Finally Illinois U Wakes Up

ryan198

Chief Illiniwek danced his last racist dance. Could it be that Illinois realized it was acting in a ridiculous manner by allowing an offensive mascot to survive for 81 years, or was it the threat of NCAA sanctions that have ended this minstrel act performed in red-face? Either way it's a step in the right direction, and hopefully others will follow suit.

jlew24asu

why is it bad to have an Indian as a mascot?

Rue D'Awakening

god i'd love for a team's mascot to be 'the cracker'. and have it just be a white guy in a suit with a briefcase.

chopitdown

ryan198 wrote:

Chief Illiniwek danced his last racist dance. Could it be that Illinois realized it was acting in a ridiculous manner by allowing an offensive mascot to survive for 81 years, or was it the threat of NCAA sanctions that have ended this minstrel act performed in red-face? Either way it's a step in the right direction, and hopefully others will follow suit.

it's college sports...i guarantee if ncaa sanctions involved money THAT's the reason why it was changed.

farfromglorified

ryan198 wrote:

Chief Illiniwek danced his last racist dance. Could it be that Illinois realized it was acting in a ridiculous manner by allowing an offensive mascot to survive for 81 years, or was it the threat of NCAA sanctions that have ended this minstrel act performed in red-face? Either way it's a step in the right direction, and hopefully others will follow suit.

Meanwhile the Dallas Cowboys get off the hook.

inmytree

farfromglorified wrote:

Meanwhile the Dallas Cowboys get off the hook.

as do the washington redskins....

farfromglorified

Rue D'Awakening wrote:

god i'd love for a team's mascot to be 'the cracker'. and have it just be a white guy in a suit with a briefcase.

Meh....http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites

jlew24asu

Rue D'Awakening wrote:

god i'd love for a team's mascot to be 'the cracker'. and have it just be a white guy in a suit with a briefcase.

but that is a derogatory name for a white guy (cracker). how is being called a Chief Illini the same? its what he is. a chief. and quite cool I might add

farfromglorified

inmytree wrote:

as to the washington redskins....

:eek:

This issue cracks me up. I've never been able to figure it out if its insecurity, stupidity, insanity, or all of the above.

inmytree

jlew24asu wrote:

but that is a derogatory name for a white guy. how is being called a Chief Illini the same? its what he is. a chief. and quite cool I might add

are you Native American...? if so, then I support your statement that it's cool, if not, perhaps you should look at the other side...

farfromglorified

inmytree wrote:

are you Native American...? if so, then I support your statement that it's cool, if not, perhaps you should look at the other side...

I'm curious...would accept this ridiculous argument from those in favor of these names?

jlew24asu

inmytree wrote:

are you Native American...? if so, then I support your statement that it's cool, if not, perhaps you should look at the other side...

no im not. and I do not want to disrespect native americans in any way. but I just dont see how it is offensive.

inmytree

farfromglorified wrote:

:eek:

This issue cracks me up. I've never been able to figure it out if its insecurity, stupidity, insanity, or all of the above.

I think it's real issue...

I wonder if the next NFL team should be the Idaho Yellowskins, or the Raliegh Rednecks....I wonder if they would be accepted...

Rue D'Awakening

american indians probably have more serious grievances than just mascots, but i don't think they're just being hypersensitive. it is so fucking condescending on the part of whoever it is that comes up with this crap.

farfromglorified

Rue D'Awakening wrote:

american indians probably have more serious grievances than just mascots, but i don't think they're just being hypersensitive. it is so fucking condescending on the part of whoever it is that comes up with this crap.

So is this post. And I support your right to make it.

inmytree

jlew24asu wrote:

no im not. and I do not want to disrespect native americans in any way. but I just dont see how it is offensive.

that's nice, but can you see how it could be offensive to some...?

farfromglorified

inmytree wrote:

I think it's real issue...

I wonder if the next NFL team should be the Idaho Yellowskins, or the Raliegh Rednecks....I wonder if they would be accepted...

It would be by me, and I doubt most people would really care. The "Raleigh Rednecks" is quite good, actually.

jlew24asu

inmytree wrote:

I think it's real issue...

I wonder if the next NFL team should be the Idaho Yellowskins, or the Raliegh Rednecks....I wonder if they would be accepted...

but what have rednecks or yellowskins done to warrant being a team leader? aka mascot. if redncecks were known for being warriors in battle I would think its a cool idea

chopitdown

http://www.honorthechief.org/tradition.html

What do actual ancestors of the Illini tribes think of Chief Illiniwek?

Over the years, the Chief Illiniwek tradition has had continued endorsement of Native American descendents. Since the tradition's inception in 1926, there has been considerable support for the Chief by Native American leaders, including several that trace their lineage to the original Illini tribes.

In the past two years, the only scientific opinion polls on the subject have concluded that the majority of Native Americans are not opposed to the use of Indian nicknames—at the high school or college level, or in professional sports. In 2002, a Peter Harris Research Group poll showed that 81% of Native Americans support the use of Indian nicknames in high school and college sports, and 83% of Native Americans support the use of Indian mascots and symbols in professional sports. The accompanying commentary concluded that the “poll suggests that although Native American activists are virtually united in opposition to the use of Indian nicknames and mascots, the Native American population sees the issue far differently.”

In September 2004, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey reported the results of a year-long poll which showed that the vast majority of American Indians say that calling Washington’s professional football team the “Redskins” does not bother them (90% of Indians took that position, while 9% said they found the name “offensive”).

jlew24asu

inmytree wrote:

that's nice, but can you see how it could be offensive to some...?

no I dont. there is nothing demeaning or derogatory about being called a chief or cowboy

Rue D'Awakening

farfromglorified wrote:

So is this post. And I support your right to make it.

in that case you confuse condescension with empathy.

ryan198

jlew24asu wrote:

but that is a derogatory name for a white guy (cracker). how is being called a Chief Illini the same? its what he is. a chief. and quite cool I might add

A. He's now defunct
B. People who supported him actually spit on, and sexually/physically threatened those Native Americans who opposed his use. It's kind of funny that UofI fans would show more reverence and deference to a white guy in red face than a real Indian.

jlew24asu

ryan198 wrote:

A. He's now defunct
B. People who supported him actually spit on, and sexually/physically threatened those Native Americans who opposed his use. It's kind of funny that UofI fans would show more reverence and deference to a white guy in red face than a real Indian.

I have no idea what the hell you are talking about

ryan198

Go to the library and get the film Act of Honor or Exploitation. It traces the struggle many Native American's have gone through to disrupt the use of Mascots depicting them. It's actually set at the UofI, and quite explicitly shows exactly what I'm talking about.

even flow?

I always thought it was funny watching all the whiteys doing the chop at Braves games without thought as to how many of the whites actually had that happen to them upon their arrival.

jlew24asu

ryan198 wrote:

Go to the library and get the film Act of Honor or Exploitation. It traces the struggle many Native American's have gone through to disrupt the use of Mascots depicting them. It's actually set at the UofI, and quite explicitly shows exactly what I'm talking about.

looks like u of I is honoring him to me.

what about this link that was posted?

http://www.honorthechief.org/tradition.html

jlew24asu

even flow? wrote:

I always thought it was funny watching all the whiteys doing the chop at Braves games without thought as to how many of the whites actually had that happen to them upon their arrival.

how many? apparently wasnt enough

even flow?

jlew24asu wrote:

how many? apparently wasnt enough

Wasn't enough what? We can say that about a lot of races in history, eh. And watch the uproar if we do.

inmytree

chopitdown wrote:

http://www.honorthechief.org/tradition.html

What do actual ancestors of the Illini tribes think of Chief Illiniwek?

Over the years, the Chief Illiniwek tradition has had continued endorsement of Native American descendents. Since the tradition's inception in 1926, there has been considerable support for the Chief by Native American leaders, including several that trace their lineage to the original Illini tribes.

In the past two years, the only scientific opinion polls on the subject have concluded that the majority of Native Americans are not opposed to the use of Indian nicknames—at the high school or college level, or in professional sports. In 2002, a Peter Harris Research Group poll showed that 81% of Native Americans support the use of Indian nicknames in high school and college sports, and 83% of Native Americans support the use of Indian mascots and symbols in professional sports. The accompanying commentary concluded that the “poll suggests that although Native American activists are virtually united in opposition to the use of Indian nicknames and mascots, the Native American population sees the issue far differently.”

In September 2004, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey reported the results of a year-long poll which showed that the vast majority of American Indians say that calling Washington’s professional football team the “Redskins” does not bother them (90% of Indians took that position, while 9% said they found the name “offensive”).

thanks for that...I guess it's no big deal...

ryan198

The link is all well and good, but if you want to see the filmed reality of it watch the film that I posted. It actually shows what people in the coalition against the use of mascots go through, particularly at the UofI. They show that the Illini tribe was all made up, and that the dress is inauthentic and made up for show as well. Then, there's the spitting, and the threats of sex and violence that end up on their answering machines. If people at the UofI are so reverent towards their mascot, why aren't they so respectful of actual Indians is my question?

jlew24asu

ryan198 wrote:

The link is all well and good, but if you want to see the filmed reality of it watch the film that I posted. It actually shows what people in the coalition against the use of mascots go through, particularly at the UofI. They show that the Illini tribe was all made up, and that the dress is inauthentic and made up for show as well. Then, there's the spitting, and the threats of sex and violence that end up on their answering machines. If people at the UofI are so reverent towards their mascot, why aren't they so respectful of actual Indians is my question?

you seem to be more concerned about the people being spit on that the actual use of an Indian mascot.