12-08-2012, 12:08 PM
Good article. Thanks for posting.
Using people groups as mascots
12-08-2012, 01:51 PM
Couple of small points. Not hugely important, but to me worth noting.
1) Starting a new thread on this is certainly the administrator's prerogative. I think it completely takes away from the normal life of any thread. If we want the nature of this board to be full tilt moderated, fine. Thankfully when most of us chose to chat in our free time our conversations lead where they lead.
2) Putting my post as the first makes it sound like I am a brobdingnagian fan of the mascot, when in fact it was a side thought coming out of the AD talk. Later posts kind of put it in context, but still.
1) Starting a new thread on this is certainly the administrator's prerogative. I think it completely takes away from the normal life of any thread. If we want the nature of this board to be full tilt moderated, fine. Thankfully when most of us chose to chat in our free time our conversations lead where they lead.
2) Putting my post as the first makes it sound like I am a brobdingnagian fan of the mascot, when in fact it was a side thought coming out of the AD talk. Later posts kind of put it in context, but still.
Couple of small points. Not hugely important, but to me worth noting.
1) Starting a new thread on this is certainly the administrator's prerogative. I think it completely takes away from the normal life of any thread. If we want the nature of this board to be full tilt moderated, fine. Thankfully when most of us chose to chat in our free time our conversations lead where they lead.
2) Putting my post as the first makes it sound like I am a brobdingnagian fan of the mascot, when in fact it was a side thought coming out of the AD talk. Later posts kind of put it in context, but still.
1) Starting a new thread on this is certainly the administrator's prerogative. I think it completely takes away from the normal life of any thread. If we want the nature of this board to be full tilt moderated, fine. Thankfully when most of us chose to chat in our free time our conversations lead where they lead.
2) Putting my post as the first makes it sound like I am a brobdingnagian fan of the mascot, when in fact it was a side thought coming out of the AD talk. Later posts kind of put it in context, but still.
12-08-2012, 02:10 PM
(12-08-2012, 11:36 AM)double e dub link Wrote:What I find offensive is Ms. Harjo's assumption that the same people she professes to defend are too stupid to realize that she knows what's best for them. If they don't agree with her viewpoint, she dismisses them as "misguided."Quote:Native American activists dismiss such opinion as misguided ("There are happy campers on every plantation," says Suzan Harjo, president of the Morning Star Institute, an Indian-rights organization based in Washington, D.C.) or as evidence that Native Americans' self-esteem has fallen so low that they don't even know when they're being insulted.
...
What a patronizing hypocrite ...
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
(12-08-2012, 11:36 AM)double e dub link Wrote:What I find offensive is Ms. Harjo's assumption that the same people she professes to defend are too stupid to realize that she knows what's best for them. If they don't agree with her viewpoint, she dismisses them as "misguided."Quote:Native American activists dismiss such opinion as misguided ("There are happy campers on every plantation," says Suzan Harjo, president of the Morning Star Institute, an Indian-rights organization based in Washington, D.C.) or as evidence that Native Americans' self-esteem has fallen so low that they don't even know when they're being insulted.
...
What a patronizing hypocrite ...
"To the press alone, checkered as it is with abuses, the world is indebted for all the triumphs which have been gained by reason and humanity over error and oppression." ~ James Madison
12-08-2012, 04:26 PM
I thought the best commentary on this was from some poster whose handle I do not remember (sorry) when this topic came up a few years ago. He pointed out that it's really insulting to name your sports team after a people that you basically wiped out. He pointed out how wrong it would be for a team in Germany to be named "The Fightin' Jews."
That cemented the issue for me.
That cemented the issue for me.
I thought the best commentary on this was from some poster whose handle I do not remember (sorry) when this topic came up a few years ago. He pointed out that it's really insulting to name your sports team after a people that you basically wiped out. He pointed out how wrong it would be for a team in Germany to be named "The Fightin' Jews."
That cemented the issue for me.
That cemented the issue for me.
12-08-2012, 04:37 PM
(12-08-2012, 02:23 AM)pefloresjr link Wrote:I spend time at a shared Latino/Native American tailgate party every year along with other events and my experience is the same as dabigvi's. My opinion is that ethinicities or races should not be used as mascots because it usually ends up being disrespectful.
When an issue like this pops up it really makes me regret not having a job that is linked to a university so I could get a take on how this generation differs from mine.
peflores comment about a joint Latino/Native American tailgate reminds me of the dangers in attributing emotional responses to groups. The two most vivid memories regarding assumptions about me based on my race (so benign as to not be racism) both happened at Stanford.
Like many of you, I got my acceptance to Stanford from Fred Hargadon (sp) and my year (it came late). I had already decided to go to another school, but my dad encouraged me to visit Stanford. I had no relatives at Stanford, and so I called admissions, and they agreed to set me up with a student for a short visit. I fly out, and they have set me up with a wonderful guy and I enjoyed staying at his dorm. Which was Casa Zapata.
Surprising? Not really. But coincidental, because I am Mexican American. The stay was great, but I have to admit, I was a bit concerned at what I felt was a bit of a preconceived notion of where I would be most comfortable.
Fast forward to arrival at Stanford, where I met my new roomates. They were great. And coincidentally, of the four Mexican American males who entered my dorm that year, three of them were in my room.
Ultimately, my take away from Stanford was that at least from my short stay there, there was an absolutely well-meaning and accepting view of minorities, but in the end, there was just a whiff of patronization. (Sort of like what Kathy mentions in her comment above.)
The Latino/Native American tailgate reminds me of what a fascinating difference there is between the different poisons that each of these groups faced, and how different the historical result was for each. But given that alums grew up at a different time, I am wondering how likely one would be willing to rock the boat at an event like this. There is a good deal of pressure at Stanford to take the "racially sensitive position", and it stems from a good place.Â
That's a long way of saying that in the blog above, the Native American stanford alum is passionate about her position, and I believe her. As to what the collective opinions of small groups at alumni reunions and signatories to petitions say about other members of those groups -- we need to be careful of going beyond the names on the paper or the blog.
My hypothesis, based on my experience with the generation of my kids, and the increasing number of "mixed" raced kids, is that the sensitivity regarding these issues is dialed down a brobdingnagian amount from even the 70 and 80s. That is ultimately a good thing, but it may be reflected in things that give us older crowd pause.
How much that really helps in an issue as specific and particularly unique as that of Native American mascots, I don't know. But it probably does explain the cavalier way some people are wearing the t-shirts.
(12-08-2012, 02:23 AM)pefloresjr link Wrote:I spend time at a shared Latino/Native American tailgate party every year along with other events and my experience is the same as dabigvi's. My opinion is that ethinicities or races should not be used as mascots because it usually ends up being disrespectful.
When an issue like this pops up it really makes me regret not having a job that is linked to a university so I could get a take on how this generation differs from mine.
peflores comment about a joint Latino/Native American tailgate reminds me of the dangers in attributing emotional responses to groups. The two most vivid memories regarding assumptions about me based on my race (so benign as to not be racism) both happened at Stanford.
Like many of you, I got my acceptance to Stanford from Fred Hargadon (sp) and my year (it came late). I had already decided to go to another school, but my dad encouraged me to visit Stanford. I had no relatives at Stanford, and so I called admissions, and they agreed to set me up with a student for a short visit. I fly out, and they have set me up with a wonderful guy and I enjoyed staying at his dorm. Which was Casa Zapata.
Surprising? Not really. But coincidental, because I am Mexican American. The stay was great, but I have to admit, I was a bit concerned at what I felt was a bit of a preconceived notion of where I would be most comfortable.
Fast forward to arrival at Stanford, where I met my new roomates. They were great. And coincidentally, of the four Mexican American males who entered my dorm that year, three of them were in my room.
Ultimately, my take away from Stanford was that at least from my short stay there, there was an absolutely well-meaning and accepting view of minorities, but in the end, there was just a whiff of patronization. (Sort of like what Kathy mentions in her comment above.)
The Latino/Native American tailgate reminds me of what a fascinating difference there is between the different poisons that each of these groups faced, and how different the historical result was for each. But given that alums grew up at a different time, I am wondering how likely one would be willing to rock the boat at an event like this. There is a good deal of pressure at Stanford to take the "racially sensitive position", and it stems from a good place.Â
That's a long way of saying that in the blog above, the Native American stanford alum is passionate about her position, and I believe her. As to what the collective opinions of small groups at alumni reunions and signatories to petitions say about other members of those groups -- we need to be careful of going beyond the names on the paper or the blog.
My hypothesis, based on my experience with the generation of my kids, and the increasing number of "mixed" raced kids, is that the sensitivity regarding these issues is dialed down a brobdingnagian amount from even the 70 and 80s. That is ultimately a good thing, but it may be reflected in things that give us older crowd pause.
How much that really helps in an issue as specific and particularly unique as that of Native American mascots, I don't know. But it probably does explain the cavalier way some people are wearing the t-shirts.
12-08-2012, 11:59 PM
I am stunningly unimpressed that "Native American activists" are united in their opposition to something when the overwhelming majority of Indians are not. It's like saying the membership of Code Pink is united in favor of charging President Obama with war crimes while the overwhelming majority of Americans are not.
You mean like when the founding fathers of our nation decided we should be ruled by a political elite? Wasn't that like saying the masses are to stupid to rule themselves (which, I think is true)? As a minority, growing up in a white country, I know very well what is like to think that you have a certain "place" in this country, that you are supposed to "accept" certain things because that is how they were/are. The activists presumably don't accept the status quo and lead the way forward. Look at the Civil Rights movement in the US...that took a long time to gain momentum and there were plenty of folks around who did not want to rock the boat.
You mean like when the founding fathers of our nation decided we should be ruled by a political elite? Wasn't that like saying the masses are to stupid to rule themselves (which, I think is true)? As a minority, growing up in a white country, I know very well what is like to think that you have a certain "place" in this country, that you are supposed to "accept" certain things because that is how they were/are. The activists presumably don't accept the status quo and lead the way forward. Look at the Civil Rights movement in the US...that took a long time to gain momentum and there were plenty of folks around who did not want to rock the boat.
I am stunningly unimpressed that "Native American activists" are united in their opposition to something when the overwhelming majority of Indians are not. It's like saying the membership of Code Pink is united in favor of charging President Obama with war crimes while the overwhelming majority of Americans are not.
You mean like when the founding fathers of our nation decided we should be ruled by a political elite? Wasn't that like saying the masses are to stupid to rule themselves (which, I think is true)? As a minority, growing up in a white country, I know very well what is like to think that you have a certain "place" in this country, that you are supposed to "accept" certain things because that is how they were/are. The activists presumably don't accept the status quo and lead the way forward. Look at the Civil Rights movement in the US...that took a long time to gain momentum and there were plenty of folks around who did not want to rock the boat.
You mean like when the founding fathers of our nation decided we should be ruled by a political elite? Wasn't that like saying the masses are to stupid to rule themselves (which, I think is true)? As a minority, growing up in a white country, I know very well what is like to think that you have a certain "place" in this country, that you are supposed to "accept" certain things because that is how they were/are. The activists presumably don't accept the status quo and lead the way forward. Look at the Civil Rights movement in the US...that took a long time to gain momentum and there were plenty of folks around who did not want to rock the boat.
12-09-2012, 07:52 AM
The irony is that the folks wearing the t-shirts probably feel like they are "fighting" the status quo.
And if he has a Civil Rights Supporter card, I don't think garvin needs to turn it in for his thoughts on this thread. Maybe just super secret probation.
And if he has a Civil Rights Supporter card, I don't think garvin needs to turn it in for his thoughts on this thread. Maybe just super secret probation.
12-09-2012, 10:13 AM
(12-09-2012, 07:52 AM)oman link Wrote:The irony is that the folks wearing the t-shirts probably feel like they are "fighting" the status quo.
I don't think it's as complicated as that. I think it's just a way to get some iconography in (there was a variation on the symbol that had Harbaugh in headdress...Fightin' Harbaughs or something like that?) as a cool shirt.
Otherwise, what are you going to wear? Red? Not a lot you can do with that. Now we know why Alabama has that elephant.
(12-09-2012, 07:52 AM)oman link Wrote:The irony is that the folks wearing the t-shirts probably feel like they are "fighting" the status quo.
I don't think it's as complicated as that. I think it's just a way to get some iconography in (there was a variation on the symbol that had Harbaugh in headdress...Fightin' Harbaughs or something like that?) as a cool shirt.
Otherwise, what are you going to wear? Red? Not a lot you can do with that. Now we know why Alabama has that elephant.
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »