The zealot in redface pictured above, outside Progressive Field before the Indians’ home opener this afternoon, was featured on Deadspin and instantly became the object of scorn and disbelief nationwide.
Who would have the balls and the stomach, most reasonable Americans asked, to confront a person belonging to a specific race of people while dressed and garishly made up in a costume which mocks (or at the very least trivializes) that specific race of people, and then inform that person that he could not possibly be — and in fact, had no right to be — offended by the costume and the makeup .
But that’s precisely what happened.
This guy, whose last name was Rodriguez and who fancied himself a kind of spokesman or public defender, strode over to the Anti-Wahoo protesters, many of them from the American Indian Movement, with a mind to spar. (This was probably about 2 p.m., before the tallest tidal wave of endurance-pre-gamers descended from bars in the vicinity). He kept insisting that he was an Indians fan — an Indians fan! — (i.e. that his actions, thereby, weren’t subject to the scrutiny of law or taste?)
“It’s Cleveland pride,” he later told a Channel 5 reporter. “That’s all it’s about.”
When asked if he’d feel comfortable arriving to a game in blackface, you know, like if his team were the Cleveland Blacks, he repeated only that he was an Indians’ fan.
Though protesters have been railing against Chief Wahoo at opening day for decades, the recent vocal opposition by city councilmen and the “historic stance” of the Plain Dealer’s editorial board has pushed the issue more centrally into local conversations.
The crazy thing about this afternoon’s protest in general and the encounter above specifically was the lengths to which the Pro-Wahoo crowd is prepared to go (and here I primarily mean logical lengths) to deny the legitimacy of those offended by the logo.
The staunch, redfaced Rodriguez refused to acknowledge that the Native American man standing before him — Robert Roche, of the Apache Nation — could possibly take offense. Rorche literally told him he was offended by Chief Wahoo and the use of tribal feathers and redface, and Rodriguez just kept shaking his head.
It’s actually a shame for the civil Wahoo supporters that their comrades put on such an embarrassing and primitive display this afternoon. Only twice in three hours did Pro-Wahoo folks talk politely with the protesters about the root of their opposition and try to explain their own difficulties with the dehumanizing logo. (One man turned his Wahoo hat around as a little peace offering).
For the most part, though, passers-by hurled insults. A handful of boozy risk-takers sporting “Keep the Chief” tees walked directly in front of those holding signs, to taunt. Others distributed individual middle-fingers to each protester while inviting them to fuck themselves. Others launched the familiar hate speech — “Go back to the reservation,” etc.
Here’s a quick rundown of the rhetorical strategies at work today. (All of this I personally overheard.)
1) De-legitimize the anti-Wahoo argument itself:
—“It’s not racist!”
—”No one thinks it’s racist!” (Bold indeed, given the protest).
—”Talk to Obama if you think it’s racist.”
—”It’s a fucking cartoon. Come on.”
2) De-legitimize the anti-Wahoo protesters themselves:
—”They’re not even Indians.” (Quite a few of the protesters weren’t Native American. Nice work!)
—”It’s funny cuz they all look homeless.”
—”Get a job!”
—”Find something better to protest.”
3) Legitimize oneself.
—“I went to college!” (???)
—“That guy has four college degrees.” (About a fellow, a white male, who looked Robert Roche in the face and told him that his life could not possibly have been affected by Chief Wahoo, then proceeded merrily down the “Fighting Irish” argument line, except with the Dallas Cowboys.)
—(Holding Wahoo hat aloft, a la Catholic Priest) “I’m Cherokee!”
—I’m an Indian! I am! My grandfather would laugh at all of you.
4) Legitimize team and logo by really original, clever comparison.
—“Where’s PETA for the Detroit Tigers? Huh? Where’s PETA?”
—“I’m Irish. You don’t see me complaining about Notre Dame.” (ENOUGH ALREADY.)
—“I guess the Dallas Cowboys should get rid of that team too, because I’m offended!”
5) Baselessly and violently insult protesters:
—”Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you. Fuck you.”
—”You’re DumbASSes. Hear me? DumbASSes!”
6) Trivialize argument while shifting focus and blame.
—”We’re trying to celebrate an American pastime.” (i.e. Stop ruining my day).
—“I’m a season ticket holder. Why don’t you come to a game before you protest my team.” (Many of the protesters were Indians’ fans as well).
—From above: “It’s about Cleveland Pride. That’s all it’s about.”
7) Outright Wahoo-specific chants and noise-making.
—“Wahooooooooooooo!”
—”Keep the Chief! Keep the Chief! Keep the Chief!
—(Obnoxious Indian battle cry ululation stuff.)
This article appears in Apr 2-8, 2014.
….and it’s such fools that will force the Dolan family to confront the issue before they feel it’s economically necessary, since it will eventually become too embarrassing to patiently wait for Daniel Snyder (who appears to be the key owner in the “Big Four”) to kick open the door for league-wide changes in the NFL, MLB, NBA and NHL.
Disgusting. Another black eye for Cleveland and yet another “incident” to make this city look like Birmingham or Atlanta in the 1960s. Boozy losers giving the finger, shouting “Fuck you!” (when you have to shout the F-word, you’ve lost the argument) and “Get a job” (how Nineties…back when there WERE jobs to be gotten),”Wahooooooo!” and “What about Notre Dame?” are pathetic drunken trash, and nothing more.
Cleveland pride, my ass. More like Cleveland Shame.
I’m pro-Wahoo, and I like to think I would have had enough sense NOT to turn Opening Day into another St. Patrick’s Day–without the green. I would have just worn my “extreme Wahoo” red T-shirt…the one that covers the full body…and let it go at that.
So now we have TWO days a year when yahoos act like moronic jamokes on our streets and ruin the day for everyone else…March 17th, and whatever day Opening Day happens to fall on (The Muni Lot tailgating shenanigans are fenced-off, rather than on the streets of Cleveland, so they don’t count).
Again…disgusting. And in redface, yet? What an asshole. Thanks for nothing buddy…and for a shameful performance that ruins any argument the more sober pro-Wahoo fans might have been able put forth. Yes…sober. I’m assuming this clown was drunk or drugged.
Chuckles the Clown
I’m a native Clevelander and I have no problem with the name “Cleveland Indians.” But Chief Wahoo is an EXTREMELY racist caricature and brings well-deserved vitriol
and shame on the people of Cleveland. Get rid of it and please don’t worry about the jocks will think. They don’t (think.)
This situation made us look like Birmingham in the 60s? Learn some history, goofball. That statement suggests some pretty fundamental ignorance.
It seems that those rallying around the “keep the chief” movement (I use that term loosely) are solely acting in spite of those who take offense to Chief Wahoo, rather than some deeply rooted concern for the smiling red logo. Sure, there will always be people who take offense to things that others might deem “silly” … but given that we’re talking about a SPORTS team using a cartoon image of an “Indian” who people are personifying and vehemently throwing their passion behind, who’s really being silly here?
If it’s about “more than sports” and really about Cleveland pride, why not have the dignity to move on and accept the challenge of change? I find the lone feather logo pretty appealing and it could become a suitable replacement for sleeve patches, and while it would never find its way onto a uniform there is something striking about the faceless, embroidered outline of a former Chief Wahoo.
Really, getting rid of the Chief on all official merchandise should satisfy both parties–it’s not as if the Dolan’s will come and confiscate all existing Wahoo-laden memorabilia, which in turn will only become more valuable and endearing to Wahoo supporters. It will show that the team is making an effort to be considerate regarding sensitive racial issues. And lastly, rather than disgracing Chief Wahoo it would do more to canonize the logo, after a long legacy representing Cleveland’s best sporting franchise. Most importantly it would put an end to ugly instances like the one described in this article.
This issue is the absurdity of absurdities. Let me get this straight: the
purpose of the Sin Tax is to gouge those who purchase alcohol and cigarettes
not because anyone is trying to discourage consumption but rather so the
County can use that money to pay for sports stadiums that do not produce
anything but a fleeting moment witnessing the passing of a football, the
dribbling of a basketball and the throwing of a baseball so that such a
minute tidbit of diversion can be enjoyed by all. The stupidity of this
proposition is enough to make your head spin even though the spin doctors
advocating passage of this nonsense are already doing a pretty good job of
hypnotizing the voters to actually consider supporting it. At least the
Robber Barons of the previous centuries provided something tangible such as
oil, steel, railroads etcetera. These team owners do not even provide one
tangible thing that could ever be considered with the term “value added.”
Almost everyone discusses this “enterprise” as though it is the same thing
as industry {which it is not}. The price of admission is essentially a
voluntary tax paid by those who can afford it to pay those who don’t need
it. If this isn’t a transfer of wealth I don’t know what is.
The real outrage here is the fact that taxes on alcohol and cigarettes will
not be used to aid in the reduction of addiction {hence the reference to
“sin”} but rather to stuff the pockets of all three teams who could easily
afford to pay for the repairs themselves. The vote was rammed through the
last time {under somewhat suspicious circumstances} and hear we go again.
But this time…not so fast!!! We the voters of Cuyahoga County are going to
fight the proponents on this one and we don’t care if the teams up and go
somewhere else {please see my views on entertainment below} because quite
frankly there are simply more important things than sports and the unearned
money that comes with it. Those in public office who are too stupid and lazy
to find other ways to grow a major American city need to resign and leave
their self-seeking political ambitions on the scrapheap of history. Don’t
ever let it be said that this was time when the tide ran out on Cuyahoga
County but rather was the time when the voters rose up to welcome the rising
tide of change and rebuked this pathetic paradigm our previous elected
leaders embraced. Let the battle be joined.
And now to the real underlying issue at hand:
One of the most disturbing facts about our capitalist nation is the
misappropriation of funds directed to the salaries of entertainers. Everyone
should agree that the value an athlete, movie star, talk-show host,
team-owner, etcetera brings to the average citizen is very small. Granted,
they do offer a minuscule of diversion from our daily trials and
tribulations as did the jesters in the king’s court during the middle ages.
But to allow these entertainers to horde such great amounts of wealth at the
expense of more benevolent societal programs is unacceptable. They do not
provide a product or a service so why are they rewarded as such?
Our society is also subjected to the “profound wisdom” of these people
because it equates wealth with influence. Perhaps a solution to this problem
and a alternative to defeated school levies, crumbling infrastructures, as
well as all the programs established to help feed, clothe and shelter those
who cannot help themselves would be to tax this undeserved wealth.
Entertainers could keep 1% of the gross earnings reaped from their endeavor
and 99% could be deposited into the public coffers.
The old ideas of the redistribution of wealth have failed, and it is time to
adapt to modern-day preferences. People put their money into entertainment
above everything else; isn’t it time to tap that wealth? Does anyone think
this will reduce the quality of entertainment? It seems to me that when
entertainers received less income, the quality was much higher.
I’m glad people who don’t agree on the wahoo logo are concentrating their efforts on trying to eliminate it instead of trying to fix these chronic issues that occur on Indian reservations: alcoholism, drug use , illiteracy, teen pregnancy, and poverty.
There was 6 protesters at the game. It’s obviously not that big of a deal.
Dick Clark is a moron
I was talking about the red-faced guy, JOHN E, not the anti-Wahoo protestors.
He looked like a minstrel with a “war bonnet” on his head. Pretty bad.
Learn some reading comprehension, asswipe.
Chuckles the Clown
Please people. Racism, prejudice, bigotry, etc is rooted in HATE. “The Chief” is rooted in history and tradition. True fans of the Cleveland INDIANS are not, nor by any means purposefully disrespecting the Native American people. Some Pro-Chief “fans” my act with ignorance and/or immaturity when confronted because that’s a common personality trait when threatened. “Threatened” may seem extreme, but confronted with change, not only of a mascot, but tradition, threatened is apropos. Speaking for myself, no disregard or malice, KEEP THE CHIEF! These are not Anti- Indian/Redskin/Chief, Nazi or Klan rallies (if we’re talking about racism, hatred). This is a baseball team, that plays baseball games, attended by fans and families of many ethnicities and religions. It’s been a tradition for Cleveland fans for decades. It’s a reminder that although our time is shared much differently now where we live than it was generations ago…there’s a reason Cleveland lies within Cuyahoga County (crooked river). Let’s not make Chief Wahoo crooked as well!!!
I like how they took a photo of the progressive field sign to show the irony in that.
Pretty sure his name is STILL Rodriguez? Or did he change it to protect himself?
😉
DetroitITheArmpitOfUSA – Are you sure your statement is true? What if those people protesting are precisely the people trying to solve some of those problems? What if they see those problems and Chief Wahoo as being connected? I don’t think you would defend your statement if you spent time with some of the people who are trying to improve things on reservations.
I agree with Anonymous in response to DetroitITheArmpitOfUSA. Detroit, do you honestly think these guys are spending their entire year protesting this? They probably have a whole laundry list of things they’re trying to do to help their people.
Both of my children are part Native American and we find the Chief Wahoo logo extremely racist and embarrassing. I learned a long ago, when dealing with another issue which I found out offended Native Americans, that what you have to do in these situations is listen to the person who is offended. It’s their opinion that really matters, not yours. Yes, the logo may not be offensive to you, but is offensive to millions of people who have been subjected genocide and to having their land stolen from them. That is significant. You don’t have to agree with them but you do have to validate their opinion.
And to those of you who don’t find caricatures of the Irish offensive, you should. The Irish were also completely degraded by the English and subjected to genocide in their homeland so the they could steal their land. Then when they came here they were only allowed the most menial and dangerous jobs. Thousands died of fever digging the Ohio-Erie Canal. Many places put up signs stating, “No Irish Need Apply.” Pay attention to history!
My only problem with this article is how the author addresses the “Fighting Irish” argument with the logical fallacy “argument ad lapidum,” wherein the person making the statement dismisses the claim without any kind of reasoning e.g. saying “enough already” to somebody who doesn’t find the Fighting Irish racist. This writer is trying to debunk the logically fallacious arguments of those who don’t consider the mascot to be racist and when the same argument is presented to him he uses this fallacy. I wonder how he would handle the same argument if a pure blooded Native American were at a Notre Dame protest and expressed that he or she was okay with the negative depiction of the Irish because he or she doesn’t find the Indian’s mascot racist. “Enough already?”
Why doesn’t this author find the Fighting Irish mascot to be equally as racist? It is. I hope it isn’t a matter of quantity of suppression, because history would laugh at anybody who wouldn’t consider the suppression of the Irish to be equally as atrocious.
If this was that big an issue it word be news for more than a month or so out of the year. Nobody cares enough to keep fighting it all year. Should tell you something about their sincerity and conviction.
I 100% agree with Nerd. I came to read this article to learn about the issue as I had no stance one way or another. However, the author’s comment: “I’m Irish. You don’t see me complaining about Notre Dame.” (ENOUGH ALREADY.) ” leads me to believe the author is a hypocrite. One can have the opinion that the mascots aren’t racist. One can have the opinion that the mascots are both racist. But if you have the opinion one is and one isn’t, you just brought yourself down to the same level as all the people that don’t think the Chief Wahoo is racist. If you’re going to have the mindset that the mascot is racist, you should at least be intelligent enough to apply this logic to all scenarios, and not be egocentric about it only affecting YOUR mascot.
Nerd said it best: “I hope it isn’t a matter of quantity of suppression, because history would laugh at anybody who wouldn’t consider the suppression of the Irish to be equally as atrocious.”
Can we just go back to being the Cleveland Spiders already?
well, since it has been established that we are Aboriginals or First Nations…..let them keep the Indians (they can deal with ppl from India)…..logo but remove the caricature freaky looking Indian chief character, the feathers and stick a picture of a pakistanian on there are see how it stands with the public…after all isn’t it about the team and not the teashirt logo..right?
“White Privilege”.. “White Power”,. White purity.. whatever is white, is better!
That illusion is what this society has been created by.
Ever since 1492, it’s been that way. Though, I wish it wouldn’t have to be like this because ignorance is insane.
Ignorant fools will remain ignorant fools and make it look bad for the whole race,.. I mean,.. It does for every race. Ignorant fools would rather point out any deficiency in other besides themselves,.. just so they can feel better about themselves and justify their B.S.
Nerd, I appreciate what you’re saying, but in regards to the fighting irish logo…it’s a leprechaun, and while that may be a an aggressive symbol, the fact remains that leprechauns are not real, they are mythical. Native americans are real and this is a racist caricature, whereas Notre Dames logo is a cartoon of a being that doesn’t exist. We could debate the name, but to me it’s a important to not change the subject away from cheif wahoo being racist. Other things can be bad while this is bad, and we can discuss one without addressing the other. And we should absolutely address other mascots, but we must be focused on the issue at hand, exploiting native cultures for the sake of sports is a very, very common trope, as I’m sure you know. Saying that if you care about X but don’t care about Y your concerns are incomplete is a straw man argument, and let’s not move a conversation about native peoples to a conversation about the feelings of white people.
And while the historical plight of the irish was awful and the atrocities they faced were numerous, and it’s not about points here….we’re talking about many nations of people being enslaved and decimated and nearly wiped off of two entire continents. The scope isn’t comparable. These are all bad things, but irish culture still flourishes, the same cannot be said for many nations of indigenous people who no longer exist or are relegated to reservations…
Beth, many ordinary, everyday occurrences are not enacted or participated in out of hate, yet they are still racist. See: Institutionalized racism. It’s funny that you would say that, among all people here; Do you think that historically men HATED women in America and that’s why they weren’t given the right to vote all those years? I dunno about you and your relationships from the past, but relationships built on hate are uncomfortable and painful. Or, that many legitimatized slavery by saying something like the following: “The slaves are good people, they just don’t know any better. It’s our duty, nay, the white man’s burden, to look out for these lost souls (and coincidentally force them to do free labor for us while we keep them essentially in cages).”
While I don’t agree with some of the tactics used by the pro CHief forces, I do support keeping the Chief Wahoo Logo. It would have been better if a majority of the fans came to the game wearing the “Chief Wahoo” symbol on a cap , shirt, jacket etc., and say nothing but parade by the protesters. That would be keeping it simple and still supporting the Chief. Too much political correctness today. It is a logo period. Get real and tackle more important issues like getting our elected officials to find common ground that is in the best interest of the Nation and not their own political party.
The idiot in the redface is just that, an idiot. The thing is that now, we as Native people are speaking up. Keep putting up his picture. Mock him, denigrate him, and show him for what he is simply by showing his picture.
He is a racist idiot. Plain and simple…….
People just love to define both sides of an argument- badly. It’s the American Way.
Well, Cleveland has not looked this bad since a little boy was knocked down for wearing the “wrong” sport team’s clothing. Way to go, Rodriguez, you asshole.
Posts by Anonymous and Shawn Jaworski, I will withdraw my comment that activists are prioritizing their efforts solely on changing a sports team logo rather than trying to fix bigger issues occurring on Indian reservations such as drugs, alcoholism, poverty, etc when you provide me info that these activist are in fact doing both. Since data shows these social issue rates are increasing, I will stand my ground on my comments and say they are only trying to fix something that won’t help any of the American Indians social issues by eliminating a major league’s team logo.
DetroitITheArmpitOfUSA – I haven’t seen the data to which you are referring, so I can’t speak to the rates of increase to which you are referring. Obviously things have gotten worse since the arrival of Europeans – that is the whole issue. But even if those problems were getting worse in recent years, it wouldn’t be evidence that people are not trying to address them, or that the people trying to address those problems don’t think their work would be more effective without Chief Wahoo. These are big, long-term problems that might get worse over time even if a lot of people are working hard to improve the situation.
We clearly agree that there are social problems on reservations. What do you think would be an effective way of improving the situation there? Looking at data is one thing, and it has its place. But I would suggest that if you do have a strong opinion about this issue that you try to spend some time on a reservation and get a feel for what you think might improve things. I have a friend who is working on and thinking about the issues, and I think he would say that dignity and basic self-respect are the minimum starting points for solving a lot of these problems. A mocking caricature like Chief Wahoo doesn’t help.
I find it incredible that there is any room for disagreement on this issue when one side might help to improve the circumstances of a group of people who have been through hell, while the other side thinks this is outweighed by their own loss – of a name carrying a level of sentimental value on par with that of other teams in the league represented by birds and even socks of various colors.
When will people learn that anything-face is a horrible idea? I mean, I never heard anyone say, “oh, blackface, what a great idea,” or, “oh, redface, what a great idea.” Heck, no one even thought that Michael Jackson’s whiteface act was a good idea either.
I do not understand the racism, arent they Indians? Seriously this city needs to stand up to bullshit claims like this. It is getting out of hand, you can not take a shit without hurting somebody’s feelings
I am a Native American and direct disendent of Chiefs. I find this whole costume depicting leaders of my people racial. I cannot see any pride given to Natives in those photo’s. In my heart all that I see is racism. To me, this states that racism lives strong in this great nation.
I myself have served in our military. My father whom was wounded twice in Korea would not say this is acceptable. It should also not be acceptable to any America.
This nation was born of many races and some of those races suffer from the action of hate. We Natives still see and have hate placed upon us. This hate needs to stop and people should hold Native America’s with great honors.
Our people enlist and serve this country with question. The Natives were of great benefit to the victory of World War I and World War II. As a group of race, Native have the highest service enlistment. Yet we are honored by such statements.
Also as a race we Native cannot have much of an impact on the political world. So we truly need others to stand up and end such acts upon us. We Native Americans are indeed a minority of America.
I myself have been a victim of racism in schools where I was beaten just because of my race and being left handed. I also faced racism in the military, police academy and as a Lawmen and life in general.
So I would say this to the population of America, please do not accept this as a pride issue, but that of racism in full color. The only way racism and racist acts is by knowing this is truly wrong.
My wish for my grandchildren and my children is to stomp out acts of hate, acts of racism upon a proud people, my people. I would also ask the people, is, How many times must we turn our cheeks to slap in our face.
As Charles Krauthammer opined last Fall in the context of a similar controversy over the name of the Washington NFL team:
Redskins and reason
By Charles Krauthammer, Published: October 17
In re the (Washington) Redskins. Should the name be changed?
I don’t like being lectured by sportscasters about ethnic sensitivity. Or advised by the president of the United States about changing team names. Or blackmailed by tribal leaders playing the race card.
I don’t like the language police ensuring that no one anywhere gives offense to anyone about anything. And I fully credit the claim of Redskins owner Dan Snyder and many passionate fans that they intend no malice or prejudice and that “Redskins” has a proud 80-year history they wish to maintain.
The fact is, however, that words don’t stand still. They evolve.
Fifty years ago the preferred, most respectful term for African Americans was Negro. The word appears 15 times in Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech. Negro replaced a long list of insulting words in common use during decades of public and legal discrimination.
And then, for complicated historical reasons (having to do with the black power and “black is beautiful” movements), usage changed. The preferred term is now black or African American. With a rare few legacy exceptions, Negro carries an unmistakably patronizing and demeaning tone.
If you were detailing the racial composition of Congress, you wouldn’t say: “Well, to start with, there are 44 Negroes.” If you’d been asleep for 50 years, you might. But upon being informed how the word had changed in nuance, you would stop using it and choose another.
And here’s the key point: You would stop not because of the language police. Not because you might incur a Bob Costas harangue. Not because the president would wag a finger. But simply because the word was tainted, freighted with negative connotations with which you would not want to be associated.
Proof? You wouldn’t even use the word in private, where being harassed for political incorrectness is not an issue.
Similarly, regarding the further racial breakdown of Congress, you wouldn’t say: “And by my count, there are two redskins.” It’s inconceivable, because no matter how the word was used 80 years ago, it carries invidious connotations today.
I know there are surveys that say that most Native Americans aren’t bothered by the word. But that’s not the point. My objection is not rooted in pressure from various minorities or fear of public polls or public scolds.
When I was growing up, I thought “gyp” was simply a synonym for “cheat,” and used it accordingly. It was only when I was an adult that I learned that gyp was short for gypsy. At which point, I stopped using it.
Not because I took a poll of Roma to find out if they were offended. If some mysterious disease had carried away every gypsy on the planet, and there were none left to offend, I still wouldn’t use it.
Why? Simple decency. I wouldn’t want to use a word that defines a people — living or dead, offended or not — in a most demeaning way. It’s a question not of who or how many had their feelings hurt, but of whether you want to associate yourself with a word that, for whatever historical reason having nothing to do with you, carries inherently derogatory connotations.
Years ago, the word “retarded” emerged as the enlightened substitute for such cruel terms as “feeble-minded” or “mongoloid.” Today, however, it is considered a form of denigration, having been replaced by the clumsy but now conventional “developmentally disabled.” There is no particular logic to this evolution. But it’s a social fact. Unless you’re looking to give gratuitous offense, you don’t call someone “retarded.”
Let’s recognize that there are many people of good will for whom “Washington Redskins” contains sentimental and historical attachment — and not an ounce of intended animus. So let’s turn down the temperature. What’s at issue is not high principle but adaptation to a change in linguistic nuance. A close call, though I personally would err on the side of not using the word if others are available.
How about Skins, a contraction already applied to the Washington football team? And that carries a sports connotation, as in skins vs. shirts in pickup basketball.
Choose whatever name you like. But let’s go easy on the other side. We’re not talking Brown v. Board of Education here. There’s no demand that Native Americans man the team’s offensive line. This is a matter of usage — and usage changes. If you shot a remake of 1934’s “The Gay Divorcee,” you’d have to change that title too.
Not because the lady changed but because the word did.
Hail Skins.
Tribe management has been attenuating current Cheif Wahoo logo for several years now, moving the Block letter “C”into the forefront — caps, pitcher’s mound blue chalking, etc. I deduce current charicature evolved in 1950’s from management’s realization internally that 1940’s mascot image was inappropriate. See, also, 1940’s era Bugs Bunny cartoons where Chief Wahoo made cameo. Maybe the Tribe should change it’s logo to noble profile of Native American warrior on obverse of U.S. Buffalo/Indian head nickel, minted from 1913-1938.
@ Big Stupid, I did not make a straw man argument because I addressed a point that the author was making in this article. If I were to express that all of this author’s points are invalid because he dismisses argument “X,” then that would be a straw man argument, or if I were to bring up something that the author didn’t address in the article and dismiss the author because he didn’t address “Y,” then that would be a straw man argument. I did not do that. In fact, the first thing I wrote was that I mostly agree with and like this article. My major point is that this author undermines himself when he lowers himself to their level by using language intentionally to divert the reader from the opposition’s claim rather than addressing the opposition’s claim critically. What the author should have done is point out what is wrong with the claim that “The Indian mascot is not racist, because I’m Irish and I’m not offended by the Fighting Irish.” It, too, is a fallacious claim. However, if the author is not capable of approaching that intelligently, then he should have left that claim out altogether.
Again, I agree with the author’s major theme: the Indian mascot is racist and needs to be changed.
I also agree that Notre Dame needs to update its name and mascot. It may be a caricature and a leprechaun, but it is intentionally to depict a stereotypical Irishman. In the 1850’s when the Irish fled from Ireland the cartoons in the papers depicted them as feral monkeys. Monkeys, like leprechauns, are not Irish people. Both, however, are intended to depict a negative stereotype.
White people are racist? I’m deeply shocked.
AIM does a lot of things for the Native communities on and off the reservations. They also do fight ignorance and racism. With Native racism this world seems to think it is fine since it is historical. Our tribes have not had much of a voice until recent years. Watching my children grow up and many others on the rez, I have noticed many things. First the general population sees the rez and being Native in a different way. It seems that a “noble” idea of nature loving stoic people is still a big view of how Natives are and for some are supposed to be. With this many children grow up seeing these things. Many families are broken on the rez. Many are not. Children grow up thinking they should be one way because that is the general belief of this Country. If you grow up hearing you are no good then most likely you will not think you are good. American Indian Movement and many others do try to help our Native children. The biggest tool we have is spreading our culture to them especially if it has been lost or is forgotten by most. AIM comes to Pow-wows across the Country, they hold seminars to children and Native adults. They speak of alcoholism and drug use and other crimes committed on the rez and in the urban native communities and how there are ways through spirituality and brotherhood to defeat these things and return to a proud culture we are. Many AIM members talk about diabetes and how through Native culture we can rid ourselves of these things. But there are others ideas constantly fighting the good things we are doing to our cultures. It’s not the people saying or doing things more than the way we are depicted and how we are trivialized. If we want to show our children about our ancestry and forefathers through culture, then how well can we do these things with the “world” saying everything is different? Trivializing our beliefs and mocking our forefathers, Is this the legacy that the world leaves us to teach our children? Sacred things to us are sacred to us, not to be sold of to others and then brought into the mainstream world as an “honor” bur twisted and deformed, usually to match the Countries ideal of how it shall be… When young Native children attend school they are often “expected” to be a certain way. If they do not act that way then they are teased or ignored. Native children , to others often are expected to be “tough” and ready to fight. They are “expected to be “cool” and “smoke weed”. They are expected to be all these things by their non-Native peers who learned what should be through the misguided society we live in. Many times these Native children drop out of school and turn to drugs to be labeled a “real Native” by our society. Being Native at home is fine but there is a lot of peer pressure to be wanted by the rest of the world also. When the education fails and bad attitudes form from Native kids who were able to excel, often they move back to the rez. Where they find out it doesn’t matter. They go to the Indian Health Clinic to pick up their monthly checks and then buy beer and ahng until the money runs out. Many become obese from lack of self esteem and also turn to the easier drug usage and alcoholism, again little if any self esteem. Ask then directly and they will beat anyone up to be hospitalized and say they do have a self esteem, but deep down where are they. We try to solve these problems all the time. Things like demoralizing our culture and belittling our images and those of our forefathers do not aid our fight to save our children and our culture. Yes it’s Cleveland pride and it as it has always been for decades and it is what is right and honoring…But to me and many other parents of Native children those things are also not helping us to solve problems on the rez. Yes the mascot name among others is a direct influence on the problems our people have, self esteem or the lack of it is a major player in everything bad we face. I just wanted to thank all of you baseball fans who want to tell me that you honor me and my children while we remain in the background without able to reach higher education and good jobs. You keep telling me want I should believe and view as right. Shoot I should just continue living on the rez and don’t worry about anything else, right. After all it is a little thing and it is historical…
The overarching message here is: “We White People will tell you when you’re allowed to be offended.”
The Notre Dame argument is moot – Irish people expressed offense at “drunk Irishmen” stereotypes, and for the most part those have been halted, especially in any official capacity. But let a non-white person say they’re offended, and it’s “Fuck you” and “nobody’s offended.” In other words, nobody that matters is offended. Sick.
I really don’t give a shit if they took away “The Chief”, but I really cannot grasp the concept of using a generic Block C as a replacement. A Block C. Just think about that. When I see I block see, my mouth suddenly gets dry. It is the most bland design a franchise can use. Right now I want to keep Chief Wahoo just because the alternative excites as much sensory activity as a concrete wall divider on a highway. Can someone tell me why we can’t think of a better logo. It’s not like they don’t have a team of designers who probably get paid 2 to 8 times more than I do to make a design. And their best idea is a Block C. To me, that’s as about embarrassing to the city as the Chief Wahoo caricature is to a person of Native American decent. I’m sick.
Want to thank you for your help in this, this could be the tipping point, It was good talking with you there.
send tweeter “@killertech216” and ALL his ilk to Somalia for some badly needed rehab ! ! !
Hey Nerd. I know it’s probably too late for you to see this, but the stuff in bold were quotes the author heard directed at the native anti-chief protestors. Not the author’s actual opinions. For example:
“quote from person deciding when someone else can be offended” (author’s opinion of quote)
“I’m Irish. You don’t see me complaining about Notre Dame.” (ENOUGH ALREADY.)
The name “Fighting Irish” came about because there were actually Irish people on the team at the time it was coined. It’s not a stereotype about drunkenness at all. That said, I don’t understand why people who bring that up as an argument for keeping this ridiculous logo don’t understand that they could, in fact, protest the Fighting Irish (or the Cowboys, which is even more stupid because cowboys are not a race of people) if they wanted to. The problem is that it doesn’t actually offend them and they lack the critical reasoning skills to understand why Wahoo is offensive or why it makes no sense to be insanely racist to prove your racist mascot isn’t racist.
As an aboriginal watching this bull from the north, all I can say to the people that like to go around in red face….try walking around in black face and see how far you get.
@ Aaron Sorrels, Exactly. The author writes, “This guy has four college degrees” (Opinion . . . then proceeded merrily down the “Fighting Irish” argument line, except with the Dallas Cowboys). Followed by the actual “Fighting Irish” line with the opinion “ENOUGH ALREADY.” What I’m saying is that the author refuses to address the “Fighting Irish” argument, but instead chooses to divert the attention of the reader away from the argument by dismissing it. The author should have addressed why the “Fighting Irish” argument is illegitimate. There are a number of logical fallacies that the “Fighting Irish” argument could fall under. Instead the author addresses the claim with, “ENOUGH ALREADY,” which is the equivalent stance of: just shut up. His opinions of the other arguments are funny and make the opposing stance look foolish, until he lowers himself to their mentality by not addressing the issue.
When a Native American group has an $8.2 billion endowment to build a top flight university founded by their relgion and then pick their own sports mascot… THEN there will be some comparison between The Fighting Irish and the Cleveland Indians.
@TheBoost, I hadn’t considered that Notre Dame is a private Catholic institution. I have researched it a little and am not seeing anything about it being primarily founded by the Irish, just that some people considered Irish and Catholic synonymous at the time. This does make me somewhat rethink my stance on the issue. However, being a Catholic institution rather than an Irish institution, I still think it should be something more like: Fighting Catholics.
Really all of this has less to do with the names and the mascots themselves and far more to do with the desensitization towards greater racial issues that come with having these kinds of names and mascots.
i wonder what would have happened in Chicago? lol
Life-long Tribe Fan: What if Krauthammer had kept using the word “gyp”? What would be the appropriate course of action for the rest of us, including Bob Costas and the President?
Would it be appropriate for President Obama to keep joking about the Special Olympics or for Rahm Emmanuel to keep using the word “retarded” because they don’t like being lectured by Sarah Palin? I would agree that as a country we are probably a little too easily offended, and I get the whole censorship angle, but I just don’t think those apply here.
It is offensive, it is wrong, “Indians” are not seen as human beings in America… or in Canada. Plain and Simple, hate is hate. Even if you are laughing and having a great time cheering a sports team… dehumanizing an entire “race” of human beings is still hate…. problem is as long as it feels good… mainstream america or canda will continue to see “Indians” as part of the history books…. there are many “Indians” left in North America… still a living culture… I would say put yourself in the shoes of someone who finds it offensive… doesn’t even have to be an “Indian”, just try see it from all sides… sheesh
It’s not just the logo.. It’s the racial stereotyping that goes with it as well like the tomahawk chop, the goofy ass headdresses and “war whoops”. It’s all a mockery and of elementary school level. And maybe some Americans of Irish decent don’t care about the whole Notre damme deal but there are some who do. And although it’s not an issue I choose protest, you will not see me wearing a leprechaun suit or talking in some fake cheesy accent on st. Pattys’ day. But I will have some good Irish staple food and celebrate with some good Irish folk music (not Irish btw).
I don’t feel it’s “white privilige’ but more American stubbornness to find a way to connect with something regardless if it’s the right way or not.
The logo should have been changed loooong ago, especially if it’s “just a cartoon”. Using that same logic, if it’s just a cartoon, then why fight so hard to keep it or argue so hard for it?
And to the person who would like to admonish protestors for their one sided observation about having more important issues such as reservation poverty.. I don’t know about you but I can address more than one issue in a year. How about you? Do you seriously think that’s all they do is protest the logo? Not to mention where’s your support when they do speak up against your more important issues? And if you can pick and choose which ones are more important, why can’t they?
The logo, the stereotyping, the red face…regardless the argument for it, it still is offensive and racist period. Just because you may not have a hatred for people of a race does not mean that you cannot offend them by doing something they find offensive.
whites have NOO pride in being “civilized” anymore.. it like giving PIGs diamonds, so to speak.. what is funny to Me is that that IDIOT in the facepaint picked an OLD MAN to voice his concern.. What a COWARD.. Its true that many WHITEs ARE boozers, just go ANYWHERE and you will see WHITEs buying booze.. LMAO!! I would burn their clubhouse down if I lived in that part of the country.. MAYBE I still can.. since I live out of the state!!! LOOK OUT here I go
Hey, I think the jerks out there don’t realize that, to be entirely “politically correct” we would have to give up the name “Indians” all together! Keeping the name if not the logo would simply stir up “horrible memories” of this terrible controversy. Any sort of subtle connotations, suggestiveness or associations would simply continue to offend someone else — and, of course, we just can’t have that. So let’s try to figure out a new name for the Cleveland baseball team. Panthers have a distinctive name. I believe the logo-designers can do something with that without it becoming offensive. And if all else fails, we can always go back to being the Spiders. Does anyone not like spiders?
ONE thing WHITEs don’t understand.. RACISM.. they don’t have to deal with it everyday.. they can just walk anywhere without reprisal.. say anything about nothing.. useless folkways and morays of a degenerate race.. WHITEs just don’t get this issue.. WHY, because its not about YOU.. get over YOURSELVES and get rid of this mascot..
Okay, we shouldn’t use the Chief (even though it was originally a tribute to one of the first heroes of Cleveland baseball, friendly grin and all. It was a character sketch just like the ones you’d see today at Cedar Point by an artist sketching for an exorbitant amount of cash).
And we have to get rid of the Indians name itself (has to be Native American to be PC).
And we can’t use an animal image, like a cheetah or panther, because of the implication of unrestrained — and dangerous — “wildness” and abuse (like the negativism of the pit bull controversy). PETA and the ASPCA would be joining in before long.
We can’t even use the generic (and boring) “C” symbol because of its certain offensive locker-room connotation (which can’t be published here — except in certain articles of the Scene Mag itself — or on the back page ads — but otherwise, no, not here).
And even arachnophobes will protest bringing back the Spiders!
So what is Cleveland known for? This is the Pothole Capital of America, so how can you make a non-offensive logo out of that?
I’d like to see this discussion last past Opening Day. In bseball, the national pastime last I checked, the names and images are about everyone. What kind of people are the fans, what kind of country is America? Bluntly, the name and the Chief are racist. Rasims is identifying a group of people based on physical characteristics as superior or inferior and both qualify.
check your history on what kind of man Columbus really was and what his motives and opinions on the native people were. The ridiculous insulting nature of the Chief is beyond question. ARe we really willing to defend this? I am not. Life is change. Let’s makethis positive,e xicitng and good—beyond a single day. For all of us.
As a white man, I can sit here and say “I understand the plight of the Native Americans” as long as the day. But I can’t. For many reasons. Partly because my ancestors came over from Nazi Germany due to their disagreement with genocide. Let me state that again. My grandparents came to the US because they fundamentally disagreed with the destruction of a race, in all states and forms. Where did they come into the US? Through CLEVELAND!!!!! It’s a place of familial history, and now I’m living in it, and I’m quite proud of that fact. Now I ask… why destroy a place of genial history, for so many, due to the name of a mascot? Rather than take offense, why not instead take pride? Here there used to live Very Proud Native Americans. Yes, I emphasized those capital letters for a reason. You may be descended from them; don’t take offense, take pride. Your ancestors are remembered, not forgotten. Perhaps an emblem doesn’t do them justice, but it beats nothing at all. Let everyone remember that Cuyahoga means “Crooked River” and that Chief Wahoo stands for it. Let nobody forget their history here, any more than I can the grandparents I never knew coming through this great city into the land of their dreams, eventually allowing me to come into existence. It is NEVER about one of us; it’s always been about all of us, together. Long live Chief Wahoo! Long live Cleveland!!!
As a white man, I can sit here and say “I understand the plight of the Native Americans” as long as the day. But I can’t. For many reasons. Partly because my ancestors came over from Nazi Germany due to their disagreement with genocide. Let me state that again. My grandparents came to the US because they fundamentally disagreed with the destruction of a race, in all states and forms. Where did they come into the US? Through CLEVELAND!!!!! It’s a place of familial history, and now I’m living in it, and I’m quite proud of that fact. Now I ask… why destroy a place of genial history, for so many, due to the name of a mascot? Rather than take offense, why not instead take pride? Here there used to live Very Proud Native Americans. Yes, I emphasized those capital letters for a reason. You may be descended from them; don’t take offense, take pride. Your ancestors are remembered, not forgotten. Perhaps an emblem doesn’t do them justice, but it beats nothing at all. Let everyone remember that Cuyahoga means “Crooked River” and that Chief Wahoo stands for it. Let nobody forget their history here, any more than I can the grandparents I never knew coming through this great city into the land of their dreams, eventually allowing me to come into existence. It is NEVER about one of us; it’s always been about all of us, together. Long live Chief Wahoo! Long live Cleveland!!! Where a few consider it racial, many consider it heritage. Would you rather we call ourselves the “Cleveland Rivers” and not honor your ancestors at all?! Would that make you happy, to put your ancestry to rest, with nobody to know who they were, in the sake of being “less biased”? Guess what, you kill your own ancestry in such a manner; by denying heritage, due to a single name, you deny all history therefore. Would you rather have a “racist” name your children have to ask about, leading to many long stories and a wealth of history, or would you rather have a name that says “Oh, we got offended, so we changed it to the blah-blah-blah”.?
If we saw everything as racial, there would be no such thing as crackers in this country; Ritz, Club, Whole Grain, it doesn’t matter, because the white people would see it as nothing more than a racial insult.
I’m offended by the Baltimore Oriole – it’s “animalist” and it offends me. BAN IT!
I’m offended by the Miami Dolphin – it’s “animalist” and it offends me. BAN IT!
Where does it stop with the wussy “easily offended” generation? Clint Eastwood was right in using the name he recently called them.