sad sad sad

[seneca77]

i find it so apaling how many "tool fans" find this song comedic. get fucking real man. this song and the "yell" at the end is anything but funny. if any of you guys actually listened to native music you would find this song to be an example, not a punchline.

what most of you fail to realize is that what you know of native americans was told to you by hollywood. and you took it hook, line and sinker.

grow the fuck up and learn about something for fucks sake.

[Carbonatedgravy]

I fucking knew this was coming. So a few people misunderstand a concept, not even blatantly ripping on it, so you take it upon yourself to preach to them about their immaturity and foolishness.

I like how everything is up for grabs when it comes to criticism, satire and analysis except your precious culture. Yeah, it's probably a mistake when people boldly comment on things they haven't researched and studied, and yet, somehow, when it's religion people criticize it's okay. It's even cool to hate Christians whether we know them personally or not.

I find Lipan Conjuring to be a lame track, and that has nothing to do with some opinion I have of... ahem... "Native Americans." I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

[Vulneris]

i agree carbonatedgravy, i think some of you people delve yourselves way too deep into tools music and its when you do this that you misinterpret the basic concept of tool. so what if people find this song funny, if that is what they took away from the song then that is fine, there shouldnt be all these rules on how to and how not to enjoy the tool experience....just enjoy it!!!

[mike09]

i find it so apaling how many "tool fans" find this song comedic. get fucking real man. this song and the "yell" at the end is anything but funny. if any of you guys actually listened to native music you would find this song to be an example, not a punchline.

what most of you fail to realize is that what you know of native americans was told to you by hollywood. and you took it hook, line and sinker.

grow the fuck up and learn about something for fucks sake.

Fuck off and die.

[blackandwhite]

I have a feeling that this isn't the last of these threads.

[DrummerAndrew]

I'm most annoyed by the tone of the starting post. The threads that comment on the comedic nature of this track make no rude gestures or profanity. How many posts have you read that say "This track is obviously a joke and anyone that thinks it's a serious Indian chant can Fuck Off! Quit being so damned sensitive and knowledgable."? Also, most of the knowledge, no matter how misinformed it may be, that an average american has regarding Native Americans is from school books and scholastic films, NOT from hollywood movies. What hollywood movies portay any Natives, besides Pocohontas or New World?

[blackandwhite]

uhhhh..the last of the mohicans? i don't even know if that's a movie, it's the only naitve american book i can think of besides the pearl right now

[NoD]

I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

Drinking's a culture?

[Carbonatedgravy]

Drinking's a culture?

Maybe not in and of itself, but it makes everything else that passes for culture more enjoyable.

EDIT: I should clarify that I'm an American with more Irish blood than anything else. So I have to trace my roots somewhere. It wasn't my intention to pose as a %100 pure Irishman.

[split_the_sky]

I don't think it's a lame or funny track and I really like it. But the original post is just... naive I guess. While most people are saying "oh i like it" or "I don't really like it" or "its so funny" or "its not supposed to be funny" theres always going to be one person who states that music does not flow, art is not expressive and that we should all conform, feel and appreciate music in one way that were told to. Total joke.

I wouldn't have changed the track itself in anyway but I believe I might have liked it even more if it led into a full song the way Lost Keys does, that would be cool. It could have led into The Pot which would have been good because I think it would lead into it better than 10,000 Days does. In my humble opinion.

[undeniable dilemma]

What hollywood movies portay any Natives, besides Pocohontas or New World?
- Dancing With Wolves
- Shanghai Noon
- This isn't a movie, but the television show Bonanza portrays Native Americans every once in a while.

[The Scottish Tool]

Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

I know what you mean.

[Loveboat Captain]

I have no skin, oh shit, how can I be judged?!

[M.Luther]

I find Lipan Conjuring to be a lame track, and that has nothing to do with some opinion I have of... ahem... "Native Americans." I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

I'm going to start an online review site called, "Segue review monthly".

all ill do is judge fillers on new albums and either bash or praise them. sounds fucking pointless doesn't it? ive said it before ill say it again segues cannot be judged, they are what they are.
and no your irish heritage isn't meaningless because you're white. it's meaningless because the irish are drunks.
if tool used some half drunk, chanting druid neo-pagans, would you be saying "omg this is a filler i can identify with"?
i doubt it.

[Carbonatedgravy]

I'm going to start an online review site called, "Segue review monthly".

all ill do is judge fillers on new albums and either bash or praise them. sounds fucking pointless doesn't it? ive said it before ill say it again segues cannot be judged, they are what they are.
and no your irish heritage isn't meaningless because you're white. it's meaningless because the irish are drunks.
if tool used some half drunk, chanting druid neo-pagans, would you be saying "omg this is a filler i can identify with"?
i doubt it.

You missed my point completely, and have consequently failed to make one of your own.

[martyrinexile86]

i find it so apaling how many "tool fans" find this song comedic. get fucking real man. this song and the "yell" at the end is anything but funny. if any of you guys actually listened to native music you would find this song to be an example, not a punchline.

what most of you fail to realize is that what you know of native americans was told to you by hollywood. and you took it hook, line and sinker.

grow the fuck up and learn about something for fucks sake.
Nobody has even so much as said a fucking thing to you, and you just come on here and automatically belittle people without even the slightest provocation. Get a life.

[resonance.]

I think we all need a long sloppy BJ.

[M.Luther]

You missed my point completely, and have consequently failed to make one of your own.
troll

[sound.out.light]

i find it so apaling how many "tool fans" find this song comedic. get fucking real man. this song and the "yell" at the end is anything but funny. if any of you guys actually listened to native music you would find this song to be an example, not a punchline.

what most of you fail to realize is that what you know of native americans was told to you by hollywood. and you took it hook, line and sinker.

grow the fuck up and learn about something for fucks sake.


hahahaha hey look guys. a cookie cutter tool fanboy!

[M.Luther]

?

[MisterMudd]

I fucking knew this was coming. So a few people misunderstand a concept, not even blatantly ripping on it, so you take it upon yourself to preach to them about their immaturity and foolishness.

I like how everything is up for grabs when it comes to criticism, satire and analysis except your precious culture. Yeah, it's probably a mistake when people boldly comment on things they haven't researched and studied, and yet, somehow, when it's religion people criticize it's okay. It's even cool to hate Christians whether we know them personally or not.

I find Lipan Conjuring to be a lame track, and that has nothing to do with some opinion I have of... ahem... "Native Americans." I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

I agree whole heartedly... But let me add that I hoped that in all forums, this one would have people who didn't feel the need to be "PC" or have others walk on eggshells less people get offended. I was wrong.

[Carbonatedgravy]

troll
Considering your first response to me, you know, ignoring all my points and attacking incidental stuff about my post... that's a very odd thing to say.

[M.Luther]

you made no points, you had no responses you just talked about how segues should be analyzed to the last minut detail and then played the "woe is me for being irish" routine.

[seneca77]

honestly, a lot of your replies are dead on. i was slightly intoxicated and pissed off when i made this thread. mostly the tone in the complaint is to blame. something i am guilty of when i speak as well.

the point i guess i was trying to make was native american music sounds alot like that track and if you ever get a chance to hear true native music you will see what i mean.

i will eat my humble pie and take this foot out of my mouth now.

[MisterMudd]

you made no points, you had no responses you just talked about how segues should be analyzed to the last minut detail and then played the "woe is me for being irish" routine.

I dont think it was a "woe is me" routine. The way I understood it was him saying that people are too selective with their cultural respect and sensitivity.

[Drawn Under]

I dont think it was a "woe is me" routine. The way I understood it was him saying that people are too selective with their cultural respect and sensitivity.

I must agree with MisterMud. That is on the dot, it seems people do take some cultures more serious than others sometimes because of personal interest in the culture as well as a variety of other reasons.

[M.Luther]

yea but the whole argument from people who are irish, german, italian or anything like that is so over played.
no one wants to hear some irishman chant...if we did we'd listen to U2

[MisterMudd]

yea but the whole argument from people who are irish, german, italian or anything like that is so over played.
no one wants to hear some irishman chant...if we did we'd listen to U2

I will give you one thing, the U2 comment made me literally laugh out loud.

[MisterMudd]

I must agree with MisterMud. That is on the dot, it seems people do take some cultures more serious than others sometimes because of personal interest in the culture as well as a variety of other reasons.

And there are 2 "d's" in MisterMudd... :-P

[M.Luther]

i just dont get what he's trying to say?
is he mad for some reason that indians are featured in the track?
im just lost i guess.

I find Lipan Conjuring to be a lame track, and that has nothing to do with some opinion I have of... ahem... "Native Americans." I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.

can anyone find the 2 logical fallacies in that quote?

[RiaN_the_Great]

One: like it was stated before, its very unlikely that Tool was ripping on anyone's culture.

Two: People in the other threads (where you should be bitching, not here) probably weren't ripping on your culture either, and if they were, oh well, the world is still spinning.

Three: Carlos Mencia = a very famous and rich man who rips on every culture out there, relentlessly. With him on the map like that, its clear. Every culture is fair game, get over it. Learn to laugh.

Now, to try to step in your shoes, I can understand being sensitive to criticism to your culture. I grew up in Montana, and most of the "Indians" (I reserve the term "Native Americans" for those who deserve it) are drunks. I don't mean to judge them, but its fucked up to see a once great people reduced to rock bottom and self induced waste, along with the shit they naturally catch as a long result of European invasion/American expansion.

A guy I graduated high school with was a native american. He had a lot of pride in where he came from, and always treated people with respect. He kicked ass in school, and became a marine (in this case, I honor that). At our graduation, he had an eagle feather attached to his mortarboard, and I thought that was awesome.

Hopefully that somehow explains that I don't think your culture is a joke.

[MisterMudd]

This thread reminds me of the people who call others racist because they did not like the movie "Roots".

[seneca77]

i just dont get what he's trying to say?

i was not trying to say if you dont like this track you are a bigot. i was pissed off and letting off steam. what pisses me off is that native americans are the punch line of a lot of crap. they are a race of people that are a publicly accepted mascot.

washington redskins is akin to the new york nig*ers

cleavland indians is akin to the cincinatti sambos

etc etc etc.. it gets a little old seeing the standard of respect applied to all individuals ignored when it comes to americas first founders.

a lot of the other threads that i have read are what triggered my foul response. comments about the comical nature of this track struck a raw nerve with me.

[indigo]

One: like it was stated before, its very unlikely that Tool was ripping on anyone's culture.

Two: People in the other threads (where you should be bitching, not here) probably weren't ripping on your culture either, and if they were, oh well, the world is still spinning.

Three: Carlos Mencia = a very famous and rich man who rips on every culture out there, relentlessly. With him on the map like that, its clear. Every culture is fair game, get over it. Learn to laugh.

Now, to try to step in your shoes, I can understand being sensitive to criticism to your culture. I grew up in Montana, and most of the "Indians" (I reserve the term "Native Americans" for those who deserve it) are drunks. I don't mean to judge them, but its fucked up to see a once great people reduced to rock bottom and self induced waste, along with the shit they naturally catch as a long result of European invasion/American expansion.

A guy I graduated high school with was a native american. He had a lot of pride in where he came from, and always treated people with respect. He kicked ass in school, and became a marine (in this case, I honor that). At our graduation, he had an eagle feather attached to his mortarboard, and I thought that was awesome.

Hopefully that somehow explains that I don't think your culture is a joke.

have you ever given much thought as to why they are "drunks"?? maybe it could be for the same reasons many war veterans are on anti-depressants...

[MrMcPheezy]

they are a race of people that are a publicly accepted mascot.


The Trojans.

The Pirate's mascot is white.

Wake Forest's mascot is white.

The Celtics.

The Vikings.


Seems to me like Native Americans are the only people who think they're too good to be a mascot.


stfu.

[Carbonatedgravy]

M.Luther: I have absolutely no sensitivity about being Irish. It was an example to make a point that you never have understood. I'm not going to bother explaining it to you because you're the only one who doesn't understand what I'm trying to say. You continue to flame me for it anyway like a 6th grader, probably expecting that I'll hypocritically tell you my heritage is off limits. Nice try.

seneca77: Thank you for your responses and your clarifications of your original posts. I can't be in your shoes but I can try to understand the disappointment and frustration with a lot of what has gone on in the United States, and how that has translated to misinterpretations here. I don't necessarily agree with all your points, but I can accept them.

[seneca77]

The Trojans.

The Pirate's mascot is white.

Wake Forest's mascot is white.

The Celtics.

The Vikings.


Seems to me like Native Americans are the only people who think they're too good to be a mascot.


stfu.

??? vikings, trojans, celtics, the demon deacon ???

imagine blacks, jews, germans, latinos, etc

it would never happen.

whites, yeah that happened.

http://www.cafepress.com/fightinwhite?CMP=KNC-G-EF

[MrMcPheezy]

??? vikings, trojans, celtics, the demon deacon ???

imagine blacks, jews, germans, latinos, etc

it would never happen.

whites, yeah that happened.

http://www.cafepress.com/fightinwhite?CMP=KNC-G-EF

So...when native americans are used as mascots, it's racist, but when white people are used, it's not? It's pretty rare that the same thing is done by the same person/people for different motives.

[seneca77]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites

it most certainly is publicly accepted for indians to be a cartoon like mascot. please imagine the same if you will of a "cartoon" black or jewish person. now imagine the public bi-partisan turmoil that would ensue.

[MrMcPheezy]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites

it most certainly is publicly accepted for indians to be a cartoon like mascot. please imagine the same if you will of a "cartoon" black or jewish person. now imagine the public bi-partisan turmoil that would ensue.

First off, I already know about the fighting whites. Stop linking to them.

Second off, I'm not offended by that at all.

Thirdly, have you seen wake forest's mascot? It's a cartoon fucking white person. As is the celtics. As is the raider's, and plenty others. I think it's clear that, at the very least, white people don't intend for such mascots to be racist or derogatory. I guess I can understand someone not particularly liking it...but if you're going to oppose it, then fucking oppose it regardless of the race involved. Otherwise, it makes you look like the bigot.

[RiaN_the_Great]

Get. Over. It.

[seneca77]

First off, I already know about the fighting whites. Stop linking to them.

Second off, I'm not offended by that at all.

Thirdly, have you seen wake forest's mascot? It's a cartoon fucking white person. As is the celtics. As is the raider's, and plenty others. I think it's clear that, at the very least, white people don't intend for such mascots to be racist or derogatory. I guess I can understand someone not particularly liking it...but if you're going to oppose it, then fucking oppose it regardless of the race involved. Otherwise, it makes you look like the bigot.

you should not be offended by the fighting whites. they were created to make aware the offense of racial stereotypical mascots.

comparing a "deacon", a pirate and a viking to a race of people is not a good analogy.

[MrMcPheezy]

comparing a "deacon", a pirate and a viking to a race of people is not a good analogy.

wtf? Again, the deacon is emobodied by an animation of a white person. As is the pirate. And guess what? The vikings were white, and are still often portrayed as such. You seem to be saying that it's ok to use small groups of a certain ethnicity as a mascot, but not an entire ethnicity. Mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty are mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty. Again, it just seems like Native Americans are the only group that consider themselves above this sort of thing.

[StereoScopicLenses]

Three: Carlos Mencia = a very famous and rich man who rips on every culture out there, relentlessly. With him on the map like that, its clear. Every culture is fair game, get over it. Learn to laugh.



I am going to change the subject b/c this thread is getting shitty. Do you think Carlos Mencia is funny? I heard Joe Rogan on the radio saying Carlos was a phony and his name is actually Ned. And he isn't even mexican like he claims. Supposedly he is half Honduran and half German. Any thoughts>? I don't think he is very funny. Seems like he takes other people's jokes and rehashes them. I guess comedy central just has to fill that void for latino comics on TV.

[MrMcPheezy]

I am going to change the subject b/c this thread is getting shitty. Do you think Carlos Mencia is funny? I heard Joe Rogan on the radio saying Carlos was a phony and his name is actually Ned. And he isn't even mexican like he claims. Supposedly he is half Honduran and half German. Any thoughts>? I don't think he is very funny. Seems like he takes other people's jokes and rehashes them. I guess comedy central just has to fill that void for latino comics on TV.

If you'd like to discuss carlos mencia and his comedy, start a thread for it.

[Carbonatedgravy]

First off, I already know about the fighting whites. Stop linking to them.

Second off, I'm not offended by that at all.

Thirdly, have you seen wake forest's mascot? It's a cartoon fucking white person. As is the celtics. As is the raider's, and plenty others. I think it's clear that, at the very least, white people don't intend for such mascots to be racist or derogatory. I guess I can understand someone not particularly liking it...but if you're going to oppose it, then fucking oppose it regardless of the race involved. Otherwise, it makes you look like the bigot.

For the most part I agree with this. As I see it, when something is chosen as a mascot or nickname for a sports team, it isn't to demean or belittle the subject matter, but to pay tribute to it. You wouldn't want to name a sports team after something you find stupid or unworthy. That said, such exposure could spread misunderstanding and feed off of existing inaccurate stereotypes. So I can understand the sensitivity to it. If you want to take offense to such things, that's your right and I know there's a reason for it. But just understand that if you're going to be sensitive to this, it's only fair to be sensitive to every other little misunderstanding about blacks, whites, atheists, christians, etc. Every group of people is subject to misunderstandings, assumptions and prejudices. Based on what has been said in this thread and others, that seems to often go unrecognized.

[MrMcPheezy]

For the most part I agree with this. As I see it, when something is chosen as a mascot or nickname for a sports team, it isn't to demean or belittle the subject matter, but to pay tribute to it. You wouldn't want to name a sports team after something you find stupid or unworthy. That said, such exposure could spread misunderstanding and feed off of existing inaccurate stereotypes. So I can understand the sensitivity to it. If you want to take offense to such things, that's your right and I know there's a reason for it. But just understand that if you're going to be sensitive to this, it's only fair to be sensitive to every other little misunderstanding about blacks, whites, atheists, christians, etc. Every group of people is subject to misunderstandings, assumptions and prejudices. Based on what has been said in this thread and others, that seems to often go unrecognized.

Hella agreed.

[blackandwhite]

Sorry America was founded by white people. Our bad.

[seneca77]

wtf? Again, the deacon is emobodied by an animation of a white person. As is the pirate. And guess what? The vikings were white, and are still often portrayed as such. You seem to be saying that it's ok to use small groups of a certain ethnicity as a mascot, but not an entire ethnicity. Mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty are mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty. Again, it just seems like Native Americans are the only group that consider themselves above this sort of thing.


ok you seem to be missing the point. vikings, deacons etc are not a race of people. yes they are white, but being a decon or what ever is not an ethnicity.

the clevland indians are no comparison to the minnesota vikings. atlanta braves, may be a better comparison to your argument as a brave is not an actual race.

and native americans are not the only ones to consider themselves above this crap either. americans in general would not tollerate a team name like the philly punjabs, new york nig*ers, san antonio spics, jamestown jews, or the chinatown chinks.

however, washington redskins is ok and any native who may be offended by such should shut their mouth and accept their role.

what the fuck ever.

i admit my mistake in opening this train of thougth in the manner i did. and i also recognize the general opinon of this country is the same as yours, and will not easily change.

what i do not understand is when it comes to this subject, so few have and empathetic view. not just yourself, but people all over this country. maybe someday you and others may realize that the smiling cartoon indian is as offensive as a smiling cartoon black man painted in black face -ala amos & andy.

[Carbonatedgravy]

Here's the thing about the Redskins. It is my understanding, as I've been told, (I'm not presenting this as fact) that at one time, the Native Americans referred to THEMSELVES as Redskins, I would imagine to distinguish themselves from whites, blacks, etc. If this is the case, it's not the same as ni*gers and chinks because those terms are racial slurs created from the outside and are well accepted as such. If white people came up with the term "redskins," then I agree that this is crossing the line of decency for a public team.

Onto a different point presented earlier. Were the Whiteskins an actual team name created by any group of people as a tribute to whites, I'd find it odd but not offensive in the least. In the case of the actual Whiteskins, it's just a stupid protest, which I find idiotic in the same way that I find Peta and the Parent Television Council idiotic.

[seneca77]

Here's the thing about the Redskins. It is my understanding, as I've been told, (I'm not presenting this as fact) that at one time, the Native Americans referred to THEMSELVES as Redskins, I would imagine to distinguish themselves from whites, blacks, etc. If this is the case, it's not the same as ni*gers and chinks because those terms are racial slurs created from the outside and are well accepted as such. If white people came up with the term "redskins," then I agree that this is crossing the line of decency for a public team.

Onto a different point presented earlier. Were the Whiteskins an actual team name created by any group of people as a tribute to whites, I'd find it odd but not offensive in the least. In the case of the actual Whiteskins, it's just a stupid protest, which I find idiotic in the same way that I find Peta and the Parent Television Council idiotic.

http://www.answers.com/topic/redskin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin

fyi, condensed history of the word.

edit: not sure if you meant the fighting whites or not, but they were a team created to draw attention to the use of native american mascots, which they did through basketball games and gear. the name and mascot was not created to offend but to educate.

and yeah, peta is pretty fucking stupid

[Carbonatedgravy]

The answers article was pretty much nothing more than reference to the Wikipedia one, but I visited both sites. Honestly, it doesn't look like there's enough information for me to come to a conclusion about the word one way or another. It's possible the word has racist origins, and it's possible that it has been bastardized by people who are oversensitive about its originally innocent usage.

This is not an issue I can make a good stand on because the word and its origins is so buried with mythology. It's fair to say that the word now has negative connotations which are never going to go away. But where did these negative connotations come from in the first place? Did they appear with the origin of the word, or were they tacked on by overly sensitive individuals as a means of baseless protest?

I can't say, so I won't. Both possibilities are implied. Honestly, from an objective standpoint, it probably would be best for the term Redskins to go away just for the sake of diplomacy.

[seneca77]

The answers article was pretty much nothing more than reference to the Wikipedia one, but I visited both sites. Honestly, it doesn't look like there's enough information for me to come to a conclusion about the word one way or another. It's possible the word has racist origins, and it's possible that it has been bastardized by people who are oversensitive about its originally innocent usage.

This is not an issue I can make a good stand on because the word and its origins is so buried with mythology. It's fair to say that the word now has negative connotations which are never going to go away. But where did these negative connotations come from in the first place? Did they appear with the origin of the word, or were they tacked on by overly sensitive individuals as a means of baseless protest?

I can't say, so I won't. Both possibilities are implied. Honestly, from an objective standpoint, it probably would be best for the term Redskins to go away just for the sake of diplomacy.


you are right, those were not the best links, but i am about to go to bed.

here is a little more food for thought

http://www.iwchildren.org/barb.htm

http://www.hanksville.org/sand/stereotypes/

way more in depth and not really light reading, but a view from the native side.

[Tyson]

wtf? Again, the deacon is emobodied by an animation of a white person. As is the pirate. And guess what? The vikings were white, and are still often portrayed as such. You seem to be saying that it's ok to use small groups of a certain ethnicity as a mascot, but not an entire ethnicity. Mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty are mascots based on people of a certain ethnicty. Again, it just seems like Native Americans are the only group that consider themselves above this sort of thing.

Wow, racist.

[Carbonatedgravy]

http://www.answers.com/topic/redskin

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redskin

fyi, condensed history of the word.

edit: not sure if you meant the fighting whites or not, but they were a team created to draw attention to the use of native american mascots, which they did through basketball games and gear. the name and mascot was not created to offend but to educate.

and yeah, peta is pretty fucking stupid

Sorry, I did mean the Fighting Whites. I just got mixed up. I'll look over the links you posted below and respond later.

[seneca77]

for a quicker read about the word redskin

http://www.iwchildren.org/redskinhate.htm

[RiaN_the_Great]

Its a song. Who cares.

They are opinions. Who cares.

You are part of American culture, which is not bound by race. Live in the now.

[NawnimNonNomen]

The answers article was pretty much nothing more than reference to the Wikipedia one, but I visited both sites. Honestly, it doesn't look like there's enough information for me to come to a conclusion about the word one way or another. It's possible the word has racist origins, and it's possible that it has been bastardized by people who are oversensitive about its originally innocent usage.

This is not an issue I can make a good stand on because the word and its origins is so buried with mythology. It's fair to say that the word now has negative connotations which are never going to go away. But where did these negative connotations come from in the first place? Did they appear with the origin of the word, or were they tacked on by overly sensitive individuals as a means of baseless protest?

I can't say, so I won't. Both possibilities are implied. Honestly, from an objective standpoint, it probably would be best for the term Redskins to go away just for the sake of diplomacy.

Point one (regarding the origins of the word "Redskin"): It doesn't really matter, meaning that if a word has a negative connotation it has a negative connotation regardless of its origins. There's this thing called an etymological fallacy (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy), which is essentially an assertion that the meaning of a word is the same as its etymology. For an interesting take on the attempt to "rescue" (or bowdlerize) words like "Indian" for genteel conversation, check out David Wilton's "Word Myths: Debunking Linguistic Urban Legends" (2004).

With most words that folks find offensive, etymology fails to change the reaction. Look at the word "nig*er" for example. Everyone here seems to be hesitant to throw that one out there, and some attempt has been made in the thread to explain why it is offensive. Fact: "Nig*er" originates from mispronunciation of the Middle French "negre," which means simply "black." The argument from etymology for use of this word would then run something like the following:
My friend is fine with being called "a black man," and "nig*er" (as its ettymology shows) just means "black"; therefore, my friend should be fine with being called "a nig*er man." Hopefully you see that doesn't work. (If you don't, why not go and try it out in your local Afr-Am community.) The reason it doesn't work is that word's meanings and especially their connotative power derives from common use.

Point two (regarding PC/diplomacy): The word probably will go away. Or it may just change in terms of connotation. As (hopefully) the above implies, if people stop using a word like "Redskin" (either altogether or simply in a deragatory manner), then it stops being THAT word. It loses its power. The reverse is true as well: if the Irish decide to all be really offended by a word or if folks use a word for the Irish in a deragatory manner often enough (such as they did with "paddy" for a short time), then it becomes THAT word. Perhaps the word's just going away would be for the best.

Point three (regarding the post that started this thread): So some people think Lipan Conjuring is "funny" or a "joke" . . . well, big deal. Some people are stupid. Some people aren't that worldly or eccentric. Again, big deal. Some people think the whole album is a hoax. Big deal.

I think CarbonatedGravy made a good point in post #2 . . . namely that uninformed non-Christian folk regularly talk the most absolute BS about Christiianity; uninformed non-Hindu folk regularly talk the most absolute BS about Hinduism in these forums (etc., etc., for nearly every religion, phenomena, culture, you name it); uninformed knuckle-heads even interpret songs based on misheard lyrics or some stupid rumor they heard about Maynard from some guy in chat. In short, there's a lot of dumb flying around out there. And the best way to handle it if a clod of dumb strikes you personally is to respond first to the knuckle-head who flung that particular clod of dumb; if that doesn't work, maybe seek to educate by starting a thread that actually educates (in this case, maybe one that includes links to some of the Native American music to which you're comparing LC.)

What certainly doesn't work is starting a thread that basically says no more than "F* yo, you f*ing f*s." When people click on that and get struck personally . . . well, then you get what we have right here.

[Carbonatedgravy]

To your first point NawninNonNomen: That's kind of what I was trying to address in saying that at this point, given the words current negativity, it probably shouldn't be used as a sports nickname.

What I find distressing is the possibility that the word was never really negative until some oversensitive people decided to take offense to it without necessity. Still, whatever the reason, the word is what it is now. It's not the ends I'm so much debating now, but I'm rather questioning the means. Otherwise, I understand and more or less agree with that which you've posted.

As far as ni*ger goes, the literal meaning may not be anything too offensive, but the history of this word is so much more documented and fueled by hate than many of our other questionable words.

[seneca77]

To your first point NawninNonNomen: That's kind of what I was trying to address in saying that at this point, given the words current negativity, it probably shouldn't be used as a sports nickname.

What I find distressing is the possibility that the word was never really negative until some oversensitive people decided to take offense to it without necessity. Still, whatever the reason, the word is what it is now. It's not the ends I'm so much debating now, but I'm rather questioning the means. Otherwise, I understand and more or less agree with that which you've posted.

As far as ni*ger goes, the literal meaning may not be anything too offensive, but the history of this word is so much more documented and fueled by hate than many of our other questionable words.


there is a lot more sensitivity to the word nig*er even on this forum. when you fully type it out, you get this ******

[MrMcPheezy]

ok you seem to be missing the point. vikings, deacons etc are not a race of people. yes they are white, but being a decon or what ever is not an ethnicity.

the clevland indians are no comparison to the minnesota vikings. atlanta braves, may be a better comparison to your argument as a brave is not an actual race.

and native americans are not the only ones to consider themselves above this crap either. americans in general would not tollerate a team name like the philly punjabs, new york nig*ers, san antonio spics, jamestown jews, or the chinatown chinks.

however, washington redskins is ok and any native who may be offended by such should shut their mouth and accept their role.

what the fuck ever.

i admit my mistake in opening this train of thougth in the manner i did. and i also recognize the general opinon of this country is the same as yours, and will not easily change.

what i do not understand is when it comes to this subject, so few have and empathetic view. not just yourself, but people all over this country. maybe someday you and others may realize that the smiling cartoon indian is as offensive as a smiling cartoon black man painted in black face -ala amos & andy.

So, are you opposed to Native American mascots, or just the Redskins?

My high school mascot was the Apache, and we didn't have anyone dress up in a stupid suit or anything (ala the fighting illini), and had a very respectful painting of a native american on the wall of our of our buildings. How do you feel about that?

[seneca77]

So, are you opposed to Native American mascots, or just the Redskins?

My high school mascot was the Apache, and we didn't have anyone dress up in a stupid suit or anything (ala the fighting illini), and had a very respectful painting of a native american on the wall of our of our buildings. How do you feel about that?

personally i am opposed to all of them, however for the sake of debate i can see how the atlanta braves are akin to the minnesota vikings..

this is taken from one of the links i posted above;
--------------------------------------
"We are honoring Indians; you should feel honored." Native people are saying that they don't feel honored by this symbolism. We experience it as no less than a mockery of our cultures. We see objects sacred to us - such as the drum, eagle feathers, face painting and traditional dress - being used, not in sacred ceremony, or in any cultural setting, but in another culture's game."
---------------------------------------
i am a native american. i would like for you to visualize yourself as a native american going to a school with an "indian" of any kind as the mascot. you go to the pep rally and observe mock pow wow's, crazy yelling and all the while others really do look at you as if waiting for you to begin dancing.

now realize, as a native, your culture is being grouped together with animals, cartoons and objects. vikings, deacons and pirates are not a culture.

the simple fact i am trying to convey is such things are demeaning and hurtful. i as an adult can blow that shit off. to a child who is only learning their identity, such things are not easily understood.

[MrMcPheezy]

personally i am opposed to all of them, however for the sake of debate i can see how the atlanta braves are akin to the minnesota vikings..


So...are you ok with the atlanta braves, or are you a hypocrite?



i am a native american. i would like for you to visualize yourself as a native american going to a school with an "indian" of any kind as the mascot. you go to the pep rally and observe mock pow wow's, crazy yelling and all the while others really do look at you as if waiting for you to begin dancing.


You have to understand though, that this is not done at all schools with native american mascots. My high school had one, and we were all very respectful about it. Sure, most of the kids just didn't care about it, but at the very least, we were not disrespectful. No one dressed up in those stupid fake head dresses. No one patted their mouths with their hands while yelling. Nothing. It was just an image on a building and a name that we took pride in.

Does that offend you?

The fact is that the argument can work both ways. Isn't it the thought that counts? Whether or not you like it, it's usually done with the best intentions. A gift offered in an attempt to show respect should be accepted respectfully.

Of course, the other view is that if you do not find the gift respectful it should not be given, but I don't see either view carrying any more weight than the other.


now realize, as a native, your culture is being grouped together with animals, cartoons and objects. vikings, deacons and pirates are not a culture.


How about you, as a native, realize that your name is being taken for the pride of a large group of people. I'm from the most ethnically diverse city in California. My high school was full of whites, blacks, asians, and mexicans...all of whom were pridefully represented by a native american mascot. I can't think of any greater form of diversity and unity.



the simple fact i am trying to convey is such things are demeaning and hurtful.

The only reason they are demeaning and hurtful is because you refuse to accept that they are not meant that way. If you would just step back for a minute, and get out of your typical "white people are evil" way of thinking, you might just be able to accept that it's done out of respect. You might not particularly like it, and you might wish that people knew more about your culture, but being angry about something done with good intentions seems pretty pointless to me.

[seneca77]

seriously, from a native perspective the answers to all of those points can be found at http://www.iwchildren.org/barb.htm

i plainly said FOR THE SAKE OF DEBATE i can see how the vikings and braves would be in the same boat.

in the 40's and 50's the black face comedy routine was also defended as not being intended to offend, just to entertain. history will show what happened with those routines.

you have your opinion which is obviously deeply rooted and good for you. i would go so far as to say it is not your fault that you and so many others feel the way you do. just realize there is always another side of the coin.

as i have previously eluded to, a high school in lets say Newton decides to honor african americans by calling their team the Newton Negros. they deveolop an african tribal person as a mascot to honor the heritage.

do you have african american friends? do you think they would feel honored? after all the intention was not to offend but to honor. without a doubt the NAACP and whatever else would put an end to that and probably get the superintendant fired for suggesting such a thing.

[MrMcPheezy]

i plainly said FOR THE SAKE OF DEBATE i can see how the vikings and braves would be in the same boat.


So you don't really think they're similar? How are they different?


just realize there is always another side of the coin.


You need to realize this as well.


as i have previously eluded to, a high school in lets say Newton decides to honor african americans by calling their team the Newton Negros. they deveolop an african tribal person as a mascot to honor the heritage.

do you have african american friends? do you think they would feel honored? after all the intention was not to offend but to honor. without a doubt the NAACP and whatever else would put an end to that and probably get the superintendant fired for suggesting such a thing.

This would be fine with me. I don't think the mere mention of race is inherently racist as a lot of people (aka native americans) seem to.

[MrMcPheezy]

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deacon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celt

These are all groups of people, and you're treating them each in the same way you're mad at others for treating native americans. Simply because it's not an entire race of people, you're writing them off as irrelevant, and saying it's ok to treat them in a manner that you percieve to be disrespectful.

These people have their own cultures, traditions, and histories, and they are bastardized by being mascots just as much as native americans. You don't think misinformation and stereotypes are spread when people see this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Celtics)?

Who's the racist here? You're the one expecting your people to be treated different as others. At least I'm even handed in my view of this issue.

[seneca77]

we can split hairs until we die.

if you think what i am stating is racist then i am not going to change your mind.

maybe this is the pot calling the kettle black, maybe not. maybe 500 years of brutality in this country is something i should get over and finaly realize, yeah i like the "honor" this country bestows upon my people. maybe i should forget all of the atrocities and enjoy the mockery. you are probably right. thanks for helping me see the light.

to end our little debate here, if you have the time someday, read Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee. it may shed some light.

[MrMcPheezy]

if you think what i am stating is racist then i am not going to change your mind.


If you don't think it is, then reply to my points. How is the way you think of the groups I've mentioned different than the way you're complaining about others thinking of your people?


maybe this is the pot calling the kettle black, maybe not. maybe 500 years of brutality in this country is something i should get over and finaly realize, yeah i like the "honor" this country bestows upon my people. maybe i should forget all of the atrocities and enjoy the mockery. you are probably right. thanks for helping me see the light.


Hey man, I never told you to forget anything. All I'm saying is that you should try to understand how it's intended. You still might not like it, but I think your anger would decrease if you understood how many others mean it. That's all I'm saying. Whether you like it or not is one thing, whether you think it's intentionally, inherently, and completely racist is another. You might not think it's right, but you should at least attempt to understand that most of us that do think it's right, think of it much differently than you do.


to end our little debate here, if you have the time someday, read Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee. it may shed some light.

How about instead you actually respond to the points I've brought up. Or you can just back out of the disccusion. Your call.

[DON IOTAE]

Wow, this thread is really putting interesting stuff out there. The thing about the fighting whites is awesome. I'll have to read on to follow up. But that FW thing hits the mark, IMO.

[seneca77]

How about instead you actually respond to the points I've brought up. Or you can just back out of the disccusion. Your call.

in time i guess. your points about the celts, vikings, deacons however are imo off the mark. and thats my OPINION.

here is something to read which i doubt will be read, but follows our current discussion.

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/irish.htm

[evilmeow]

Looks like seneca is really on the WARPATH here am I right? Better get some COWBOYS in here to take care of him before he starts SCALPING people.

Seriously, people need to stop being so sensitive to jokes. Take it from me, I'm Polish.

[MrMcPheezy]

in time i guess. your points about the celts, vikings, deacons however are imo off the mark. and thats my OPINION.


You can't just say it's off the mark without explaining how it's different. Again, you're just making it seem like it's ok to you use anyone but native americans as mascots. Is that what you're saying? If not, you need to explain what makes one ok and the other.

[seneca77]

You can't just say it's off the mark without explaining how it's different. Again, you're just making it seem like it's ok to you use anyone but native americans as mascots. Is that what you're saying? If not, you need to explain what makes one ok and the other.

i supose i could have said i gotta go to work so ill be brief.

i will be honest here, i am not an advocate for all things harmful to all cultures. as most people do, what hits close to home for me, i form an opinion.

i have never met anyone offended by other mascots. i think once i may have read about a protest for the fighting irish.

i never said its ok to use "white" mascots. i did say the use of native american mascots is demeaning and hurtful. which it is.

you mrmcpheezy are not one to tell me what i should feel honored by or offended by. as i can not tell you the same. what i can tell you as a fact, is having an nfl team in our nations capital called the Redskins is not ok with me and many others like me.

i have tried to explain to you why and you want to parse hairs here about why it is ok to use the vikings etc... if you find a norseman who is offended, become his advocate.

[blackandwhite]

Wow, racist.

Wow, dumbass.

According to Dictionary.com

rac·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Actually, I would agree with you if you were saying he was being racist towards white people, but that's just impossible now isn't it. White people are always wrong.

[blackandwhite]

Drinking's a culture?


PS- Sorry for the DP, but THAT'S racist.

[Carbonatedgravy]

Wow, dumbass.

According to Dictionary.com

rac·ism ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rszm)
n.
The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Actually, I would agree with you if you were saying he was being racist towards white people, but that's just impossible now isn't it. White people are always wrong.

Great post, though I don't understand who you're saying was being racist towards white people. That's the only part I don't get.

This will likely be my final post in this thread, because I'm sick of debating, and I've probably already made every point I've felt a need to.

It would be naive to say that every race and group of people are treated fairly across the world and particularly in the United States where I live. There will always be major problems with racial and cultural relations, but this is multiple sided. The things that whites have done against blacks and Native Americans are very well documented, which in and of itself is good. It's important that we know our past so that we aren't doomed to repeat it and even so that we can develop sensitivity.

But the atrocities of the past are not representative of the person who I am. They never have been and never will be. I refuse to feel guilty for slavery and the slaughtering of the innocent because that was not me, and it wasn't my people. Not to sound like a stupid hippy, but as humans we're all the same and we're all in this together. I was born just as pure and ignorant as anybody whose ancestors were native to this land.

When it is recognized that everyone is the same and that we all came from the same place, (And I'm not speaking religiously. We can all be traced back to the immeasurably small amounts of energy that exploded out of the big bang), team names and mascots like the Redskins won't matter, because it's all just a reflection on one aspect of the collective consciousness.

HOWEVER, to be more practical in my analysis, all I ask is that until it is accepted that we are indeed all the same, criticism should be spread evenly. Most misunderstandings aren't dangerous, and intention DOES matter. To become offended by team mascots, cartoon indians and the like may be justifiable, but it's ultimately petty. It's not my place to demand that you or anyone else just "get over it," as doing so would be hypocritical. There's a lot of crap I have issue with when I probably shouldn't. However, in this case, tolerance, having a sense of humor about yourself, and maintaining patience and understanding are all virtues compared to demanding that others change to suit you. Nothing anybody does can really tear apart your culture and heritage. Be proud of it and love it for what it is.

[RiaN_the_Great]

blackandwhite....way to not suck. Keep up the good fight.

[EdwardJamesKeenan]

now i dont want to ruffle any feathers but being an englishman the whole "my culture doesnt matter 'cos i am white" thing hits close to home. Look at england, we let anybody ito this country and i am all for other cultrues, different beliefs and all taht, but not at the cost of my or my countries identity! christ its not england anymore we cater more for the immigrants allowing them to flourish whilst we loose our identity. it hurts really, i am proud to be british and belive england is a great country.

slightly off post, it basically turned into a rant about England. Anyone see the point i'm trying to make?

[MrMcPheezy]

i will be honest here, i am not an advocate for all things harmful to all cultures. as most people do, what hits close to home for me, i form an opinion.


Clearly you're going to feel more strongly about the issues that you feel involve you more directly...but whenever a similar issue comes up, I'd expect you to at least feel similarly. It still seems like you only care about the respect native americans get, and that you don't give a fuck about respecting other cultures.


i have never met anyone offended by other mascots. i think once i may have read about a protest for the fighting irish.


So what? Does the fact that you don't know anyone fighting against it make it ok?



i never said its ok to use "white" mascots.


But you're clearly not opposed to it at all, which is what makes you look like a complete hypocrite.


you mrmcpheezy are not one to tell me what i should feel honored by or offended by. as i can not tell you the same. what i can tell you as a fact, is having an nfl team in our nations capital called the Redskins is not ok with me and many others like me.


Dude, where have I tried to tell you how to feel about this? All I've said is that you don't seem to care about other cultures at all, and that you should understand how this stuff is usually intended. You might be opposed to it, but it's still important to understand how it's meant by others.


i have tried to explain to you why and you want to parse hairs here about why it is ok to use the vikings etc... if you find a norseman who is offended, become his advocate.

Again. Is it what's being done that bothers you, or merely the fact that it's being done to your people?

[EulogyCallinMe]

if any of you guys actually listened to native music you would find this song to be an example, not a punchline.

what most of you fail to realize is that what you know of native americans was told to you by hollywood. and you took it hook, line and sinker.

grow the fuck up and learn about something for fucks sake.

an example of what exactly? and how does thinking the yell at the end of the song is funny, relate to the hollywood perception of native americans? it didnt for me at all. all i know is that following some super serious tracks a native american chant with a guy yelling his head off sounded funny to me. i may not know what it was supposed to signify but that doesnt meant it still cant sound funny. for example "oui oui" is yes in french, and to most americans thats like kid talk for taking a piss. big freaking deal man, nobody said "ha indians are stupid and drunk" because of this song. plus there are all kinds of horrible stuff like that..like Hogans Heroes (not hogan knows best) for example they made a comedy show about the holocaust...how is that even funny? its just funny in the context of the show, not if you think about the millions being slaughtered for no reason. and amongst a dark scary tool album this is slightly amusing regardless of meaning.

also i think your avatar is amazing, i used to have the banana and spoon for something.... ha. also the jamestown jews is a hilarious name and i have no idea why. but really to me the only way it would be offensive if it was like the jamestown burning jews or something horrible like that like or the drunken indians or whatever. just to use the name isnt that offensive i dont think. but thats me personally. but i guess the mascot would not have to push the jewish stereotype of like a gigantic weird nose with a beard and yarmulka or something or else i could see that being offensive. but if the word indian is a racist term well then...i guess it is. (im jewish by the way)

[AloneOnceAgain97]

I'm Irish, and I wouldn't like to have an Irish track on there either. Oh, I forgot. My culture is meaningless because I'm white.
.

[formerlycontent]

seneca77 it seems youre embarassed by your race. thats what i take from your posts. who cares about the redskins being a mascot. well, hell. if i was a native american, thats the team i'd be supporting.

[seneca77]

seneca77 it seems youre embarassed by your race. thats what i take from your posts. who cares about the redskins being a mascot. well, hell. if i was a native american, thats the team i'd be supporting.

not to sure how many different ways i can say this, but this says it best.

http://www.iwchildren.org/redskinhate.htm

[seneca77]

an example of what exactly? and how does thinking the yell at the end of the song is funny, relate to the hollywood perception of native americans? it didnt for me at all. all i know is that following some super serious tracks a native american chant with a guy yelling his head off sounded funny to me. i may not know what it was supposed to signify but that doesnt meant it still cant sound funny. for example "oui oui" is yes in french, and to most americans thats like kid talk for taking a piss. big freaking deal man, nobody said "ha indians are stupid and drunk" because of this song. plus there are all kinds of horrible stuff like that..like Hogans Heroes (not hogan knows best) for example they made a comedy show about the holocaust...how is that even funny? its just funny in the context of the show, not if you think about the millions being slaughtered for no reason. and amongst a dark scary tool album this is slightly amusing regardless of meaning.

also i think your avatar is amazing, i used to have the banana and spoon for something.... ha. also the jamestown jews is a hilarious name and i have no idea why. but really to me the only way it would be offensive if it was like the jamestown burning jews or something horrible like that like or the drunken indians or whatever. just to use the name isnt that offensive i dont think. but thats me personally. but i guess the mascot would not have to push the jewish stereotype of like a gigantic weird nose with a beard and yarmulka or something or else i could see that being offensive. but if the word indian is a racist term well then...i guess it is. (im jewish by the way)

perhaps you did not read my later explination, however when i created this thread i was intoxicated and pissed off.

given that you are jewish, imagine the "joke" mascot in a country where jews have a history of brutal violence against them. say... germany.

[seneca77]

Clearly you're going to feel more strongly about the issues that you feel involve you more directly...but whenever a similar issue comes up, I'd expect you to at least feel similarly. It still seems like you only care about the respect native americans get, and that you don't give a fuck about respecting other cultures.

sure i could see similarities in a discussion about the offense such a thing to another culture. where is that discussion? hmmm.. i guess there isnt one. other than natives, who is there to care about what respect natives get? they certainly are not getting elected.


So what? Does the fact that you don't know anyone fighting against it make it ok?

once again, i never said it is ok. some here have spoke of the honor natives should feel by being a picture on a high school wall. honor is determined by intended recipient, not the person or group doing the honor.


But you're clearly not opposed to it at all, which is what makes you look like a complete hypocrite.

pot calling the kettle black here. try some empathy.

Dude, where have I tried to tell you how to feel about this? All I've said is that you don't seem to care about other cultures at all, and that you should understand how this stuff is usually intended. You might be opposed to it, but it's still important to understand how it's meant by others.

intensions? immigration is a hot topic now a days maybe the nfl will approve a new Washington Wet Backs team with a soaked latino who just swam over as the mascot. no? why? hmmm. that might be offensive right?


Again. Is it what's being done that bothers you, or merely the fact that it's being done to your people?

both. if a group of irish were actually feeling the same, i could most certainly see why they would not like the fighting irish dude.

i have never met these people and according to what i am reading, i should be the acl-fucking-u over here and demand all bad things stop for all cultures, meanwhile you are just pointing fingers telling me i am a hypocrite due to my lack of concern for the white people in this country.

it seems to me you are continually trying to trivialize the points i am making, which is why this diatribe is getting old.

[MrMcPheezy]

once again, i never said it is ok. some here have spoke of the honor natives should feel by being a picture on a high school wall. honor is determined by intended recipient, not the person or group doing the honor.


For clarity, I hope you acknowledge that I have never said how you should feel about it, simply that you should attempt to understand how others intend it. There's a pretty big difference.



pot calling the kettle black here.


Not at all. I'm fine with racially based mascots regardless of the race involved. I'm accusing you of hypocrisy, which I cannot reasonably be accused of with regards to this issue.



intensions? immigration is a hot topic now a days maybe the nfl will approve a new Washington Wet Backs team with a soaked latino who just swam over as the mascot. no? why? hmmm. that might be offensive right?


As I've said, the Redskins are the one team whose mascot I'm opposed to. I'd feel the same way about a team called the Wet Backs. My point all along has been that teams like the Braves and my high school the Apaches are not nearly as offensive, and that if you're going to be opposed to those, then you must be opposed to similar mascots that make reference to other races. I don't think it's right that the Redskins are the mascot for a team, and I've never said anything in support of it.

It seems to me like you're using the Redskins to say that there shouldn't be any mascots that reference native americans, and I don't think that makes must sense.



if a group of irish were actually feeling the same, i could most certainly see why they would not like the fighting irish dude.


Why does it matter? If you think it's racist and wrong, you should think that no matter how other people feel.



i have never met these people and according to what i am reading, i should be the acl-fucking-u over here and demand all bad things stop for all cultures, meanwhile you are just pointing fingers telling me i am a hypocrite due to my lack of concern for the white people in this country.

it seems to me you are continually trying to trivialize the points i am making, which is why this diatribe is getting old.

And it seems to me you're trying to ignore the points I'm making, which is making you look foolish and ignorant.

[DON IOTAE]

Clearly you're going to feel more strongly about the issues that you feel involve you more directly...but whenever a similar issue comes up, I'd expect you to at least feel similarly. It still seems like you only care about the respect native americans get, and that you don't give a fuck about respecting other cultures.
I feel seneca has tried to make his point clear, MMPh, but you just keep chipping away at seneca's arguments. I mean, that can be done at any argument, and chipping at it enough, you will find fault. Believe me, us humans are good at that. But seneca has made his point and at no moment has he said it's "wrong" to do it towards native americas AND "i don't give a fuck" whether it's done to other groups/ethnicities/races. Seneca's just trying to stick to what he knows, and your attacking him precisely because of that. You've gotta have a side in a debate, what's yours? Mine is that shit like what seneca is fighting for should be respected, and he feels that way because of his background. There's some identity there for him. What do you feel strong about?

What I love (and here I'm being mildly ironic) about America (and even though I don't live in USA anymore, I did live there for an important period of my life) is how everything can be trashed, made fun of, and descredited. Sometimes that is a good thing. It's difficult to measure when it is, though. And that tendency collides with deep ingrained beliefs, like the debate we're witnessing here. Maybe things would be more balanced if we could see clearly what you, MrMcPh, are fighting for.

So, seneca, are you a man, woman, hermaphrodite, et-fuckin'-cetera; so I can quit the he/she bullshit?

[DON IOTAE]

seneca77 it seems youre embarassed by your race. thats what i take from your posts. who cares about the redskins being a mascot. well, hell. if i was a native american, thats the team i'd be supporting.
Shit like this is easily said. Too easily.

[MrMcPheezy]

I feel seneca has tried to make his/her point clear, MMPh, but you just keep chipping away at seneca's arguments. I mean, that can be done at any argument, and chipping at it enough, you will find fault. Believe me, us humans are good at that. But seneca has made his point and at no moment has he/she said it's "wrong" to do it towards native americas AND "i don't give a fuck" whether it's done to other groups/ethnicities/races. Seneca's just trying to stick to what he/she knows, and your attacking him/her precisely because of that. You've gotta have a side in a debate, what's yours? Mine is that shit like what seneca is fighting for should be respected, and he/she feels that way because of his/her background. There's some identity there for him/her. What do you feel strong about?


My stance is basically that I don't think it's ok to be opposed to mascots of one race, while not being equally opposed to mascots of other races.

Either you're opposed to race based mascotrs, or you're not. Picking and choosing which ones to oppose is more racist than anything.

The only basis for picking and choosing should be the severity of the mascot. Redskin is clearly more offensive than Apache. Apache, however, is no more offensive than Viking.

[seneca77]

So, seneca, are you a man, woman, hermaphrodite, et-fuckin'-cetera; so I can quit the he/she bullshit?

xy

[DON IOTAE]

My stance is basically that I don't think it's ok to be opposed to mascots of one race, while not being equally opposed to mascots of other races.

Either you're opposed to race based mascotrs, or you're not. Picking and choosing which ones to oppose is more racist than anything.

The only basis for picking and choosing should be the severity of the mascot. Redskin is clearly more offensive than Apache. Apache, however, is no more offensive than Viking.
OK. Understood. Hell, I'm on your side. There should be no need for these discussions. But nevertheless they happen.

You must understand, however, that there's a clear side for seneca to fight for, and for him (fuck it, I'm labeling him a lad) to generalize the way you're expecting him to is not easy. There's a side to his story that maybe you're missing, and for me, that's the question: What is it? How come he's got the burden of proof? You both are obviously coming from different backgrounds, and that's what we must be careful with here. And we can't treat all ethnicities/races/groups the same. Because they're not. The fact that they're different is what we should be looking at here.

[seneca77]

My stance is basically that I don't think it's ok to be opposed to mascots of one race, while not being equally opposed to mascots of other races.

Either you're opposed to race based mascotrs, or you're not. Picking and choosing which ones to oppose is more racist than anything.

The only basis for picking and choosing should be the severity of the mascot. Redskin is clearly more offensive than Apache. Apache, however, is no more offensive than Viking.


i rarely say this but man, you are wrong.

[MrMcPheezy]

i rarely say this but man, you are wrong.

About what?

[MrMcPheezy]

You must understand, however, that there's a clear side for seneca to fight for, and for him (fuck it, I'm labeling him a lad) to generalize the way you're expecting him to is not easy. There's a side to his story that maybe you're missing, and for me, that's the question: What is it? How come he's got the burden of proof? You both are obviously coming from different backgrounds, and that's what we must be careful with here.


I'm not sure I really understand your point here.


And we can't treat all ethnicities/races/groups the same. Because they're not. The fact that they're different is what we should be looking at here.

Of course, but mistreatment is mistreatment. If you think that one race is being mistreated by having a mascot named after them, then this must be true for all races, unless you can somehow show some huge difference between them, which still has not been done.

[DON IOTAE]

What I'm basically trying to say is that it's hard for you to understand what seneca's fighting for and why, since, well... I should ask first: What's your background, where do you come from?

[MrMcPheezy]

I should ask first: What's your background, where do you come from?

I'm not sure how this is relevant, but I'm from Vallejo, California. I'm mostly white, part filipino, part african american, part native american.

[DON IOTAE]

It's totally relevant since that's exactly what we're discussing. We know about seneca's background, and now, we know about yours (thanks for your info). Now, since you come from a mixed bg, you can understand how it can be difficult to understand one man's opinion who is completely one sided (this is not to say that it's necessarily wrong: A man may have a mixed bg, but it's still one man's opinion, which could be wrong). I mean, you have no experience in that sense. You're a big mix! On my side I am part Costarrican, part Nicaraguan (please don't call me latino or spic), but if I were to trace it back like you're doing, hell, I'd be part Spanish and part Mayan, or Inca or some shit.

Ok, my argument is starting to resemble a labrynth.

Another thing I wanted to point out is that, well, someone like seneca77 with his bg has strong reasons to stand behind his past. I don't. And I don't think you do either. So my final point is: YOU'RE BOTH DISCUSSING FROM DIFFERENT LEVELS, you'll never reach an understanding...

unless...

[MrMcPheezy]

It's totally relevant since that's exactly what we're discussing. We know about seneca's background, and now, we know about yours (thanks for your info). Now, since you come from a mixed bg, you can understand how it can be difficult to understand one man's opinion who is completely one sided (this is not to say that it's necessarily wrong: A man may have a mixed bg, but it's still one man's opinion, which could be wrong). I mean, you have no experience in that sense. You're a big mix! On my side I am part Costarrican, part Nicaraguan (please don't call me latino or spic), but if I were to trace it back like you're doing, hell, I'd be part Spanish and part Mayan, or Inca or some shit.

Ok, my argument is starting to resemble a labrynth.

Another thing I wanted to point out is that, well, someone like seneca77 with his bg has strong reasons to stand behind his past. I don't. And I don't think you do either. So my final point is: YOU'RE BOTH DISCUSSING FROM DIFFERENT LEVELS, you'll never reach an understanding...

unless...

I'm still not sure what your point is. Clearly we come from different areas, and clearly that's a big part of the reason we feel differently on this issue. But again, I don't mind his opinions with regards to native american mascots (though I tend to view the issue differently), what I mind is that he's unwilling to extend that same opinion to others. He's asking for empathy (and complaining about the fact that he's not getting it) and refusing to show empathy towards others. Hypocrisy bothers me regardless of the hypocrtie's background.

[DON IOTAE]

I don't feel he's being a hypocrite. He's just talking about his situation. And not taking others into account is not hypocrisy. He's just trying to focus on one issue. You know?

Maybe this rant of mine is coming to an end. For what it's worth, I did exercise some neurons!

[MrMcPheezy]

I don't feel he's being a hypocrite. He's just talking about his situation. And not taking others into account is not hypocrisy. He's just trying to focus on one issue. You know?

I feel you, and I agree that that's what he was doing at first, but once I brought up the parallel issues, he failed to show the same empathy he was asking for and seemed to expect from others.

[seneca77]

I feel you, and I agree that that's what he was doing at first, but once I brought up the parallel issues, he failed to show the same empathy he was asking for and seemed to expect from others.

empathy for who? you did not portray yourself to be one offended by other mascots. so who would i be showing empathy for. i have been conveying to you my point of view and your only response has been along the lines of me being racist due to my lack of compassion for the vikings who have been wronged.

get real.

[MrMcPheezy]

empathy for who? you did not portray yourself to be one offended by other mascots. so who would i be showing empathy for. i have been conveying to you my point of view and your only response has been along the lines of me being racist due to my lack of compassion for the vikings who have been wronged.

get real.

People still live in Greece, ya konw. There are greeks here in this country. Ever head of USC? The trojans?

The fact that you don't hear many Greeks complaining about this could easily be attributed to the fact that there aren't all that many here, and that they aren't given much attention by others. For all you know, you're treating them the same way you're complaining about your people being treated.

If you're going to complain about people not caring about your race's feelings on this issue, at least attempt not to do the same with regards to other races. If you think it's wrong, then you should always think it's wrong regardless of the race involved.

I don't understand why it's so hard for you to just say that you're opposed to mascots of any race. That would really make things a lot easier.

[seneca77]

People still live in Greece, ya konw. There are greeks here in this country. Ever head of USC? The trojans?

The fact that you don't hear many Greeks complaining about this could easily be attributed to the fact that there aren't all that many here, and that they aren't given much attention by others. For all you know, you're treating them the same way you're complaining about your people being treated.

If you're going to complain about people not caring about your race's feelings on this issue, at least attempt not to do the same with regards to other races. If you think it's wrong, then you should always think it's wrong regardless of the race involved.

I don't understand why it's so hard for you to just say that you're opposed to mascots of any race. That would really make things a lot easier.

easier? you are quite foolish. this isnt even a debate, i have a position, and your position is telling me how i feel about the issue.

[MrMcPheezy]

easier? you are quite foolish. this isnt even a debate, i have a position, and your position is telling me how i feel about the issue.

Yes, I am criticizing your stance on the issue. I'm not saying you should feel as strongly about mascots based on other races, I'm simply saying that you should aknowledge that what's being done to your race is also being done to others, and that you feel similarly about both cases.

That's it. Why can't you do that? The only reason I can think of that you think it's wrong to do it to your race, but ok to do it to any other race.

But I hope I'm wrong. You just haven't given me any reason to think that I am.

[justify_denials]

I'm most annoyed by the tone of the starting post. The threads that comment on the comedic nature of this track make no rude gestures or profanity. How many posts have you read that say "This track is obviously a joke and anyone that thinks it's a serious Indian chant can Fuck Off! Quit being so damned sensitive and knowledgable."? Also, most of the knowledge, no matter how misinformed it may be, that an average american has regarding Native Americans is from school books and scholastic films, NOT from hollywood movies. What hollywood movies portay any Natives, besides Pocohontas or New World?
Why then do we have a holiday; Columbus day, that is to celebrate a man who killed thousands of indians? Assuming this is correct, which most likely it is because I never learned it in school. You never learn, in school, the good things Adolf Hitler did; again something I never saw happen in school, no teachings refering toward any positive side of Hitler.

[justify_denials]

seneca77 it seems youre embarassed by your race. thats what i take from your posts. who cares about the redskins being a mascot. well, hell. if i was a native american, thats the team i'd be supporting.
My highschool mascot was "The indians". It got changed to capitalistic symbol of the eagle; which don't get me wrong, eagles are neat animals, but I don't want my mascot being changed to something that kind of mimics the symbol on the dollar; done by our corrupt and dirty government. Point being, fucking asshole on the east (complete other side of the country!) did not like our "Indian" mascot and wanted changed because he is an asshole.......If he did'nt like our indian mascot he should have changed our town name to because it is an indian name as well as several other citys (proboly a few dozen I can think of), lakes, rivers, and countys in this state. Might as well petitioned to change "Seattle" into something else, wait!.... That guy is an ignorant fuck because people are only going to attack something if its named "Indian". Go ahead attack this song, call it a joke, you don't know anything about the indians or their cultures! Go ahead call them a fucking joke!!!

But really, then again maybe its just the track title that is a joke? Is'nt the guest vocalist for this song infact a indian? If so, then technicly TOOL "conjured!" him (the indian, Lipan) to sing the part.

[justify_denials]

Sorry America was founded by white people. Our bad.
And the act of living on American ground was founded by the natives. Rape the land and their lives; kill, and guess what you get? America! Just like the Catholics and christians! Shove the religion down others throat! only way to keep the shitty bullshit religion alive!

[NawnimNonNomen]

Yes, I am criticizing your stance on the issue. I'm not saying you should feel as strongly about mascots based on other races, I'm simply saying that you should aknowledge that what's being done to your race is also being done to others, and that you feel similarly about both cases.

That's it. Why can't you do that? The only reason I can think of that you think it's wrong to do it to your race, but ok to do it to any other race.

But I hope I'm wrong. You just haven't given me any reason to think that I am.

McPheezy,
You seem to be suggesting that there is an on/off value to empathy, that feeling for others is an absolute quality. But empathy does not exist in a vacuum or some computational binary switch in the ether; it's a human emotion and, as such, needs something genuine to incite it.

Yes, you've proposed a number of potential and hypothetical groups that may be offended by mascots, but none of the mascots you mentioned--Trojans, Pirates, Celtics, Vikings--seem to have actually offended anyone you can point to. Show us the group of Greeks who are picketing outside of Trojans games (the actual people, not the hypothetical picture you can invent) and see whether seneca77 is sympathetic toward those people. Show us the "pirates" who you seem so convinced are opposed to the "Pirates" mascot, and see how he feels then.

Thus far, all you've done is thrown out a bunch of hypothetical situations and then thrown the label "racist" around whenever he doesn't weep for the real demonically possessed church deacons who are apparently so upset by the Wake Forest mascot. Your expectation that he feel bad for people who you can't prove exist is just ridiculous. Your accusation that until he can do so he can't have his own beliefs without being racist is really just a nice little way of preserving the status quo and a typical example of blaming the victim.

[MrMcPheezy]

McPheezy,
You seem to be suggesting that there is an on/off value to empathy, that feeling for others is an absolute quality. But empathy does not exist in a vacuum or some computational binary switch in the ether; it's a human emotion and, as such, needs something genuine to incite it.

Yes, you've proposed a number of potential and hypothetical groups that may be offended by mascots, but none of the mascots you mentioned--Trojans, Pirates, Celtics, Vikings--seem to have actually offended anyone you can point to. Show us the group of Greeks who are picketing outside of Trojans games (the actual people, not the hypothetical picture you can invent) and see whether seneca77 is sympathetic toward those people. Show us the "pirates" who you seem so convinced are opposed to the "Pirates" mascot, and see how he feels then.

Thus far, all you've done is thrown out a bunch of hypothetical situations and then thrown the label "racist" around whenever he doesn't weep for the real demonically possessed church deacons who are apparently so upset by the Wake Forest mascot. Your expectation that he feel bad for people who you can't prove exist is just ridiculous. Your accusation that until he can do so he can't have his own beliefs without being racist is really just a nice little way of preserving the status quo and a typical example of blaming the victim.

Have you been reading my posts? The fact that those minority groups are too small to make much noise about this issue does not change that it is the same issue seneca is complaining about. While the Pirate one might be a bit of a stretch, there are still people living in Greece today, there are Greek-Americans. Who knows how they feel about it? Personally, I don't. But for all we know they're just as offended as seneca is by native american mascots, but feel so small and unempowered that they don't complain about it. Again, it seems as though seneca is writing these groups off as irrelevant, just as he is complaining about others doing to his group. How is that ok?

Maybe if he had more respect for other cultures and groups he'd be opposed to racist acts toward them regardless of the power they have to oppose those acts.

[NawnimNonNomen]

Have you been reading my posts? The fact that those minority groups are too small to make much noise about this issue does not change that it is the same issue seneca is complaining about. While the Pirate one might be a bit of a stretch, there are still people living in Greece today, there are Greek-Americans. Who knows how they feel about it? Personally, I don't. But for all we know they're just as offended as seneca is by native american mascots, but feel so small and unempowered that they don't complain about it. Again, it seems as though seneca is writing these groups off as irrelevant, just as he is complaining about others doing to his group. How is that ok?

Maybe if he had more respect for other cultures and groups he'd be opposed to racist acts toward them regardless of the power they have to oppose those acts.

McPheezy, I certainly have been reading your posts and, again, have yet to see a non-hypothetical example raised by you. Earlier you raised the question, "Does the fact that you don't know anyone fighting against it [i.e., the Fighting Irish mascot] make it ok?" Since this seems to represent your basic point, I'll focus on this question with a couple of examples.

1) Florida State University made the first NCAA prohibition list for Native American mascots. This was part of an essentially blanket decision on names, logos, mascots, etc. derived from Native American cultures. FSU's name was removed from the list, though, after an appeal. Why? Because the FSU Seminole mascots, logos, etc. are used with the express approval of the Seminole tribe of Florida, and the university and tribe work closely together on the portrayals of the Seminole mascot Chief Osceola. Seminole women make the mascot's clothing, and the university has changed practices and logos in the past whenever the tribe found them inappropriate. The mascot is still protested by sympathetic people (some Native American but not Seminole, many more white).

So in this case, who has the right to decide whether Chief Osceola should be used? I'd say the local Seminoles should have the right. The mascot purportedly honors them, and the university has gone to admirable lengths to ensure that this honor doesn't offend the very people it's meant to honor. If I'm some white kid from Duluth who thinks that the mascot is offensive without bothering to look at the people directly impacted, my opinion shouldn't have any effect on the debate; after all, for me to say I'm stepping up to speak for a native people who actually disagree with me is more a proprietary and arrogant position than one of true empathy. (It'd be equivalent to my saying--again, as a white kid from Duluth--that Oprah Winfrey is degrading to African-American women and trying to arrange a protest, which actual protest would probably be protested by African-American women themselves.)

2) Then there's a group like the Atlanta Braves. To begin with, "brave" is a generic label for NA warriors, so there's no specific group to determine whether the term is an honor or not. Instead, all Native Americans do really have a say in the issue. Again, I still say that if I (as a white kid from Duluth) find the team name offensive and am in disagreement with actual Native Americans on the point, my opinion is moot; it's the group either honored or slandered by the name who gets to determine whether it's acceptable.

On the prejudice circuit, the Atlanta Braves are best known for Chief Noc-A-Homa, who stepped out from his tipi to perform a "native" dance whenever the team scored a home run. Noc-A-Homa was a blatantly ridiculous caricature: his name (pidgin for "Knock-A-Homer") was clownish in the sense of naming conventions; his garb was inauthentic; his "native" dance (named the "pain-dance") was inauthentic; and the idea that he "lived" in the bleachers probably rubbed a few people the wrong way in connection with the reservations and all. Following protests, Noc-A-Homa was retired, but no other concessions were made. The fans quickly replaced the caricature by taking up the "tomahawk chop," accompanied by an inauthentic war chant that was barely a step up from the five-and-six-year-old's "woo-woo woo-woo" role-playing. "The Chop Stop" (www.chopstop.com) remains to the Braves what toolshed is to Tool.

This team has gained almost universal scorn from active NA groups. If I (as the white kid from Duluth) were looking to express my empathy, it would be in connection with a group like this.

My point in the two examples above is that empathy needs to be guided, needs to be connected to a genuine sentiment, otherwise it's just self-righteousness. Seneca77's assertion that he doesn't know of anyone opposed to the Vikings or Trojans but that he can see how such names would be akin to Braves for the sake of argument seems a fair enough statement of empathy, given that there's been nothing presented to him outside of hypothetical (i.e., "for the sake of argument") parallels.

If he were to go any further than this in opposing such names without any evidence that those people actually impacted by those names are offended, it would become a proprietary and arrogant stance, not an empathetic one. (As an example, I've had Afr-Am friends tell me I should be offended by "King of the Hill" because it represents embarrassing white stereotypes, in response to which I always think, "Hell, those guys are just like my neighbors. Who are they to tell me I should be embarrassed by my neighbors?")

My main point is not that everyone should only be allowed to feel things in connection to their own race, but that we shouldn't let empathy carry us away to the point where we start stepping on others' toes in our attempts to help them. When Irish-Americans actuallly protest the "Fighting Irish" or Greek-Americans protest the "Trojans" (or even the rubbers coompany for that matter), I would hope seneca77 and nearly everyone else had the empathy to stand up and fight alongside them, but since it's the group affected that decides whether such things are offensive, it's up to the group affected to get the ball rolling.

[Jett]

what's with Tool fans feeling the need to write frickin' novels. I'd love to take a couple of hours to understand you man, but seriously. Keep it short and sweet.

It's only music.

[snakeeyedhawk]

what's with Tool fans feeling the need to write frickin' novels. I'd love to take a couple of hours to understand you man, but seriously. Keep it short and sweet.

It's only music.

Perhaps they have deeper interpretative conventions than yourself?

*shrug*

[MrMcPheezy]

McPheezy, I certainly have been reading your posts and, again, have yet to see a non-hypothetical example raised by you. Earlier you raised the question, "Does the fact that you don't know anyone fighting against it [i.e., the Fighting Irish mascot] make it ok?" Since this seems to represent your basic point, I'll focus on this question with a couple of examples.

1) Florida State University made the first NCAA prohibition list for Native American mascots. This was part of an essentially blanket decision on names, logos, mascots, etc. derived from Native American cultures. FSU's name was removed from the list, though, after an appeal. Why? Because the FSU Seminole mascots, logos, etc. are used with the express approval of the Seminole tribe of Florida, and the university and tribe work closely together on the portrayals of the Seminole mascot Chief Osceola. Seminole women make the mascot's clothing, and the university has changed practices and logos in the past whenever the tribe found them inappropriate. The mascot is still protested by sympathetic people (some Native American but not Seminole, many more white).

So in this case, who has the right to decide whether Chief Osceola should be used? I'd say the local Seminoles should have the right. The mascot purportedly honors them, and the university has gone to admirable lengths to ensure that this honor doesn't offend the very people it's meant to honor. If I'm some white kid from Duluth who thinks that the mascot is offensive without bothering to look at the people directly impacted, my opinion shouldn't have any effect on the debate; after all, for me to say I'm stepping up to speak for a native people who actually disagree with me is more a proprietary and arrogant position than one of true empathy. (It'd be equivalent to my saying--again, as a white kid from Duluth--that Oprah Winfrey is degrading to African-American women and trying to arrange a protest, which actual protest would probably be protested by African-American women themselves.)

2) Then there's a group like the Atlanta Braves. To begin with, "brave" is a generic label for NA warriors, so there's no specific group to determine whether the term is an honor or not. Instead, all Native Americans do really have a say in the issue. Again, I still say that if I (as a white kid from Duluth) find the team name offensive and am in disagreement with actual Native Americans on the point, my opinion is moot; it's the group either honored or slandered by the name who gets to determine whether it's acceptable.

On the prejudice circuit, the Atlanta Braves are best known for Chief Noc-A-Homa, who stepped out from his tipi to perform a "native" dance whenever the team scored a home run. Noc-A-Homa was a blatantly ridiculous caricature: his name (pidgin for "Knock-A-Homer") was clownish in the sense of naming conventions; his garb was inauthentic; his "native" dance (named the "pain-dance") was inauthentic; and the idea that he "lived" in the bleachers probably rubbed a few people the wrong way in connection with the reservations and all. Following protests, Noc-A-Homa was retired, but no other concessions were made. The fans quickly replaced the caricature by taking up the "tomahawk chop," accompanied by an inauthentic war chant that was barely a step up from the five-and-six-year-old's "woo-woo woo-woo" role-playing. "The Chop Stop" (www.chopstop.com) remains to the Braves what toolshed is to Tool.

This team has gained almost universal scorn from active NA groups. If I (as the white kid from Duluth) were looking to express my empathy, it would be in connection with a group like this.

My point in the two examples above is that empathy needs to be guided, needs to be connected to a genuine sentiment, otherwise it's just self-righteousness. Seneca77's assertion that he doesn't know of anyone opposed to the Vikings or Trojans but that he can see how such names would be akin to Braves for the sake of argument seems a fair enough statement of empathy, given that there's been nothing presented to him outside of hypothetical (i.e., "for the sake of argument") parallels.

If he were to go any further than this in opposing such names without any evidence that those people actually impacted by those names are offended, it would become a proprietary and arrogant stance, not an empathetic one. (As an example, I've had Afr-Am friends tell me I should be offended by "King of the Hill" because it represents embarrassing white stereotypes, in response to which I always think, "Hell, those guys are just like my neighbors. Who are they to tell me I should be embarrassed by my neighbors?")

My main point is not that everyone should only be allowed to feel things in connection to their own race, but that we shouldn't let empathy carry us away to the point where we start stepping on others' toes in our attempts to help them. When Irish-Americans actuallly protest the "Fighting Irish" or Greek-Americans protest the "Trojans" (or even the rubbers coompany for that matter), I would hope seneca77 and nearly everyone else had the empathy to stand up and fight alongside them, but since it's the group affected that decides whether such things are offensive, it's up to the group affected to get the ball rolling.

Sorry I didn't reply to this sooner. I missed it somehow.

Anyway, while you make some good points, you make them all with regards to empathy, which is not necessarily what I'm talking about.

I'm simply talking about a priniciple. Regardless of whether or not people are complaining about it, the fighting irish mascots spread stereotypes and ignorance with regards to a specific culture. How can that bother you when it happens to one culture but not to another? No, irish-americans haven't made all that big of a deal about it, but why does that matter? Personally, I tend to be opposed to stereotypes regardless of the race involved. So far, this does not seem to be true of seneca.

I guess that's the main reason that I can find to be opposed to racial mascots: that they spread misconceptions about an ethnicity. So, if you're opposed to misconceptions being spread about native americans, you should be just as opposed to misconceptions being spread about other races. Why is that too much for me to ask?

[Lysanderdarkstar]

And the act of living on American ground was founded by the natives. Rape the land and their lives; kill, and guess what you get? America! Just like the Catholics and christians! Shove the religion down others throat! only way to keep the shitty bullshit religion alive!
I'm sorry to have to use your post as an example but i'm christian and i dare say that this post is a little worse off than some one saying a song that might possibly have somthing to do with my race/religion is funny but you see i just let his hate and anger roll off you should do the same. This is the opinion section man.... people are going to voice their opinions you should come braced for these kind of attacks... any way i don't mean to offend any one or any thing just saying my peice....

[saut]

guys, everyone knows that native americans dont even exist and are just a myth created by liberals to make white people feel bad about themselves

[nighthawk]

guys, everyone knows that native americans dont even exist and are just a myth created by liberals to make white people feel bad about themselves
really? cuz i don't feel bad about myself.

[saut]

you should, because you have absolutely no sense of humor

[A Spirit of Radio]

monkeys killing monkeys...........................

[Lordog]

"Whoa B, they killed Killer!"

[NawnimNonNomen]

Sorry I didn't reply to this sooner. I missed it somehow.

Anyway, while you make some good points, you make them all with regards to empathy, which is not necessarily what I'm talking about.

I'm simply talking about a priniciple. Regardless of whether or not people are complaining about it, the fighting irish mascots spread stereotypes and ignorance with regards to a specific culture. How can that bother you when it happens to one culture but not to another? No, irish-americans haven't made all that big of a deal about it, but why does that matter? Personally, I tend to be opposed to stereotypes regardless of the race involved. So far, this does not seem to be true of seneca.

I guess that's the main reason that I can find to be opposed to racial mascots: that they spread misconceptions about an ethnicity. So, if you're opposed to misconceptions being spread about native americans, you should be just as opposed to misconceptions being spread about other races. Why is that too much for me to ask?

McPheezy, I don't guess that's too much to ask, and the way you put it in that last post makes sense. (Of course, asking for something reasonable doesn't mean you're likely to get it :) I reckon we've just got our lines drawn in different places in the sand. For me, I got so tired of getting into Zor-and-Zam* conflicts, that now I tend to sit back and wait (where it concerns folks who aren't me) on someone else's call to action, which means compromising on principles sometimes.
So it goes; I guess I'm getting too old.

*And, yeah, that's a Monkees ref.

[Koan]

Maybe not in and of itself, but it makes everything else that passes for culture more enjoyable.


The most funny thing I heard all day, yet also very true!