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

Wednesday, July 09, 2014

San Francisco Giants considering ban on culturally insensitive attire

The proposed policy, which is still in the working stages, could potentially say that fans who wear culturally insensitive attire to games or use culturally insensitive language could be asked to stop by Giants security or potentially be asked to leave the stadium.

Staci Slaughter, Giants senior vice president, communications, and senior advisor to the CEO, said the Giants have policies about obscene language and offensive signs.

“We are considering expanding the policy to be more explicit about culturally insensitive signs and articles of clothing,” she told USA TODAY Sports
“I don’t want to overstate where we are,” she added. “We haven’t finalized the language. We are still in the process of revising it.”

The proposed policy comes after an incident at a Giants game last month when two Native Americans approached a group of men who were passing around a fake headdress to tell them it was disrespectful. One of the Native Americans asked for the headdress and then declined to return it. Security was called and the Native Americans were detained but not arrested. The incident occurred on Native American Heritage Night…

“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 11:58 AM | 114 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: giants, insensitivity, native americans

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. boteman is not here 'til October Posted: July 09, 2014 at 03:58 PM (#4747193)
It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore


And yet http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381707/?ref_=fn_nm_nm_2a

I see we still have a long way to go, Jacki.

My culture doesn't wear clothes. Will the Giants policy protect me from the repressive recent law imposed by the City of San Francisco?
   2. Gold Star - just Gold Star Posted: July 09, 2014 at 03:58 PM (#4747195)
“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry.
(shelves idea for Al Jolson Bobblehead Night)
   3. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:12 PM (#4747222)
Staci Slaughter, Giants senior vice president, communications, and senior advisor to the CEO, said the Giants have policies about obscene language and offensive signs.


Also her father was the master of the Bootcamp Match.
   4. PreservedFish Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:16 PM (#4747227)
Some fans of sports teams with Indian-themed names have long attended games wearing feathers and war paint.

“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”


War paint and redface are not exactly the same thing, are they?
   5. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:19 PM (#4747232)
What if a Native American happens to decide that he wants to go to the game wearing his headdress? Is he going to be required to carry identification on his person certifying himself as being authentically Native American?

What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?
   6. smileyy Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:21 PM (#4747237)
[4] They're pretty much the same thing.
   7. smileyy Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:25 PM (#4747247)
And when are they going to have White History Month?
   8. tfbg9 Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:27 PM (#4747251)
“It is not acceptable for anyone to wear blackface anymore,” said Jacqueline Keeler, a founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry. “So why is it acceptable for fans to come to stadiums dressed in redface? The clowning of our culture must stop.”


If you ask me, this Jacqueline Keeler lady oughta get out of the Native American anti-defamation business, and into the animal rights racket. Why, you ask?

Well, because then she could call herself Jacqueline "Free Willy" Keeler.

/runs away
   9. JE (Jason) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:29 PM (#4747258)
What if a Native American happens to decide that he wants to go to the game wearing his headdress? Is he going to be required to carry identification on his person certifying himself as being authentically Native American?

What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?

Let's invite Elizabeth Warren to a Giants game and find out.
   10. PASTE Thinks This Trout Kid Might Be OK (Zeth) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:30 PM (#4747259)
And when are they going to have White History Month?


Silly, every month is White History Month. Didn't you pay attention in high school history class, where every day was a new opportunity to learn more about the exploits of privileged white males through the ages?
   11. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: July 09, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4747325)
Let's invite Elizabeth Warren to a Giants game and find out.

I thought the criterion was "half Native American," not "zero Native American."
   12. kthejoker Posted: July 09, 2014 at 05:30 PM (#4747378)
My father in law has a series of "Kid's US History in Pictures" from the 60s, I flipped through the one about 1880-1900 the other day and literally the entire book was about white politicians and businessmen. There was a grand total of one page dedicated to the Native American wars (and I believe it used the term "war whoops"), and one paragraph (!) dedicated to culture - a blurby list of novels of the time, including Huck Finn and The Wizard of Oz.

It was like a primer for white hegemony. Very ... telling.
   13. Srul Itza Posted: July 09, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4747459)
Let's invite Elizabeth Warren to a Giants game and find out.


Yeah, Jason never injects politics into other threads . . .
   14. cardsfanboy Posted: July 09, 2014 at 06:51 PM (#4747499)
And when are they going to have White History Month?


January, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December are all white history month...

   15. JE (Jason) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 06:57 PM (#4747509)
Yeah, Jason never injects politics into other threads . . .

Get a grip, Srul. It was humor injected into a borderline politics thread.
   16. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: July 09, 2014 at 06:58 PM (#4747514)
There goes Lehderhosen night!
   17. BDC Posted: July 09, 2014 at 07:24 PM (#4747533)
What about a guy who's half Native American and half evil white man? Will he be permitted to don the headdress, forbidden, or only allowed half a headdress?

Your comment is all in good fun, I understand, but this is an important issue at powwows. Non-Indians should stand at given times, show respect, sometimes give money as appropriate, but being "on the drum" (singing and playing for dances) or dancing itself is not something they should just get up and do, however well-intentioned (let alone as a kind of wacky party stunt). By that token, "Half Native American" would almost always be more than OK for participation. Blood quantum is a very real legal and cultural issue, as is demonstrated participation and commitment in a culture. It can be a relatively small quantum, but if it is, then a person's cultural participation, residence in a community, and other factors can determine identity.

I can pretty much guarantee that someone with 50% Indian ancestry showing up for Native American Night would be allowed to decide exactly how s/he would like to dress and participate.
   18. McCoy Posted: July 09, 2014 at 08:13 PM (#4747574)
What if they're 7/8th caucasian?
   19. haven Posted: July 09, 2014 at 08:28 PM (#4747585)
Silly, every month is White History Month.


this was going to be my response
   20. PreservedFish Posted: July 09, 2014 at 08:35 PM (#4747591)
Except for August. Nobody thinks about history during August.
   21. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 10:13 PM (#4747643)
If only Max Planck or Lord Rutherford had done something with a peanut.
   22. Rennie's Tenet Posted: July 09, 2014 at 10:31 PM (#4747649)
shelves idea for Al Jolson Bobblehead Night)


I was looking through Robert Creamer's biography of Ruth, and was surprised to see that Jolson was also a St Mary's inmate for a time.

   23. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 09, 2014 at 10:36 PM (#4747651)
Yeah, Jason never injects politics into other threads . . .


Get a grip, Srul. It was humor injected into a borderline politics thread.

I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

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

Silly, every month is White History Month.

That reminds me of the classic National Lampoon Ivory Magazine parody of Ebony, which reviewed Kate Smith in the movie "Lady Sings The Scales", and had a feature story about Congress with a picture labeled "Your White Caucus At Work". Of course the picture was of the entire Congress, which at the time was about 97% white.
   24. JE (Jason) Posted: July 09, 2014 at 11:38 PM (#4747668)
I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

I don't mind the occasional snide political jab, Andy, but you may recall what I kvetched about several weeks back involved someone here -- a dude who I don't think has ever participated in OTP -- hijacking another perfectly fine baseball thread discussing, you know, baseball with a fairly long political rant, this time about Fox News.
   25. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: July 10, 2014 at 01:18 AM (#4747701)
So that "F*ck the Dodgers" t-shirt I bought outside the park isn't allowed anymore?
   26. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 10, 2014 at 01:18 AM (#4747702)
Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.
   27. G.W.O. Posted: July 10, 2014 at 03:12 AM (#4747719)
#26 the key difference - the sleeping fan lawsuit actually exists, rather than being a bombastic stunt.
   28. Swedish Chef Posted: July 10, 2014 at 03:32 AM (#4747721)
I see loads of potential for fun here, if they try to enforce it against the Indians.
   29. BrianBrianson Posted: July 10, 2014 at 04:29 AM (#4747725)
I see more potential fun, when the Golden State Warriors show up for a team outing and demand all the baseball players wear uniforms without terms insensitive to their differently-ableness.
   30. Bhaakon Posted: July 10, 2014 at 06:57 AM (#4747730)
I see loads of potential for fun here, if they try to enforce it against the Indians.


Like if a Native American shows up in Dockers and a polo shirt?
   31. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 10, 2014 at 07:13 AM (#4747733)
I agree, Jason, but just remember that the next time someone starts whining when someone else does the same thing. We've got an excess of solemnistas around here sometimes, and it isn't always just Brown Diaper Baby Joey.

I don't mind the occasional snide political jab, Andy, but you may recall what I kvetched about several weeks back involved someone here -- a dude who I don't think has ever participated in OTP -- hijacking another perfectly fine baseball thread discussing, you know, baseball with a fairly long political rant, this time about Fox News.


I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

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

Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.

Well, I suppose if you take Boehner's lawsuit seriously, you might not see the humor in the parallel. But then since everything about Obama is deadly "serious" to the Solemnistas, I can see why a throwaway line like that might not amuse you. I'd suggest reading Tom The Dancing Bug for a few weeks as part of your rest cure.
   32. Lassus Posted: July 10, 2014 at 08:02 AM (#4747742)
I find the word "mascotry" offensive.
   33. villageidiom Posted: July 10, 2014 at 08:42 AM (#4747754)
A bunch of people wearing "Giants" shirts could be considered culturally insensitive to short people.
   34. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 10, 2014 at 08:47 AM (#4747757)
A bunch of people wearing "Giants" shirts could be considered culturally insensitive to short people.


Forget about the twerps, a hyperactive pituitary is a medical condition, not a mascot!
   35. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 10, 2014 at 09:20 AM (#4747772)
A bunch of people wearing "Giants" shirts could be considered culturally insensitive to short people.

Especially if this guy wuz wearing it.
   36. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 10, 2014 at 09:28 AM (#4747779)
[4] They're pretty much the same thing.

I don't think so. Wearing warpaint and a headdress is more like Vikings fans wearing horned helmets.

You're celebrating the martial valour of the Indians, and linking your team to that valour. Self-identifying with positive attributes of a group is not demeaning.
   37. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: July 10, 2014 at 09:38 AM (#4747791)
Aren't those "panda hats" I sometimes see fans at Giants games wearing culturally insensitive to the Chinese, and perhaps even to pandas themselves? Don't these monsters know that the Giant Panda is a seriously endangered species and not to be made light of?

Your comment is all in good fun

It is in good fun, but this story is just more evidence (as if we needed any) of how completely insane San Francisco leftists and Moursundian red diaper babies in general have become.
   38. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: July 10, 2014 at 10:06 AM (#4747817)
As a private entity, the Giants can impose whatever restrictions on the attire of their customer base that they want. Philosophically, this is no different than a "No shoes, no shirt - no service" policy.

In practice, it could be a good thing or a bad one, depending on the way in which it is enforced.
   39. JE (Jason) Posted: July 10, 2014 at 10:45 AM (#4747848)
I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

Fair enough. Now what would it take for Jim to authorize a monthly Game of Thrones thread...?
   40. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 10, 2014 at 10:50 AM (#4747853)
Your comment is all in good fun


It is in good fun, but this story is just more evidence (as if we needed any) of how completely insane San Francisco leftists and Moursundian red diaper babies in general have become.

Well, never mind that on this issue I part company with whichever San Francisco leftists may be raising a stink, but I have to feel flattered that I've apparently joined Gonfalon on your Brown Diaper Doper enemies list. If only I could monetize such an honor, I'd offer you a kickback.
   41. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 10, 2014 at 10:55 AM (#4747856)
I agree with your complaint in cases like that, but the truth is that all these threads are fluid, and morph from one topic to another. For every political "hijacking", there are a dozen hijacks into other topics that have no connection whatever to baseball. But for whatever reason, it only seems to offend certain people when someone like you or I throw in a one liner with no real intent to steer the topic astray. Personally I don't take those complaints seriously, because they're so full of their own pomposity that they kind of collapse of their own weight.

Fair enough. Now what would it take for Jim to authorize a monthly Game of Thrones thread...?


I'd settle for a monthly thread on the moral and intellectual superiority of nine ball to soccer, and maybe another one on the many virtues of black & white movies from the pre-code and noir eras over the mindless special effects we get in today's Hollywood blockbuster trash. (smiles and ducks)
   42. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 10, 2014 at 11:37 AM (#4747902)
Fair enough. Now what would it take for Jim to authorize a monthly Game of Thrones thread...?


Hijack unrelated baseball threads until people start complaining to Jim.
   43. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 10, 2014 at 12:03 PM (#4747937)
Fat chance of getting a GoT thread between seasons. You'd have a better chance of getting the show-runners to dedicate an entire episode to Podricks magical penis.
   44. PreservedFish Posted: July 10, 2014 at 12:12 PM (#4747945)
Hijack unrelated baseball threads until people start complaining to Jim.


Please don't. Hijack the politics thread.
   45. BDC Posted: July 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM (#4747947)
What if they're 7/8th caucasian?

That would mean a single great-grandparent from a given tribe, the rest of one's great-grandparents being of white or indeed any number of different ethnicities, including other Indian groups. That's not at all unusual for tribal membership and/or cultural participation.
   46. valuearbitrageur Posted: July 10, 2014 at 12:51 PM (#4747973)
I can't wear my Braves attire to Giants games anymore?

cool.
   47. Bitter Mouse Posted: July 10, 2014 at 12:57 PM (#4747981)
Please don't. Hijack the politics thread.


There have been a couple GoT hijacks in OT-P. It is a nice respite every once in a while (and I don't like GoT, old school since the books first started coming out).
   48. smileyy Posted: July 10, 2014 at 03:58 PM (#4748152)
Silly, every month is White History Month.


I could have stood to be more obvious in my sarcasm. [5] sounded a little too much as coming from a dickish place of privilege for me. "Well, you can make me be nice, but I'm sure going to be an ####### about it..."
   49. smileyy Posted: July 10, 2014 at 04:04 PM (#4748164)
I don't think so. Wearing warpaint and a headdress is more like Vikings fans wearing horned helmets.

You're celebrating the martial valour of the Indians, and linking your team to that valour. Self-identifying with positive attributes of a group is not demeaning.


It may be a little different in that Vikings have never really been demonized, backstabbed, displaced and nearly genocided in this country.

I guess that's the benefit, though -- once you kick a people off their land, you can co-opt all that culture they left behind.
   50. The Yankee Clapper Posted: July 10, 2014 at 04:28 PM (#4748196)
Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's case against Obama. The big problem may be that he is under the impression that inserting (smile) makes his post funny.

Well, I suppose if you take Boehner's lawsuit seriously, you might not see the humor in the parallel. But then since everything about Obama is deadly "serious" to the Solemnistas, I can see why a throwaway line like that might not amuse you. I'd suggest reading Tom The Dancing Bug for a few weeks as part of your rest cure.

I wasn't the one that called out Andy on the lame Boehner "joke", it was actually one of his fellow Team Blue compatriots, who noticed yet another unfunny political reference from someone who claims that he rarely does that. However, I'll be glad to give Andy a pass on any "joke" that is as subtle & humorous as JE's Elizabeth Warren jibe. It'd be a first.
   51. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 10, 2014 at 06:38 PM (#4748310)
Of course my "joke" comparing the sleeping fan's lawsuit against ESPN to John Boehner's threatened lawsuit against Obama just happens to be 100% true (they both have a 0% chance of succeeding), and the truth apparently hurts. But go on and amuse us with a few bon mots from Dennis Miller and Rush Limbaugh; I won't object.
   52. BDC Posted: July 10, 2014 at 07:25 PM (#4748339)
Andy was also recently called out for suggesting that the lawsuit by the sleeping fan was comparable to John Boehner's

I missed this. Is Boehner suing Syracuse or something?
   53. Jose Canusee Posted: July 10, 2014 at 09:33 PM (#4748450)
Didn't RTFA but am guessing that wearing "Beat LA" t-shirts is not grounds for ejection.
   54. Dale Sams Posted: July 10, 2014 at 09:47 PM (#4748457)
I don't think so. Wearing warpaint and a headdress is more like Vikings fans wearing horned helmets.

You're celebrating the martial valour of the Indians, and linking your team to that valour. Self-identifying with positive attributes of a group is not demeaning


Well, never mind that Vikings never wore those helmets.

So, positive stereotypes are all right?
   55. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:46 AM (#4748587)
ROFLMAO, a RDB actually pulled the "check your privilege" meme on me. What community college are you teaching Marxist studies at, professor?
   56. BDC Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:15 AM (#4748628)
"Viking" isn't a term of offense anywhere, AFAIK. There's a Danish rec club called Viking Atletik.

Positive stereotypes would seem to be OK, yes; otherwise every team name would be the Unique Individuals :)
   57. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:42 AM (#4748645)
"Sensitive" white American liberals share equally with "insensitive" white American "conservatives" the spoils of mistreatment of Native Americans by earlier generations of whites.

Renounce those spoils and we can talk. Until then, they're just silly hypocrites. Being more "sensitive" about Native Americans' "feelings" is never going to undo the crimes of the past.(*) People just need to accept that and move on. They look ridiculous.

(*) We must distinguish here between silly gestures toward "sensitivity" like the Giants' and forbidding flat out slurs such as the nickname of the Washington NFL franchise.
   58. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:44 AM (#4748647)
American Indians would probably be less upset about things if there were a Portland Zulu Warriors.

As I've said before:

Ditch Redskins. And stop trying to hang onto it by the fingernails.
Ditch Chief Wahoo.
FFS stop showing up at games in headdress and war paint. It's *not* honoring martial warrior prowess anymore than blackface honors musical talent. It's perpetuating the myth of 'the savage warrior'.

And what the #### is making tomahawk gestures and singing "dunnn dun dun dun dunnnn dunn dun dun dun dunnnnnn" honoring other than 1940's Westerns?
   59. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:49 AM (#4748652)
American Indians would probably be less upset about things if there were a Portland Zulu Warriors.

USC Trojans. Michigan State Spartans. Notre Dame Fighting Irish. New York Yankees. Oklahoma Sooners. Dallas Cowboys. Boston Celtics.
   60. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:55 AM (#4748660)
So you're okay with The Zulu Warriors and crowds showing up in blackface and spears and chanting "UNGAWA!!"

Of course you are Snapper.
   61. Swedish Chef Posted: July 11, 2014 at 10:55 AM (#4748661)
"Viking" isn't a term of offense anywhere, AFAIK. There's a Danish rec club called Viking Atletik.


Someone hasn't been at Lindisfarne...
   62. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:03 AM (#4748666)
So you're okay with The Zulu Warriors and crowds showing up in blackface and spears and chanting "UNGAWA!!"


I am. As a Jew I'd be even happier at a Hebrews game where people wore stick-on payot and danced the Hora in the aisles after a big homer. Just don't throw stale bagels at Whitey Ford.

Seriously, have fun, it's sport, it's frivolous by nature. If fans of other teams started showing up wearing Nazi uniforms and chanting "fire up the ovens" (or showing up to Zulu Warrior games in Klan robes carrying a noose) then they're the jerks, not the people having fun with the heritage.
   63. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:08 AM (#4748670)
I am. As a Jew I'd be even happier at a Hebrews game where people wore stick-on payot and danced the Hora in the aisles after a big homer. Just don't throw stale bagels at Whitey Ford.


And if the ushers showed up with hook noses and went around collecting coins from fans? (Special coin wins a prize!)
   64. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:08 AM (#4748671)
"Sensitive" white American liberals share equally with "insensitive" white American "conservatives" the spoils of mistreatment of Native Americans by earlier generations of whites.

Renounce those spoils and we can talk. Until then, they're just silly hypocrites. Being more "sensitive" about Native Americans' "feelings" is never going to undo the crimes of the past.(*) People just need to accept that and move on. They look ridiculous.

(*) We must distinguish here between silly gestures toward "sensitivity" like the Giants' and forbidding flat out slurs such as the nickname of the Washington NFL franchise.


Translation: As long as we agree to say "Washington Professional Football Team" instead of that Naughty Name We Mustn't Mention, we can keep pretending that racial problems are all in the obsessive imaginations of liberals and minorities.

Income gaps? It's all the fault of their culture!

Racial profiling? An understandable response to crime and terrorism!

Job discrimination against people with "black sounding" names? Stupid parents shouldn't give their kids these names!

But "Washington Redskins"? Now THAT's a real issue with no other POVs permitted, and if anyone still uses the name they're the worst kind of racists!
   65. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:11 AM (#4748673)
I am. As a Jew I'd be even happier at a Hebrews game where people wore stick-on payot and danced the Hora in the aisles after a big homer. Just don't throw stale bagels at Whitey Ford.

And if the ushers showed up with hook noses and went around collecting coins from fans? (Special coin wins a prize!)


Like anything else it can be done tastefully or not. I don't think any of the Indian-themed teams have ushers in feathered headdresses and loincloths telling customers how much wampum they need pay-um for hot dog.
   66. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:22 AM (#4748683)
I don't think any of the Indian-themed teams have ushers in feathered headdresses and loincloths telling customers how much wampum they need pay-um for hot dog.


Heh.

No, the ushers don't. But the team allows its fans to perpetuate a negative stereotype (the savage warrior). And the ushers are team employees. I just took it a step further.

Edit: I tried to find 'Mongols' as a team mascot and couldn't really come up with a definitive example. True, 'Indians' would be more natural to US teams, but it's not like the US has a huge Spartan or Trojan heritage also. Surely if there are some 900 Indian mascots, there should be a few Mongols.
   67. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:26 AM (#4748686)
But the team allows its fans to perpetuate a negative stereotype (the savage warrior).


So you're more of a Chief Wahoo kinda guy?
   68. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 11:34 AM (#4748691)
Serious question: I wonder if employees of the Indians, Braves, Redskins...are given instructions on how to respond to drunk ######## saying "How!" or "How much wampum for ticket/hot dog!"
   69. vivaelpujols Posted: July 11, 2014 at 12:05 PM (#4748712)
But the team allows its fans to perpetuate a negative stereotype (the savage warrior).


Honestly, who cares? No one actually believes Native American's currently are savage warriors (being drunks - that's another story). It's a stereotype based off of a 200 year old archetype that doesn't effect anyone anymore. It would be like making fun of Vikings for being rapists, there's no harm in the stereotype anymore because it's so distanced from reality.

I agree with SBB that it's all a facade for liberals to placate themselves (not that there's anything so noble about the rights of idiots to dress like Indians at a baseball game).
   70. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 12:54 PM (#4748750)
Honestly, who cares? No one actually believes Native American's currently are savage warriors


No, but it perpetuates the myth that they WERE savage warriors.

Who cares? I care. Because it leads to marginalization. And it leads to dismissal. Which has been my BIGGEST complaint for the...well....history of the internet.

"What's wrong with Redskins?"
"What's wrong with Squaw?"
"When did we become a nation of pussies?"



"No one actually cares (except for some butt hurt folk) that Columbus was a genocidal maniac"
"No one cares that Teddy Roosevelt said 'I wouldn't say the only good Indian is a dead Indian. But 9 out of 10? yes.'"
"No one cares what Andrew Jackson did. He's on the $20!"
   71. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:14 PM (#4748778)
So you're okay with The Zulu Warriors and crowds showing up in blackface and spears and chanting "UNGAWA!!"

Of course you are Snapper.


Blackface, no. There's a clear racist/mocking connection to that.

I see nothing inherently wrong with a team called the Zulus, or Zulu Warriors. Using paraphernalia based on real Zulu weapons or dress, or using an authentic Zulu war chant would also seem appropriate.

I don't see the problem with saying "we want our team to emulate these fierce warriors". Do you have a problem with the New Zealand All Blacks and their dances? Would a team called the "Centurions", where the fans wore Roman Legionary equipment and shouted "Vae Victis" be offensive to Italians?

Using mocking caricatures or chants is problematic. I'm not a fan of the Tomahawk chop, and I can see the objections to Chief Wahoo.
   72. PreservedFish Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:19 PM (#4748786)
No, but it perpetuates the myth that they WERE savage warriors.


Weren't they savage warriors? I mean, not all of them, but it's probably tough to find a culture that didn't have savage warriors.
   73. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:24 PM (#4748796)
Weren't they savage warriors? I mean, not all of them, but it's probably tough to find a culture that didn't have savage warriors.

Yup. American Indian warriors were rough customers; including ritual torture of captives and ritual mutilation of dead enemies.

Not that they were uniquely savage; the Romans used to punish rebellions with mass crucifixions, lined up along the main roads like telephone polls. The Mongols build pyramids of skulls to mark their victories. The Turks and Balkan peoples liked to impale captives.
   74. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:33 PM (#4748812)
Not that they were uniquely savage;


Some English kings let dead bodies hang from poles in London until they rotted away.

The Aztec would cut out the hearts of living POWs and drop them (the bodies) over the side of their temples (the hearts they apparently cooked, I take it their gods didn't like raw meat)

The various Soviet security agencies had a fondness for shooting people point blank in the back of the head (the infamous Katyn massacre wasn't a singular event/mass killing- the 20-25,000 killed were each killed individually one at a time, over a period of 2-3 months)

The Nazis...

and now we have that charming band in Syria/Iraq, ISIS

edit: The moral is, humans suck
   75. BDC Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:34 PM (#4748815)
I'll totally admit never having been to Lindisfarne. Still bad blood there 1,200 years later? I'd be skeptical except that I know Irish people to whom the battle of Clontarf was like yesterday.
   76. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:40 PM (#4748820)
Yup. American Indian warriors were rough customers; including ritual torture of captives and ritual mutilation of dead enemies.


Also depends upon the Tribe, but yes there were quite a few tribes you did not want to be falling into the hands of.


   77. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 11, 2014 at 01:40 PM (#4748822)
I agree with SBB that it's all a facade for liberals to placate themselves

Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.
   78. PreservedFish Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:03 PM (#4748856)
edit: The moral is, humans suck


My assumption with pre-modern Native Americans is that they were no better or worse than any other group of humans. They weren't all bloodthirsty savages, nor were they all peaceful environmentalist proto-hippies. And obviously it wasn't a monolithic culture. They fought each other, committed atrocities against each other, etc. Just like everyone else on Earth.
   79. JE (Jason) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:19 PM (#4748867)
"No one cares what Andrew Jackson did. He's on the $20!"

So ... when do the protests in front of the US Bureau of Engraving begin?
   80. Steve Treder Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:22 PM (#4748872)
Just like everyone else on Earth.

Why would we assume otherwise?
   81. Ray (RDP) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:28 PM (#4748875)
What a mess this thread is.
   82. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:30 PM (#4748877)
Do you have a problem with the New Zealand All Blacks and their dances?


I don't form opinions on different cultures cause It's not my place. I haven't the faintest clue on the relationships over there.

See. We're all having a civil discussion without being dismissive. And some people are coming around on the problem of dressing up and caricatured 'war chants'. That's all I ask. *I* don't have a problem with "Indians" and "Blackhawks" or "Braves". (I do with Redskins) but if someone does have a problem, I don't want to see them dismissed.

   83. McCoy Posted: July 11, 2014 at 02:37 PM (#4748887)
Edit: I tried to find 'Mongols' as a team mascot and couldn't really come up with a definitive example. True, 'Indians' would be more natural to US teams, but it's not like the US has a huge Spartan or Trojan heritage also. Surely if there are some 900 Indian mascots, there should be a few Mongols.

Look for the Golden Horde.
   84. zenbitz Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4748994)
I prefer the non-racial "Victor's History Month". Er "Months"
   85. zenbitz Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4748998)
I was actually AT this game for Native American Hertiage night. Suffice to say, the Giants got beaten like Native Americans.

I did see a guy at an SF skatepark wearing what I thought was a "Stormfront" t-shirt! That was pretty offensive. But it turns out that I just misread the font and it was a shirt for some Death Metal band like "Suffocation".
   86. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:37 PM (#4749009)
And some people are coming around on the problem of dressing up and caricatured 'war chants'.

Do you have a problem with authentic costumes and war chants?

The Florida State Seminoles name, and mascot are done with the full approval of the Seminole tribe, Do you object to that?
   87. Tulo's Fishy Mullet (mrams) Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:39 PM (#4749011)
Could you wear the old Metallica T-shirt, "Metal Up Your Ass", with the sword driving upwards through the toilet? Are local metal bands exempt? That's got to be objectionable to somebody, or is it considered culturally neutral. I love me some metal but I don't want it up my ass.
   88. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:42 PM (#4749014)
Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.

Good to see that Andy's still pulling his hair out at the shocking realization that I don't much care for racists, racism, or racial slurs.
   89. Greg K Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4749017)
I have a t-shirt with a picture of Groundskeeper Willie ripping off his shirt, under which it reads "GREASE ME UP WOMAN!"

Once or twice I've had to stop myself from wearing it to certain functions. Though to be fair that has little to do with offending Scotsmen.
   90. PreservedFish Posted: July 11, 2014 at 04:50 PM (#4749020)
There's nary an animal that can outrun a greased Scotsman.
   91. Dale Sams Posted: July 11, 2014 at 05:13 PM (#4749028)
The Florida State Seminoles name, and mascot are done with the full approval of the Seminole tribe, Do you object to that?


Not at all. Though I note the Oklahoma Seminoles have some objections, I don't really think they have much say.
   92. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: July 11, 2014 at 05:31 PM (#4749034)
On a related note, Russia has banned the use of certain swear words...
the words in question are apparently certain Russian euphemisms "Describing female and male private parts and sexual intercourse,"

what a bunch of ####### prigs.
   93. The Chronicles of Reddick Posted: July 11, 2014 at 06:14 PM (#4749062)
Greased Scotsman was a hell of a punk band in the day.
   94. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 11, 2014 at 06:35 PM (#4749077)
Except that 90% of SBB's allies on this one issue are from the group that he routinely mocks and demonizes any other time that race happens to be the topic of discussion. He poses as this big anti-racist against the Redskins name, while without skipping a beat he just as fiercely denounces anyone who ever mentions issues like racial profiling against blacks or Latinos.

Good to see that Andy's still pulling his hair out at the shocking realization that I don't much care for racists, racism, or racial slurs.


Of course you defend racial and ethnic profiling by pretending that it doesn't exist, or by demanding impossible levels of "proof" in every individual case. But never mind any of that, because you really, really protest the Redskins nickname.
   95. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: July 11, 2014 at 07:23 PM (#4749101)
Andy, I agree with you 100% about SBB, but you have a real blind spot when it comes to the Redskins name and logo.
   96. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:02 PM (#4749113)
It wouldn't bother me if they changed it, especially since I haven't been a Redskins fan since Snyder bought the team. But I doubt if there's been a single person in history who's ever used that team name in a racially derogatory manner, and I doubt if anyone, anywhere, in any context, in the past 81 years** has ever used "redskin" as an epithet in the real world.*** That's hardly the case for those other names that people try to use as analogies, like n*gg*r or Jew.

**Which was when the team acquired the nickname

***"You ####### Indian" would be the much more likely choice of insult. Using "redskin" to an Indian's face would just make the user seem more than slightly ridiculous, and about as anachronistic as calling a black person an "Ethiopian".
   97. tfbg9 Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:04 PM (#4749117)
What? Andy doesn't have a problem with "The Redskins"? Bwah-ha-ha-ha!
Umm...lemme guess. That's his favorite NFL team?
   98. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:11 PM (#4749123)
But I doubt if there's been a single person in history who's ever used that team name in a racially derogatory manner, and I doubt if anyone, anywhere, in any context, in the past 81 years** has ever used "redskin" as an epithet in the real world.***

The term is inherently racially derogatory. The fact that people are able to so blithely dismiss Native Americans from their thoughts when they use it -- or defend it -- makes the use more, not less, racist and insulting.

What? Andy doesn't have a problem with "The Redskins"? Bwah-ha-ha-ha!
Umm...lemme guess. That's his favorite NFL team?


Shocker, right?

   99. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:27 PM (#4749135)
What? Andy doesn't have a problem with "The Redskins"? Bwah-ha-ha-ha!
Umm...lemme guess. That's his favorite NFL team?


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

Shocker, right?

Yeah, shocking that the two modern philosophers making those observations don't even bother to read what they're responding to. As I noted in the immediately preceding post, the last year I rooted for the Redskins was 1998. I do like Griffin, but I wish he could be playing for the Lions or the Browns and let Mark Brunell reclaim the Deadskins quarterbacking job.
   100. Rennie's Tenet Posted: July 11, 2014 at 08:45 PM (#4749148)
The term is inherently racially derogatory


I think that calling someone a whiteskin is inherently derogatory, because it implies an increased risk of skin cancer.
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
tshipman
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCuban outfielder Rusney Castillo to sign with the Red Sox for $72 million
(40 - 1:48pm, Aug 22)
Last: Jose Can Still Seabiscuit

NewsblogOT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video
(4917 - 1:46pm, Aug 22)
Last: The Good Face

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 8-22-2014
(18 - 1:46pm, Aug 22)
Last: Misirlou's been working for the drug squad

NewsblogA Look Inside Baseball's Ever-Evolving Stimulant Culture | Bleacher Report
(25 - 1:45pm, Aug 22)
Last: Perry

NewsblogPosnanski: The Royals might actually know what they are doing
(84 - 1:44pm, Aug 22)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread August, 2014
(503 - 1:41pm, Aug 22)
Last: andrewberg

NewsblogBoswell, WaPo: For streaking Washington Nationals, runs like this don’t come around very often
(8 - 1:38pm, Aug 22)
Last: Danny

NewsblogDRays Bay: Rays to Montreal? “Smart chronicler” says yes
(5 - 1:38pm, Aug 22)
Last: DEF: #attentionwhore

Newsblog10 episodes of ‘The Simpsons’ every sports fan needs to watch
(53 - 1:31pm, Aug 22)
Last: Dog on the sidewalk

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 8-22-2014
(9 - 1:26pm, Aug 22)
Last: Dillon Gee Escape Plan

NewsblogPhillies have decisions to make heading into '15
(20 - 1:18pm, Aug 22)
Last: Jesse Barfield's Right Arm

NewsblogMegdal: Humble shortstop Marty Marion should be in Hall contention
(63 - 1:14pm, Aug 22)
Last: HowardMegdal

NewsblogDowney: Let Pete Rose in the Hall of Fame already
(48 - 1:12pm, Aug 22)
Last: Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip

NewsblogVotto appears. . .and speaks | The Real McCoy | Cincinnati Reds baseball news
(1 - 1:09pm, Aug 22)
Last: RMc's desperate, often sordid world

NewsblogAngels Acquire Gordon Beckham
(18 - 1:05pm, Aug 22)
Last: Chone Mueller

Page rendered in 0.6981 seconds
53 querie(s) executed