Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisJNelson
Getting rid of simple racist things doesn’t preclude us from making bigger, most substantial improvements to society. It’s not either/or. We shouldn’t have racist, dehumanizing mascots, period. Seems pretty obvious. Maybe it’s not the biggest impact in the world but it’s better than not doing it.
|
Totally agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinsTHunter
Calling a baseball team "Indians" does not honor their heritage in any way whatsoever.
|
But it does if a team is called
Vikings
Trojans
Celtics
Spartans
etc. ?
I think the answer is the same whether these or Indian names. Yes. that was and still is the intent.
I think most agree that teams were not given the name Indians, Braves, Chiefs, etc. as a way to denigrate themselves. Especially after paying the cost to start said teams? IOW the teams were not named as a racist insult. It wouldn't make sense.
If we went back in time and the owners, all white, had banded together and prohibited Indian related names what would the conversation be today? Would some be asking "why aren't\weren't they included?". These owners were racists.
I don't know just seem to me saying one's historical ancestors being strong men that should be feared and fought bravely is not an insult. I think that was the idea with the Euro\Caucasian named teams listed above, "opponents should fear us". Same with all of the Indian type names.
All of those teams listed above have caricatures and most weapons of war. Sure the "smiling Indian" and a few others look very bad and needed to be removed. But a Chief, Brave, spear, tomahawk doesn't say racism to me. No different than a war axe, sword, horned helmet, etc. Anything that mocks should be gone. A tomahawk chop is done to mock? An Indian on a horse mocks? But.. A Trojan on a horse is ok. A Viking swinging an axe is ok. It all portrays a team that plays hard to win to my eye. All are fine IMHO.
Too never have had these names would seem more racist to me. To have the early owners say "nobody will name their teams Indians, Braves, etc.", in the context of the times, what else would that be? The more I think about it the more I'm surprised Indian names were used at all pre 1960's.