Indians to remove chief Wahoo stating in 2019

[Snapolit1]

Basically the equivalent to some mocking horrible black stereotype character from the 1930-40 with huge lips and bulging eyes. Hard to imagine there can even be a discussion on this one.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Basically the equivalent to some mocking horrible black stereotype character from the 1930-40 with huge lips and bulging eyes. Hard to imagine there can even be a discussion on this one.

Furthest thing from it. Those depictions were malicious.

By the way, the Indians can't go with the Block C anymore. The Block C was also the logo of the Indianapolis Clowns. Talk about offensive.

[Peter_Spaeth]

David -- here is a link to the speech. LBJ clearly had evolved, as he says himself.

http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/johnson.htm

[orly57]

Exactly Steve. For some reason, people think racism only applies to African Americans. As if only they should be protected from epithets and stereotypes. As if they were the only ones who have been subject to racism in this country. I think that the term "redskin" is every bit as racist as the "n word" that we can't even utter, much less name a professional sports team after. The Indian caricature was shameful. And by the way, I can't stand political correctness. Its proponents have been the the proverbial "boy who cried wolf." When truly disturbing issues like this are raised, they are treated with an eye-roll because we are all so sick of it. But this one, and the redskins, in my opinion, have real merit.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by orly57

Exactly Steve. For some reason, people think racism only applies to African Americans. As if only they should be protected from epithets and stereotypes. As if they were the only ones who have been subject to racism in this country. I think that the term "redskin" is every bit as racist as the "n word" that we can't even utter, much less name a professional sports team after. The Indian caricature was shameful. And by the way, I can't stand political correctness. It has been the equivalent of the boy who cried wolf. When truly disturbing things like this are raised, it is treated with an eye-roll because we are all so sick of it. But this one, and the redskins, in my opinion, have real merit.

+1

[A2000]

I'm shocked by how this thread has gone.

[rainier2004]

Kyle - I have reached out to Native Americans, I have asked them what they of names like those that belonged to Central Michigan University and the Cleveland Indians. I have gone to gatherings and social events that bring awareness to the tough road they have traveled. So why don't I do something you ask? Speaking my opinion is doing something, asking opinions and listening is doing something and becoming willing to change is doing something IMO.

Will removing this logo change the lives of all Native Americans? Absolutely not, not in any way. Go ono a reservation, study some history and look at what was done to this entire group as a whole and tell me how "important" that logo is...really? That cartoonish big smiling Chief is simply not cool and those are not my words only.

Why doesn't the Indians organization reach out to the local tribes and come to some sort of understanding? How hard would that be? I know there are ways for this to be done, its been done before and Id assume it will be done again. But I couldn't care less about how important this logo is to you or any "fan"...its simply disrespectful. We need to come to an understanding and evolve as the times evolve and we grow as a nation or we will die by killing our own brothers and sisters. I hate PC as well, just like Orly stated, but sometimes things need to change.

[mark evans]

I agree with the decision to replace the Wahoo logo. And, I acknowledge that heading down this road will raise some tough line-drawing problems. But, public policy frequently involves resolution of just such problems; they can't be avoided.

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

David, he doubtless was for much of his life, but he changed. Read the incredible speech to Congress where the punch line is his adoption of the "We Shall Overcome" lyric.

Sorry Pete but he was quoted as saying “we’re gonna have these n-word’s voting for democrats for the next hundred years!”

Perhaps a skilled politician but a terrible man.

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by drcy

Irrelevant to political/racial issues and whether or not the name 'Indians' itself is reverent, it's a rather stupid and outdated cartoon logo, and teams alter and change their logos all the time. My various favorite teams have changed their logos and designs regularly during my fandom-- sometimes to my aesthetic disappointment. I wish the Milwaukee Brewers had kept their 'ball in glove' logo.

Agree on all points

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

Sorry Pete but he was quoted as saying “we’re gonna have these n-word’s voting for democrats for the next hundred years!”

Perhaps a skilled politician but a terrible man.

You're very close, but he actually said 200 years. I was going to say this, even had my response typed out, but I didn't want to hijack the thread, nor did I want it to become political.

[timn1]

Edited for civility, but still...

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Furthest thing from it. Those depictions were malicious.

By the way, the Indians can't go with the Block C anymore. The Block C was also the logo of the Indianapolis Clowns. Talk about offensive.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

Sorry Pete but he was quoted as saying “we’re gonna have these n-word’s voting for democrats for the next hundred years!”

Perhaps a skilled politician but a terrible man.

I read Robert Caro's biography. I came away believing he changed. Nothing and nobody forced him to become the relentless champion of civil rights that he became as President.

[tjb1952tjb]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Basically the equivalent to some mocking horrible black stereotype character from the 1930-40 with huge lips and bulging eyes. Hard to imagine there can even be a discussion on this one.

Calls to mind the old Sambo's restaurants.........

[pclpads]

The once proud Cleveland franchise can now change their name to the Cleveland Pu**ies, after capitulating to the PC crowd. Only problem is what a relevant mascot would look like.

[Bpm0014]

However, nobody is up in arms about that one one because the Irish have a sense of humor.

Aaaaaaa-men!!

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Additionally, you can't marginalize vintagetoppsguy for bringing up the Irish mascot for both the Celtics and Notre Dame. That's hypocritical. Or how about the following...

San Francisco Giants = offensive to little people
Minnesota Twins = offensive to only children, triplets, quintuplets, etc.
NY Yankees = offensive to the Dutch (didn't know that) and southerners; hell, as a northerner, I'm not sure I like being referred to as a Yankee
Tampa Bay Rays = what about the rest of the shark family?
Chicago Cubs = offensive to grown bears, plus the bear is brown; what about black bears, polar bears, etc.?
White Sox & Red Sox = what about blue sox, grey socks, black socks, green socks, yellow socks, etc.?
Kansas City Royals = offensive to people who aren't of royal blood
Oakland A's = an elephant on a circus ball is offensive, especially considering the Ringling Bros Circus or whatever was discontinued to people getting offended
Detroit Tigers = what about the rest of the cat family?
Philly Phanatic = what about lethargic fans?
Colorado Rockies = what about the Appalachian Mountains?
Arizona Diamondbacks = really, referring to rattlesnakes as diamondbacks... that's pretty offensive to them
Cardinals & Orioles = what about other birds?

You are seriously trying to equate a logo stereotyping an entire race of people with logos "offensive" to mountain chains or different colored socks or members of the animal kingdom?

That line of argument doesn't do any favors to your defense of Chief Wahoo. That argument is a pretty glaring exhibit that Chief Wahoo is an offensive stereotype that needs to be thrown on the dustbin of history,

[bbcardzman]

Just more stupidity from the idiots on the left

[Bpm0014]

How long before the Rebels and Running Rebels are forced by the left to change their names too?

[darwinbulldog]

It'll be interesting to see how many of you guys Leon decides to ban now.

[Mutton Chop Yaz]

This is the right move, and it should have happened a long time ago.

I'm an Indians fan and had avoided the Wahoo logo for years.

[keithsky]

Were all getting to be like robots. Everyone has to do and say the right thing without offending anyone otherwise they'll protest. Everyone has there own view on things in life as it should be. If I don't like something doesn't mean the other guy has to agree or if I like something doesn't mean everyone has to but that is what society wants anymore. Everyone is on edge to make sure whatever they say doesn't hurt anyones fellings. We're all different and should be, that is what makes us unique.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

I challenge everyone complaining about Chief Wahoo to actually do something for these oppressed Native Americans you apparently care so much about. Protest the government for putting them on reservations, protest to get them their land back. Hell, leave this country since it belonged to them before the white man came along. Take action, other than getting rid of a logo designed to pay tribute to Indians, to clear your conscious and rid yourself of whatever guilt you may feel for some reason.

Otherwise, you're choosing to be offended, and for some reason you think the world should shift/change to fit your beliefs. That's exactly what this is about. It's incredible how little credit you're giving those who oppose you. What did they do to make you believe they are so heartless for liking Chief Wahoo? What if they just choose to not look for something offensive? What if they simply view Chief Wahoo for what it is: a fun-loving, smiling Indian logo created to pay homage to Native American heritage, Cleveland baseball history, and Louis Sockalexis? Just take a second and think about that. Why do SO many people like him if he's supposedly that offensive? Why don't you just not support the Indians?

Now my team that I've grown up rooting for, the one that has had Chief Wahoo since the '40s, chose to cower to Manfred and the minority. I now lose the chance to see Chief Wahoo on the National Stage. Do you know how proud I and so many others were to see that smiling Indian in the World Series in 2016? I was a baby, but I don't think I've ever heard a story about people bitchin' and moanin' in the '90s when the Jake was sold out game after game for nearly a decade, Chief Wahoo on EVERYONE's person. I own ONE tshirt with the Block C, and that's because it has an American Flag in it (is that offensive because we took this land from he Native Americans?).

Additionally, you can't marginalize vintagetoppsguy for bringing up the Irish mascot for both the Celtics and Notre Dame. That's hypocritical. Or how about the following...

San Francisco Giants = offensive to little people
Minnesota Twins = offensive to only children, triplets, quintuplets, etc.
NY Yankees = offensive to the Dutch (didn't know that) and southerners; hell, as a northerner, I'm not sure I like being referred to as a Yankee
Tampa Bay Rays = what about the rest of the shark family?
Chicago Cubs = offensive to grown bears, plus the bear is brown; what about black bears, polar bears, etc.?
White Sox & Red Sox = what about blue sox, grey socks, black socks, green socks, yellow socks, etc.?
Kansas City Royals = offensive to people who aren't of royal blood
Oakland A's = an elephant on a circus ball is offensive, especially considering the Ringling Bros Circus or whatever was discontinued to people getting offended
Detroit Tigers = what about the rest of the cat family?
Philly Phanatic = what about lethargic fans?
Colorado Rockies = what about the Appalachian Mountains?
Arizona Diamondbacks = really, referring to rattlesnakes as diamondbacks... that's pretty offensive to them
Cardinals & Orioles = what about other birds?

I'll stick to just the MLB, and won't bring up the other offensive names in sports; I'm sure if I look hard enough, I could find something to be offended about with every single nickname/logo in sports. And how ridiculous the above seem, is how ridiculous the argument against Chief Wahoo is with very few of the outspoken minority against Chief Wahoo being Native American (from what I've seen/heard).

Keep the Chief. You'll see me an thousands of others at games next year sporting nothing but Chief Wahoo gear.

And another sick angle to this: Manfred probably threatened to take away the 2019 All Star Game if Dolan kept Chief Wahoo.

Let me make sure I'm following your reasoning here.

If Indians is offensive to Indians and Irish is offensive to the Irish, then the other names must be offensive to the groups that they do not refer to. That's so stupid it's brilliant. And yet somehow manages to be the most reasonable component of your argument.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

It'll be interesting to see how many of you guys Leon decides to ban now.

LOL! How typical! Disagree with someone on the other side and you should be banned...shut up...not allowed to speak. I didn't see that one coming

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

LOL! How typical! Disagree with someone on the other side and you should be banned...shut up...not allowed to speak. I didn't see that one coming

Banning people for making political comments is Leon's rule. You can look it up. I'd actually prefer more political discussions. But it does put Leon in a difficult and interesting position when you get a thread like this where, depending on one's definition, anywhere from 10% to 50% of the posts are political.

[vintagetoppsguy]

When I was a kid growing up, we played Cowboys and Indians.

If you're in favor of banning the Chief Wahoo logo, then why not the Oklahoma State Cowboys logo? Seriously, what's the difference?



Or as I previously mentioned, the Boston Celtics logo? Why is it that you're only concerned with the minority groups getting offended? Sounds like a double standard to me.

[rainier2004]

David - The thing is Native Americans were nearly wiped out, they continued to be oppressed and struggle to present day. I don't think its about minority, its more about learning to respect this group in general. Sure the cowboy logo looks silly, but I don't remember cowboys being treated the same way in the past as Native Americans were and are today having families ripped apart and "socialized"...hell, most true cowboys still live today as they did some time ago.

[Mutton Chop Yaz]

Also, to correct an earlier assertion on this thread:

https://www.theringer.com/mlb/2018/1...ief-wahoo-logo

"Cleveland’s American League franchise adopted the nickname 'Indians' in 1915, after 14 years as the Blues, the Bronchos, or the Naps. The name was supposedly a tribute to Louis Sockalexis, a member of the Penobscot tribe who had played for the crosstown Cleveland Spiders from 1897 to 1899. It’d be curious if the team was named for a player who appeared in 94 games for a different franchise nearly 20 years prior, and, sure enough, contemporary newspaper coverage shows that naming the team the 'Indians' was never intended as much of a tribute."

[KMayUSA6060]

Let me come at this from a different, less angry and aggressive angle.

What is offensive about the modern Chief Wahoo? Is it the red skin? If so, would it still be offensive if the Indians went back to their vintage Chief Wahoo?

[ronniehatesjazz]

Originally Posted by rainier2004

David - The thing is Native Americans were nearly wiped out, they continued to be oppressed and struggle to present day. I don't think its about minority, its more about learning to respect this group in general. Sure the cowboy logo looks silly, but I don't remember cowboys being treated the same way in the past as Native Americans were and are today having families ripped apart and "socialized"...hell, most true cowboys still live today as they did some time ago.

So true, no one mutters the word redneck nowadays (perhaps not totally directed towards "cowboys" but basically is). Please man, this is the one group that it's totally okay to make fun of in society today and face no negative consequences. The white working class and particularly the types who take on a "country" persona are the scapegoats of the white upper middleclass and beyond. It really is disgusting that people can hold such views and not realize the hypocrisy. My angst is totally directed at you but just the overall mindset of this in general.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

When I was a kid growing up, we played Cowboys and Indians.

If you're in favor of banning the Chief Wahoo logo, then why not the Oklahoma State Cowboys logo? Seriously, what's the difference?



Or as I previously mentioned, the Boston Celtics logo? Why is it that you're only concerned with the minority groups getting offended? Sounds like a double standard to me.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you want a sincere response. Here you go.

If our nation's cowboys have been systematically oppressed by the non-cowboys in political power and are hurt by their representation in logos with crude caricatures of them then certainly changing that logo would be a nice thing to do. Otherwise it's not causing any harm so it might as well be left alone. That is the standard I would propose for all of these cases -- not a double-standard, just a standard.

I am primarily Irish, so I'll go ahead and speak as a representative of that particular historically oppressed minority. Irish-Americans were already in power in Boston by the time that logo was created, and my guess is that's why it isn't upsetting to the community. It is a representation of their fan base rather than of some other minority group that could be caricatured for fun. Personally it bothers me that they pronounce it Seltics rather than Celtics, but at least the spelling of the name is fine.

If, on the other hand, you had an English soccer team in the 1800s named the Irish and using this mascot, that would be different with regards to the standard I mentioned in the first paragraph.

[frankbmd]

How about the CLEVELAND LAKE EFFECT with Snowflake cheerleaders and white pompoms everywhere?

If you thought the Indians were upset, wait until the concept of snowflakes in July sinks in with the goreables.

Come to think of it, this name change might be more appropriate for the Cleveland Browns???

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by rainier2004

David - The thing is Native Americans were nearly wiped out, they continued to be oppressed and struggle to present day. I don't think its about minority, its more about learning to respect this group in general. Sure the cowboy logo looks silly, but I don't remember cowboys being treated the same way in the past as Native Americans were and are today having families ripped apart and "socialized"...hell, most true cowboys still live today as they did some time ago.

Debatable. What happened to the Native Americans was atrocious, more violent, and blatant, but comparisons can be drawn. Between government overreach, regulations, land grabs, etc., "cowboys" have been forced to socialize to an extent. I would definitely argue that they cannot live today as they did some time ago, with the constant war on the 2nd Amendment/firearms, regulations on farming, taxes, and land grabs. Look no further than the Bundy's and their dispute with the government land grab. Like I said, it's not as broad, violent, or blatant, but comparisons are there. I identify more as a "country" person, with lots of my friends sharing that in common. None of us find the term "redneck" as offensive, and actually use it quite often ourselves, despite its intended derogatory origins/nature. Maybe we should choose to find it offensive and raise hell?

The point of bringing up the Cowboys', Celtics', and Notre Dame logos is if we look hard enough, we can find offense in all aspects of life, regardless of demographic size.

By the way, how was it ok for Bomani Jones, or whatever the hell his name is from ESPN, to wear a Caucasians shirt in response to Chief Wahoo?

[btcarfagno]

From what I have read, the logo will still be available on merchandise in places like the team store, so it won't disappear completely.

I have mixed feelings on this one.

As a Libertarian, this seems to be an internal issue within the framework of major league baseball. If they feel the need to step in, that is a business decision and they are free to make it...letting any consequences be as they may based on free market forces (such as they are in America circa 2018 anyway). I am also all for any aggrieved group banding together of their own free will to try to have changes implemented that said group feels would be of benefit to them. More power to them.

As a person with some indigenous ancestry, I know that there are much larger issues facing the Native American population, much of which was forced upon them and has now metastasized into several generations of internal issues and generally poor decision making. I don't think it should be overly political to believe that offering sympathy and a hand up to them would be a good and humane idea for our fellow Americans. That said, if they feel that minor (in the grand scheme of things) issues such as this are worthy of their time and effort, I suppose I can get behind that. At the same time, with the myriad of other issues within their community, I also can't shake the feeling that some may be better served putting on their big boy and big girls pants and tackling some more important and fundamental issues to their longer term success as a people.

As a Pirates fan, we seem to change our logo about as often as a Kardashian rolls out a new product line. In that context, I can't really empathize with Cleveland fans who have had variations of the same logo for generations.

Basically I am all over the map on this one and have thoughts that both agree and disagree with pretty much everyone. Hell. I agree and disagree with my own thoughts on this.

Hope that clears this up for everyone then.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by frankbmd

How about the CLEVELAND LAKE EFFECT with Snowflake cheerleaders and white pompoms everywhere?

If you thought the Indians were upset, wait until the concept of snowflakes in July sinks in with the goreables.

Come to think of it, this name change might be more appropriate for the Cleveland Browns???

Or in tribute to the great passenger steamships that brought base ball fans to the shores of Lake Erie to watch the franchise in its early years, perhaps the Cleveland Steamers.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

Or in tribute to the great passenger steamships that brought base ball fans to the shores of Lake Erie to watch the franchise in its early years, perhaps the Cleveland Steamers.

You just went there!!

Although the franchise certainly has earned that logo to be sure.

[Rookiemonster]

It’s not a perfect world. I doubt that all native Americans feel offended about this. I don’t think this helps native Americans with what they had happen to them. What if the renamed the team the Cleveland Natives and had a more friendly logo. That might be a more progressive move.

There are many many types of people that have these small racial issues that they put up with.
I’m a mixed person genetically I have Irish, Italian, and Romani ( gypsy ) on both sides.

Growing up I had to see kids come to school dress up a gypsys ! Would it be ok to see kids come to school dressed as Jews or Africans ? I think not !

I hear people say I got GYPED Alll the time which is very racist and it bothers me to hear it. But guess what, people say it like it’s nothing. Is it ok to say you got Jewed?

Do I lose sleep over this ? No, if it all stopped tomorrow would my life be better . Nope.

Forget about the Irish and Italian side of my family. It’s very common for people say something about either one as well. But it seems that only a select few get to the PC world protect them.

[z28jd]

As someone with native American blood, who has a bunch of older relatives who grew up with the person it all came from, I can tell you that not one of them are offended by these logos. They are proud of their family history. As many have mentioned with the Notre Dame symbol, these same people are half Irish and they have never been offended by that symbol, or the mascot, or the Celtics. They just don't get offended by team logos, especially not ones from a long time ago and they certainly aren't going to sit there and be told what offends them. If those people who grew up with that history and have twice as much Native American blood as I do don't care, then why should I try to find something that isn't there. The Indians and the Fighting Irish aren't sitting there spreading hate with those symbols and common sense people realize that.

I know where the names came from from for the teams and the history behind the symbols, so it doesn't bother me. Of course, no one in my family wakes up ready to find out what someone tells them to be offended over each day, so maybe those people with no ammo in the conversation should listen to those who do.

I personally don't care what they decide to do with it. Teams change logos all of the time. They could have changed it and not even given a reason.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by z28jd

As someone with native American blood, who has a bunch of older relatives who grew up with the person it all came from, I can tell you that not one of them are offended by these logos. They are proud of their family history. As many have mentioned with the Notre Dame symbol, these same people are half Irish and they have never been offended by that symbol, or the mascot, or the Celtics. They just don't get offended by team logos, especially not ones from a long time ago and they certainly aren't going to sit there and be told what offends them. If those people who grew up with that history and have twice as much Native American blood as I do don't care, then why should I try to find something that isn't there. The Indians and the Fighting Irish aren't sitting there spreading hate with those symbols and common sense people realize that.

I know where the names came from from for the teams and the history behind the symbols, so it doesn't bother me. Of course, no one in my family wakes up ready to find out what someone tells them to be offended over each day, so maybe those people with no ammo in the conversation should listen to those who do.

I personally don't care what they decide to do with it. Teams change logos all of the time. They could have changed it and not even given a reason.

Makes no difference to me if 0.01% or 99.9% of group XYZ agrees with a logo or not. Public opinion polls are poor indicators of what's right or wrong.

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Public opinion polls are poor indicators of what's right or wrong.

What is a good indicator of what's right or wrong? Just because you say it is?

[orly57]

Originally Posted by ronniehatesjazz

So true, no one mutters the word redneck nowadays (perhaps not totally directed towards "cowboys" but basically is). Please man, this is the one group that it's totally okay to make fun of in society today and face no negative consequences. The white working class and particularly the types who take on a "country" persona are the scapegoats of the white upper middleclass and beyond. It really is disgusting that people can hold such views and not realize the hypocrisy. My angst is totally directed at you but just the overall mindset of this in general.

You are 100% right on this. It bothers me to no end when African American comedians mock white people and it's totally ok. I think that reverse racism is part of the reason that so many white men are angry at the PC Police. But that shouldn't blind us to the fact that it's not cool to make fun of other cultures...especially those with the ugly history that the native Americans have. They don't have the Jesse Jackson's of the world fighting for them, but it doesn't make them any less worthy of the same considerations as we give African Americans.

[cincyredlegs]

Originally Posted by Orioles1954

Makes no difference to me if 0.01% or 99.9% of group XYZ agrees with a logo or not. Public opinion polls are poor indicators of what's right or wrong.

With societal issues, what's right or wrong is also a personal opinion. Typically changes take place when the majority of society decides to change it.

Now, a small minority of people are trying to make changes for the majority and if you don't agree with them you are vilified and condemned.

I would love to find the data that supports the majority of Cleveland, MLB fans or the US want to make this change or are offended by it.

[darwinbulldog]

Time for a card. I give you George Stovall, right-handed first baseman and the handsomest devil to ever don the Naps' grays.

[steve B]

Originally Posted by Bpm0014

However, nobody is up in arms about that one one because the Irish have a sense of humor.

Aaaaaaa-men!!

I'd scan and post some of the old anti-Irish cartoons, but I'd probably be banned.

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

What is a good indicator of what's right or wrong? Just because you say it is?

My personal opinion is that the logo is wrong. The powers that be (for whatever reason) agree.

[steve B]

That one is actually rather tame compared to some I have in old magazines.

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you want a sincere response. Here you go.

If our nation's cowboys have been systematically oppressed by the non-cowboys in political power and are hurt by their representation in logos with crude caricatures of them then certainly changing that logo would be a nice thing to do. Otherwise it's not causing any harm so it might as well be left alone. That is the standard I would propose for all of these cases -- not a double-standard, just a standard.

I am primarily Irish, so I'll go ahead and speak as a representative of that particular historically oppressed minority. Irish-Americans were already in power in Boston by the time that logo was created, and my guess is that's why it isn't upsetting to the community. It is a representation of their fan base rather than of some other minority group that could be caricatured for fun. Personally it bothers me that they pronounce it Seltics rather than Celtics, but at least the spelling of the name is fine.

If, on the other hand, you had an English soccer team in the 1800s named the Irish and using this mascot, that would be different with regards to the standard I mentioned in the first paragraph.

[KMayUSA6060]

Still looking for answers to the following (reference post #79 for the image)...

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Let me come at this from a different, less angry and aggressive angle.

What is offensive about the modern Chief Wahoo? Is it the red skin? If so, would it still be offensive if the Indians went back to their vintage Chief Wahoo?

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by steve B

That one is actually rather tame compared to some I have in old magazines.

I don't own any of those magazines myself, but I took a history class on Irish immigration to the U.S. (from a professor who was an Irish immigrant to the U.S.), and I saw quite a few that semester that I would say make the one I posted look rather tame.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060

Still looking for answers to the following (reference post #79 for the image)...

I suspect that's because you're assuming that it's either the color or the shape, or at least because your wording is instructing people to choose one or the other. There's no reason that you can't have an image more than one of whose features is offensive to a particular group.

[KMayUSA6060]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I suspect that's because you're assuming that it's either the color or the shape, or at least because your wording is instructing people to choose one or the other. There's no reason that you can't have an image more than one of whose features is offensive to a particular group.

If it's not the color OR the shape, then what's offensive about it?