By Moni Basu and Greg Botelho, CNN
Atlanta (CNN) – The Atlanta Braves are reportedly bringing back a controversial screaming Indian logo in their new design for batting practice caps, unveiled in a blog post on ESPN.
Writer Paul Lukas of Uni Watch, who broke the news of the new cap design, said he got a first look at the hat designs from an "industry source."
He gave a failing grade to the Braves logo featuring a Native American wearing a mohawk and a feather in his hair and belting out a tribal yell.
"Last year the Braves conspicuously avoided using their 'screaming Indian' logo as a sleeve patch on their retro alternate jersey - a welcome move for those of us who oppose the appropriation of Native American imagery in sports," Lukas wrote. "Unfortunately, it turns out that the logo hasn't been permanently mothballed. Disappointing. Grade: F."
Braves officials deferred comment to Major League Baseball, which told CNN that the new batting practice cap designs for several MLB clubs, including the Braves, were still in development and may never end up on the diamond.
"We will unveil the program when it is finalized," the MLB statement said. "We do not know where (ESPN) obtained the designs. We can not make them available to CNN because they are not finalized or approved."
The screaming Indian was part of the Braves logo when the team moved to Atlanta from Milwaukee in 1966. It was retired in 1989.
The team also had a mascot, Chief Noc-a-Homa (knock a homer), who wore Native American dress and war paint.
The possibility of a new cap design drew fire from those who believe the image caters to unhealthy stereotypes of Native Americans.
Kevin Gover, director of the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of the American Indian, said he was deeply disappointed that the Braves may be choosing to go backwards.
Gover, 57, said he grew up with all sorts of stereotypes. He was hoping his grandchildren wouldn't.
"What this does is contribute to the casual racism native people are subjected to in our society," said Gover, a member of the Pawnee Nation.
The screaming Indian is an image of an imaginary Indian, Gover said. It and other stereotypical sports mascots, he said, do not portray Native Americans for what they truly are.
American Indian Movement founder Clyde Bellecourt said Native Americans "no longer want to be mascots for America's fun and games."
"They would not do this to black people," he said. "They would not do that to white people. They would not do this to Mexicans, or Italians. They do this to Indian people."
The controversy of sports mascots is, of course, not new. U.S. professional and collegiate sports teams have used Native American logos and names for years. Baseball's Cleveland Indians, for instance, continue to feature a smiling Indian dubbed Chief Wahoo, criticized as a racist caricature.
Sometimes this happens with the blessing of Native American tribes, and other times - like with the NFL's Washington Redskins, a term that many feel advances a demeaning stereotype - they have denounced as effectively racial slurs.
The NCAA imposes a ban on offensive Native American mascots and earlier this year, voters dumped the University of North Dakota's Fighting Sioux mascot. Florida State University's use of Seminole imagery is allowed because it is supported by the the state's Seminole Tribe.
Also this year, Oregon prohibited public schools from the use of Native American names, symbols or images as mascots. The names on the banned list include: Redskins, Savages, Indians, Indianettes, Chiefs and Braves.
Gover said a lot of people think it's OK to use Native American imagery. That was evident on the comments posed on the Atlanta Journal-Constitution's blog post about the Braves design:
User Dedoh wrote: "I love the old Braves uniforms. I could care less that someone is offended over the new logo. Too many people are offended by insignificant things that have no bearing on their daily life. The offended can watch another less offensive team. Go BRAVES!!!!!!!"
Slick Rick wrote: "This isn’t bad … but 'Redskins' is. That name should go away forever."
Other fans weighed in on an online forum on MLB.com, baseball's official website.
“How can you not love this?” wrote one commenter, with the moniker NELSKOF.
But one person, writing with the name Shag23, questioned whether the change was worth it.
“This new hat will draw a lot of attention, just maybe the wrong type,” the commenter wrote.
The comments were flowing on Twitter as well:
They're the Atlanta #Braves, not the Atlanta Savages. It's a screaming brave. Because - get this - he's brave.— Paul McCord (@jpmccord) December 28, 2012
They're the Atlanta #Braves, not the Atlanta Savages. It's a screaming brave. Because - get this - he's brave.
Still don't know how the Braves screaming Indian logo is racist. I'm about to go buy a hat with that logo on it to troll.— Ryan Hall (@ATLscrubLove) December 28, 2012
Still don't know how the Braves screaming Indian logo is racist. I'm about to go buy a hat with that logo on it to troll.
But Gover said such imagery leads kids to grow up thinking that all Native Americans look menacing or do the tomahawk chop, the customary "rally" routine of Braves fans.
"It's nice that they named a team after us but we don't behave like that," he said. "It's hard to see what honor there is in using that imagery."
CNN's Tristan Smith and David Close contributed to this report.
Tell us what you think of the Braves decision below. Is going retro a bad thing in this case?
Good for the team!
Im always surprised no one pays mind to the Washington REDSKINS. Thats pretty darn racist. I'm sure people everywhere would be fine if they renamed the team the "BLACKSKINS".
Go Skins!! We are finally having a great season. We have RGIIIzus (RGTHREEZUS). Our savior. He is going to take us to the Holy land.
How about the Washington Whiteskins? As a white American I would be proud for a team to named after my beautiful white race... too bad it would never happen.
Wow don't the Braves know that the only racial group that it is OK to degrade is White men all they need to do is read CNN.
given all the things white men have done... you'll forgive me if know cares about them being "discriminated" against.
calm down nobody is degrading white men. What we are degrading is the act of stealing the cultural image and likeness of NAtive Americans for sport and profit by white owned ball clubs like the Atlanta Braves. What is offensive to me is that the founders and owners of the ATlanta Braves are not in fact NAtive American yet they use an image of one without permission or giving proper compensation or say in how that image is used.
With any luck, maybe some one like, say....Jim Thorpe, would buy the franchise and change the logo. There is nothing preventing a wealthy Native American from buying the franchise if Ted Turner ever decides to sell. Besides, who's to say that Ted Turner doesn't have NA blood in him? Or is this you making racial assumptions?
You're right. White men have it really tough. I cry myself to sleep every night because of how tough White men have it. They have to be the most persecuted group on the planet. Poor things. I'm starting to cry just thinking about it. Oh the humanity.
Its 2200 and China has invaded and conquered the USA. They have developed a super weapon which has no defense. They have killed millions of Americans and sent the survivors to remote corners of the country to survive on their own. China starts to help themselves to all the bounties that the former USA used to own. This is progress. The world changes and expands and you have go along or you get left behind. Now its 2400 and China has changed the name of the USA to China 2. They have these strange games and they decide that it would be great to honor those former Americans by naming there teams names like, "The Strong Whites" or "The Round Eyes". A logo could show a white guy with a very antiquated assault rifle. The rifle that they used to try and defend their country against the Chinese with their super weapons. The Chinese would say how brave these white people were. Meanwhile, the white people who were not accepted into the Chinese society struggle to live in these independent zones with scarce resources. That would never happen would it?
True Story Bro.
The Beijing Rednecks.vs. Chengdu Trailer Parkers.
That is funny!
Nice to see many posts by people who feel the same way as I do. Which is: the oppressor using the historically oppressed as their mascot is always unacceptable.
I'll give you another example similar to yours above: imagine if Germany had a sports team named the Fighting Jews...Would that offend anyone?
Wow. A great analogy.
chicago blackhawks,,,,,,lets not forget that racist group.......geez lighten up everyone
So if somethings blatantly racist or offensive, you're saying let it slide?
Kansas City Chiefs...not that is a racist elitist team, they don't include the lower class braves,
What an Idiot! I couldn't even finish the article it was such drabble
If you are offended by the logo, then show it by not going to their games. I am sure someone else will take your seat. Get over your offended self.
Here you white people are telling folks what racism is .
What do you know of racism?
The Native Americans need to have symbols of their past greatness.
Clubs like Atlanta keeps that in our consciousness. Otherwise, everyone will think we are just blackjack dealers.
You know what would add to our present greatness? Having control over the use of our image and likeness and stopping white people from once again profiting from depicting our culture. OK lets say we keep these images out there, then white owned ball clubs and sports teams need to pay royalties for the use of it and give tribal leaders control of how its used! THAT would be honoring greatness!!
Ok, then when ever you use an image of a white person you should pay white people in general and if you use a picture of a Mexican then you should pay Mexicans.
LOL That last line was perfect about blackjack dealers. And I'm sorry, but please, everybody who is "offended" just stop. Have you not ever heard of the phrase, "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery"? There is nothing wrong with having the screaming Indian "Brave" as their logo. I am so sick of all of this political correctness bullsh!t. I would really love for someone to explain to me without going on and on why exactly this is racist because I just don't see that at all because it's not being used in that manner. God, the stupidity factor is out of control in this world.
For me, whats most racist is the fact that a white/non-native ball club can just use an image of a NAtive WArrior without permission and without compensation or say in how its used. The image itself isn't what I find offensive. The Atlanta Braves are not Indians but they use a likeness of our Warrior without paying proper respect. See I wouldn't be offended if the team were owned by NAtive Americans or founded by NAtives. But we all know it wasn't
I hope they bring back Chief Noc-a-homa too.
I heard the Celtic Woman was sued for big bucks, for WHITE SUPREMACY!!!
We minorities demand QUOTAS to be enacted!
I am as Liberal and PC as you can get... HOWEVER:
NOBODY can own the images of cowboys or indians. If they got a trademark, it expired a century ago.
While we are at it, the Redskins can have halftime ceremonies where they slaughter early settlers, and the Saints can have a rendition of the Crusades, or mock executions of women via the Spanish Inquisition? Why not do away with ALL the PC Bull since so many of yu think this Braves logo is appropriate?
So I'm gonna bring you up to speed. this is about a white owned ball club (we all know NAtive Americans didn't found and don't now own the Atlanta Braves) co-opting an image and likeness of a Native Warrior for sport and profit. NAtives do not like this image and want it to not be used. The white owned ball club wants to ignore this. Now Notre Dame is an Irish CAtholic University, they pick the fighting irish. Fair Enough. The Atlants Braves areNOT Native so therefore have no right to use the imgae and likeness of an Indian Wariior. Until Indians own and profit from the use of this image and likeness the Atlanta Braves are a bunch of punks.
Now let me bring YOU up to speed ... the football team that plays in Dallas are not Cowboys, the team that plays Seattle are not birds, and the team in Tennessee are not mythical Gods. Teams chose their mascots based on symbols of bravery and toughness. Get over yourself ... it's a freakin' game!
Tribes in my state do in fact profit greatly from using their icons and images. At the entry points of all major highways there are multi-billion dollar operations. They use names such as Riverwind, Firelake, Winstar, Apache, Comanche, First Council, Sac & Fox, to name a few. The Winstar is the largest casino complex on planet Earth. If Vegas had a comparable casino, it would be a combination of Bellagio, Monte Carlo, and NYNY. I'm talking gaming floor and not hotel rooms. Tribes run huge amounts of cash through these operations and its only because they are tribes. I cant open up one of these centers. Of course I want to change that. I figure we can turn the southern part of Oklahoma City into a massive complex of new hotels if we allow Harrah's, MGM, and Wynn to come in. The tribes have so far spent tens of millions in PAC money to prevent it from happening and have been very successful at it.
@joe= What white people (owners of the Cowboys and the Vikings and the like) do with their own regional cultural icons is their business. what White people do with my image and cultural likeness is my business and I don't like it.
@Rick Springfield- This is great we need more native owned business and commerce and less of white owned ball clubs profiting by the use of our culture!! Like I said if this was something we had control over and made a profit from I think I would be satisfied. But truth be told it really hurt seeing a guy like John Rocker wear a Braves uniform. This is something I've been thinking about for a long time.
Let's change the PC Friars logo to a priest boinking a small child, or bring back the beer mug to the Celtics leprechaun and have him defecating in his knickers, and vomiting all over himself? After all, it IS what they do, is it not? :)
Please for all that is holy change all the team names associated with native americans. That way we'll never have to hear from them again. So tired of people looking for something to be offended by. I'm offended that you are offended. How about that?
Best comment I've read all day.
We live in a free society, where freedom of speech means some people are going to be offended. Get over it.
Also, how is wanting to put a native indian as your logo 'racist'? Sports teams choose symbols and imagery they want associated with POSITIVE traits, presumably in the indians' case that means bravery and being fearsome. I would be flattered if someone wanted to use my people as a logo for those things.
My 2 cents.
Anyone who doesn't think this is racist is clueless about how Native Americans have been treated and continue to be treated. To me it says "We think you are really cool and make a great team mascot even though we took away all your lands and gave you little or no compensation and then drove you onto reservations, so get over it". Its pretty condescending to Native Americans. Some of them don't even realize its condescending because they've been abused for so long.
This comment to me sounds a bit like the white person saying "If I was a black person, I know I wouldn't be offended if someone called me n--r, so I don't know what the big deal is."
The argument is about principle. They don't have the right to use native imagery, whether it's positive or negative because it's not their imagery.
Predicted response: "What about animals? I'm offended that they use tigers."
Answer: So, you're argument that using native imagery isn't degrading or racist is to compare human beings to animals? Good one.
I look like "Uncle Ben" what do I get? ......and I'm wearing white sox. If it's such a problem y'all should've won.
Only white’s can be racists because it is only white’s that are claiming that they are a separate and superior race to the afro centric human race because their ancestors did not come from africa but from somewhere else. All other people are more properly tribalists, not racists. And tribalists can be every bit as bigoted as racists.
if anyone should be offended by that logo, it's Mr. T. i hope they have his permission to use his likeness!
Say what you will about what's right or wrong in representing Native Americans – this will all boil down to one issue: MONEY. The precedent has already been set – look at the Washington Redskins. The logo AND name is by far the most racists in professional or college sports. But, since the 'Skins have serious cash flow, they've been allowed to keep their racist logo because they have obviously paid off lobby groups to help keep this issue a non-issue. As for the issue at hand – bringing back the current Braves logo is bad idea. But, apply this rule fairly – have the 'Skins rename their team and remove that disgustingly racist logo ... show some respect to a culture we have trampled on for centuries.
If we get rid of every thing that people find offensive why start with sports? Lets get rid of the United States flag. More people want it gone than those who want to keep it. Lets do away with our freedom and other rights as well. I am Native American and a big Braves fan. I am not offended by this move at all.
Calling a native american an Apple if pretty offensive. Show a little respect.
Amayetli you're an embarassment of a human being. You're actually the first person I've ever seen ACTUALLY use that word. You make me sick.
Are you offended when remembering the bounties on the heads of your ancestors when the colonist were clearing "their" land of you? Are you offended with the red human skins bought forth to collect said funds?? Are you offended that this organization is continuing to exploit your image for $$$...hey but if you like it i love it....everyone doesn't need self-respect i guess...
how about pay tribes the profits made from the buying and selling of merchandise with our likeness? At the very least. I don't like the idea of a white owned ball club turning one cent on our images when we havve people on the res without proper healthcare and REAL WARRIORS coming home from a REAL WAR who need support.
Hey anybody ever hear of the "Fighting Irish"? Oh gosh isnt that an ethnic group? Quit whining its an honor .
Yes it's disrespectful. However it depends on the group if Irish people dont find it offensive than it's not. Some Indians do so they have a right to feel that way.
"Fighting Irish" is as much of an honor as naming a team the 'Thieving Africans.' I mean really, are you saying that since there's more than one racist mascot/team that makes all the racist mascots/teams perfectly okay? Shouldn't you be saying, "Hey we should probably get rid of 'fighting Irish' as well"?
Hey Donnie- Notre Dame is an Irish CAtholic University founded by Irish Catholics and they can use whatever they like to represent themselves. The Atlanta Braves wasn't founded by NAtive Americans. Nor do NAtives have control or profit from the use of that Indian Warrior as their logo. So what not an honor is having a the image and likeness depicting your culture co-opted by a white owned ball club and not given control of how that image is used and not given profit form money made offof that image. NAtive people don't profit from the braves but an Irish Catholic University profits from the fighting Irish. See the huge difference. This is about stealing.
Why is "fighting" automatically perceived as negative? People fight for honorable purposes, too. Good Lord, we have become a nation of spineless, sniveling wussies who will whine over ANYTHING. Ridiculous.
What's the Native word for Brave?
There are 566 tribes, almost all have an unique language. There is no one "indian" word for Brave.
Indeed. One fella on this board said the use of the word Chief wasn't offensive because it's not even a Native word, yet he finds the word Brave to be offensive.
II can understand the argument from both sides. First it would seem like honoring the Indians would be cool. However if you look at the whole picture it kinda doesn't feel right. The settlers that came over here basically conquered the Indians and now they are humiliating them by using their image(s). One thing I can agree on is that Atlanta braves are trash They get all the media attention because of Ted Turner who owns the station and CNN.
For all those who believe this image or mascot is honoring Native Americans, this is public sentiment of the era when this mascot was created.
Richard Henry Pratt was the head of all boarding schools for Native Americans during the early 1900's, these boarding schools forcefully took indian children from their parents and communities and sent states away in some cases. The idea of the boarding school was instead of fighting wars with indians they will simply try to assimilate them and essentially make them "white".
The following is a quote from Pratt himself
“A great general has said that the only good Indian is a dead one, and that high sanction of his destruction has been an enormous factor in promoting Indian massacres. In a sense, I agree with the sentiment, but only in this: that all the Indian there is in the race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man.”
Word! This is an insult. To profit off an image depicting a Native Warrior. They never got permission and NAtives don't see any compansation. Totally insulting!
Anyone remember when the Braves had Chief Noc-A-Homa?
If only George Carlin were still alive... He'd set all you PC, whining pukes straight.
He'd also say: People who say they don't care what people think are usually desperate to have people think they don't care what people think.
He would absolutely call BS on the stealing of Native Image for the profit of white men.
Really?? I disagree...Carlin would rail at the racist hypocrisy of these images. I wonder how you'd feel if your religion, skin color, disability, etc., was depicted as a slur? Maybe that would bring it home to you.
That's right, it's a modern shooting rifle, not an assault rifle. So make sure your politically correct and call it a modern shooting rifle.
This is extremely offensive and outrageous. I cannot believe they think they can justify bringing back such a racist and inconsiderate image. I hope someone takes this to court.
Why aren't there any Native Americans in the comment section "off the reservation" about this logo change. Paul Lukas can give a failing grade all he wants. America is dying because we are all paying way to much attention these windbags. Get a life and find a real cause to bring attention to.
First off, your remark is EXTREMELY racist and inconsiderate. Secondly, maybe they aren't coming to the comments section because they don't want to deal with said racist dribble from people like you. A cursory glance through all the comments makes it very clear that people think our race is still just fine and dandy to use as a caricature for your amusement.
.....My Aunt Jemihma never got a dime either.
Hmm, I always thought it looked like the Indian was laughing. What's wrong with that?
when I was 3-4 years old, the Braves were my favorite team (1982) because of this indian logo. Why? because just like when watching the Lone Ranger, I despised the white men.
images can invoke the spirits
I am part Native American (American Indian), and I love the name.
It shows our heritage as a Brave.
Why does this make one so angry.
Now if the Braves don't win then that is a reason to get upset.
I'm a native american too and I agree.
We shouldn't allow this kind of stuff to ruffle our feathers.
I'm not an Indian, but the logo is hella cool, and I don't know why anyone wouldn't want it. That Notre Dame logo, though... grrr...
I believe it is a great way to give recognition to different groups...like the Sioux and the Irish. You take away the "Sioux" and that is one less place that Sioux will be mentioned.
The Red Sox will win the World Series as soon as they rehire Terry Francona. So you win two World Series in three years and you fire the coach because some overpaid athletes can't do their job? It must be the curse of the Bambino. That's like giving Johnny Football the hardware when Manti Te'o clearly deserved the trophy. Outrageous.
"Atlanta Braves" is racist, as are all of their emblems, old and new. Same for the Cleveland Indians, Washington Redskins, an on and on. Racist.
People need to stop using the word racist. Everyone who uses that word is a racist. It takes one to know one. I think it is ignorant to ban a screaming Indian head for the Braves to use. It shows me that the Braves see Native Americans as fierce warriors and a respectable people for them to use them as their logo
what would probs be paying them more respect is if they made money off the buying and selling of their image and likeness and respecting their wishes for it not to represent a team not run or owned by NAtive Americans. I'm pretty sure that would be more respectful.
Since when does identifying a problem (racism) make you racist? That is the most ignorant thing I have ever heard and falls into the folk theory of racism described by Jane hill. Educate yourself. Look into it. We can't fix problems (like racism) when people like you exist in our society. You are the problem in this country.
""They would not do this to black people," he said. "They would not do that to white people. They would not do this to Mexicans, or Italians. They do this to Indian people."
Oh really? Ever heard of the Fighting Irish? The Trojans? The Spartans? The Patriots? The Yankees? The Padres? The Buccaneers? The Vikings? The Cowboys? No... it is not only Native Americans, get over yourselves.
I almost forgot the Celtics
White northerners everywhere demand the Yankees change their name!
It's not IF it has been done. It's HOW it's being done. Are you familiar with the Cleveland Indians logo? Big-tooth, smiling Indian with a feather? You even said it: the "fighting" Irish. That's noble. That's cool. How about the Potato Famine Irish? That would be cool, huh?
@ Dan- Ok so all of those mascots you mentioned accurately represented the regions and people who founded and owned those teams right? Notre Dames an Irish Catholic University. Minnesota was settled by scandinavians etc. The Atlanta Braves were founded and now owned by white men who had no consent to use an Native image as their mascot. IF it were the Atlanta BRaves from a Georgia Indian Reservation and NAtive People owned and profited from the team it would be their business to use the image of a screaming Indian Warrior. Just like Notre DAme uses the Irish guy. But its not. ITs about white poeple co-opting someon other culture's image for sport and profit
How about since this is America, we are all one race regardless of color. I have Cherokee blood in me and so does my fiance, although not much, and I am in Tennessee. I believe many people around Georgia and Tennessee have relatives of Native American. so technically they are part of the culture the use for imaging by blood. If that is not enough, then maybe we should not show anything near "stereotyping" to our youth and just let these cultures and history die out. Even if exagerated I'd like to be remembered.
@Cookston- I kinda hear what your saying. Though this is about Non Indian people profiting from the image and likeness of Indians. IT isn't right.
EVERYONE is soooo sensitive.
Have those groups been discriminated against to the extent natives have? Were their children stripped from them and sent to boarding schools where they were forced to cut their hair, punished if they spoke their native tongue and forced to convert to Christianity? Are those groups still denied their civil liberties and discriminated against? Were those groups slaughtered by the tens of thousands to the point they make up less than one percent of the population when we are on their land? Didn't think so. You should think before you speak. Can't compare any of the groups you listed to native Americans. You would know that if you educated yourself. You are so ignorant it is offensive.
Thank you Briana. Most people, regardless of race, are unaware of the TRUE history of relations between Europeans and/or the US government and the Indigenous people of the Americas. There is a long road of historical trauma that feeds Native reactions to these mascots. Most of the people posting on this issue could never have a serious face-to-face conversation about Native history/culture. Education is the key and as that continues our society will slowly evolve for the better! Idle No More!
Natives are part of Americana. 26 out 50 States have Indian names. Many more counties, towns and cities have them as well.
Can I still drive my JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE to Brave's games ?
no. you must get a wrangler and go to a cowboys game.
No, you must buy an American made Toyota Tundra and drive to watch Alabama win on the 7th.
The Democrat party says to ignore the tribe leaders and that Elizabeth Warren will be instructing you on what to say and think at Moore-on[dot]org shortly.
As the Democrats and the voters of her state said, she is 100% Native American, more Native American than anyone else alive today, and that she speaks for every original American.
So how about the Celtics with the macsot of a Leprechaun? Is that how we see Irish people like they are all dwarfs?
How about the Cowboys? Is that how we see every white person as a cowboy in this country?
Let's make a logo with a black dude with a fro and a bone through his nose. How about an awesome Orthodox Jew with beard and thick glasses blowing a ram's horn. Sure, let's have at it. Let's see how that flies.
Here's the thing...the image of a fighting leprchan is an Irish one. We can Agree. Notre Dame is an Irish Catholic University. We can Agree on that. IF they want to use that image its THEIR BUSINESS. If you are an IRish person and offended by it its YOUR RIGHT to saya that. ITs even your right to launch whatever protest against it. The Atlanta Braves was not founded by NAtive Americans. Natives don't own that ball club. So therefore the white men who founded it and now own it don't really have a right to co-opt the image of a NAtive Arrior as their mascot. NAtives don't make money from that logo. NAtives didn't and still don't give permission.
And the Minnesota Vikings were not founded by actual Vikings, nor did they ask permission to use the imagery. Get over yourself. You're just a typical lazy American screaming from the sidelines how important you are and demanding other people who are working hard ask your permission to continue doing what they are doing.
"...They would not do that to white people". Ummm how about the Fighting Irish or the Celtics? Do the PC crowd assume that these teams and their supporters are saying that all Irishmen are belligerent little people?
Apples and oranges, a leprechaun is a fictional fairy...
"Apples and oranges, a leprechaun is a fictional fairy..."
No, but Vikings were real people. Specifically, they were basically pirates who preyed on poorly defended coastal civilian populations for a couple of hundred years. Leif Ericson's discovery of North America notwithstanding, the Vikings name "celebrates" a really violent period in Scandinavian history. Do Swedish Americans complain about that? No, we complain when they choke in the fourth quarter. (12 men in the huddle, then have the 40-year-old who's been getting illegal hits all game throw off a bootleg. Geeeez. It's like they don't want to win.)
Smallz, apart from having trouble with plurals (try a -s instead of a -z, it works better), makes an interesting argument re: who's actually choosing the team name. Interesting, but I'm not sure it's right. Does it really matter? Portland State also claimed the Vikings moniker, and unlike Minnesota it's not obvious to me that Portland (or any of a host of high school teams, for that matter) has any particular connection to Scandinavian ethnicity. Does that matter? If we lump all "white people" together, that doesn't seem any more reasonable than allowing the Seminole tribe of Florida to endorse the Fighting Sioux as well as FSU Seminoles. (New fundraising option for some tribe: license "Indian" nicknames.) Midway through the 19th Century, Irish immigrants were so scorned that Irish laborers were employed for jobs that were too dangerous to risk valuable slaves in, the "paddy wagon" was so named because the Irish were assumed to be habitual drunk-and-disorderly arrestees, and as late as the JFK campaign it was openly wondered whether an Irish Catholic could be trusted to hold the presidency without being dominated by the Pope. But sure, the Fighting Irish nickname is reflective of the DOMINANT power group. Uh-huh.
Nobody owns an ethnicity. Suppose the Western Carolina University were to decide that "Catamount" is a terrible sports name (it is) and, with the blessing of the Eastern Band of Cherokees, become the Western Carolina Cherokees. Does the Oklahoma branch of Cherokees have the right to veto it? If so, why? What if some people in each band are in favor of it, and some aren't. Who gets to pick? Is there a heckler's veto?
Or, here's an idea: it's a sports team name. Find something genuinely important to worry about.
Cue the angry white guilt. Who cares if they use a screaming native american as their mascot? My family is from Ireland and I am not offended by Notre Dame's mascot. The whole thing is absurd.
for all you know everyone on this thread could be brown. You assume everyone is white. Thats interesting. The fact of the matter is the image is being used by a white owned ball club. IF the atlanta braves were a NAtive Owned ball club then we wouldn't be arguing would we. Native Americans would be in control of how their image is used. ITs about stealing an image of SOMEONE ELSE's culture without consent for sport and profit. Personally, as a NAtive I'd like to see some royalty money from all the images of all NAtive Arriors used in PRo Sports!! Boom!
No, I do not assume everyone on this board is white. I could care less what anyone's ethnicity is on here. I am speaking about the group who will fain outrage over this issue. I merely look at recent history and the people who have voiced opposition over some cartoon imagery or slogan that some minority group may or may not find offensive. And the people in this country who are the loudest voices are white people. White college educated liberal minded people. I feel I can say this with impunity because I fall into this group and I can see with my own eyes who are the ones championing these issues. White people in this country hold a tremendous amount of guilt because they feel that they should carry the burden of what people did hundreds of years ago. It's almost funny.
Get over it. You PC people are ruining the world. In the last 20 years I've seen so much whining and bickering over this nonsense that continues to erode our country's sense of humor.
"But Gover said such imagery leads kids to grow up thinking that all Native Americans look menacing or do the tomahawk chop, the customary "rally" routine of Braves fans."
Sure, just like the Notre Dame mascot has led me to believe all Irish people look like Leprichauns and just like how the Jacksonville Jaguars have led me to believe that Jaguars are terrible at football.
Is it offensive? Probably. I'd rather hear numerous Native tribe/leaders weighing in on it than the general public, though.
I do agree though, Redskins, that's offensive. Could you imagine a team named the "Blackskins" out on the field? I mean come on. That's got to change. I'm all for tradition, but not that kind of tradition.
Good post. Agreed; redskins is a derogatory term. Braves is not.
let's be honest with ourselves for a minute. redskins is only derogitory if you make it. it is a word describing a native american. it is also used by Native Americans to describe themselves "red power" and "red pride." it only became a derogatory term when someone decided it was. it's origin was only to communicate an idea.
we see the same thing with other cultures and races who have changed the descriptive term for their race with each new generation claiming the previous term is offensive. it is only a word. changing the word does not change it's meaning. if you are ashamed of the word, you are ashamed of what it is communicating. if a word describing your race offends you, you might be ashamed of your race. if you think a word describing another's race is offensive, you might be racist. changing the word does not change the race. if you are changing the words or categorizing them as PC and offensive, you are admitting there is something wrong with the race.
a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet. people are all people, races are nothing nothing more than a few hundred years of environmental exposure and cultures are short lived. we are all mostly the same which is frightfully boring so let's learn to celebrate and share our differences rather than dance around them.
This article came out just in the nick of time. I was getting bored with the comments on the 'offended Asian" article.
For me, I think I'll look for something lighter to read about. Like "famous Jewish sports heroes". (from Airplane!)
I bet there are plenty of good books about Hank Greenberg, one of the greatest Detroit Tigers of them all. :-)
Only if the books about Sid Luckman are all out of stock. (Still has the Bears passing records, and let's see Cutler return punts.)
How about Adam Greenberg making his big comeback on the Marlins! He did so well, that the Baltimore Orioles want him to play in 2013.
It's not the image of an Indian. It's the image of a sports fan wearing a mohawk and feather in support of his team.
(and no one can tell what an image is yelling)
I want no part in the debate, I just acknowledge that the native people were screwed over by this government long time ago.
we committed genocide on Native Peoples
Who is "we"?
Then give all you have back to them since you admit it was you who stole from them. I stole nothing. I'm guessing you are one of the people who vote these murderers and thieves in yet deny what they are so you can stand up for your "right to vote." Calling the people thieves who you vote for shows your hypocrisy.
Gotta agree with EZdidit on this one. "We" didn't do anything. People who lived in this country hundreds of years ago committed genocide on Native Americans. "We" did not. My relatives didn't even arrive in this country until early 1900's.
When will the Cincinnati Reds start wearing the Hammer & Sickle?
"When will the Cincinnati Reds start wearing the Hammer & Sickle?"
Never because if you were a student of baseball history you would know that their original name was the Cincinnati Red Stockings.
They also became the "Redlegs" for five years during the Red Scare.
I would rather have a Leprechaun or a Patriot anyway – the rest of the Indian nation was wiped away might as well remove the name, pictures and all references that they ever existed.
So I guess you don't attend the many Native American Powwows that are held each year in every state.
Oh Snap!! That one needs to get themself so frybread! They don't know what they are missing!!!
What makes you say the indian nation is wiped away? We're still alive and thriving.
I am native American.. NO team, no school no car manufacturer used the Native american name or symbol in any way that was disrespectful.In fact it was done in an honorable way. Used to depict ultimate coolness....
I think the whole controversy was ridiculous..
Now if they wanted to call a team the Squaw's thats disrespectful and I understand not liking that..... but then there is a squaw valley..?
Put a screaming indian on a porta potty and I might get mad~! :)
Otherwise , what's the fuss?
With respect Ms MAry- White people using Native imagery for sport and for profit. They got neither consent nor do NAtives see a penny of the money made off of an image of a Native Warrior. I'm offended because when the Braves were founded we know it wasn't founded by NAtive Americans. That's why I make a fuss. White people can use whatever image of their own cultures that they wan't. Natives should have the say what is ok when using our likeness and NAtives should profit if they agree to it.
You can't copyright a generic image of an ethnicity. What a silly thought.
how can you call yourself a native american when you don't even care that our people are still being looked over as less than people? people go to those games with "war paint" and "war bonnets", but they wouldn't show up in blackface if the mascot were black. what's the difference? they may be called "braves" implicating that natives are brave but every image they create is made from satire towards native american culture not respect.
Easy now. He is right.. It is not some drunken Indian it is the representation of a warrior. Stop the PC BS. Now go complain to the nfl because that should be the issue ie. Redskins.
Because the use of the native american names and symbols for teams and cars. Were to represent something VERY SPECIAL..
Do you know of a team called the Hyenna's..? Or a car called the sloth?
come on.. They get cool names like Impala, cougar, etc.
I am PROUD, PROUD, PROUD of who I am.. Where I come from..
And having a sleek, powerful gorgeous car named after us..Or a team of strong, team with a strong fighting spirit named after us.. Is COOL>>>>>
And since as a race we are basically being bred out of existence.. I think having the name live on attached to something brave and cool..Is, well..."cool"...
Seriously.. what is the big deal?
The bottom line is we should be in control of how our image is represented! Not white people.
I think they should use a more modern photo of Braves living in Atlanta. Heck, they should also allow any remaining Braves living in Atlanta free tickets to see the games. That would be nice to honor those who you named the team after.
Those Braves now live in Oklahoma .
There are members of the Cherokee and Creek Nations still living in Georgia.
Word. And those tribes and all tribes who claim the screaming braves as a representation of their own tribes or bands get every penny made off merchandise using that image!!!
Maybe it should be a picture of an indian dealing blackjack...
Little do you know that most tribes do not have casino affiliations and those that do only receive a small percentage of the profits.
funny they don't complain when it's used as a position of honor. Commander-in-chief. Chief of police. Chief warrant officer. Chief executive officer. Fire chief. My chief complaint is all the brave soldiers protecting the home of the brave.
Mr Bill- Chief is an English word....It has been in use longer than columbus landing in the new world and really has nothing to do with NAtive language. IT is just a noun that describes a position of authority and not offensive to anyone. The wrod cheif was a way to describe a tribal leader. the Native word for Chief is different for each tribe.
What's the native word for Brave?
Chief isn't even a native american word. its origins are spanish. its when the word chief is associated with a bad image of a native american that its offensive. Many natives don't even use the word chief, they avoid it by saying leader or something similar or equivalent in their own language.
Brave is probably not even a Native American word either, so, meh...
rule of thumb if it offends even one person of that ethnicity then don't use it or if they got the backing of the local tribe then it should be ok but you should make sure and shouldn't assume it doesn't offend.
Thank you for some long awaited common sense. I remember telling my kids that it wasn't a joke if the other person wasn't smiling. You could just as easily say that you're not honoring someone if that person doesn't feel honored.
Born in USA=Native American. so, speaking as a Native American, this would not offend me at all
being born in the USA doen't make you a native american in the sense that its used in mascots. so not really relevant.
I am less offended by a picture then the idea that Atlanta should represent any Native American. Blackfoot (Blood) ancestry.
I'm even more offended that all these years Native people haven't seen a cent of any money made from the logo on merchandise being bought and sold. Thats a lot of money NAtive people should be suing for!!
But sometimes people are a little too sensitive. In a hundred years we will probably have people of Indian heritage yelling about why they were ignored all those years.. as they look at the logo of a fat white guy screaming with a baseball mitt on his bald head.
Fine, then since people need to not be so sensitive, how about if we pick a few other new names: the Negr0s, the Dag0s, The M1cks, The Y1ds, etc. etc. Get my point?
Barry, your examples are silly. Those are derogatory terms. Braves is not.
In the way that they use it to exploit native american culture, yes it is.
Maybe they can change the team name to the Atlanta Black Hand? As someone of Italian descent, that wouldn't rub me the wrong way!
ND's drunken brawling leprechaun laughs at you.
Wow /-: Simply wow.
Basic sentiment seems to be that it's OK to offend some people so long as we don't think they should be offended.
I would have no trouble with using native american imagery if we hadnt almost completely destroyed their cultures in the greatest genocide of history.
i don't think anyone living was part of that conflict. same goes for slavery, the spanish inquisition, and a thousand other culture, religion or race based war/killing/injustice. get past it. if one can't let it go no matter what side your ancestors were on, then the problem behind the original conflict persists.
"greatest genocide of history"? Your view of history must be fairly recent and your definition of genocide fairly broad. Invading a land and conquering its peoples is as old as recorded history. Macedonia, Carthage, Rome, the Ottomans...those are just a few of the hundreds of empires that were built on the tears of the vanquished. For every nation of earth today somebody lost a war, or wars, at some point. It happens; get over it.
Its genocide because they meant to get rid of native americans totally. its an untold history that still effects native americans today. they created reservations as a last resort to keep them from the rest of the population when it initially failed. The genocide included the introduction of diseases by selling smallpox infested blankets to native americans to outright killing them. i'd suggest researching it before outright claiming that it isn't what it is.
Truth beknown if the tribes had spent more time sober, and less time fighting with themselves they may have prevented your so called "genocide". Nazi germany would be more acceptable as a definition of the greatest genocide in history.
Native American "cultures" are alive and well if you will take the time to check it out.
It wouldn't go well at all if it was a black person drawn with exaggerated features, Littlesun. HOWEVER, THAT SHOULD BE FINE. GROW A THICKER SKIN PEOPLE, WOW. We live in a generation of the most sensitive little children, who happen to be aging rapidly while still being CHILDREN that are upset by things that only a CHILD would be upset at.
Go for it.
"Writer Paul Lukas of Uni Watch... gave a failing grade to the Braves logo... " Atlanta's world = shattered.
I find it offensive that you directed your comment solely at white men when there are people of Native American ancestry who have commented to say that they did not find it offensive. Guess that means you should be forced to remove your comment.
The Braves' logo is demeaning to Native Americans. Native Americans, however, must take the lead on this issues and speak out if they believe that logo is offensive. Forming a unified front will be difficult given the diversity of Native Americans.
Make Black Artists stop using the N word and then we have something to talk about. Hyprocrites.
I am a native American. I was born here therefore I am a native. I think everyone should just get over all the "I am offended" garbage. Nobody guarantees a life full of smiles. Nobody around here today ran anybody off of their land either. Indians get tax free this and that and most of the houses I see on the reservation look like crap with a dozen or so broken down cars in the yard. They sure have nice casinos though.
Being born here does not make you a Native American, it only makes you a citizen of the United States.
actually if you look up the history between native americans and the US government, you'll find that native americans were in fact forced off their lands. native americans are only tax free on reservations. and the reason everything looks like crap is because of an inherited depression from years of degradation and oppression from outside cultures that most people look past.
Native Americans have been complaining but their complaints are ignored.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers
New England Patriots
Notre Dame Irish
.... just a few white people who are mascots.
Native Americans have a lot to be upset about but using names like "Braves" or "Indians"
is not a very legitimate one.
Seal Team Six did not use "Archie Bunker" for the codename. They used a code name with clout:
Dude-White people using white images of white archetyoes of white culture for sport and profit is fine.....however what we are talking about is white people (I'm quite sure the first Altanta Braves team was not comprised of, run and owned by Native Americans) using an image and likeness from someone elses culture for sport and profit without their consent. Also, except for the fighting irish those teams and people they depict can be any race...Mariners are seafarers and can be of any race or nationality as were pirates and buccaneers. Vikings were from minnesota and as we all know that part of the country was settled and still populated by scadanavians.
Then let the Native AMericans complain about it! I grew up near the Creek Indian tribe in Alabama. Their favorite baseball team? The Braves.
Correction-Also the vikings-and we all know that there is a heavy scandinavian population in MN. Like I said...using images and archetypes from ones own culture should never be an issue. Using someone elses isn't right. Notre Dame is an Irish Catholic School. ITs their perrogative to use that imagry and culture for their mascots...If we were talking about a Native American University or Reservation wantin g to use their own faces as a nmascot then thats their perrogative too
Sure using your own is your perogitive. But it will always be someone else's culture when looking in from the outside. Someone, somewhere will always find a way to be offended. Too bad. Boo hoo, here's a tissue.
I'm descended from Vikings and they never asked my permission to adopt that team name. I'm offended. My people never wore horned helmets.
Smallz, I understand what you meant. but reread your comment and consider the logic. What you are, in effect, saying is that "sports" belong to white people. By saying that sports teams cannot use Indian imagery because it is not appropriate for white men to use another culture's icons, you have just said that "sports" are the white mans domain, which is about as silly as saying that black people own Jazz music. Your phrasing unintentionally poses the question "When does a sport 'belong' to a race?" If one of Notre Dame's sports teams is mostly black, is it appropriate for that team to continue using the Fighting Irish logo or is that now racist? If it's inappropriate to have one racial/cultural icon, then it's probably inappropriate to have any. Any other conclusion would require some bizarre formula for determining how many people of a particular race have to be offended before we can claim something is offensive. The bottom line is that no sport or activity belongs to only one race, or put another way, no one race gets to speak on behalf of an entire sport or activity.
@ James – Since I cna't respond to you I will respond to me. When white men profit from ownership of thier sports teams...yes it would seam that its their domain. If the Atlanta Braves were formed on an Indian reservation and comprised of NAtive players and NAtives profited from business associated with it then IT would be their domain wouldn't it as well as their perrogative to use their image and likeness. But We know that historically NAtives didn;t form the Atlanta Braves did they? Now when African americans were allowed to enter Notre Dame they had very little say in how their team mascot would be depicted. However, Notre Dame is still an Irish Catholic Organization. And they want to keep their fighting irish mascot its their business. But how dare people who are not Native use and image of a NAtive Warrior without consent. The plain and simple truth is white poeple hate being told what they can't do and that their stuff offends people. The image is offensive and since it isn't Natives who are using it...the Atlants Braves should stop. The end.
@ James – oh I almost forgot about this statement of yours
"The bottom line is that no sport or activity belongs to only one race, or put another way, no one race gets to speak on behalf of an entire sport or activity."
Unless an equal number of African American, Asians, NAtive American's and LAtinos and all of the other races that exist in the US start to equally profit from the sports industry as much as white people, the business of sports in this country will be the domain of white people. And I'm not talking about the players. Because you and I both know that the white men who own their teams and the sports media etc are the ones making the cash, and you and I both know that their faces are white!! And they white men actually do speak for other races when concerning sports. That is why were are having this argument. Because they want to speak for NAtive Amricans and use their image without their consent. So your statement is totally untrue. Now its the end.
How about these Atlantans name their team after Gen. Sherman?
IF the owners of the Atlanta Braves wanna name their team after a confederate general thats their deal. just don't steal someone else's cultural image....I mean if the Atlanta Braves was a team from a Georgia Indian reservation we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Smallz, Sherman was a Union General (he burnt Atlanta to the ground)
Wow Smallz. That went right over your head. . .
@smallz you are hereby banned from wearing or doing anything that is not "owned" by your culture whatever that is. this means no Jeans unless your a french sailor, no lucky charms unless you are Irish and don't even think about Halloween unless you are a Pagan and dress up as yourself.
The Atlanta Sherman Neckties?
I don't care about the wars you people had amongst yourselves. Both sides hated Indians and to be honest Indians hated them back. I don't really value your culture or hold your heros as my own. BOOM!
Let's not forget the Boston Celtics, The NY Yankees, The USC Trojans, Michigan State Spartans, Nebraska Corn Huskers, UNLV Rebels, and a whole bunch of other teams. Just goes to prove, if you want to be a victim, you can probably find something to be upset about.
These are all really poor examples and don't in any way back up your argument and here's why....
Th Boston Celtics were started and made up of mostly Irish men
The NY Yankees- are from new york and the regional name for northerers was "yankee" IT represents accurately the region
The USC Trojans – The Trojans no longer exists and unless Greeks have an issue, this is a ridiculous comparison Michigan State Spartans " "
Nebraska Corn Huskers- Nebraskans have a history of corn production
UNLV Rebels- The word Rebels in this case is an adjective
IF the Atlanta Braves was a team formed on an Indian Reservation, owned and run by NAtive Americans and they wanted to use this image its their business. IF Nebraskans want to use their corn growing farmer as a mascot its their business. But The Atlanta Braves were not in fact started owned and run by NAtive Americans. Therefore these comparisons are not enough to prove your point. Like the Fighting Irish is Notre Dames Team...ITs an Irish Catholic School. They can do whatever they want with their image. If Irish people don't like it they can complain. But we are talking about white people using another culture's image without their consent for sport and profit.
As someone with native American blood running thourgh my veins I have no problem with this and people who do should worry about more important things not a logo a sports team may or may not use
Thankfully, you do not speak for most of your people.
sports mascots are chosen as emblems of pride because of some sort of trait that is admirable such as bravery and strength. if your race has never been used as a mascot then there is a slight worth complaining about. but if it has, stop whining and take the compliment and take some pride that others want to be associated with your race, culture and history. and if they get it wrong in your opinion, get over it. you can't expect that a single character will accurately represent thousands or millions of individuals.
native americans could learn a lot from the us Irish. learn to love yourself and embrace the use of your cultural icons as a celebration of your people—it's a lot more fun.
Here's the thing it wasn't a team of NAtive People that formed the Atlanta BRaves like Notre Dame was an Irish Catholic School. If the Braves were infact a NAtive American team when we could talk. Your argument holds no water. We are talking about a group of white people co-opting another groups image and likeness without their permission for sport and profit. So your comparisson to the Irish is flawed on many levels.
Thank you Smallz. Unfortunately I think your use of logic is falling on deaf (and dumb) ears.
so maybe by your logic only people of Irish decent can cheer for ND or the Celtics. Maybe only Irish can eat lucky charms too. While we are at it we might want to throw a fit when others wear green and celebrate St. Patty's. on the contrary we find it flattering because we are proud of our heritage which by the way is one of misery and defeat from the beginning of history. we have been colonized, evicted, starved, and unwelcomed for centuries. there was no Irish pride on the docks of NYC and Boston 100 years ago. but we as a culture learned to stop hating ourselves and to celebrate our culture and indeed share it.
my comparison is dead on. i know my culture's history. my ears are not deaf or dumb. perhaps in 100 years those Native Americans who are complaining about sports logos will learn to love their culture, icons and stereotypes enough to share them and even take pride when outsiders celebrate them like the Irish (even when they get it all wrong like you all do with us Irish) instead of being so ashamed that they think they are being mocked when outsiders appropriate them.
PC perpetuates racism. if a name or representation of who you are offends you, you have a problem with self loathing. call me a ginger-haired mic johnny and i will accept it with pride. wear a ND hat and fake orange beard to a St. Patty's parade and no matter your race or heritage, know that you will be welcomed by the Irish. we are not all catholic, brawling red-headed drunks, but if that's what you associate with us, so be it. it is the "US" that we are proud of and the Fighting Irish mascot, though wrong in every way represents "US" and we are not ashamed of who we are anymore and so there is no longer offense.
Fun fact: "Notre Dame" is French. The University was founded by a French priest. Spots writers referred to their teams as "Irish" because it was a Catholic University, and most people at that time believed Catholic and Irish were synonymous.
@ME- How you and other white people regard your cultural icons and archetypes is your business. How White people regard MY cultural icons and archetypes is my business. Your logic isn't logic and your arguments flawed. The truth is white poeple have control of and profit from the use of their white icons and cultural archetypes- like the fighting irish. Notre Dame profits from that. They control the image and how its used etc. The Atlanta BRaves is a team founded by white men who have co-opted (stole) the image and likeness of a NAtiveAmerican. No Native tribes or groups profit or have any say in how this image is used. What you do with yours is your business. And how ours is used is ours. The end!
Guess we better change the names of all the states, cities and towns named after native american tribes....oh wait, those are named in honor of the tribes, mascots are chosen for the same reason!
now THAT'S funny!!
CNN doesn't always stir the race pot, but when they do, they ignore Notre Dame's white mascot and focus on the Atlanta Braves' Indian.
Took the words right out of my mouth.
People-the difference between the fighting irish and the braves is that NAtre Dame is an Irish Catholic organization. They can use their cultural image any way they want. What we are talking about is a team that was formed by whites, owned and run by whites using another culture's image and likeness and making money etc off of it. So thats the difference. If the Atlanta Braves were formed by a group of NAtive American and NAtives had a say in how their images was used then we wouldn't be having this conversation.
People need to shut up. It's a mascot and everyone is so damn touchy and sensitive about every little thing.
The FIghting Irish, Columbus Blue Jackets, New England Patriots. I don't find any of these offensive, and frankly i'm proud of these names, all great parts of this country. A team name is meant to instill fear in the other teams (ie Avalanche). If your Bravery can do this you should be proud too. What about the Vancouver Canucks (the Johnny Canuck Logo is a bad stereyotpe) but canadians just laugh ..... it's a game don't take it so serious.
every Caucasian should be incredibly offended the Patriots have a pic of a white revolutionary/minuteman as their mascot...LOL...this is all ridiculous.
Obviously Clyde Bellecourt was unaware of all the Viking, Celtic, Knights just to metion a few of the White Anglo team mascots and nicknames.
2/3 are not ethic groups. The other name came from the Irish Catholics and their history at Notre Dame. Important distinctions that a little research would teach you.
To sum up. What white people want to do with their own image is their business. But this is a case of White people using someone else's image without their consent and profiting from it. If whites from New England want to represent their role in the revolutionary war with a minuteman archetype they can. But we all know the Atlanta Braves weren't found by NAtives. Native people didn't own that team when it was formed. I'm damn sure tribes don't turn a cent everytime something with their logo is bought and sold. That;s the difference between the patriots and those other mascots and teams like the braves
This is one of things that make you go hmmmm. As someone of Native decent I personally do not have a problem with native themed mascots and logos (just look at "The Fighting Irish of Notre Dame" and their Irish caricature logo) , but there are also many Native Americans who are offended, so I usually don't comment one way or the other. But in this instance, where the logo was retired quite a few years ago, it appears to me that "bringing it back" is an attempt to ignite discussion or provoke a reaction about something that was put to rest by this team years ago. If the Atlanta Braves are unhappy with their current letter "B" logo (I like it), then they should look into designing a new logo for the team – maybe a contest for a new logo would be a good marketing tool.
I meant letter "A" logo.
Yes Yes Exactly! Unless the Atlanta Braves were in fact historically formed by a team of exclusively Native players then we got ourselves a clear case of why comparing this to the Fighting Irish is pointless.
Conflicted. Bring it back because it's cool looking and incredibly politically incorrect. Yet, the "run" started soon after Knockahoma's retirement. Hruum.
Great, now Boston is going to want them back so they have a winning team...
We in Seattle are offended being called Mariners!! There's other jobs up here too...See you at Seattle's Best!
I'm not really sure you guys get the point of a sports team logo or name. Names are generated by things people fear and things that people wish they could be. Not out to make fun of anyone. You want to be a predator, devil, a warrior, and yes a Indian, a pirate, a lion, brave. You want to say your someone that fought for your land, your home, this is your terf, your land, your women, and your food. I say to all of you that are "offended" grow up. Nobody's making fun of you, they are honoring, and respecting you, wish they could be you. I hate to say it but the white guys didn't exactally win this land but we all did, the black guys well you didn't exactally have a choice in the day, but everyone does now and that's what's important. But the indian is what everyone feared back then for they scalped and slane with tomohawks and faught in a way that all of us respected. Tony stark said it right is it better to be feared or respected, why can't we have both?
Alan-Not sure you really are listening. And I'm quite sure you dont get to tell us what is offensive and not offensive when images and caricatures of our culture are being used for profit and sport. The end.
I, as a white, am insulted by any reference to reds as a logo, since they scalped whites. They scalped President Truman's mother-in-law. My father put "red" on my brother's birth cercificate in 1937. We had three "Reds" in our family history. Go figure...
scalping wasn't a common practice of native americans. it was the settlers that started that because people were paying money for the scalps of native americans. they also paid money for bones and other things. so the incident you describe, was a rare occurrence. from what I know of native american history, that natives who did that were looked down upon in their culture.
See now this is important.. Having a accurate accounting of who scalped who and why and who ACTUALLY did it first and why..
Being that it was easier to bring a scalp to prove a dead indian than to bring the whole indian.. Because scalps were paid for..Based on the fact it was offered as proof of a dead native.
THOSE are the things we should care about.. The TRUE and the ACCURATE history.. The real insults and cruelty upon our people.
Lets do that . Lets deal with important things like accurate history..
The University of North Carolina at Pembroke's team is called "Braves" and their logo is a Native American. Why is ok for a Native American university to do what Native Americans don't want Atlanta to do?
This is part of the liberal/diversity alternate universe. Its ok for the 'aggrieved' to say or do anything they want because, well, they are agrieved. Funny thing is they won't call Hank Aaron a racist for wearing the same logo years ago.
You answered your own question. Read your response.
It's the imagery. The drum is the heart beat of all Native people. There is a certain protocol and custom for the drum. It's to be honored. The songs we sing are honor songs, war songs, songs of great deed and honor. Many of those songs are older than this country. A Chief holds an honored place among his/her tribe. I bet you dimes to dollars the students of that university honor those things and don't bring dishonor to these time honored traditions and customs. They are the "Braves" because they are stepping up to honor their communities and people. They are young people who feel strongly about where they came from. There's your difference.
Considering how the Braves used to play back when this logo was originally in use, I always thought the Indian was crying.
Every native American whome is offended has every right to retaliate anyone wearing this logo. The logo is meant to insult every oppressed native American tribe. Freedom to insult someone has another thing coming to them. Freedom is useless without common sence and humility.
how is this insulting...mascots are about honor and pride...i suppose all dog owners should be insulted if a team is called the bulldogs or huskies.
I'm guessing English as a second language?
So if i see any native american wearing something i dislike or feel offended i have a right to retaliate?
People forget that their right to freedom of speach and any other rights is also shared with all groups of society.
Question for you; how is this offensive? Native americans at one time did not dress like this in the past?
Again, to be clear, the sports logo intention is to reflect strength and to be "brave". No pun intended.
I would be proud as part of the latin community if a sports franchise would take up an image that is related to latinos as its logo.
Obviously, like everything in life, we cannot go to the extremes, but, if they decide to put a mexican face with a large mexican hat shouting as their logo, i would be proud of it.
What about the FIghting Irish?
Crazed gunmen kill children, firefighters, and moviegoers, but a cartoon mascot is somehow important. Everyone knows this is a stylized image. If you're really concerned about this issue, not your fake concern over a logo, then do something to improve the poverty, disease, unemployment, and lack of education among vast portions of Native Americans.
"...such imagery leads kids to grow up thinking that all Native Americans look menacing or do the tomahawk chop..." That's just plain dumb. Maybe we should ban classic Westerns, too, or kids will grow up thinking cowboys and Indians have a shootout every week.
The Braves still suck at baseball
Enough with the PC junk
Cleveland should drop " The Browns", sounds racist.
Paul Brown – their first coach.
As a teacher, I have this conversation every year with U.S. History students. As I explain to them, you/we do not get to tell others what is or isn't offensive to their race or culture. It would be hard to argue this isn't stereotypical and equally difficult to not see how Native Americans might find it offensive. Ironic how we non-miorites tend to over value our history but under value that of others. Yes, I do think there are many more important things to work on. However, as someone who has studied and taught this for nearly two decades, I know it's the little things hat quickly become much greater problems.
Thank you! Very well said.
Well said, my friend. There are too many adults in this nation of ours who have never learned the meaning of respect for others. Freedom of speech does NOT give a green light to be offensive to whoever you please. As with any issue or intended act, the deciding question is: "how would I like it if I was on the receiving end?".
Not having your feelings hurt is not one of the basic human rights. If I say something that offends you, without any malice on my part, perhaps the problem lies with you.
Sorry, not the same John as the original poster. Don't want him to be blamed for my directness.
Just because you claim to be offended, does not mean that an offense has taken place.
I agree 100%. I once had a t-shirt with fake names and mascots for the Jersey Jews, Georgia Blacks, and Los Angeles Asians. I was told it was offensive. Well that is the damn point.
And if you don't get why, that's fine too. Just don't claim you are honoring anyone. If the group you are "honoring" thinks what you are doing is being a bigot, and you keep doing it, you can't claim ignorance.
The 'screaming Indian' should be retired for good, really. I don't dislike it, and I've been seeing it since the mid 1960's. From a sports view, it is a virile aggressive Native American whom I highly respect and love. That said, Native Americans feel it is an offensive stereotypical image and should be removed. I agree with them. No image of any nationality or race of people should be used if that group considers it improper. Those of you who know any Native Americans know how they feel about a lot of what's happened to them since this country was born. Land stolen, lifestyle eradicated, beliefs infringed upon. If they had use of a time machine, they'd go back, and not allow Chris Columbus or Americus Vespucci and any of their passengers/crew off their ships
Word!! Well put! You set a good example! ITs about respect and reasonability. And acknowleging a groups right to how their image and likeness are treated and used.
Gotta love the screaming Indian. Some simple minded people may find it disrespectful, but it so much more robust and inspiring to cheer for a team that respects itself fully rather than those that coward behind insecurities. I'm not an Atlanta Braves fan, but I totally respect this move.
No doubt NAtive people are all about their warrior history but we are talking about a Team owned by white men using an image of NAtive people that they didn't get permission or consent to use. Nobody is arguing that its cool image and it for sure inpires pride and strength, but the image isn't anyones to co-opt or use except for Natives. And we know Native Americans don't own the braves. Native Amricans didn't make up the first team. That si what this is about.
Haha wanna talk about simple minded? Says one of the people who cannot simply live without these images. A team which respects? Haha you do know when this image was first made, Native American children were being forcefully taken from their house holds and forced to go to boarding schools where they were physically (some died, and scarred) and emotionally abused for doing one thing, being an indian. They were forbidden to speak their language and practice their culture.
The man who overlooked all boarding schools, Henry Pratt has a famous quote
Native Indians should be proud of this logo. Their ancestors faced incredible odds against the 'white man' and their bravery is the reason that sports teams took Indian names for their teams.
right and white men are using this image for sport and profit. Ya know how much $ Indians make off the merchandise with thier historic image and likeness??? $0.00. If white people want to use their white mascots, fair enough. But they stole someone else's warrior image and now make money off of it. So its not really honoring NAtives is it.
Maybe they should change their name to the "priests" and have the logo be of a screaming boy? No one would object? It's just a team name not personnel...
So, this is what the hubub at the en of the Mayan calendar was all about
Stereotypes aren't illegal.
It's not a crime to use stereotypes when freely expressing oneself under the First Amendment.
It's not a crime to, so what's the problem?
If Paul Lukas and other people think it's such a crime, then they should call the cops.
Otherwise, they should just let it go and stop trying to control how people express themselves.
except by todays warped standard any stereotype of a jew is forbidden and considered antisemite. The kiss of death to politicians...
Unfortunately, all you care about are your first amendment rights, paying no attention to other people's feelings and sensibilities. Thus, we have the crux problem of modern society- "I'll do what I want and screw everyone else."
Isn't that the current GOP platform?
Hope I don't offend any Vikings.
Agreed. I am a KC Royals fan. Hope we do not 'anger' any monarchs with our team name...heavens!
Sorry...just do not see this as a significant issue. I believe there are many far more important socio-econonic concerns for this country, and its' citizens, to address than what logo the Atlanta Braves are wearing on their uniforms.
Let's focus on the important things, people...
My mistake...typo on 'economic'.
I love it! Colleges that change their names are pathetic. I was so annoyed when my college went from Redmen to "Red". What the hell is a "Red"? They are now RedHawks I think.
Riverhawks...it got changed to a stupid riverhawk...much to the anger of probably a majority of the native american student population.
As a recent graduate of NSU and a Cherokee who works in revitalizing language and culture from the days when gov't killed or tried to turn indians into "whites", I hate any kind of mascot which depicts us Indians as screaming, tomahawk chopping, feather wearing, and scalping heathens. I have seen frat boys dressing up and acting like drunk idiots mocking indians and when we asked them to quite they beginning acting like drunk @ssholes.
If you want to truly honor Native Americans then take the time to educate yourself and quit making the assumption that you are honoring us. Because majority of us think it is ridiculous and shameful. Havent seen any teams called the "Fighting Whites", or "Fighting Buffalo Soldiers", or "Fighting Wetbacks".
Aho! amayetli is correct, and has made the point well!
What defines you? Maybe it’s the shade of your skin, the place you grew up, the accent in your words, the make up of your family, the gender you were born with, the intimate relationships you chose to have or your generation? As the American identity changes we will be there to report it. In America is a venue for creative and timely sharing of news that explores who we are. Reach us at email@example.com.
Send Feedback | Subscribe