Edit: Meme has been slightly altered to be more accurate. Credit to @ininewcrow for the updated and better image.

  • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    Right? Like, you should be honored that their mascot would be a guy who looks exactly like you. He does, he looks exactly like you. It’s celebrating how your people were brave warriors who fought with honor despite being uncultured savages, and you should be proud to have your entire culture condensed into one easily imitated mascot. Also, you should be thrilled how they chant “Defense” to the tune of Amazing Grace and Ave Maria, you should love that because those are your songs. How could you possibly be insulted by such an honor?

    • Wogi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Context is important here.

      I wouldn’t be offended at a team called Caucasians, filled entirely with Indian players. But I don’t live in the same universe that Indian people do.

      But maybe if white people made up 2% of the population, after being systematically eliminated by Indians to make use of our land, maybe if white people were relegated to the poorest, least productive areas of the country and told to be thankful for it, and maybe if the word Caucasian was kind of a rude way to refer to my skin color, I could see myself being offended at the idea.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This one’s on me, because I was trying to make a point and be sarcastic at the same time.

        While I agree with you, I’ll quibble that context isn’t actually important here. The point of the shirt, and the point I was trying to make, was that reducing an entire culture to a caricature is offensive in any context (regardless of whether or not you would it offensive). The people who defend using native imagery for sports mascots often claim that the portrayal is intended as an honor, and that they are celebrating the culture instead of demeaning it.

        All of your points are correct, and each one compounds the offense. But even if you turn it around and use white people as the mascot, a people and culture who have not been systematically oppressed, deprived of life, liberty, and property, it’s still an inherently prejudicial and ignorant thing to do. So any argument about how mascots are intended to promote or celebrate or honor a culture or a people still fails to justify the practice.

        • Wogi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Grew up near a res friendo, it was generally the preferred term. But tell me more about that horse you’re on

          • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh hey pot! I’m kettle, nice to meet you!

            The fuck you on about “horse I’m on” lmao, you just did the same exact thing

            • Monster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m indigenous and I personally have no problem with being called Indian but I know a few of my relatives hate the term. I guess it really depends on the person

            • Wogi@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m using the term I’ve been told to use to describe a group of people, by that group of people. Or at least a group of that people. If someone of that group comes up with a different term they’d like me to use I’ll happily use that, until then, I’ll use the last term I know to have been acceptable.

              If you’re a member of that group and prefer a different term, then make that known.

              If you’re not a member of that group, then you’re making assumptions for a group of people and calling it respect while completely disregarding the wishes of the people to whom you’re attempting to refer.

              • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m not disregarding wishes. I’ll call any INDIVIDUAL whatever they want to be called. Groups will be referred to by the most accurate and accepted name. Indians are from India and it’s ridiculous to call Native Americans/American Indians that. It’s as ridiculous as calling any black person “African American”, like when the interviewer insisted on that terminology for Idris Elba, a black British man. That’s it. I’m not calling them “Redskins”, for example. I’m using a perfectly respectful and accepted term and not one that may or may not be accepted, depending on who you ask, and not one that is literally incorrect.

                Edit: There’s a person directly below this comment whose relatives hate the term “Indian”.

          • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            So you speak for ALL American Indians, then? Do I speak for ALL Germans? Or have I been in the US long enough that I’m no longer German? My grandmother was born in Germany, is that too far? Or is it just skin color, I speak for all whites, no matter the country or culture of origin? I’m curious to the rules here- I shouldn’t speak for American Indians because I’m not one, right? So who can speak for all American Indians and all 547 distinct tribes (federally recognized)? Do you speak for every tribe? If not you, then who? Your phrasing was “Unless you’re American indian”, so… yes? You speak for all 547 tribes and 5.2 million people?

              • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Buuuuuut… you did say “Unless you’re American indian”, so that does imply that you or someone else CAN speak for all of a group. So I’m a bit confused here. I will call you whatever you’d like me to call you, including “Indian” on its own if that’s what you’d prefer to be called (even though that doesn’t make sense to me), but you didn’t actually answer my questions. Let me try again- how is it bigoted to not assume that a group of people would want to be called something that is fundamentally incorrect by definition, has a turbulent history, and is not what most federal programs call them- you yourself say that the benefits go to “American Indians”, not “Indians”.

                Thanks for the coloring page, is it one of your favorites?