Posted on 12/15/2004 11:36:03 AM PST by add925
Today, the Ohio Supreme Court upheld the right of officers to arrest protestors who burned Cleveland Indian's Chief Wahoo in effigy. The Court indicated the arrest was justified not because Chief was burnt, but that it created a public safety concern.
Why were they burning the mascot in the first place? Were they angry over not making the play-offs? Or losing to Atlanta?.....
"It says here that the Hekawi tribe is royally p!ssed, Cap'n Parmenter, sir." :)
Well, it IS a little bit stereotypical. Not as bad as the one from the 1940s, however ;0)
... and to give you my take on it - if it's ok to have mascots of other races, with the "stereotypical" features those races are known for, then I'll say this mascot is ok, too :)
"Activists" have a lot of time on their hands:
http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/
http://www.shipbrook.com/jeff/ChiefWahoo/
http://gbgm-umc.org/Response/articles/wahoo.html
http://www.courttv.com/archive/trials/wahoo/history.html
So let's rename the team to the Straight Whitey Christians. They're about the only group you can reduce to a charicature without fear of being branded a bigot.
A terrific headline....
I've never gotten the idea that because someone wants to call their team by the name of a tribe or even a generic Indian figure, that is somehow racist. I would believe it was an honorable thing. We have APACHE helicopters because they were known as fierce fighters. Jeep uses Cherokee, etc. Why does this protest make no sense?.....
i think the 1915 one was impressive -- and respectful too.
I like the name "Indians". I like the name "Braves", too. I think those kind of things are intended to pay tribute, not to demean. At least that's what comes to my mind when I hear them.
However, I think this particular image is ugly, cartoonish, and unflattering, and I'd probably burn it also. : ) (And I'm no moonbat.)
And what would the straight whitey Christian charicature look like? Germanic? Italian? English?
Its not so much the name in this case as the logo that is demeaning.
Well, that would be just as silly. It['s not the NAME that is a problem - it's the logo/mascot.
Imagine, a team called the Cleveland Negros, with a mascot that looks like Al Jolsen in blackface - I can't, can you? That certainly would NOT be ok, but for some reason, along with Straight White Christians, Indians are the only other race that is expected to sit down, shut up, and take it.
THAT is my point.
Oh, you're gonna like this page:
http://www.cafepress.com/fightinwhite
I've got my own Fightin Whites teeshirt at home!
I agree with that. It's not the name. The mascot is.
How about this image?
"So let's rename the team to the Straight Whitey Christians."
How about "The Fightin' Whiteys?" There is a logo out there somewhere
I have one, too. I figure of whites can run around with the Cleveland Indians mascot on a shirt, turn-about is fair play ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.