perhaps “/s” isn’t universally understood.
#justmyopinion
2 Likes
Up north, we find it astonishing how old-school it is in the south still. Trust me, your girlfriend wouldn’t want to use the term “colored” here on the south side of Chicago. Doesn’t matter how dark her tone. It’s not acceptable here, from anyone, unless they’re quoting a Maya Angelou poem.
5 Likes
Put me in the “not a caricature” camp when it comes to the symbol for Washington. It’s an illustration but there really isn’t any feature exaggerated for “comic” effect. OTOH,chief Wahoo, the symbol of the Cleveland Indians IS a caricature, even if that NAME isn’t particularly offensive in the way that “Redskins” is.
1 Like
Again… Indians are the only legitimate stakeholders in this issue. Nobody else has the right to Native identity but the Natives. If you want to see unity of opinion, bring this up at the next Indian gathering that you attend (as if…)
It makes no difference at all if it is intended to be offensive. All this theorizing about offense is beside the point. This is about ownership of identity. You do not have a say in the issue. Just freaking listen to what Indians want to do with their identity and cultural heritage.
11 Likes
That. So much that.
I am not offended by the logos. How could I be?
I am deeply offended at times by the utter arrogance and insensitivity shown in public -anonymously- around the issue by those defending their right to treat others feelings as irrelevant to nonexistant to faked… because of their own feelings which do matter and exist and are real.
At the end of the day, people who feel they have no equal will degrade others one way or another. These logos are one of those ways. How could I know what they think? I don’t, I merely remember a time when the sun shined out of my own asshole. I think i was 15? I got over it. Anyone can if they choose.
Even functioning autistics can arrive at a practical intellectual understanding of these things. If they want to.
6 Likes
Fine, don’t call it a caricature.
Call it:
• cultural misappropriation
• wanton theft from a people from whom nearly everything else has already been stolen
• unauthorized use of spiritually copyrighted intellectual property
• a trophy head hung on the wall to flaunt the victor’s dominance
• arrogant, clueless bullshit
… for a start
8 Likes
Huh? Not feigning ignorance, careful how? Where? Who would disagree with that statement and consider it opinion? [quote=“Mister44, post:14, topic:73375”]
I think “colored” is a similar word - archaic, some times used as a derogatory term, at one point was considered the more polite term than others, and some times used as a self identifying term.
[/quote]
An entirely factual and non-offensive description of how a word has had different meanings in different times and places. No?
The NAACP means no insult, the Afrikaner-Broederbond did.
Or what?
2 Likes
I’m with you on most of those, although I think that too much material is already defined as intellectual property, so creating yet another category under the rubrick of “Spirtually copyrighted” is a mistake.
6 Likes
That second quote was not me. And the first quote, you know perfectly well what I meant. But here you go, in case my assumption is incorrect about what you know already.
1 Like
And just because something was acceptable and normal in my grandfather’s time does NOT imply that it is always and forever okay.
3 Likes
I was speaking poetically, in an attempt to provide a contrast to the legalistic hair-splitting provided by some commentators. The actual institution of a legally-recognized “spiritual copyright” would be in direct opposition to the, uh, spirit of my post.
4 Likes
It behooves us all to be more careful than usual with our words when the subject of the conversation is terminology.
2 Likes
For once, the stupid white guy is not Dan Snyder.
1 Like
Mr. McNair, meet Pedro Rodriguez of Cleveland, Ohio. Your racist-splaining makes you look as ridiculous and insensitive as he, even though you aren’t wearing redface and probably aren’t a Cleveland Indians fan.
4 Likes
Probably shouldn’t jump into this, but you are very correct that @Mister44 is not Indian (at least I don’t think that he has any ancestors from India) – he is Native American/First Nations/etc.
3 Likes
What people can say and do should really depend on their racial make-up.
We can only be equal by creating different sets of rules for each racial group. /s)
How do you feel about kama’aina haoles chanting and dancing hula?
1 Like
You are seriously trying to tell me that Mister44, the defender, as far as I can tell from this thread, of white privilege, is “Native American/First Nations/etc.”?? What are you talking about?
As for you suggesting that the term Indian shouldn’t be used for the indigenous people of the Americas, let me ask you this: do you know any of them? I do, and they generally refer to themselves as Indian or, online, NDN. “Native American” is preferred by some, but is problematic for those who do not consider themselves any kind of American, Native or otherwise. Note the Indian Country Today Media Network the California Indian Storytelling Festival, etc., as examples.
6 Likes
Nothing says authenticity to me quite like ‘I will start being who I want to be, tomorrow’.
Pretty average, if you think about it, that if you don’t explicitly agree… it might not be explicit.
Not settled. So not settled the University of Nebraska Press published a whole book about it (full disclosure: I work for UNP). It might be a little dry for some, but it’s an important look at the whole issue. http://nebraskapress.unl.edu/product/Redskins,677175.aspx
8 Likes
