Memorial High School (VT) retires “Little Indian” mascot.
2004, Nov. 8 – Southeast Missouri State changes from Indians to Redhawks.
2005, Sept. 23 – Old Town High School (Maine) drops Indian nickname.
2005, Oct. 10 – Carthage College changes from Redmen to Red Men. NCAA removes them from list.
2005, Oct. 10 – Midwestern State University drops Indians. NCAA removes them from list.
2006, Jan. 8 – West Georgia University changes from Braves to Wolves.
2006, Jan. 20 – Southeastern Oklahoma State University changes from Savages to Savage Storm.
2006, Jan. 26 – Chowan College (NC) drops Braves nickname and mascot.
2006. Jan. 30 – Muscatine Community College (Iowa) drops Indians nickname and mascot.
2006, March 23 – Kelseyville High School (CA) drops “Indians” nickname, and Mountain Vista Middle School (CA) drops “Braves” nickname.
2006, April 8 – University of Louisiana-Monroe changes from Indians to Warhawks after being one of 18 schools on the NCAA list. References to the campus as “the Reservation” also stopped.
2006, Oct. 10 – College of William and Mary (VA) announces it will remove two feathers from its logo to comply with NCAA rule.
2006, Oct. 20 – Tomah (WI) School Board drops Indian mascot and logo by 4-1 board vote.
2006, Nov. 12 – Newberry College (SC) drops Indian nickname. NCAA removes them from banned list.
2006, Dec. 14 – Ypsilanti High School (MI) drops nickname Braves on a 4-3 board vote.
2007, Jan. 19 – Salesian High School (CA) changes from Chieftains to Pride.
2007, Feb. 17 -- the University of Illinois Board of Trustees announces it will remove Chief Illiniwek from performing at athletic events after Feb. 21, 2007.
2007, March 13 -- the University of Illinois Board of Trustees passes a resolution officially eliminating Chief Illiniwek, discontinuing the use of its Chief head logo, regalia, and the names "Chief Illiniwek" and "Chief." It passes by a 9-1 vote.

I am well aware of the vanishing Indian concept and I understand how that could create a very reasonable repugnance toward the practice of Indian mascots.

That said, the second prong of your theory is what I take issue with. It is not ipso facto dehumanizing to be used as a symbol or mascot. There are plenty of symbols and mascots that are not animals, for openers, and even some that are reference to groups of people. You've got your fierce animals, your regionally symbolic animals, your funny animals, sure. but you've also got symbols of potency and pride like (lightning, thunder, etc), nods to settlers (e.g. 49ers), groups of people (Demon Deacons, Gauchos) and a variety of other types of symbols.

Do we believe that Southern Baptists, gold rushers and Argentine cowboys are dehumanized by these uses?

So that wipes out your second prong IMO, although not entirely because the widespread use of them does pertain to the first. Hence I maintain that a high level of vigilance is desirable but the complete prohibition (as recommended by you and the APA) is not.

There is certainly a lack of understanding and appreciation for the history of First Land people in North America, I feel a bit guilty about it myself (my dad is actually an Indian American history buff but my own knowledge is somewhat limited) and I know more than the average person probably. I agree that there is a strong need to promote that but I also think if used appropriately these symbols can be a stepping stone to that effort.

They can only tell an accurate story to the extent that any flash of an image can but I do think UND was careful in their construction of the image. The re-labeling of a bunch of small groups into a larger group is an issue any time you have colonization, same thing is true in Africa of their tribes, but that is a pretty difficult thing for a sports program to address let alone reverse. There are many harsh realities, too many to hit in one mouthful. It doesn't make them grave robbers that they don't, it just means they need to do more.

Finally, while I appreciate the information you have provided here very much and also think you're a great sport for withstanding resistance and ignorance (some from me I am sure), you don't have too firm a handle on the actual proceedings in North Dakota. The fact of the matter is that the agreement forced UND to seek approval from two groups, one of which they received strongly, the other of which they were unable to by the deadline but had made serious progress with. If you consider the abolition of all American Indian symbols as mascots/logos a good thing, yes, this is a victory, if you have the desires and interests of the local Sioux at heart, it is much less clear. That is not to say it is a loss or not a victory, it's just to say that the issue is a lot more complicated than your own personal viewpoint. I can understand why you'd be impassioned to believe otherwise. I don't generally believe in this practice but I don't categorically think it's a terrible thing either, this is an instance where it requires a longer look than the NCAA gave it.

Warriors?

I dont get that.


Warrior = a person of war ....a fighter in war ...a warrior ....



Im sorry I dont get that one.



If that's the case ,all songs ever created should be banned from existence for having the word warrior in its chorus or lyrics...


Shit, the movie warrior should be banned as well.


cmon

http://www.freewebs.com/wrestlingtapestrade/Warrior%20VHS%202%20pic.jpg

guess we should rename him too

Im not going to promenade in here like I have an immense grasp on Native American culture, because I do not....I know about Native Americans of Illinois and a little data about Indians in Haiti before Spain infiltrated.


However, I will say this. St.Johns had to convert their name from the Redmen to the Redstorm. They were getting a lot of flack about that name, so they went ahead and did the right thing and dropped it.....Redskins=Redmen...

Also , The fighting Illini had to drop their mascot some years back, and I remember when I was a student there how some of the native american students would protest about the mascot....I didnt give a fuck at the time, because I was just a young man, and plus I was just trying to holler at one of them bitches, but they were pretty fucking furious about that indian running around with a tomahawk and yelling.

I think that was the most disrespectful mascot of all time to be honest. Dude would be dress in full native american attire with paint on his face, doing indian yells and shit.....Now that I think about it, how did they even let that shit fly?

how did jews "let" things fly in 30s Europe?

how did black people "let" blackface become a prominent mode of entertainment?

it's hard to speak up with a foot on your throat and, in this case, no numbers to boot.

The funny thing is that the dude dressed up as the indian mascot wasnt even indian. Dude was some irish cat.

( hopefully, you saw what I just did there)

Of interest here is further clarification that they needed two groups to approve this, one of which did, the other of which did not disapprove and was sorting through the issue. Also, the Nov 30 deadline from the NCAA was not Nov 30, 2009, it was Nov 30, 2010 (which was unclear in previous swipes). This process was hastened by the ND State Board of Higher Education and Spirit Lake plans to keep challenging their decision.

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/274870/group/Sports/

GRAND FORKS – Nothing will be changing in Ralph Engelstad Arena if general manager Jody Hodgson has anything to say about it.

Despite Thursday’s ruling by the North Dakota State Board of Higher Education to begin retiring the Fighting Sioux name and logo at the University of North Dakota, the privately owned arena – with an estimated 3,000 Sioux logos in it – might remain in its current state.

Speaking from Chicago, Hodgson again debunked the urban legend that there’s a secret document from Ralph Engelstad calling for the closing of the 11,640-seat venue if the nickname ever changes.

In fact, Hodgson says it is his wish that nothing changes at all.

“The first thing I have to do is fully analyze and understand what’s happened today,” Hodgson said.

“I’ll have to discuss this with the board (of directors) as well. But, if I have anything to do with it, nothing in the building will ever change. Nobody will ever be allowed to change anything.

“It would be the utmost sign of disrespect if anybody ever tries to deface that building. If I have anything to say on the matter, that will never happen. Never.”

It is unknown whether the NCAA would grant Ralph Engelstad Arena a men’s hockey regional or a women’s Frozen Four if the thousands of logos stay. But Hodgson said the arena won’t make any decisions based on the NCAA’s thoughts.

“I could care less,” Hodgson said. “Sometimes, you’ve got to stand up for what’s right.”

Hodgson, a member of the board of directors at the arena, said he and members of the Engelstad Foundation were “deeply disappointed and deeply saddened” by the State Board’s decision.

“It’s obvious that it was never about how the Native Americans felt,” Hodgson said. “If they wanted to honor the Native Americans, they would have honored their wishes. Nobody has ever proven that they don’t want the name and logo.

“If Standing Rock voted and wanted to change the nickname, I’d be the guy at the front of the group saying it’s time to change this thing. But I don’t believe that would ever happen. I believe a significant majority want us to maintain the name and logo.”

Hodgson points to the reservation-wide vote at Spirit Lake, which overwhelmingly approved of the Fighting Sioux nickname and the 1,000-plus signatures gathered by nickname supporters at Standing Rock in an effort to put the nickname issue to a reservation-wide vote there.

In a settlement with the NCAA, UND needed to get approval from both tribes by Nov. 30 in order to keep the nickname.

The State Board decided to begin the process of retirement before that date, though.

“The only urgency in the matter is that those that wanted to see the nickname and logo change were beginning to think that it might be approved,” Hodgson said. “They thought, ‘We better get these things changed because we might have both tribes approving this thing.’ That’s the only conclusion I can come to.”

Hodgson said he communicated with Standing Rock Tribal Chairman Charles W. Murphy a day earlier. Murphy told Hodgson that the people’s wishes had to be recognized.

“It’s not a dead issue at Standing Rock,” Hodgson said. “The chairman is meeting with the judicial committee next week to discuss the 1,000 signatures. The Board of Higher Education knew that. It’s an absolute abomination. It’s a slap in the face and a kick in the ass to the people of Standing Rock.

“It has been a very small group of people creating barriers and log jams. You’ve got more than 50 percent of the people who voted in the last general election saying that they want to vote on the issue. Why is nobody listening to them?”

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5063198

The College of William & Mary has selected a griffin as its new mascot.

The selection of the mythical monster with the body of a lion and the head, wings and claws of an eagle was announced Tuesday by school president Taylor Reveley at an event on the Williamsburg, Va., campus.

The griffin emerged the winner among four other finalists: a pug, a phoenix, a wren and royalty, represented by a king and a queen.

William & Mary began searching for a mascot after the NCAA ruled that the university's green and gold feather logo could be offensive to Native Americans.

William & Mary for decades was known as the Indians. The school changed its nickname to the Tribe in the 1980s.

So ^THAT'S Offensive?!?

that chick will eat your neck out...

she's a shape shifter.... one of them twilight motherfuckers.

w/o just using the simpler version "vampires."