Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Indian nicknames in the news


jimdahl
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

I am coming to the realization that in todays world of Cancel Culture (Especially now) any reference to historical figures is going to be scrutinized.  There is a reason why schools tend to pick generic animal names as their nicknames.  As much as I wanted Roughriders as UND's nickname, could you imagine having to go thru all this again?!! 

Roosevelt Statue to Be Removed From Museum of Natural History

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/21/arts/design/roosevelt-statue-to-be-removed-from-museum-of-natural-history.html

Was the statue removed because it's Teddy or because it depicts him towering over a shirtless Native American and black man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2020 at 8:32 AM, UNDBIZ said:

Was the statue removed because it's Teddy or because it depicts him towering over a shirtless Native American and black man?

See this is the question most people should be asking but are not, just reacting. I guess I want to know about the reason and intent of the statue and what those additional figures symbolize.

Id guess many who have reacted do not even know the statue includes those figures and just a super small amount of them know why, hell I dont, probably should look it up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2020 at 3:03 PM, MIBT said:

Agreed. When Miles Brand and the NCAA came up with that policy I believe there were 19 schools involved. All of them had their instance resolved within 6 months. UND was the only one that stretched it out .Most of the schools got approval from the local tribe and some made concessions (i.e. removing icons/mascots). I think a couple did change their nicknames voluntarily. I was surprised some kind of agreement wasn't reached as well. Maybe it came down to financial and the leadership of the tribe was too stubborn and asked for too much money. I don't expect it will ever fully go away.

Not to beat a dead horse but it has to do with the how the ncaa gamed the system. The ncaa knowing stand rock was not going to approve it UND was required to get not the closest Tribe everyone else (Spirit Lake) but the two closest tribes to approve it. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Vegas_Sioux said:

Not to beat a dead horse but it has to do with the how the ncaa gamed the system. The ncaa knowing stand rock was not going to approve it UND was required to get not the closest Tribe everyone else (Spirit Lake) but the two closest tribes to approve it. 

And yet UND agreed to it in the settlement. It wasn't originally required until UND sued. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/22/2020 at 8:32 AM, UNDBIZ said:

Was the statue removed because it's Teddy or because it depicts him towering over a shirtless Native American and black man?

The two figures at Roosevelt’s side are guides symbolizing the continents of Africa and America, and his friendliness to all races according to the sculptor. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SiouxHawkGuy said:

The two figures at Roosevelt’s side are guides symbolizing the continents of Africa and America, and his friendliness to all races according to the sculptor. 

I also heard there is a movement to get this shipped to Medora, where it would be appreciated.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those that still though it was not the right decision in in 2012 to retire the Sioux name (mainly for other circumstances, not necessarily because it was offensive), imagine what UND would have been going through now in the now “woke”, PC world we live in now!! If we didn’t change it back then, guarantee it wouldn’t survive now.  If the Washington Redskins name is forced to change,  no name that is even the slightest bit controversial has a chance to survive. 

Washington Redskins move toward changing controversial team name

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/07/03/washington-redskins-launch-review-controversial-team-name/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Siouxperfan7 said:

For those that still though it was not the right decision in in 2012 to retire the Sioux name (mainly for other circumstances, not necessarily because it was offensive), imagine what UND would have been going through now in the now “woke”, PC world we live in now!! If we didn’t change it back then, guarantee it wouldn’t survive now.  If the Washington Redskins name is forced to change,  no name that is even the slightest bit controversial has a chance to survive. 

Washington Redskins move toward changing controversial team name

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/07/03/washington-redskins-launch-review-controversial-team-name/

 

Cancel culture is out of control, it's ridiculous.   But unlike other native nicknames (which should stay), the Redskin name change is long overdue.  There's no need to be called that.  Might as well be called the Washington Coloreds, Wetbacks or Wops.      

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, UNDlaw80 said:

Cancel culture is out of control, it's ridiculous.   But unlike other native nicknames (which should stay), the Redskin name change is long overdue.  There's no need to be called that.  Might as well be called the Washington Coloreds, Wetbacks or Wops.      

You're on a very slippery slope. And one that is all too familiar in these parts. YOU found Redskins offensive, so it has to go. Okay...what if SOMEONE ELSE finds Fighting Sioux offensive? Does their opinion not matter at least as much as yours?

That said, if there is any intellectual honesty to be had, all humanoid nicknames should go. The Irish, Catholics (Padres, Deacons, Friars), Norse (Vikings), they've all pissed at least somebody off. Hell, even the Aztecs probably still have a few enemies. And don't get me started on those awful, awful Trojans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NoiseInsideMyHead said:

You're on a very slippery slope. And one that is all too familiar in these parts. YOU found Redskins offensive, so it has to go. Okay...what if SOMEONE ELSE finds Fighting Sioux offensive? Does their opinion not matter at least as much as yours?

That said, if there is any intellectual honesty to be had, all humanoid nicknames should go. The Irish, Catholics (Padres, Deacons, Friars), Norse (Vikings), they've all pissed at least somebody off. Hell, even the Aztecs probably still have a few enemies. And don't get me started on those awful, awful Trojans.

 

You're describing cancel culture.  Yea it's out of control.  Once the ball gets rolling where does it stop?  I dunno.

But there's no slippery slope if people use common sense, rationality, intellectual honesty.  Any educated person can disseminate the difference between the Redskins and the Fighting Sioux, Fighting Irish, Seminoles, Padres, Deacons, Friars, Vikings, whatever.  The latter are humanoid nicknames, the former is a contemporary derogatory ethnic slur.  Go up to some random native fella and call him a redskin. See how far you get with that.       

Native nicknames have been incorporated into the sporting lexicon so people don't seem to notice anymore.  Yet nobody in their right mind would consider a similar name for a different ethnicity appropriate (the coons, the yellowmen, the pakis).    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but im as conservative as they come, and Redskins is a name that has no bbn place in society today or the for some time now.

Indians.....probably best to go too.

Chiefs, Braves, Blackhawks.... should stay but wont.

 

Washington needs to find the possibility of reinvented marketing and embrace the change...

 

.....but they have selected alumni of the team and other stakeholders in a committee process..... so 99.9% they go with Red Hawks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Frozen4sioux said:

Sorry but im as conservative as they come, and Redskins is a name that has no bbn place in society today or the for some time now.

Indians.....probably best to go too.

Chiefs, Braves, Blackhawks.... should stay but wont.

 

Washington needs to find the possibility of reinvented marketing and embrace the change...

 

.....but they have selected alumni of the team and other stakeholders in a committee process..... so 99.9% they go with Red Hawks.

Isn't Hawks a pretty generic and overused name?   Oops....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, 90siouxfan said:

I recall some movie or TV series where they changed the name to something the "haters" would burn daily, spurring gear sales into the stratosphere...  DC Klan?  DC Slavers?  Whipmasters?  lol, just in jest, don't burn me down

I'm old enough to remember  Washington of the NBA changing their nickname due the violent connotation of Bullets. Happy to report that currently has worked out well within the inner cities of this nation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me see.  

If I walk up to a Native American and greet him/her with, " Hi Redskin!  How are you doing?", would that be all okay and fine?

I've never felt the Fighting Sioux nickname was offensive.  I dont feel the same way about "Redskins". 

Change it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...