The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by bigtrain

One guy is a murderer, one is not. What is so difficult to understand about that? Name calling that is devoid of logic does not win arguments

The only thing that will stop the cancel culture from continuing to mow down traditions in this country will be their hypocrisy, when they give certain people who have done reprehensible things a pass because of political affiliations. Although in the case of Forrest and Byrd, both were of the same party.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only thing that will stop the cancel culture from continuing to mow down traditions in this country will be their hypocrisy, when they give certain people who have done reprehensible things a pass because of political affiliations. Although in the case of Forrest and Byrd, both were of the same party.

I remember first year of law school when minority students were objecting to the tradition of calling on and grilling students as racist and calling for a "no hassle pass."

And now, decades later, we have trainers telling us that people like me are inherently racist because we grew up in a mostly white suburb. Really?

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

And now, decades later, we have trainers telling us that people like me are inherently racist because we grew up in a mostly white suburb. Really?

Exactly. It is insidious and needs to be confronted. If someone generalized a negative attribute to all people of a particular minority race, we would all agree that is reprehensible, and the very definition of racism. Yet people can look at your skin color, and nothing else, and ascribe all sorts of negativity on you because you happen to be white.

It's the same exact concept, and it is a rotten thing on principle. The way to end racism in this country is to treat everyone with equal respect, until they, as individual people, through their own actions, prove otherwise. But you don't end racism my turning that evil cannon around and firing it at white people, thinking it is somehow evening the score.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Exactly. It is insidious and needs to be confronted. If someone generalized a negative attribute to all people of a particular minority race, we would all agree that is reprehensible, and the very definition of racism. Yet people can look at your skin color, and nothing else, and ascribe all sorts of negativity on you because you happen to be white.

It's the same exact concept, and it is a rotten thing on principle. The way to end racism in this country is to treat everyone with equal respect, until they, as individual people, through their own actions, prove otherwise. But you don't end racism my turning that evil cannon around and firing it at white people, thinking it is somehow evening the score.

It's ridiculous. The one Black kid in our neighborhood was a close and ultimately lifelong friend of my brother, and was a fixture in our house. Nobody could have cared less about his skin color. I say that not in self-congratulation but as illustration.

I live in an extremely liberal town. Our Mayor is always ranting and raving about institutional racism. Ironically, her predecessor, who would have easily been reelected had he run, was Black.

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by Mark17

The only thing that will stop the cancel culture from continuing to mow down traditions in this country will be their hypocrisy, when they give certain people who have done reprehensible things a pass because of political affiliations.

It is far worse than you think. Not only will cancel culture mow down traditions, it will also lead to dancing among our children.

[sdimag]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

It is far worse than you think. Not only will cancel culture mow down traditions, it will also lead to dancing among our children.

“Dancing”? Is that what the cancel culture is calling rioting,looting,and burning now?

[vintagetoppsguy]

Originally Posted by sdimag

“Dancing”? Is that what the cancel culture is calling rioting,looting,and burning now?

You would be thinking of CNN's "mostly peaceful protest"

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You would be thinking of CNN's "mostly peaceful protest"

You must be thinking of the “normal tourist visit” in January 6th that “cancel culture” doesn’t talk about.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cliff Bowman]

Originally Posted by BCauley

You must be thinking of the “normal tourist visit” in January 6th that “cancel culture” doesn’t talk about.

The people the bases are named after rebelled against the US. That's what they DID. Why should that be celebrated? Do you celebrate the people who stormed the Capitol on January 6th?

You still haven't answered any of my questions though. Specifically, and now I can't see my comment so it's not word for word, wht should they name a base after them? What did they do to accomplish such an honor since they rebelled against the country? Additionally, should those on the 6th of January be celebrated as well?

"Cancel culture" is the people who stormed the Capitol on January 6th right? To void an election in service to one person who doesn't care about them one way or the other? Just want to make sure I understand what "cancel culture" is on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Anybody have a guess on the over/under for the duration of this thread?

[sdimag]

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy

You would be thinking of CNN's "mostly peaceful protest"

That’s the one! A summer of “dancing” in the streets!

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by sdimag

“Dancing”? Is that what the cancel culture is calling rioting,looting,and burning now?

That was a joke, champ, and I figured most people had enough neurons bouncing around inside their melon to catch the implication. Obviously, I was wrong. So, even though it doesn't really belong in this section, I'll try to explain. There are two premises here, but I will only address the one that is actually relevant (IMO) to the name change from Indians to Guardians. Also, these are my general observations. It isn't meant to be one size fits all. I am sure many of you do not fit neatly into the narrative:

1. Cancel culture is just the latest biennial moral panic conjured up by political operatives who needed something new to gin up outrage now that the previous panics have lost their impact.
2. The name change in Cleveland has nothing to do with "cancel culture." It is an artifact of the usual inter-generational changes that cause the olds to get their backs up and the youngs to roll their eyes at grumpy old Papaw.C

I was born in 1965 and I am part of the first Gen X cohort. I spent the first part of my professional career working with Baby Boomers and the second part with Millennials and (now) Gen Z. It's my observation that the younger generations are more comfortable with differences along ethnic, cultural, faith, and sexual orientation lines. With this comfort level comes a desire to use language that acknowledges the difference without resorting to potentially offensive tropes. It is nothing more than matter of being considerate of other people. And, I think we can all agree that being considerate is a good thing.

This isn't to say that Boomers (and my generation) are inherently racist. But we were able to move through our formative years without being confronted with the increasingly multi-cultural nature of America. Having one minority family in your neighborhood or, in my case, your graduating class doesn't mean that you are the living embodiment of MLK Jr "I have a dream" speech. It does mean that you grew up in an environment where you didn't need to think about how to deal with such issues. It also means being more intentional now in how we deal with those issues.

The Cleveland Indians were under no serious threat of going out of business by retaining the Indians name. However, we all also know that baseball is facing a demographic cliff with a rapidly aging fan base that is not being replaced by younger people. As younger generations become more accepting of differences, it is not surprising that various institutions (be they corporate or public sector) change to reflect the zeitgeist. It isn't a matter of caving to the "woke crowd." It is a matter of following the money and creating brand loyalty. Let's just face up to the hard truth: the only industries that consider our market demographic highly desirable are reverse mortgages and catheters-by-mail. So, if you really must be upset about this, you would do better to criticize Cleveland's ownership from engaging in such a obvious, cynical marketing ploy.

And, since every thread needs a card

[BCauley]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

That was a joke, champ, and I figured most people had enough neurons bouncing around inside their melon to catch the implication. Obviously, I was wrong.

I read your comment and thought of the movie Footloose.

Please don’t ruin it for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by BCauley

I read your comment and thought of the movie Footloose.

Please don’t ruin it for me.

Don't read any further then. There be dragons.

[sdimag]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

That was a joke, champ, and I figured most people had enough neurons bouncing around inside their melon to catch the implication. Obviously, I was wrong. So, even though it doesn't really belong in this section, I'll try to explain. There are two premises here, but I will only address the one that is actually relevant (IMO) to the name change from Indians to Guardians. Also, these are my general observations. It isn't meant to be one size fits all. I am sure many of you do not fit neatly into the narrative:

1. Cancel culture is just the latest biennial moral panic conjured up by political operatives who needed something new to gin up outrage now that the previous panics have lost their impact.
2. The name change in Cleveland has nothing to do with "cancel culture." It is an artifact of the usual inter-generational changes that cause the olds to get their backs up and the youngs to roll their eyes at grumpy old Papaw.C

I was born in 1965 and I am part of the first Gen X cohort. I spent the first part of my professional career working with Baby Boomers and the second part with Millennials and (now) Gen Z. It's my observation that the younger generations are more comfortable with differences along ethnic, cultural, faith, and sexual orientation lines. With this comfort level comes a desire to use language that acknowledges the difference without resorting to potentially offensive tropes. It is nothing more than matter of being considerate of other people. And, I think we can all agree that being considerate is a good thing.

This isn't to say that Boomers (and my generation) are inherently racist. But we were able to move through our formative years without being confronted with the increasingly multi-cultural nature of America. Having one minority family in your neighborhood or, in my case, your graduating class doesn't mean that you are the living embodiment of MLK Jr "I have a dream" speech. It does mean that you grew up in an environment where you didn't need to think about how to deal with such issues. It also means being more intentional now in how we deal with those issues.

The Cleveland Indians were under no serious threat of going out of business by retaining the Indians name. However, we all also know that baseball is facing a demographic cliff with a rapidly aging fan base that is not being replaced by younger people. As younger generations become more accepting of differences, it is not surprising that various institutions (be they corporate or public sector) change to reflect the zeitgeist. It isn't a matter of caving to the "woke crowd." It is a matter of following the money and creating brand loyalty. Let's just face up to the hard truth: the only industries that consider our market demographic highly desirable are reverse mortgages and catheters-by-mail. So, if you really must be upset about this, you would do better to criticize Cleveland's ownership from engaging in such a obvious, cynical marketing ploy.

And, since every thread needs a card

I think your neurons are overactive,champ! I don’t think my prior reply to you was an attack on you.But I’ll “play” if you want!

[carlsonjok]

Originally Posted by sdimag

I think your neurons are overactive,champ! I don’t think my prior reply to you was an attack on you.

I didn't think it was an attack either. I just figured you didn't understand the point I was making and I took the opportunity to develop the idea in a bit more detail.

But I’ll “play” if you want!

Deleted

[MooseDog]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target.

Maybe it's active spellcheck at work but if you were indeed top of your class I would assume that you'd spell guerilla correctly...

[Leon]

So before you are reprimanded for this, WTF? Do you really think you can threaten someone's life on this forum and not have any repercussions?

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

I didn't think it was an attack either. I just figured you didn't understand the point I was making and I took the opportunity to develop the idea in a bit more detail.



I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the f--- out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my f---ing words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, f---er. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life.

[gawaintheknight]

+1

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

That was a joke, champ, and I figured most people had enough neurons bouncing around inside their melon to catch the implication. Obviously, I was wrong. So, even though it doesn't really belong in this section, I'll try to explain. There are two premises here, but I will only address the one that is actually relevant (IMO) to the name change from Indians to Guardians. Also, these are my general observations. It isn't meant to be one size fits all. I am sure many of you do not fit neatly into the narrative:

1. Cancel culture is just the latest biennial moral panic conjured up by political operatives who needed something new to gin up outrage now that the previous panics have lost their impact.
2. The name change in Cleveland has nothing to do with "cancel culture." It is an artifact of the usual inter-generational changes that cause the olds to get their backs up and the youngs to roll their eyes at grumpy old Papaw.C

I was born in 1965 and I am part of the first Gen X cohort. I spent the first part of my professional career working with Baby Boomers and the second part with Millennials and (now) Gen Z. It's my observation that the younger generations are more comfortable with differences along ethnic, cultural, faith, and sexual orientation lines. With this comfort level comes a desire to use language that acknowledges the difference without resorting to potentially offensive tropes. It is nothing more than matter of being considerate of other people. And, I think we can all agree that being considerate is a good thing.

This isn't to say that Boomers (and my generation) are inherently racist. But we were able to move through our formative years without being confronted with the increasingly multi-cultural nature of America. Having one minority family in your neighborhood or, in my case, your graduating class doesn't mean that you are the living embodiment of MLK Jr "I have a dream" speech. It does mean that you grew up in an environment where you didn't need to think about how to deal with such issues. It also means being more intentional now in how we deal with those issues.

The Cleveland Indians were under no serious threat of going out of business by retaining the Indians name. However, we all also know that baseball is facing a demographic cliff with a rapidly aging fan base that is not being replaced by younger people. As younger generations become more accepting of differences, it is not surprising that various institutions (be they corporate or public sector) change to reflect the zeitgeist. It isn't a matter of caving to the "woke crowd." It is a matter of following the money and creating brand loyalty. Let's just face up to the hard truth: the only industries that consider our market demographic highly desirable are reverse mortgages and catheters-by-mail. So, if you really must be upset about this, you would do better to criticize Cleveland's ownership from engaging in such a obvious, cynical marketing ploy.

And, since every thread needs a card