"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
basketball shoes are for black people only? news to me.
paying homage via the arts is not the same as caricaturizing a whole group of people based on racist tropes.
No, no. You know damn well the shoes are a style issue, not strictly for playing. Second it is appropriation and white people are getting rich on it, even the arts. Third, no one is arguing to keep the name Indians. The question is whether Tribe is appropriate. It's not racist. It's not a caricature. Brian said it's appropriation. That's true. But how is it insulting or any different than the examples I put forth.
k, maybe i don't know the history of air jordan's, but how is it appropriation when it was simply a guy who got paid to put his name on a product for marketing purposes? it's also not appropriation for a white person to buy Dre's Beats headphones.
because tribe, as you said, is already a nickname for Indians. i'm not quite sure how you don't see that as a problem. why even bother changing the name if all you're doing is changing it, as I said before, to Indians Light?
To whatever degree white kids' choice of dress is appropriating black culture, it's not the same as a huge business (that happens to be a sports team that an entire region rallies behind) doing so; not to mention selling merchandise, etc.
I have no ties to any native-named team, so I probably don't have a strong sense to the attachment that fans have to those teams. But I just have a difficult time seeing Indians to Tribe as an improvement.
Truth be told, I'm not sure where I stand on names like Indians, Chiefs, and Braves. (Washington absolutely had to change). I might be OK living in a world in which those names stay even though you'll never see a new team take on such a name. But I find most of the imagery and rituals embarrassing. The Tomahawk Chop made me cringe when it first hit the scene when I was about 17 (against my team, the Twins in 1991). I am not even comfortable with the Chiefs arrowhead logo. If I were a Chiefs fan, I might wear their stuff but I'd probably avoid the arrow. So I guess I kinda think it's time for them to go away, even though "that's not necessary" is in the back of my mind.
I went to the Braves Unnecessary New Suburban Ball Park a couple of years ago. And I noticed a lot of fairly expensive lighted signage with "Atlanta," "Braves," and "Atlanta Braves" wordmarks, just like on the jerseys. But those wordmarks never had the tomahawk. The only expensive signage I saw with a tomahawk was the "Chop House" restaurant beyond the right field seats; the logo is two crossed tomahawks very much in team colors. It kinda struck me that they might be preparing for the day that the tomahawk needs to go away.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,733
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
To whatever degree white kids' choice of dress is appropriating black culture, it's not the same as a huge business (that happens to be a sports team that an entire region rallies behind) doing so; not to mention selling merchandise, etc.
I have no ties to any native-named team, so I probably don't have a strong sense to the attachment that fans have to those teams. But I just have a difficult time seeing Indians to Tribe as an improvement.
Truth be told, I'm not sure where I stand on names like Indians, Chiefs, and Braves. (Washington absolutely had to change). I might be OK living in a world in which those names stay even though you'll never see a new team take on such a name. But I find most of the imagery and rituals embarrassing. The Tomahawk Chop made me cringe when it first hit the scene when I was about 17 (against my team, the Twins in 1991). I am not even comfortable with the Chiefs arrowhead logo. If I were a Chiefs fan, I might wear their stuff but I'd probably avoid the arrow. So I guess I kinda think it's time for them to go away, even though "that's not necessary" is in the back of my mind.
I went to the Braves Unnecessary New Suburban Ball Park a couple of years ago. And I noticed a lot of fairly expensive lighted signage with "Atlanta," "Braves," and "Atlanta Braves" wordmarks, just like on the jerseys. But those wordmarks never had the tomahawk. The only expensive signage I saw with a tomahawk was the "Chop House" restaurant beyond the right field seats; the logo is two crossed tomahawks very much in team colors. It kinda struck me that they might be preparing for the day that the tomahawk needs to go away.
Few things to wrap up my points here:
1. To be clear, I don't think they will retain the Tribe. And it's for the very reason pointed out earlier, that they will need to do a clean break for optics and not to catch the raft of shit that would come from SJWs all the way to the people that are more well meaning. I'm just saying I would like them to retain the Tribe for the connection to the past. The nostalgia is spoken of here as if it's a terrible thing, as if the 90's Indians or Bob Feller were part of the Indian Removal policies of Andrew Jackson. Or that we have a giant statue of Custer outside the Jake that we want to preserve. 2. In your example of white kids appropriating black culture, let me be clear in the analogy. The kids are akin to the fans like me. The people monetizing it are the clothing companies, the Beastie Boys and RHCP. They are the ones that became millionaires off of black culture. So in that example, yes Team got rich and so did the music companies/clothing companies. It's the same thing. 3. And to your point, if the Tribe is not okay, what about the Chiefs, the Blackhawks (name, not logo), the Noles, and likely countless others. No difference.
And to the person who wondered how you would have a logo for the Tribe, I don't think that's an unsolvable problem.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
To whatever degree white kids' choice of dress is appropriating black culture, it's not the same as a huge business (that happens to be a sports team that an entire region rallies behind) doing so; not to mention selling merchandise, etc.
I have no ties to any native-named team, so I probably don't have a strong sense to the attachment that fans have to those teams. But I just have a difficult time seeing Indians to Tribe as an improvement.
Truth be told, I'm not sure where I stand on names like Indians, Chiefs, and Braves. (Washington absolutely had to change). I might be OK living in a world in which those names stay even though you'll never see a new team take on such a name. But I find most of the imagery and rituals embarrassing. The Tomahawk Chop made me cringe when it first hit the scene when I was about 17 (against my team, the Twins in 1991). I am not even comfortable with the Chiefs arrowhead logo. If I were a Chiefs fan, I might wear their stuff but I'd probably avoid the arrow. So I guess I kinda think it's time for them to go away, even though "that's not necessary" is in the back of my mind.
I went to the Braves Unnecessary New Suburban Ball Park a couple of years ago. And I noticed a lot of fairly expensive lighted signage with "Atlanta," "Braves," and "Atlanta Braves" wordmarks, just like on the jerseys. But those wordmarks never had the tomahawk. The only expensive signage I saw with a tomahawk was the "Chop House" restaurant beyond the right field seats; the logo is two crossed tomahawks very much in team colors. It kinda struck me that they might be preparing for the day that the tomahawk needs to go away.
Few things to wrap up my points here:
1. To be clear, I don't think they will retain the Tribe. And it's for the very reason pointed out earlier, that they will need to do a clean break for optics and not to catch the raft of shit that would come from SJWs all the way to the people that are more well meaning. I'm just saying I would like them to retain the Tribe for the connection to the past. The nostalgia is spoken of here as if it's a terrible thing, as if the 90's Indians or Bob Feller were part of the Indian Removal policies of Andrew Jackson. Or that we have a giant statue of Custer outside the Jake that we want to preserve. 2. In your example of white kids appropriating black culture, let me be clear in the analogy. The kids are akin to the fans like me. The people monetizing it are the clothing companies, the Beastie Boys and RHCP. They are the ones that became millionaires off of black culture. So in that example, yes Team got rich and so did the music companies/clothing companies. It's the same thing. 3. And to your point, if the Tribe is not okay, what about the Chiefs, the Blackhawks (name, not logo), the Noles, and likely countless others. No difference.
And to the person who wondered how you would have a logo for the Tribe, I don't think that's an unsolvable problem.
And without those SJWs you seemingly disparage, most of us know that nothing would ever change because the majority rarely, if ever, listens to the put upon minority. It’s only when the scales tip, evident throughout history, that meaningful change occurs.
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
Well, but not really, but only because Jazz, though primarily black music, is also American music. An though it was formed by African Americans, as truly American music, it makes sense that it would become inclusive of other cultures while being acknowledged as having originally been created by African Americans. And again, it was mainly black jazz musicians who made the move to have integrated bands and their intentional inclusion of white musicians into the music removes it from cultural appropriation. You won't find Native Americans encouraging whites to join in on Ghost Dancing.
And I would say traditional music from specific places and times- like, say- Lakota Native American Ghost dance chanting- is really the only music that could be culturally appropriated. Jazz and blues have been more evolutionary and broadly inclusive in nature.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
Well, but not really, but only because Jazz, though primarily black music, is also American music. An though it was formed by African Americans, as truly American music, it makes sense that it would become inclusive of other cultures while being acknowledged as having originally been created by African Americans. And again, it was mainly black jazz musicians who made the move to have integrated bands and their intentional inclusion of white musicians into the music removes it from cultural appropriation. You won't find Native Americans encouraging whites to join in on Ghost Dancing.
And I would say traditional music from specific places and times- like, say- Lakota Native American Ghost dance chanting- is really the only music that could be culturally appropriated. Jazz and blues have been more evolutionary and broadly inclusive in nature.
I'm making the point that cultural app is totally common in our country, from music, to dress to language. We used to call it a melting pot of cultures but now it seems to be a negative thing.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
My aren't you judgy.
I do judge racists, and I don’t even feel remotely bad about that.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
Well, but not really, but only because Jazz, though primarily black music, is also American music. An though it was formed by African Americans, as truly American music, it makes sense that it would become inclusive of other cultures while being acknowledged as having originally been created by African Americans. And again, it was mainly black jazz musicians who made the move to have integrated bands and their intentional inclusion of white musicians into the music removes it from cultural appropriation. You won't find Native Americans encouraging whites to join in on Ghost Dancing.
And I would say traditional music from specific places and times- like, say- Lakota Native American Ghost dance chanting- is really the only music that could be culturally appropriated. Jazz and blues have been more evolutionary and broadly inclusive in nature.
I'm making the point that cultural app is totally common in our country, from music, to dress to language. We used to call it a melting pot of cultures but now it seems to be a negative thing.
You're not wrong, but then I'd say that whoever labeled the Indians as "culturally appropriating" was missing the key point and that this is a very mildly related tangent.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
My aren't you judgy.
I do judge racists, and I don’t even feel remotely bad about that.
Who are these racists of which you speak?
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,733
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
Well, but not really, but only because Jazz, though primarily black music, is also American music. An though it was formed by African Americans, as truly American music, it makes sense that it would become inclusive of other cultures while being acknowledged as having originally been created by African Americans. And again, it was mainly black jazz musicians who made the move to have integrated bands and their intentional inclusion of white musicians into the music removes it from cultural appropriation. You won't find Native Americans encouraging whites to join in on Ghost Dancing.
And I would say traditional music from specific places and times- like, say- Lakota Native American Ghost dance chanting- is really the only music that could be culturally appropriated. Jazz and blues have been more evolutionary and broadly inclusive in nature.
I'm making the point that cultural app is totally common in our country, from music, to dress to language. We used to call it a melting pot of cultures but now it seems to be a negative thing.
I'm good with the idea of incorporating ideas in music, dress or whatever as long as it is approved of by all concerned. But if something specific to a group or culture is appropriated without consent of that culture or group, I would say that is an egregious act of cultural theft, aka cultural appropriation.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
My aren't you judgy.
I do judge racists, and I don’t even feel remotely bad about that.
Who are these racists of which you speak?
Mr. Blackface. the current PM of Canada.
Hell, Trudeau took blackface up a notch and went full blackface and black body....
"Tribe" might not be offensive if the team wasn't already connected to a native american culturally insensitive name. to me that sounds like "Indians Light".
and let's be honest, when anyone says the word "tribe", literally zero people get a picture of a group of white people in their head.
I don't think that's true at all. A tribe is a word that yes, is Native American in nature, but is used in all sorts of contexts of a group of people with a common set of beliefs, or whatever. Just like the Strangest Tribe. To say that literally zero think of white people is kind of silly. When I say Tribe, I think about Cleveland baseball fans, my fellow fans. I don't think about Native Americans or anything else.
That could be true, but to me, when I hear a white person use the word "tribe", the concept of cultural appropriation pops into my head. My step daughter, wonderful, bright, marvelous person that she is, occasionally uses the word "tribe" to describe her circle of friends and every time she does I think it sounds awkward at best. For one thing, her "tribe", a great bunch of people though they may be, do not fit the definition of tribe...
"a social division in a traditional society
consisting of families or communities linked by social, economic,
religious, or blood ties, with a common culture and dialect, typically
having a recognized leader"
...because they are an eclectic group that does not fit that definition.
There is a modern usage of the term "tribe" with it's own contemporary definition, but that word, used that way, must honestly and unarguably be described as an example of cultural appropriation. It then becomes an issue how how one feels about cultural appropriation. Personal, I don't dig it.
So when a white kid wears Air Jordan's and a flat cap, is that wrong? It's cultural appropriation by the very definition. What about when you break dance or play some jazz on your sax. Where's the line between respect and damage?
Other than traditional costume, I don't think there is a well defined cultural affiliation with clothing. I will say, at best it looks a bit embarrassing and silly when a rocker like Dee Dee Ramone dresses like a rapper.
Mixed race jazz bands go back a long way and few black jazz musicians today or in the past have had strong objections to white musicians playing jazz. On the other hand, some will strongly object to white jazz musicians being given better opportunity or recognition for the music. For example, in the early 70's I took a jazz appreciation class at San Francisco state under the tutelage of black recording jazz artist John Handy. John told us that in many circles, big band jazz was often attributed to white bands like the Glenn Miller Orchestra or Tommy Dorsey's band, etc. Handy did not object to these bands playing jazz music, but he did object to the fact that they were given credit for creating music that was originally created by and better written and performed black jazz bands- orchestras led by the likes of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Those white bands were also paid better and given better accommodations. Handy and most other black performers argued rightly that racism was an obvious component in how the music was received and rewarded, but there was no mention of cultural appropriation in white bands playing jazz. And some of the greatest jazz musicians have had integrated jazz band from Louis Armstrong to Charlie Parker hiring Red Rodney (and having to claim Rodney was an albino black in order to play in some clubs) to Mile Davis working with white musicians.
So of course cultural appropriation is not a factor in jazz. But racism certainly has been.
What you just described is cultural appropriation, isn't it? Just because it went deep into racism doesn't mean it wasn't appropriation.
Well, but not really, but only because Jazz, though primarily black music, is also American music. An though it was formed by African Americans, as truly American music, it makes sense that it would become inclusive of other cultures while being acknowledged as having originally been created by African Americans. And again, it was mainly black jazz musicians who made the move to have integrated bands and their intentional inclusion of white musicians into the music removes it from cultural appropriation. You won't find Native Americans encouraging whites to join in on Ghost Dancing.
And I would say traditional music from specific places and times- like, say- Lakota Native American Ghost dance chanting- is really the only music that could be culturally appropriated. Jazz and blues have been more evolutionary and broadly inclusive in nature.
I'm making the point that cultural app is totally common in our country, from music, to dress to language. We used to call it a melting pot of cultures but now it seems to be a negative thing.
I'm good with the idea of incorporating ideas in music, dress or whatever as long as it is approved of by all concerned. But if something specific to a group or culture is appropriated without consent of that culture or group, I would say that is an egregious act of cultural theft, aka cultural appropriation.
Brian - so I'm not trying to pick you apart, but what does that mean? The whole culture has to unanimously agree? Does there have to a vote? Surely some Black people were uncomfortable with the success of the Beastie Boys. Should I ditch the records, should they be removed from the HOF, should their records come off the shelf? The bar you set is unachievable. How does a culture provide consent?
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
My aren't you judgy.
I do judge racists, and I don’t even feel remotely bad about that.
Who are these racists of which you speak?
They’re all around us, unfortunately.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
it's just that i think squabbling over a marketing item is silly. because when it comes down to it, that's all a team name is. marketing.
i mean, i have the same conversations about band names with people. "it's not alice in chains without layne", etc. i personally don't care. the band is whatever the band wants to call itself.
if ed left and the rest of the guys hired scott stapp and still called it pearl jam, i couldn't give two shits. its' a name.
and believe me when i tell you i'm one of the more nostalgic people i know. team/band names just don't fall into that category for me.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
No, I think that people who are upset that their racist team name needs to change are just doubling down on the original error and shouldn’t get any sympathy.
My aren't you judgy.
I do judge racists, and I don’t even feel remotely bad about that.
Who are these racists of which you speak?
They’re all around us, unfortunately.
That's pretty vague. Be more specific as it relates to this conversation. Surely your post was in reference to this conversation and not just a random observation.
As the most die hard Indians fan that you'll meet (except of course John Adams who lugs the drum into every game), I'm okay with the name changing at this point. I don't like the Spiders, the Naps, or any of the old names. I'd go with the Tribe. That would create continuity and the reality is, no fan is ever going to stop saying "Hey, when's the Tribe on tonight?". They are the Tribe and they play at the Jake. It's that simple. As an aside, the College of William and Mary changed their name a number of years ago to the Tribe, for the same reason. Works fine down here.
I feel like teams that make this change are going to make a far bigger departure from native names than this. "Tribe" isn't much better than "Indians." I see some people suggest Washington Warriors and while that's not as grotesque as their previous name, it seems like the smart move it to just move totally away from that and make sure not to be going through this same thing in ten years.
I agree with this. "Tribe" still opens the door to all sorts of Native American characterization and such. If they are doing such a major move as renaming a 120 year old sports team, they are going to make sure they are well out of the crosshairs.
Would Native Americans take offense to the word "tribe" under any circumstances? I'm thinking through this and don't see how it could be perceived as offensive or characterizing. I think it is factual that Native Americans were often times part of tribes that they took great pride in being a part of. It would seem more of a badge of honor than a negative connotation. I'm the furthest thing from an expert on Native American history, but much of this we learned at a very young age. I'm just missing the potential negative fallout from a move like that.
Its about continuing to profit off the characterization of a race of people who seem to be making it clear that they are not comfortable with this stuff. i dont know if they will take as much offense or not. Im sure some people will. Maybe "Tribe" will be considered over-the-line in 15 years? You know fans will come dressed in head dresses. Maybe bring foam tomahawks, gotta be careful what is depicted on merchandise, etc... It will still keep the door open for Chief Wahoo. Would people just call them the "Indians" like they currently call them the "Tribe"?
Tribe also leaves them where they are now for branding, which is kind of a purgatory/nowhere to go. I sense the team would like a clean break from anything Native American so they can sell merch and create sharper looking uniforms
I think this would be the biggest reason to move past Tribe. What the hell do you even use as the image for your brand? It's dead in the water and the only purpose seems to be a nostalgic shout out to the previous name. They need a fresh start that sounds good, looks good and sells. This is a big opportunity that most franchises don't get so they should spend a lot of time and money getting this right. If they do, they'll sell a ton of merch to their fan base and anyone who just thinks it looks good.
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
These are easy things for you to say when it isn't your team.
nope. if it was my team i wouldn't give two shits. it would be weird at first, for sure, but to me ending the hurt of a large group of people is of much bigger importance
I didn't give a shit about the Redskins. But I know a lot of people here in VA that did. They understood it but didn't like it either. They were sad. Sorry you can't identify even in the slightest, but don't act like no one would/should give two shits.
you said 'easy to say when it's not your team". my answer was a direct retort to that, in that i wouldn't personally care if it was my team.
i never said anything about not understanding why it might upset people. i do get that. but these people obviously don't understand the cultural and ethical implications, or don't care, because if they did, in my opinion, they wouldn't care so much about the name. whether it be tribe or indians or otherwise.
i just don't get how people can be more upset about a team name than the hurt it causes a massive group of people that have been oppressed and mocked for hundreds of years. it's not even close.
Comments
because tribe, as you said, is already a nickname for Indians. i'm not quite sure how you don't see that as a problem. why even bother changing the name if all you're doing is changing it, as I said before, to Indians Light?
www.headstonesband.com
I went to the Braves Unnecessary New Suburban Ball Park a couple of years ago. And I noticed a lot of fairly expensive lighted signage with "Atlanta," "Braves," and "Atlanta Braves" wordmarks, just like on the jerseys. But those wordmarks never had the tomahawk. The only expensive signage I saw with a tomahawk was the "Chop House" restaurant beyond the right field seats; the logo is two crossed tomahawks very much in team colors. It kinda struck me that they might be preparing for the day that the tomahawk needs to go away.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I loved that mid-90's Cleveland team and was rooting for them to win the WS, even as a MN fan whose team had gone in the dumper in the middle of that decade. I had a t-shirt and a baseball cap that I wore all the time. It replaced my Michigan hat after someone stole it.
www.headstonesband.com
1. To be clear, I don't think they will retain the Tribe. And it's for the very reason pointed out earlier, that they will need to do a clean break for optics and not to catch the raft of shit that would come from SJWs all the way to the people that are more well meaning. I'm just saying I would like them to retain the Tribe for the connection to the past. The nostalgia is spoken of here as if it's a terrible thing, as if the 90's Indians or Bob Feller were part of the Indian Removal policies of Andrew Jackson. Or that we have a giant statue of Custer outside the Jake that we want to preserve.
2. In your example of white kids appropriating black culture, let me be clear in the analogy. The kids are akin to the fans like me. The people monetizing it are the clothing companies, the Beastie Boys and RHCP. They are the ones that became millionaires off of black culture. So in that example, yes Team got rich and so did the music companies/clothing companies. It's the same thing.
3. And to your point, if the Tribe is not okay, what about the Chiefs, the Blackhawks (name, not logo), the Noles, and likely countless others. No difference.
And to the person who wondered how you would have a logo for the Tribe, I don't think that's an unsolvable problem.
Im fine with the change, based on the inevitability of it. Getting lathered up about it does nothing
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I also don't see the point in keeping something so similar to Indians, if they are indeed trying to get away from that imagery.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I'm good with the idea of incorporating ideas in music, dress or whatever as long as it is approved of by all concerned. But if something specific to a group or culture is appropriated without consent of that culture or group, I would say that is an egregious act of cultural theft, aka cultural appropriation.
Hell, Trudeau took blackface up a notch and went full blackface and black body....
i mean, i have the same conversations about band names with people. "it's not alice in chains without layne", etc. i personally don't care. the band is whatever the band wants to call itself.
if ed left and the rest of the guys hired scott stapp and still called it pearl jam, i couldn't give two shits. its' a name.
and believe me when i tell you i'm one of the more nostalgic people i know. team/band names just don't fall into that category for me.
www.headstonesband.com
i never said anything about not understanding why it might upset people. i do get that. but these people obviously don't understand the cultural and ethical implications, or don't care, because if they did, in my opinion, they wouldn't care so much about the name. whether it be tribe or indians or otherwise.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com