- Joined
- Sep 13, 2014
- Messages
- 19,612
- Reaction score
- 7,713
- Location
- Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
It has nothing to do with individuals either harmed or insulted. It has to do with racial stereotypes being bad for society. If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.
It's not a racial stereotype, it's a historical reference and a positive one at that. Big difference.
breakdown of thread:..i cannot boycott the redskins and be affective [powerless tribal chief ], so i shall boycott those i can be effective against those that deal with the redskins.
Difference is that in Canada Native Canadians actually integrate in society, you see them everywhere. In the US you can go years without actually seeing one unless you go to a casino or reservation to buy cigarettes.
Tim-
It's a racial stereotype and it marginalizes those left out.
Except he can't even be effective against FedEx.
Whatever.....
Your social ignorance does not dismiss the facts.
Your social ignorance does not dismiss the facts.
The warrior reference is a high compliment.
Your claiming social harm does not actually demonstrate social harm. When do you think you'll get around to actually doing that?
Oh, you're grasping, alright. :roll:It has nothing to do with individuals either harmed or insulted. It has to do with racial stereotypes being bad for society. If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.
So, in the interest of consistency and fairness, you also openly and actively advocate for changing the name of the Minnesota Vikings. After all, Vikings were a well-known aggressive and war-like society, and Scandinavian pacifists might be marginalized and left out, and by your own admission in your other quote in this post, we just can't have that.It's a racial stereotype and it marginalizes those left out.
Stereotypes do not harm society?
I suppose if it was the Washington Gays, depicted as pansies, you'd be ok with that stereotype too.
You confuse fact with opinion.Your social ignorance does not dismiss the facts.
If we take your comments at face value, and do not consider the troll potential, in effect what you are arguing for is the complete elimination of ALL sports team names. Just call them by their city and leave it at that. Even naming a team after an animal, Lions as one example, might marginalize someone who would view that as stereotyping lions.So what? It's still a stereotype and marginalizes those left out. It doesn't matter whether a stereotype is "positive" or negative, it marginalizes.
I know, right? God forbid we should want to highlight a positive aspect of something.Nope, not particularly. And somehow, I doubt that you'd find a sports team depicting themselves as limp-wristed prancing gay boys, that doesn't fit with the sports model, but it wouldn't actually affect society at all. It's just a sports team.
It has nothing to do with individuals either harmed or insulted. It has to do with racial stereotypes being bad for society. If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.
I know, right? God forbid we should want to highlight a positive aspect of something.
Your hyperbole doesn't dismiss the facts. Do you know a lick about Native American history? The warrior reference is a high compliment.
I know. I was agreeing with you.Hey, I'm not the one saying that "warrior" is a negative. It's been pointed out that, to many, it would be a very positive aspect.
If you dismiss the savagery of Native Americans, then you don't know **** about their history. Yes, there were peaceful tribes, but the vast majority of them were brutally savage. Unless you think dashing the heads of infants against a tree is perfectly peaceful.NO. It. Is. Not.
I do know a **** load about "American First Nations" History, and "warrior" is only a compliment in some tribes. Your posts here show the usual level of "cowboys and injuns" myth starting with the fact that there were over a hundred co-existing nations with well formed societies, complete with legal structure some of whom taught the Pinksins how to survive.
The "warrior" label along with "redskin" is continuing the stereotypical myth that "Indians" are "savages", when it was they who were the scouts and frontiersmen who taught pinksins and were repaid by being kicked out of their traditional lands and slaughtered in "take no prisoners raids" killing women and children indiscriminately. The "savages" were the ones with cannons and muskets with a greed-thirst for free land
If you dismiss the savagery of Native Americans, then you don't know **** about their history. Yes, there were peaceful tribes, but the vast majority of them were brutally savage. Unless you think dashing the heads of infants against a tree is perfectly peaceful.
FGFS I did not dismiss the savagery of "Native Americans", another false stereotype, but rather pointed out that pinkskins were at least just as "savage" and a lot of the time more. If you want to dwell on the "savages" feel free. But there is a whole other culture out there, from smoke ceremonies [that never involved a "peacepipe"] to a legal system some progressive societies are seeing as superior and are adopting them.
So, before you accuse someone of ignorance, you may want to do some reading about these "Redskin savages!"
Nope, not particularly. And somehow, I doubt that you'd find a sports team depicting themselves as limp-wristed prancing gay boys, that doesn't fit with the sports model, but it wouldn't actually affect society at all. It's just a sports team.
You confuse fact with opinion.
If we take your comments at face value, and do not consider the troll potential, in effect what you are arguing for is the complete elimination of ALL sports team names. Just call them by their city and leave it at that. Even naming a team after an animal, Lions as one example, might marginalize someone who would view that as stereotyping lions.
I know, right? God forbid we should want to highlight a positive aspect of something.
Let that one go down in history ecofarm, the first time I ever agreed with anything you posted.
So what? It's still a stereotype and marginalizes those left out. It doesn't matter whether a stereotype is "positive" or negative, it marginalizes.
Stereotypes do not harm society?
I suppose if it was the Washington Gays, depicted as pansies, you'd be ok with that stereotype too.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?