Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, December 27, 2012

Pattison Ave: Braves determine ‘screaming savage’ is best suited for batting practice

Apparently, we’ve conquered racism in America, and awful caricatures of the past can be resurrected as kitsch on official MLB batting practice caps:

It’s called the “screaming savage.”

It’s exactly what it sounds like.

The Braves’ wordless image of a mohawaked Native American cocking his head back can be difficult to interpret—it is hard to tell whether the man is screaming or laughing uproariously. 

But one thing we interpret for sure is that the logo, originally named “Chief Noc-a-Homa,” comes from a different time, when this sort of thing was… allowed to… be a thing. 

That time was the 1950s to the mid-80s.  And maybe it should have stayed there.

Adam B. Posted: December 27, 2012 at 05:50 PM | 137 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: braves, logos, mascots

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. CFBF Is A Golden Spider Duck Posted: December 27, 2012 at 06:22 PM (#4333273)
Oy, Braves. Just...oy.
   2. Tim D Posted: December 27, 2012 at 06:42 PM (#4333279)
Until the professional football team in the nation's capitol changes its name everybody else is going to be way, way behind the leaders in the field of insensitivity to Native Americans.
   3. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: December 27, 2012 at 06:43 PM (#4333282)
Eh, still not as bad as the Tomahawk chop. Or the Redskins.

edit: to be clear, that's topping a very low bar.
   4. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 27, 2012 at 06:44 PM (#4333284)
I could be wrong, but I don't ever remember that "screaming savage" design ever being used after the Braves' first year in Atlanta.
   5. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: December 27, 2012 at 06:50 PM (#4333288)
I could be wrong, but I don't ever remember that "screaming savage" design ever being used after the Braves' first year in Atlanta.

I am sure I have at least one set of baseball cards that uses that logo for the Braves players.

EDIT: 1989 Donruss it looks like.
   6. thetailor Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:00 PM (#4333294)
#2 and #3 are right. Redskins are by far, by far, by far the worst offenders. But it's football, so nobody cares.

Actually, I think this is an opportunity to examine deeper. What is it about the image that's offensive? That it depicts a person of a certain ethnic background? That it depicts them in a certain way? That the person pictured has their particular history as a part of this country?

I'm Irish, which of course is not a big deal, but I think we can make a worthy comparison. Notre Dame? Awesome. Celtics? Neutral. St. Patrick's Day drunks? Offensive. I don't think we need to automatically assume that this image is offensive. I don't think that any usage or depiction of a Native American is racist. I'd like to know what those affected by it think, rather than to conclusions.
   7. Lassus Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:02 PM (#4333295)
I could be wrong, but I don't ever remember that "screaming savage" design ever being used after the Braves' first year in Atlanta.

I am sure I have at least one set of baseball cards that uses that logo for the Braves players.
EDIT: 1989 Donruss it looks like.



I was gonna say, I'm not as old as Andy, but I sure remember it. Might be an NL/AL thing, familiarity-wise.

Note: I never, ever, thought he was screaming, always laughing.
   8. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:16 PM (#4333299)
#2 and #3 are right. Redskins are by far, by far, by far the worst offenders. But it's football, so nobody cares.

Actually, I think this is an opportunity to examine deeper. What is it about the image that's offensive? That it depicts a person of a certain ethnic background? That it depicts them in a certain way? That the person pictured has their particular history as a part of this country?


In the case of the Redskins, it's solely the name, and not the specific logo. The logo itself is dignified and unremarkable beyond its ethnic origin. The last time the Redskins ever used any sort of a cartoon Indian was on the cover of their 1954 programs, which were in the same style as they were in 1940. The next year the same artist switched gears and came up with covers like these, and AFAICR there's never been any reversion to the childlike cartoon version.
   9. Dale Sams Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:16 PM (#4333301)
From the comments

A Brave and/or an Indian is a warrior...ready to do battle at any given time


What, Indians weren't braves? Indians were not fierce competitors? Guess who invented lacrosse.


I don't think anything the Indians did could be represented in a negative way (except the "fire water" deal). They were not cowards, they made the most of what the land gave them and they never polluted.




Annnnnnd this is exactly why the images are harmful. They help propogate ignorance.
   10. Rowland Office Supplies Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:19 PM (#4333302)
It was the embossed team logo on tickets well into the 80s.
   11. DA Baracus Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4333303)
I've seen this logo on merchandise at Turner Field all last year. But now that it's on a hat, it's an outrage.
   12. zonk Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4333304)
Actually, I think this is an opportunity to examine deeper. What is it about the image that's offensive? That it depicts a person of a certain ethnic background? That it depicts them in a certain way? That the person pictured has their particular history as a part of this country?


FWIW -

The hockey Chicago Blackhawks are an interesting comparison -- now, the 'Blackhawks' are not a tribe, rather - Chief Black Hawk was a Sauk chieftan who battled earlier Illinois settlers. The origin of the team name was that an early team owner commanded an Illinois-based "Blackhawk" division in WWI or WWII (I forget).

Obviously, you can find a range of opinions from Native Americans on the appropriateness of the logo/name, however -- FWIW, there have been a ton of local stories asking for those opinions whenever the Hawks are in the news, or, whenever the issue of such other similarly textured team names make the news.

However -

- The organization itself says that they get "very few" complaints

- The fellow who led the charge to have the Illinois 'Fighting Illini' get rid of 'Chief Illiniwek' doesn't consider the 'Blackhawks' or the logo nearly as offensive (he'd prefer it change, but says it's done 'respectfully' and isn't interested in starting a similar movement based on it).

- You can find some NA heritage organizations who say it's fine; others who oppose it (but all of them generally consider it "least offensive")

Why?

- There is no 'mascot' associated with the Hawks... no one dances around in costume, etc... "Tommy Hawk" is a hawk with the signature four feathers
- There is no "tomahawk chop' or other associated fan actions based on the name or logo that it is basically a caricature of the NA culture
- The Hawks themselves are respectful about the logo -- the 'Black Hawk' logo is relatively based on the chief himself. In addition, there are certain traditions that are observed -- for example, the logo on the floor of the locker room is not stepped on by players, etc

Ultimately - I would expect the Blackhawk logo and name to go, too... but it's usually at the very tail end of all such debates because it's probably done as inoffensively/uncaricaturely as such a thing can be done.
   13. thetailor Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:20 PM (#4333305)
#9 - fair, but do we want to make our decisions based on the lowest common denominator? The answer to this could be yes.
   14. Srul Itza Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:28 PM (#4333310)
The next year the same artist switched gears and came up with covers like these


Looks a hell of lot like Wes Studi in Last of the Mohicans, don't it?
   15. DA Baracus Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:29 PM (#4333311)
I'd like to know what those affected by it think, rather than to conclusions.


FWIW, Paul Lukas did a survey of Native American readers to get their opinions. He only got 11 responses, and they vary from "I have no problem, whatsoever, with the use of Native American logos" to "I have never liked the use of Native American imagery in sports. I see it as disrespectful."
   16. JJ1986 Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:38 PM (#4333317)
Where is this author getting "screaming savage" from? The term is the most offensive part.
   17. thetailor Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:45 PM (#4333320)
That is why this is a great site and I hope that it never goes mainstream. #8, #12 and #15 are such well-researched posts.
   18. thetailor Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:49 PM (#4333322)
Some UniWatch responses... a lot of calling out of Redskins in particular:

#1 "What is completely unacceptable is the use of iconography that reinforces the ‘Myth of the Redman,’ instead of the actual people of this land. ... it’s hard to see that representation as anything more noble than the black-faced performers they replaced in Vaudeville shows."

#2 "I am of Cherokee descent and by and large have no misgivings regarding the use of Native American namesakes or imagery in sports — with the exception of the Redskins... I like the Braves — it is a strong, honorable term, and the team’s tomahawk logo looks great, no different than a sword being used for a team called the Knights.

#3 "The teams that have been given permission to use tribal names are fantastic, and keep the Native American culture alive. But the ones that are broad, out-dated stereotypes need to be erased."

#4 "For most pro teams, like the Indians and Braves, I don’t have an issue so much with their name as I do with their stereotypical mascots. Chief Noc-a-homa and Chief Wahoo both cross the line and are more of a caricature of Native Americans than a tribute."
   19. NTP Nate Posted: December 27, 2012 at 07:58 PM (#4333324)
Having grown up in the greater DC area I've come to the opinion that the local professional football club, if they're serious that the team name isn't meant to be a racial slur, should change their logo to a small roasted potato (possibly drizzled with olive oil, sea salt, black pepper and parsley).

That said, a stadium full of (mostly) white (mostly) southerners doing the tomahawk chop and associated chant strikes me as much more offensive on several levels. So, in that light, why bother worrying about Chief Noc-a-Homa?
   20. zonk Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:09 PM (#4333326)
So, in that light, why bother worrying about Chief Noc-a-Homa?


Because if we don't, Frink's robot will kill Homer!
   21. PerroX Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:12 PM (#4333328)
   22. The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott) Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:14 PM (#4333330)
"Chief Noc-a-homa and Chief Wahoo both cross the line and are more of a caricature of Native Americans than a tribute."

This makes a lot of sense to me, and is a big part of why I reacted negatively to the logo, as I do to the tomahawk chop. And DC calling it's team the "Redskins" is like if Notre Dame called their team the "Fighting Micks." Of course, this is the same city that called their NBA team the "Bullets" from 1974 until 1997.
   23. PerroX Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:18 PM (#4333333)
That said, a stadium full of (mostly) white (mostly) southerners doing the tomahawk chop and associated chant strikes me as much more offensive on several levels.


Offensive?

The only black faces are on the bandstand.
   24. PerroX Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:19 PM (#4333334)
Of course, this is the same city that called their NBA team the "Bullets" from 1974 until 1997.


Bullets don't discriminate.
   25. PerroX Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:23 PM (#4333335)
White people taking offense at racial an ethnic stereotyping seems overcompensation for a guilty conscience.

By treaty, something like a third of the United States is occupied territory. Let's give it back.
   26. DA Baracus Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:27 PM (#4333336)
That said, a stadium full of (mostly) white (mostly) southerners doing the tomahawk chop and associated chant strikes me as much more offensive on several levels.


Would it be less offensive had they stayed in Milwaukee or Boston?
   27. OsunaSakata Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:34 PM (#4333339)
I'm sure it was during the glory days of Atlanta's playoff streak. The fans were engaged in a tomahawk during a rally. Only it was interrupted for a cavalry "Charge!" from the PA system. Now which side of that conflict was their team supposed to represent?
   28. Dale Sams Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:34 PM (#4333340)
Offensive?

The only black faces are on the bandstand.


Canal, I'll take the analogy even further and say, "Of course not! House of Pain and Vanilla Ice are white, you don't hear them complaining."


I'd never seen that before, and was ready to be impressed that Fallon had worked out a 10 minute routine...two five minute routines is pretty impressive though.
   29. NTP Nate Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:36 PM (#4333344)
Would it less offensive if they stayed in Milwaukee or Boston?


Everything is less offensive in Milwaukee. As for Boston, Scott Brown's campaign staff seem to have mastered the tomahawk chop already. Plus, the image of Bill Simmons doing the chop would allow me to consolidate two of my dislikes, which is nice.
   30. zonk Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:42 PM (#4333346)
White people taking offense at racial an ethnic stereotyping seems overcompensation for a guilty conscience.


I think there's a pretty big difference between taking personal offense and simply recognizing/attempting to understand or appreciate someone with a direct line to the purported offense, then supporting a change to remove that offense, if for no other reason than there are almost certainly things or situations to which I might genuinely take offense (which might be shared by a wholly different slice of people and considered silly by a different slice of others)... and I'd prefer to have the same done for me.

I don't think there's anything wrong with the latter...

   31. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:43 PM (#4333347)
Canal, I'll take the analogy even further and say, "Of course not! House of Pain and Vanilla Ice are white, you don't hear them complaining."


House of Pain purport to be Irish, which hardly qualifies as white.

Obviously all these sports teams should get real native mascots as so not to promote offensive stereotypes. I know these gentlemen would leap at the chance.
   32. Quaker Posted: December 27, 2012 at 08:50 PM (#4333348)
People sure do love getting offended on behalf of other people.
   33. bookbook Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:04 PM (#4333353)
#31, that link was funny. British "scientists" justifying their subjugation of the Irish, I assume?

I do think we should rename DC's team, the Macacas, to honor the fact that the acorn doesn't fall far from the tree.

#32, it is the ability of humans to empathize with other people that makes us our best. This is why Christianity followed in Judaism's footsteps by enshrining the golden rule as the pinnacle of understanding one's religious (and human) obligation. Trust me, just because you aren't hearing from Native Americans does not mean they are fine with being treated institutionally as caricatures.
   34. Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:08 PM (#4333355)
   35. bobm Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:17 PM (#4333359)
Would it be less offensive had they stayed in Milwaukee or Boston?

When did the Redskins play in Milwaukee? :-)

From Wikipedia:

The team originated as the Boston Braves, based in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1932. At the time the team played in Braves Field, the home field of the Boston Braves baseball team. The following year the club moved to Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox, whereupon owners changed the team's name to the Boston Redskins. The Redskins relocated to Washington, D.C. in 1937. 
   36. Poster Nutbag Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:24 PM (#4333361)
So, since the Presidential Races and such are all caricatures as well, is that offensive too? To Presidents? To Caucasian Males?

How about the Sausage Races? Who's thinking of the poor pigs we're disrespecting?!

Just curious/playing Devil's Advocate. Seems like there is room for discussion and recognizing that applying these concepts to EVERYTHING relevant might show that it isn't done in some disrespectful fashion.....it's just another way to sell tickets....a marketing gimmick.
   37. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:46 PM (#4333364)
White people with lots of time on your hands are offended by this stuff. The rest of us think you need to get a life. Or at least a new hobby. Being offended on behalf of other people is such a first world problem.
   38. Pops Freshenmeyer Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:48 PM (#4333365)
Being offended on behalf of other people is such a first world problem.

What about being offended about being offended on behalf of other people?
   39. OsunaSakata Posted: December 27, 2012 at 09:57 PM (#4333370)
The rest of us think you need to get a life.


Anyone who posts here telling someone to get a life seriously needs to look in the mirror.
   40. Bhaakon Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:04 PM (#4333375)
#32, it is the ability of humans to empathize with other people that makes us our best. This is why Christianity followed in Judaism's footsteps by enshrining the golden rule as the pinnacle of understanding one's religious (and human) obligation. Trust me, just because you aren't hearing from Native Americans does not mean they are fine with being treated institutionally as caricatures.


It kind of breaks down in subjective fields like giving offense, though, as evidenced by the most awesome team mascot ever.
   41. Erix Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:04 PM (#4333377)
I'd never seen 34. That's outstanding.
   42. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:06 PM (#4333380)
#39-Really? I learn a lot from this site. It's a rare place on the internet with actual smart people. That civil war generals thread from a while back was awesome.
   43. PerroX Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:23 PM (#4333385)
I'd never seen that before, and was ready to be impressed that Fallon had worked out a 10 minute routine...two five minute routines is pretty impressive though.


A lot of fun. Fallon impresses me, and I've always liked Timberlake, who from all reports is very down to earth. But it's the Roots make that tribute work.
   44. Srul Itza Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:37 PM (#4333396)
That civil war generals thread from a while back was awesome.


Link?
   45. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:42 PM (#4333398)
I'm on my phone, I'll never find it. I believe the article that spawned it was comparing the Royals GM to McClelland (sp?) if that helps. Around the time of the Shields trade.
   46. Srul Itza Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:42 PM (#4333399)
Being offended on behalf of other people is such a first world problem.


So if somebody white casually uses the word N*gg*r to refer to black people, other white people are not allowed to be offended?

If somebody rails against the Kikes running hollywood, gentiles need not mind it?

If somebody says the problem is that the damn spics refuse to learn English, anglos can take the day off?

If somebody tells racist jokes, we are obliged to put up with it, because we are not the ones being denigrated?

   47. Srul Itza Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:43 PM (#4333400)
I believe the article that spawned it was comparing the Royals GM to McClelland (sp?) if that helps. Around the time of the Shields trade.


That found it for me, thanks.

You're still wrong, but thanks.
   48. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: December 27, 2012 at 10:44 PM (#4333401)
Aaaaand ... never mind!
   49. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:22 AM (#4333430)
I like the hat.
   50. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:29 AM (#4333434)
I'm pretty sure I've never seen this logo before. As such it seems like the Braves are introducing a brand new logo for a new generation, a logo that seems to be, at best, a surprising and questionable choice.
   51. DA Baracus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4333445)
I'm pretty sure I've never seen this logo before. As such it seems like the Braves are introducing a brand new logo for a new generation, a logo that seems to be, at best, a surprising and questionable choice.


Is this a serious comment? "I haven't seen it before, therefore it must be new." Because it's not a new logo. As I said before, they sold merchandise with this logo last year. This is only an issue because it is now on their batting practice hats.
   52. Sleepy supports unauthorized rambling Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:02 AM (#4333447)
I'm pretty sure I've never seen this logo before.

Are you sure?

I pity the fool that doesn't like this logo.
   53. flournoy Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:19 AM (#4333449)
I haven't seen the logo in a while, but my some of my earliest Braves memories come from these cards, so it is hardly unfamiliar to me. I don't have any political or ideological objection to it, but I prefer the script A logo. If I had my way, the Braves would use the same "classic" ('90s era) uniforms for all occasions.
   54. vortex of dissipation Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:25 AM (#4333450)
1966 Braves uniforms. Note the sleeve patch.
   55. flournoy Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:33 AM (#4333452)
I'm pretty sure the Braves corrected Aaron's cross-handed style long before 1966, but maybe he still just liked to pose that way.
   56. Bhaakon Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:47 AM (#4333456)
1966 Braves uniforms. Note the sleeve patch.


Somehow, that look even worse. Probably the demonically reversed eye tones.
   57. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:28 AM (#4333468)
I guess I was never familiar with "batting practice caps" before, so I thought this was an addition to the actual uniform repertoire. Until now the BP caps have just been ordinary caps slightly modified to look trendy, right? The new ones having old-timey logos all over them and weird experimentation with contrasting colors are a new development.
   58. Robert in Manhattan Beach Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:38 AM (#4333474)


So if somebody white casually uses the word N*gg*r to refer to black people, other white people are not allowed to be offended?

If somebody rails against the Kikes running hollywood, gentiles need not mind it?

If somebody says the problem is that the damn spics refuse to learn English, anglos can take the day off?

If somebody tells racist jokes, we are obliged to put up with it, because we are not the ones being denigrated?


If you like. They're just words spoken by ignorant people, we all know it's not cool. If you want to chase down everyone who dares speak and un-PC word, go for it. I've got stuff to do, we've gotten past the point in this society where stuff like that actually makes any real difference. Whether or not we hold Michael Richards or that kid the Jays traded to the Mets or whomever's feet to the fire makes no real difference in anyone's life. It's just folks with too much time on their hands getting to feel self righteous.
   59. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: December 28, 2012 at 03:31 AM (#4333478)
I've got stuff to do,...
Which obviously includes posting in a thread where no one seems to be getting all that upset, and the tone, other than yours, seems remarkably unself righteous.

It's just folks with too much time on their hands getting to feel self righteous.
Hilarious.


Note: I never, ever, thought he was screaming, always laughing.
Likewise, and it struck me as odd. I can see a mascot being fierce, or stern, or concentrating like the Dickens, or looking tough and superior, but, laughing his head off? What was that about?
   60. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: December 28, 2012 at 07:24 AM (#4333498)
Whether or not we hold Michael Richards or that kid the Jays traded to the Mets or whomever's feet to the fire makes no real difference in anyone's life. It's just folks with too much time on their hands getting to feel self righteous.


I agree. This has to be the most easily offended generation that ever walked the Earth.
   61. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 28, 2012 at 08:45 AM (#4333519)
AFAIC the best way to re-position the Washington Redskins would be to change their name to the Rednecks. Real rednecks would embrace the name, Native Americans would be off their backs, blacks and irony-loving liberals of all races would appreciate the humor, conservatives couldn't complain on anti-PC grounds, and the team wouldn't even have to change its marching tune. I've yet to hear any real objection to this idea from anyone other than traditionalists who want to keep the name as it is.
   62. Lassus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:09 AM (#4333528)
Whether or not we hold Michael Richards or that kid the Jays traded to the Mets or whomever's feet to the fire makes no real difference in anyone's life. It's just folks with too much time on their hands getting to feel self righteous.

The amount of thought I gave to Richards and the Jays kid was nil. The amount of thought I give to a national baseball franchise is, shockingly, not nil. Your comparison makes no sense.

BTW, the idea that people are "offended" oh lord, and fanning themselves is silly. It irritates me, and strikes me as stupid and making lives more difficult. The idea that trying to curtail that is worthy of animus because... well, I don't know the because. Because it forces you to think even remotely of others? Whatever.
   63. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:17 AM (#4333531)
Yeah, teaching people not to be jackasses isn't about "offense", it's about teaching people to be excellent to each other. Basic human decency.

We take a few seconds out of our day to say, "hey Noah Syndergaard, don't be a jackass", or "hey Washington Football Club, don't be jackasses". (The effect works more quickly on individuals than corporations.) People like Robert get far more worked up about these issues than anyone else.
   64. RMc is a fine piece of cheese Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:23 AM (#4333534)
Fun fact: the Redskins got their nickname from the fact they originally played in Boston, then home of the Braves.
   65. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:51 AM (#4333546)
That logo was all over the place when I was a kid in the early 80s.

Oddly enough, the 'Yo Is This Racist' podcast (summary: eh) was playing in the background as I saw this and the guest made a point that I think gets at Robert's/Ty's concern. Paraphrasing and tweaking: As soon as you signal yourself as someone who's thoughtful / willing to talk about / etc... these issues, you can then be pegged as someone who has to think about these things in a very specific way and be vigilant about it - which is odd, as it's not thoughtfulness that's the core problem, it's ignorance and/or a lack of basic human consideration.
   66. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:52 AM (#4333547)
We lied, cheated, swindled, and slaughtered you, stole your land and way of life, and herded you into "homelands," but hey -- at least we have the decency to take offense to our games being cluttered with your images.
   67. Long Time Listener, First Time Caller Posted: December 28, 2012 at 09:54 AM (#4333548)
#60: It's also by far the least racist generation--both institutionally and casually. And frankly, those two things almost certainly have everything to do with one another. I think I'll take that tradeoff, personally. I'm not white btw, so evidently I'm allowed to have that opinion? Can I get a ruling, Robert in Manhattan?

I mean, just personally, if the worst direct side effect of people en masse recognizing the damages of tacit and overt institutional racism is that people get a little upset when they see a caricature of Native Americans whose name is a joke at the expense of how "weird" American Indian names are....well--that seems like the thing that's not particularly worth getting upset about. Not the quote/unquote attack on a vestige of the days when it was both okay to make jokes at the expense of others and also not hire others or let them date your daughter.
   68. depletion Posted: December 28, 2012 at 10:04 AM (#4333553)
The following year the club moved to Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox, whereupon owners changed the team's name to the Boston Redskins.

From sportscyclopedia.com:
1933: Now led by Lone Star Dietz, a Native American Coach, the team moves to Fenway Park. With the move the team also undergoes a name change becoming the Boston Redskins. The Redskins would alternate wins and losses all season and would finish with a 5-5-2 record.

Lone Star Dietz(half German, half Sioux) was a teammate of Jim Thorpe at Carlisle. Wikipaedia indicates that the name Redskins was chosen by George Preston Marshall to magnify the PR of the hire of Dietz, thought of as a star coach.

The Redksins won a law suit against them claiming that their trademarked name was an offensive word. I think they should keep the respectful logo and change their name to the Potomacs or some similar local Native American term.
   69. Nasty Nate Posted: December 28, 2012 at 11:17 AM (#4333591)
I agree. This has to be the most easily offended generation that ever walked the Earth.


Really? I would guess that in past generations actual violence and wars were started by verbal offenses and perceived slights between groups. And even now in other countries, wasn't there recently actual violence because of that movie making fun of Mohammed?

But you think a few people trying peacefully to get a logo changed is the most easily offended group of all time? Get a grip
   70. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: December 28, 2012 at 11:32 AM (#4333606)
"These people are too easily offended" usually means "I can imagine these people being offended by something I might say".
   71. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 11:37 AM (#4333612)
AFAIC the best way to re-position the Washington Redskins would be to change their name to the Rednecks. Real rednecks would embrace the name, Native Americans would be off their backs, blacks and irony-loving liberals of all races would appreciate the humor, conservatives couldn't complain on anti-PC grounds, and the team wouldn't even have to change its marching tune. I've yet to hear any real objection to this idea from anyone other than traditionalists who want to keep the name as it is.


Count me as a vote in favor. I might even watch a football game if the Rednecks were playing.
   72. thetailor Posted: December 28, 2012 at 11:52 AM (#4333627)
So if somebody white casually uses the word N*gg*r to refer to black people, other white people are not allowed to be offended?

I think you know that nobody is saying that. I believe that it is just a question of a) what kind of characterizations are being made (e.g. nobody really knows what this Indian is supposed to depict) and b) what you think of your own place in society (e.g. whether you feel like it is your responsibility to be vigilant on behalf of/along side of those who may be being discriminated against).
   73. The District Attorney Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:08 PM (#4333641)
whether you feel like it is your responsibility to be vigilant on behalf of/along side of those who may be being discriminated against
Is the implication here that one shouldn't feel that way?
   74. TerpNats Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:19 PM (#4333651)
The Redksins won a lawsuit against them claiming that their trademarked name was an offensive word. I think they should keep the respectful logo and change their name to the Potomacs or some similar local Native American term.
If the team returned to the RFK site at a domed stadium a la what Jerry Jones has in Arlington, Texas (reportedly one of Snyder's long-term goals), the team could be renamed the Anacostias after the river running near the stadium (as long as Marion Barry isn't named team mascot, he said sarcastically). According to Wikipedia, the name "Anacostia" comes from the anglicized name of a Nacochtank Native American settlement along the Anacostia River. Moreover, in honor of this, Anacostia High School's athletic teams are called "Indians."

Oh, and as for the Braves' batting practice cap, how about using the Indian head profile worn on the sleeve during their final few years in Boston and first few years in Milwaukee? Far less offensive.
   75. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:45 PM (#4333670)
When did the Redskins play in Milwaukee? :-)


They last played in Milwaukee in 1988 at County Stadium.

The Redskins have played the Packers in Milwaukee a handful of times over the years, some at State Fair Park.
   76. I Fought Vance Law and Vance Law Won Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:06 PM (#4333682)
Change the team name to the Bravos, cash in on all the new merchandise everybody will buy, and go get a left fielder.
   77. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:22 PM (#4333696)
Yeah, teaching people not to be jackasses isn't about "offense", it's about teaching people to be excellent to each other. Basic human decency.

We take a few seconds out of our day to say, "hey Noah Syndergaard, don't be a jackass", or "hey Washington Football Club, don't be jackasses".

Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality. It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech are any less bigoted or know how to behave any better than people who either do not criticize such speech or even those who engage in such speech. All these "teachers" are doing is "teaching" other people to be more like themselves.....and that's usually not any better.
   78. Bitter Mouse Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:31 PM (#4333706)
Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality. It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech are any less bigoted or know how to behave any better than people who either do not criticize such speech or even those who engage in such speech.


If by higher morality you mean don't be disrespectful of other people, take their feelings into account, don't be a jackass regarding racial stereotypes and such then yeah in this instance the teacher does have moral high ground over the "Washington Football Team" and others.
   79. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 28, 2012 at 01:49 PM (#4333720)
The Redskins have played the Packers in Milwaukee a handful of times over the years, some at State Fair Park.

The first game in "modern" (division era) NFL history was the Boston Redskins at Green Bay in 1933, which was also the first game in Redskins history. And as you correctly say, they also played in Milwaukee several times over the years.
   80. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:15 PM (#4333736)
Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality. It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech are any less bigoted or know how to behave any better than people who either do not criticize such speech or even those who engage in such speech. All these "teachers" are doing is "teaching" other people to be more like themselves.....and that's usually not any better.

Can you provide an example? (not a gotcha -- I'm genuinely curious)
   81. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:21 PM (#4333739)
You boys are going to totally #### your pants over the Opening Day Smallpox Infected Blanket giveaway.
   82. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:39 PM (#4333753)

Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality.


No, it just means that you have to recognize when somebody is doing something wrong. It doesn't take any 'higher morality' to do that (fortunately).

It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech


The use of "non politically-correct" here is a dead giveaway because it's never applied to socially-disapproved-of language that conservatives don't like.
   83. Lassus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:53 PM (#4333759)
It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech

What the hell does this even mean? Say, "chink"? If I criticize or try and correct my teenage niece if I hear this, I'm some kind of... what?
   84. DA Baracus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 02:56 PM (#4333760)
You boys are going to totally #### your pants over the Opening Day Smallpox Infected Blanket giveaway.


Scout's Alley has been renamed Trail of Tears. (They're greasy tears.)
   85. There are no words... (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 03:38 PM (#4333789)
You boys are going to totally #### your pants over the Opening Day Smallpox Infected Blanket giveaway.

Scout's Alley has been renamed Trail of Tears. (They're greasy tears.)


Like former Washington NFL Team coach Earl "Greasy" Neale? See how I brought that full circle?
   86. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: December 28, 2012 at 03:56 PM (#4333807)
Like former Washington NFL Team coach Earl "Greasy" Neale? See how I brought that full circle?

Too bad that Neale coached Washington & Jefferson college and the Philadelphia Eagles, but not the Washington Redskins. But it's close enough for BTF horseshoes.
   87. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: December 28, 2012 at 04:03 PM (#4333814)
I'm strongly against racism and hate. What I'm tired of is the most offended about some particular thing deciding I have to be as offended as they are or else I'm an insensitive jerk. What happened to the Native Americans is a travesty. The hat? Not so much. I respect your right to consider it terribly offensive, but you must also understand the hat is in the "gray area" where reasonable people may reach different conclusions. Figure of speech, btw. I hope I don't have to issue a mea culpa to gray people now.
   88. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: December 28, 2012 at 04:13 PM (#4333822)
BTW, the idea that people are "offended" oh lord, and fanning themselves is silly. It irritates me, and strikes me as stupid and making lives more difficult. The idea that trying to curtail that is worthy of animus because... well, I don't know the because. Because it forces you to think even remotely of others? Whatever.


Maybe "whiny" is a better word for it. No harm in being offended about, you know, really important stuff. For people to contend this hat is prima facie an act of horrible racism on the part of the Atlanta Braves organization is rather ridiculous.
   89. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: December 28, 2012 at 04:19 PM (#4333826)
But you think a few people trying peacefully to get a logo changed is the most easily offended group of all time? Get a grip


I don't think this generation is the most easily offended because of the Braves cap, so you can go grip yourself. It's a much broader statement I'm making, obviously. But this isn't a bad example of people getting their panties in a wad over something relatively trivial - even if it were offensive, which is certainly debatable.
   90. jack the seal clubber (on the sidelines of life) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 04:45 PM (#4333842)
I'm strongly against racism and hate. What I'm tired of is the most offended about some particular thing deciding I have to be as offended as they are or else I'm an insensitive jerk. What happened to the Native Americans is a travesty. The hat? Not so much. I respect your right to consider it terribly offensive, but you must also understand the hat is in the "gray area" where reasonable people may reach different conclusions. Figure of speech, btw. I hope I don't have to issue a mea culpa to gray people now.


As a spokesperson for the AGPA (American Gray People Association) I demand an immediate apology. Your blatant racism and anti-gray comments have no place in a civilized society. You are history's greatest monster. There are many other posters here who also need to make public apologies and go through a mandatory six month sensitivity training course for their vicious and disempowering comments, particularly Sam and his insensitive although funny Smallpox Blanket Giveaway comment.
   91. DA Baracus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 04:54 PM (#4333845)
Like former Washington NFL Team coach Earl "Greasy" Neale? See how I brought that full circle?


You just erroneously told an Eagles fan that Greasy Neale coached a rival team. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

   92. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 28, 2012 at 05:11 PM (#4333852)
Scout's Alley has been renamed Trail of Tears.


I'm excited to see the "How Fast Can You Pitch" boot under the grandstands turned into the new "Scalpin' Station." That should be fun for all the kids.
   93. DA Baracus Posted: December 28, 2012 at 05:54 PM (#4333872)
I'm excited to see the "How Fast Can You Pitch" boot under the grandstands turned into the new "Scalpin' Station." That should be fun for all the kids.


A friend of my gf's did that. He neglected to tell them he had recently been drafted. He threw 93.
   94. Poster Nutbag Posted: December 28, 2012 at 06:27 PM (#4333889)

As a spokesperson for the AGPA (American Gray People Association) I demand an immediate apology. Your blatant racism and anti-gray comments have no place in a civilized society. You are history's greatest monster. There are many other posters here who also need to make public apologies and go through a mandatory six month sensitivity training course for their vicious and disempowering comments, particularly Sam and his insensitive although funny Smallpox Blanket Giveaway comment.


Thank you....I was wondering when our voice would be heard!
   95. Greg K Posted: December 28, 2012 at 06:38 PM (#4333894)

I agree. This has to be the most easily offended generation that ever walked the Earth.

Not sure how we're measuring, and it's restricting it to a class, but 17th century French nobility seemed pretty easily offended judging by how many duels they fought.
   96. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: December 28, 2012 at 06:52 PM (#4333903)
If by higher morality you mean don't be disrespectful of other people, take their feelings into account, don't be a jackass regarding racial stereotypes and such then yeah in this instance the teacher does have moral high ground over the "Washington Football Team" and others.

OK I'll put this even more bluntly so you can understand. If I do not respect your opinion on what is or is not "disrespectful of other people" or being a "jackass regarding racial stereotypes", then you look like a dense hypocrite to me when you pretend that you actually know anything about that topic, and I do not care to be "taught" anything by you, and I also find it irritating when you try to "teach" in a public forum. Basically, unless you have some track record of fighting for an unpopular cause in the realm of "respecting other people", you have no credibility to teach anyone anything on this topic. Anything you say is just some guy on the street voicing an opinion which should be ignored as a default response.

Teaching people how to behave presumes that the "teacher" knows how to behave and has some higher morality.
No, it just means that you have to recognize when somebody is doing something wrong. It doesn't take any 'higher morality' to do that (fortunately).

It means that you presume to know what is right or wrong, and that other people should care about your opinion. Nobody who doesn't already respect you has any reason to care about your opinion on this matter.

It has not been my experience that people who criticize non-politically correct speech
The use of "non politically-correct" here is a dead giveaway because it's never applied to socially-disapproved-of language that conservatives don't like

I have no idea what this refers to, but what I meant by "non-politically correct" is words and images that were not disapproved of at one time and then subsequently became disapproved of. The meaning of the words and images has not changed, rather only how popular it makes the purveyor of the words and images has changed. I have no idea what you mean by "conservatives", and at this point, don't particularly care.
   97. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: December 28, 2012 at 07:40 PM (#4333923)

It means that you presume to know what is right or wrong


So you are saying there is no such thing as right or wrong, it's all just opinion and relative?

Nobody who doesn't already respect you has any reason to care about your opinion on this matter.


And yet you seem to care about people's opinions here quite a lot.

The meaning of the words and images has not changed,


The meaning of words and images changes all the time. Look at the swastika. But in fact what has changed in a lot of these disputes is not the meaning of words and images (there was no time in the past when 'redskins' was not an offensive term), but the social and political power of those whom the words and images were directed against. In the past, insulting other groups was so de rigeur people often did it without thinking about it, now we are much more aware of the effects on other people, and respectful of their feelings on the matter.
   98. Bourbon Samurai Posted: December 28, 2012 at 07:41 PM (#4333925)
As a lifelong Redskins fan who is married to a woman who is 1/4 blackfoot, I struggle with this one. She, for her part, does not give a #### and is wearing a Redskins fleece right now.

I guess I get what the "this is a horrible racist name" people are saying, but I have yet to meet an American Indian who actually cares.
   99. Joe Bivens, Minor Genius Posted: December 28, 2012 at 08:29 PM (#4333956)
You people have it wrong. The "screaming savage" is obviously Sam H.
   100. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: December 28, 2012 at 08:36 PM (#4333959)
I guess I get what the "this is a horrible racist name" people are saying, but I have yet to meet an American Indian who actually cares.


To busy making a spicy curry, I suppose.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
rr
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(5 - 2:47pm, Oct 24)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(37 - 2:47pm, Oct 24)
Last: McCoy

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(17 - 2:46pm, Oct 24)
Last: Jeltzandini

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3640 - 2:46pm, Oct 24)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogWall Street didn't kill sabermetrics - Beyond the Box Score
(5 - 2:36pm, Oct 24)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(39 - 2:28pm, Oct 24)
Last: Kiko Sakata

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(58 - 2:21pm, Oct 24)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogBeaneball | Gold Gloves and Coco Crisp's Terrible 2014 Defense
(1 - 2:19pm, Oct 24)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogGleeman: Royals may bench Norichika Aoki for Game 3
(24 - 2:10pm, Oct 24)
Last: Roger McDowell spit on me!

NewsblogHow top World Series players ranked as prospects. | SportsonEarth.com : Jim Callis Article
(7 - 2:07pm, Oct 24)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(914 - 1:52pm, Oct 24)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogPittsburgh Pirates prospect Tyler Glasnow captures Starting Pitcher MiLBY Award | MiLB.com
(1 - 1:33pm, Oct 24)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(13 - 1:11pm, Oct 24)
Last: bfan

NewsblogKen Rosenthal on Twitter: Rays’ Friedman going to Dodgers. Colletti remaining as senior advisor.
(93 - 12:32pm, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-24-2014
(3 - 12:30pm, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

Page rendered in 0.8939 seconds
53 querie(s) executed