Jump to content


Photo

Fighting Irish


  • Please log in to reply
23 replies to this topic

#1 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:09 AM

Just wondering what y'all think if the Washington Redskins name and logo?

Personally, I don't see the harm. I mean, we have the Vikings and the Fighting Irish. Why are the Sweedes and Irish not up in arms? Is it just bitterness?
  • GC90 likes this

#2 SunnyMeadowz

SunnyMeadowz

    The Royal Dutch of Dukes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver
  • Interests:Weed, Pussy, Records (In no particular order)

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:30 AM

GTFO with that bs cash.

#3 gEEchieDan

gEEchieDan

    STMB Official

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakland, Ca (E14th)
  • Interests:Cooking, Boxing, Music, STMB, Madlib...
  • Soundcloud:geechiedan

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:39 AM

IM 13.7% CHEROKEE AND IM BROWN!! TAKE MY ANCESTOR OFF THE HELMET! THE PALE MAN IS RED WHEN ANGRY!!!!

#4 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:44 AM

Fo reals?
Ok.
Just curious. Serious tho, not trying to be offensive, but what is the difference, between the Viking and RedSkins, or the Fighting Irish? I mean obviously the native americans have been victim of genocide and have every right to be angry, but lets just say natives were revered and prospered under european influence, would it make a difference?

I only say as because as far as I know, no Irishmen or Sweedes are against the teams "representing them".

#5 SunnyMeadowz

SunnyMeadowz

    The Royal Dutch of Dukes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver
  • Interests:Weed, Pussy, Records (In no particular order)

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:53 AM

Yes the cruel treatment of America's native peoples definitely has a lot to do with the issue.

#6 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:56 AM

Yes, I would think so.

Hm.
Its just that, to me, it seems like a compliment, ( I am not native, so please dont get on my ass ) , but the players consider themselves RedSkins, people who are strong, and smart, succesful etc. However, in a natives shoes I suppose, it is like being thrown a bone, a back handed compliment.

Hm. interesting. Would a team name that was an actual native sect be any different?


#justMidDayBlabbing

#7 SunnyMeadowz

SunnyMeadowz

    The Royal Dutch of Dukes

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,026 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Denver
  • Interests:Weed, Pussy, Records (In no particular order)

Posted 16 October 2013 - 12:43 PM

I'm pretty sure if the Atlanta Falcons were called the Atlanta Cotton-Pickers no one would view that as a compliment.

#8 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 01:05 PM

True.
But what did cotton puckers do beside build America? Slave labour is what gave America its head start. But yah, I get the idea.

#9 HUNGRYMAN

HUNGRYMAN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 329 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Soundcloud:https://soundcloud.com/hungrym4n

Posted 16 October 2013 - 06:15 PM

I think the whole deal is kinda over the top. The Redskins have been a team for 81 years, why wait until now to say something? In baseball, should the Indians and Chiefs change their names also? As well as all the other ethnic referenced names? I used to be all for political correctness, now I just view it as a way sugar coat or silence the truth of things. Funny how kids are so desensitized to nudity and curse words nowadays, because it's everywhere, then we have the nerve to ban old cartoons because of racial stereotypes of the past. I mean, did any of those shows set a definition of how you grew to view ethnic groups in society? Or did they just humor you in the childish way they were intended?

From wikipedia about the censorship of Speedy Gonzales cartoons:

"This criticism prompted Cartoon Network to largely shelve Speedy's films when it gained exclusive rights to broadcast them in 1999. However, fan campaigns to put Speedy back on the air, backed by the League of United Latin American Citizens saw the shorts return to air in 2002. Despite the controversy in the USA, Speedy Gonzales remains a very popular character in Latin America.

On the Looney Tunes Golden Collection the Speedy cartoons are prefaced by a disclaimer that states:

The cartoons you are about to see are products of their time. They may depict some of the ethnic and racial prejudices that were commonplace in American society. These depictions were false then and are still false today. While the following does not represent the WB view of society, these cartoons are being presented as they were originally created, because to do otherwise would be the same as to claim these prejudices never existed."

#10 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 07:24 PM

Hm.
Yah, I am on the fence, I guess offensive depictions of a race, are a very subjective thing. My ancestry is Scottish, I am not that offended by most intactments of Scots. Rarely do they hit the mark. Occasionally I cringe a bit tho. So it is easy to see how a race which has been abused historically by whites could feel very offended by any mention of them.


I think it is being raised now as Obama is President and as such, has opened the door to pokes a lot of holes in the status quoes.

#11 orchidthegreat

orchidthegreat

    STMB Official

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 541 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:02 PM

The only reason people find it offensive is because redskin has been used as a racial slur toward Native Americans. Braves, Indians, chiefs, Seminoles, Blackhawks, etc, are all either generic labels or a specific tribe. Redskin was a tribe, but the only of these that has also been used before as a negative term. In my opinion, people are waaaayyyyyy too sensitive nowadays. Everything requires being a perfect political correctness, it's pathetic.


  • James Frank. likes this

#12 HUNGRYMAN

HUNGRYMAN

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 329 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Soundcloud:https://soundcloud.com/hungrym4n

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:19 PM

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. I'd say if enough people want it changed then change it. But do the organizations that want it changed, really feel like the name is been used in a racial derogatory way? Personally, I don't see it that way. I see it as they are using it to pridefully represent themselves. I'd rather see Native American organizations fight to get rid of the bogus ass national holiday, Columbus Day, that just passed.

My question is how far are we gonna let this PC stuff go? Is it going to get to the point were we revise history even further from the half-truths it already is, just to make it more digestible?

On another note, if Houston is gonna lose all season, I'd like them to change their name to not offend the whole state; black, white, brown, yellow, and red. :lol:
  • GC90 and James Frank. like this

#13 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 08:25 PM

On another note, if Houston is gonna lose all season, I'd like them to change their name to not offend the whole state; black, white, brown, yellow, and red. :lol:



#14 James Frank.

James Frank.

    Rookie of the Year

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DENVER
  • Interests:crates, paint, sashimi, sticks of sherm.

Posted 16 October 2013 - 09:09 PM

i think in some cases, this PC shit is a positive thing that gets done what our past generations failed to do in owning up to their mistakes...and i think that, honestly, in this particular case it's justified for them wanting to change the name.

HOWEVER:

9/10 times i adamantly disagree with the language police and their pointless crusades against shit nobody really cares about. i've heard about a study conducted within the last five years where the modern descendants of various Native American tribes were asked whether or not they wanted to change the name for the NFL team the Washington Redskins...and supposedly the vast majority of them didn't give two shits about a football team. whenever you see these PC crusades against things, a lot of the time it's not run by the actual oppressed minority group, but rather guilty white people who overcompensate their open-mindedness to make sure every minority looks at them as one of the "good white people"...believe me, i see it every day over on the CU campus, and it's sickening tbh.

i'm not against diversity at all lol; i'm against phony populism championed so that one can go home and brag to their rich, white hipster friends that they spent three months backpacking in Haiti instead of just two...and i see the phoniness constantly. in fact, i'd be willing to go so far as to say that a lot of the same people who jump on the Twitter bandwagon to crucify the owner of an 81-year old football team of all things are the same ones who i sit with in the campus radio station hearing them tell me stories about how they used to have season passes to Disneyworld when they lived in Florida and that it was "pretty cool" but the asians are sooooo annoying with their cameras and slow-walking everywhere they went and oh my god can you believe we have a black guy working at the station now?!?!?!!!


my point being that most of these people championing these ridiculous causes are truly the racists lol, you wouldn't believe some of the ignorant, hypocritical shit some of these people say behind closed doors despite the causes they wear on their sleeves in public to gain status. so, yeah...i really don't give a shit; but i could see why a Native American man/woman would...even though they never really cared before...and i guess that changing the name wouldn't be that big of a deal. but i mean seriously, what the fuck are they gonna go after next? the Miami Hurricanes? the Memphis Grizzlies? there's been a shit ton of bear and hurricane-related deaths in the past decade, where's the PC Police championing those causes for us? the Boston Celtics has a fucking stereotypical Irish Nixon-look-alike leprechaun caricature smoking a pipe and spinning a basketball...and i'm part Irish, but i'm not offended one bit. i get that people's hearts are in the right place, but you can find something offensive with anything if you're looking for it hard enough.


and FYI, Native-Americans weren't the only persecuted folks here in the country. if this were a hundred years ago i'd be among the scourge of fucking society for being a potato-eater...people are quick to forget how harshly the Irish were treated 100-200 years back in the past. but hey, i guess my opinion doesn't matter based on the color of my skin...

Posted Image

i think ^ this is much more offensive and insensitive in characterizing an entire culture as something negative than this:

Posted Image
  • GC90 likes this

#15 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 October 2013 - 10:25 PM

Posted Image

i think ^ this is much more offensive and insensitive in characterizing an entire culture as something negative than this:

Posted Image


Agreed, just as a removed, non bitter native american, I am much more stoked on the Redskins.


That was my point. The redskins logo, in terms of visual impact can be compared to the Vikings, quite easily. The Fighting Irish is an angry Leprechaun. That being said, I am sure the Irish love Notre Dame. However, again, the Irish while have a right to be bitter at many things, they cant be anywhere near as bitter as the native population.

#16 GC90

GC90

    waxramble.com

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,167 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Beaverton, OR
  • Interests:Music

Posted 17 October 2013 - 02:13 AM

Why are the Sweedes and Irish not up in arms? Is it just bitterness?


There are Native Americans/Indians/whatever you want to call them who appreciate the team's name/logo and some that don't. The one's who are really up in arms are the white guilt PC police folks (see SNF's stupid commentary on subject).

Think there's a difference between Redskins vs Cleveland Indians, can see why some folks might be upset about their mascot

Posted Image

#17 gEEchieDan

gEEchieDan

    STMB Official

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 896 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oakland, Ca (E14th)
  • Interests:Cooking, Boxing, Music, STMB, Madlib...
  • Soundcloud:geechiedan

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:11 AM

The only reason people find it offensive is because redskin has been used as a racial slur toward Native Americans. Braves, Indians, chiefs, Seminoles, Blackhawks, etc, are all either generic labels or a specific tribe. Redskin was a tribe, but the only of these that has also been used before as a negative term. In my opinion, people are waaaayyyyyy too sensitive nowadays. Everything requires being a perfect political correctness, it's pathetic.


yep im part seminole indian and i really dont care i feel like this countrys history in itself when it comes to native americans is negative so ive been there done that, the logos dont bother geech at all! columbus and his menions are who my beef is with but good music and a couple of big girls every now n then along with the casinos we got will do until something else happens....
  • James Frank. likes this

#18 James Frank.

James Frank.

    Rookie of the Year

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DENVER
  • Interests:crates, paint, sashimi, sticks of sherm.

Posted 17 October 2013 - 10:36 AM

it really is a weird instance, because usually the causes people fight for are banal, irrelevant shit that they think is gonna somehow change the world; but in this particular instance, i can see that it's truly offensive and the only real argument for keeping it is "ehh, fuck it-- it's been around since the '30s," which really isn't a good one admittedly lol.

i get worried though because it's a very slippery slope with these people, they aren't gonna stop after this name gets changed. they've successfully ruined several college teams (the most ridiculous one i can think of is the Syracuse Orange Men, which they argued was oppressive to the women teams so now they're the Syracuse Orange...literally, a fucking orange, just one. that's supposed to rile up school spirit now when you go to the Warriors vs. the Orange game), and they've fought to actually ban words and get people fired from their livelihoods over them. and while yes, most of those words are unpleasant, you can't just legislate them out of existence-- that isn't how language works. meanings for words change over time; the n-word is more and more being used in hip-hop as a paradoxically positive term for describing just about anybody, people use it like you would use 'dude' at this point; faggot does not necessarily mean a homosexual anymore, although it sometimes is used in that hateful way (i see it being used much more as a synonym for like 'dummy' or 'douche' or something); retard is the same thing...and you know what offends me personally the most? people who think they know better than i do for what i should be offended at.



i have a little brother with autism, and that's no fucking lie. we've had one hell of a time raising him, especially after his dad died a few years back--so if anyone would have a legitimate right to get angry at other people using the word 'retard' or 'retarded', it's me and my family. but instead what i see is (once again) guilty white people who were around to watch the whole Don Imus thing go down and now they feel that they have to go crusade for the cause of EVERY single fucking person in the world, whether or not they even have a personal connection to the ethnic/religious/gender/etc group they're fighting for (they usually don't)...it's a very condescending, subversively elitist way to go around fighting for the rights of minorities because you inherently think they're too stupid to do it themselves. i don't think people look at the big picture here and realize that every time we do this kinda thing, we're effectively rendering the First Amendment completely useless (and let me tell you, 'freedom of speech' was not created to protect popular speech, that's the entire point of it).



it's getting crazy though...in fact, i actually heard a radio DJ on a national platform trying to argue that the word "crazy" is offensive to crazy-Americans and we should ban it because Chevy has a commercial that uses the word a lot...this shit has got to stop somewhere, we have to draw a line; and i personally think that line is somewhere post-Redskins and post-Cleveland Indians.

#19 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:44 PM

it's getting crazy though...in fact, i actually heard a radio DJ on a national platform trying to argue that the word "crazy" is offensive to crazy-Americans and we should ban it because Chevy has a commercial that uses the word a lot...this shit has got to stop somewhere, we have to draw a line; and i personally think that line is somewhere post-Redskins and post-Cleveland Indians.



Hilarious at the crazy being offensive.


On one hand I grew up saying "retard", if someone was acting dumb. I still think it sounds "right", but if it offended you, or a friend, I would certainly stop. Same thing with "fag". To me tho, not to offend, but they are kind of appropriate. I mean if some one is being stupid, "hey retard" sounds less offensive than "hey dummy", but perhaps that will offend the dumb people.


I like the ability to insult ones ancestry or thier simple defects. What I mean is, I enjoy Dave Chappelle and so much of his humor is race based. I think if, it is done intelligently, which he does, it can be a great social commentary and insight. Done stupidly however, it is crass and offensive.



But yes, I am sick of the trying to be politically correct on everything. I find that offensive and fake.

#20 James Frank.

James Frank.

    Rookie of the Year

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,105 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:DENVER
  • Interests:crates, paint, sashimi, sticks of sherm.

Posted 17 October 2013 - 06:52 PM

^^^ exactly. i find nothing wrong with people using offensive language in most cases, because in most cases it's not coming from a place of genuine hatred. in my entire life i think i've only seen one instance of someone actually calling a mentally challenged person a 'retard', 9/10 people are not cruel and intolerant people, despite what the news would have you believe...oh, and that was incident was back in middle school, btw.

#21 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 October 2013 - 07:04 PM

Yah.
It is completely in the tone.

Like if you look at the logos, I don't see the Redskins as offensive, at least visually. The Cleveland logo while I don't see as outrageously bad, can see it as negative. That being said, it is a cartoony, smiling Indian. As a member of that team, let alone the owner I would be uncomfortable with it as a logo regardless of any racist implications.

#22 PADYBU

PADYBU

    Rookie

  • Members
  • 9 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dublin, Ireland
  • Interests:beats.
  • Soundcloud:https://soundcloud.com/padybu

Posted 13 June 2014 - 05:05 AM

and FYI, Native-Americans weren't the only persecuted folks here in the country. if this were a hundred years ago i'd be among the scourge of fucking society for being a potato-eater...people are quick to forget how harshly the Irish were treated 100-200 years back in the past. but hey, i guess my opinion doesn't matter based on the color of my skin...

The_Fighting_Irish_by_pumpkinmaster.jpg

i think ^ this is much more offensive and insensitive in characterizing an entire culture as something negative than this:
 

Im actually Irish and I can tell you that I haven't heard of anyone find that logo offensive, it's just a funny little sketch of an important aspect of irish folklore, little cheeky leprechauns. I think we care less about racist remarks towards us because they're so few and far between and because we are loved everywhere except England and Arabia haha. 

 

dope pumpkin too 



#23 mangoes cash

mangoes cash

    STMB Deluxe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 June 2014 - 06:39 AM

To tell you the truth, I think people of colour have a much more sensitive way of seeing this as an Irishman is not known if he is Irish until he speaks and or, in the case of a 1st, 2nd generation one, in the new world, until he tells you.

I was at the bar the other night and some chick, who was Peruvian, was just going in and on about race.

#24 soulREBEL360

soulREBEL360

    Certified ST Dope(ness) Pusher

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Everywhere and nowhere.
  • Soundcloud:www.soundcloud.com/soulrebel360

Posted 13 June 2014 - 02:05 PM






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users