Another Idiotic Decision by NCAA

[Careless]

Because I was once a Boy Scout I've always thought of Native Americans as reluctant warriors that fought because they had to. Don't we risk forgeting that if we eliminate all these names that are deemed offensive? Sure we could pay tribute by building statues or museums but more people go to sports events. How many people had ever heard of the Choctaws before reading this thread?

Really, that's not much better than being taught that they were violent savages. War was an important part of aboriginal american culture just like it was in every other agrarian society, and many of them eagerly participated in war for fun, honor, and profit. They were (and are) human, members of a species that is frequently violent

[Careless]

The term "Redskin" was first used back in the late 1800's when they were scalped. And the scalping was not just related to the head, but their skin would be "scalped". I'm just telling you what was told to me.

 

There is a myth that the term originates from the fact that In the past there was a going rate for the scalps or hides of indigenous men, women, and children often referred to as "Redskins". The myth states that these "redskin" trophies could be sold to most frontier trading posts. However, as was pointed out by Geoffrey Nunberg on the June 14, 2005 episode of NPR's Fresh Air, the historical evidence provides little or no support for this theory. His commentary states, "as best I can tell there's no historical record that connects redskin to the bounties for scalps, and in fact nobody seems to have mentioned the connection until about a dozen years ago." (Source: Redskin Blues, Geoffrey Nunberg.)

 

Just as I suspected, I found a site that says that the term Redskin does come from the scalping of Native Americans. Not saying your quote isn't accurate, but just that I'm sure on this issue there are two sides. I would hope the person who told me way back in college wasn't making it up. Who knows. If I were more computer literate I'd have listed the site, but it's one of the first ones I found when using the search engine for the term "Redskin". It's still interesting how the term "Redskin" came to being.

Let's do a little Occam's Razor action here... These same people called people of the epicanthic fold "yellow". Now if they thought the chinese were big cowards, I might buy the explaination for "red"...

They didn't. they used a slight tendency in skin color to label them. Given this and the fact that I'm quite sure there was a name they had for the aboriginal americans well before this explaination for "redskin" would be applicable, I'd bet heavily on the skin color being the answer.

[adamb0719]

Let's do a little Occam's Razor action here... These same people called people of the epicanthic fold "yellow". Now if they thought the chinese were big cowards, I might buy the explaination for "red"...

They didn't. they used a slight tendency in skin color to label them. Given this and the fact that I'm quite sure there was a name they had for the aboriginal americans well before this explaination for "redskin" would be applicable, I'd bet heavily on the skin color being the answer.

 

I just looked in one of my text books (not that it is a definitative source). It stated the first source of the word Redskin was used in 1699, in reference to the stability of a home (it was built well enough to withstand the attack of the redskins). Now I am not sure why a house would have to built well enough to withstand the attacks of scalps but...

 

Also I just found a poll from 2004, done by the University of Pennsylvania in which only 9% of the American Indian population polled found the term Redskin to be offensive. It did not give the size of poplulation polled or anything like that.

 

 

Man, I have way to much time on my hands.

[OleMissCub]

 

Also I just found a poll from 2004, done by the University of Pennsylvania in which only 9% of the American Indian population polled found the term Redskin to be offensive. It did not give the size of poplulation polled or anything like that.

 

 

That kind of gives creedence to something I was saying earlier about how if you polled native americans you'd probably find that most of them really don't care and don't think stuff is offensive. It's similar to how the majority of black counties in Mississippi voted to keep the Confederate flag in the State Flag.

[imb]

For what it's worth, I live in the Cherokee Capital of America, and it's pretty unanimous as far as support for the decision goes around here.

 

For some reason, our local College is called the "Redmen", and it wasnt part of the ban, although another school with the name "Redmen" was banned. I read a quote from the chief saying that he would be in favor of NSU's team name being changed.

[OleMissCub]

For what it's worth, I live in the Cherokee Capital of America, and it's pretty unanimous as far as support for the decision goes around here.

 

For some reason, our local College is called the "Redmen", and it wasnt part of the ban, although another school with the name "Redmen" was banned. I read a quote from the chief saying that he would be in favor of NSU's team name being changed.

 

Cherokee? You aren't Cherokee are you? Because if you are that is bad news for you. Being part Choctaw I would have to fight you to the death, you being a nautral enemy of the Choctaws and all. Sucks for you :-)

[imb]

For what it's worth, I live in the Cherokee Capital of America, and it's pretty unanimous as far as support for the decision goes around here.

 

For some reason, our local College is called the "Redmen", and it wasnt part of the ban, although another school with the name "Redmen" was banned. I read a quote from the chief saying that he would be in favor of NSU's team name being changed.

 

Cherokee? You aren't Cherokee are you? Because if you are that is bad news for you. Being part Choctaw I would have to fight you to the death, you being a nautral enemy of the Choctaws and all. Sucks for you :-)

 

Nope, no Cherokee in me. Too bad too, they get a lot of benefits.

[Careless]

For what it's worth, I live in the Cherokee Capital of America, and it's pretty unanimous as far as support for the decision goes around here.

 

For some reason, our local College is called the "Redmen", and it wasnt part of the ban, although another school with the name "Redmen" was banned. I read a quote from the chief saying that he would be in favor of NSU's team name being changed.

 

Cherokee? You aren't Cherokee are you? Because if you are that is bad news for you. Being part Choctaw I would have to fight you to the death, you being a nautral enemy of the Choctaws and all. Sucks for you :-)

 

Nope, no Cherokee in me. Too bad too, they get a lot of benefits.

*grumble* you know, in situations like this it's perfectly ok to start a race war that results in a fight to the death and winds up setting the entire board on fire

[fromthestretch]

I do not see how anyone could view an animal mascot as offensive. That is absurd.

 

Would Gary the No-Trash Cougar be considered offensive? :P

 

 

http://familyguy.wikicities.com/images/3/38/Garycougar.jpg

[biittner77]

Because I was once a Boy Scout I've always thought of Native Americans as reluctant warriors that fought because they had to. Don't we risk forgeting that if we eliminate all these names that are deemed offensive? Sure we could pay tribute by building statues or museums but more people go to sports events. How many people had ever heard of the Choctaws before reading this thread?

Really, that's not much better than being taught that they were violent savages. War was an important part of aboriginal american culture just like it was in every other agrarian society, and many of them eagerly participated in war for fun, honor, and profit. They were (and are) human, members of a species that is frequently violent

 

I can't say I know for sure but I'd guess the Boy Scouts figured that the portrayal of Native Americans as bloodthirsty savages was handled pretty well by Hollywood and TV and that they were emphasizing the peaceful, naturalistic elements of Indian Culture to give the other side of the story.

 

Keep in mind that this was a long time before political correctness was ever an issue.

 

As for the part about war, of course they fought wars and that was an important part of life. The difference is that among agrarian societies wars are generally not fought for the purpose of annihilating the enemy. This was a matter of practicality as they needed everyone to help raise crops, gather food, etc. and having all the men get killed in a war was counterproductive.

[imb]

florida state already picked out a new team name/logo

 

http://home.bellsouth.net/coDataImages/p/Groups/25/25793/folders/36444/318147fsuhelmet.jpg

 

FSU Criminoles.

[GaryWoods]

I was referring more to the fighting part. I keep reading that people find the fighting part of nicknames to portray certain groups in certain ways, violent and such.

 

Athletic teams from my alma mater, Western Illinois University (then known as Western Illinois Teachers College), originally sported the monniker "Fighting Teachers." They reportedly changed it to "Fighting Leathernecks" because they were afraid that the image of fighting teachers might deter some students from attending.

[stuy119]

florida state already picked out a new team name/logo

 

http://home.bellsouth.net/coDataImages/p/Groups/25/25793/folders/36444/318147fsuhelmet.jpg

 

FSU Criminoles.

 

Very classy and creative. Why would I expect more from you?

[imb]

I wish I was talented enough to make/come up with that. I just saw it on another messageboard. I actually meant to link to the post in the picture, but I screwed it up somehow.

[JC]

I thought it was funny.

[imb]

I guess I could see why someone that actually liked Free Shoes University would find it offensive, though.

[adamb0719]

Free Shoes University

 

I have never heard that before. That's hilarious! :lol:

[TruffleShuffle]

Free Shoes University

 

I have never heard that before. That's hilarious! :lol:

 

You're kidding... you've never heard that one?!?!?!

 

Jeez there are a bunch of others... can't remember them offhand, but one is:

 

Felons Start, Usually

[adamb0719]

You're kidding... you've never heard that one?!?!?!

 

Jeez there are a bunch of others... can't remember them offhand, but one is:

 

Felons Start, Usually

 

No, I am not kidding. I don't know where the hell I have been. :oops: I also have a very deeply dislike the FSU football team, (sorry any FSU fans) so keep them coming if you can remember.

[treebird]

fumes smell usually

 

(i made that one up myself)

[snoodmonger]

I could be wrong on this, but isn't the term "Sioux" inherently offensive when used to describe Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota tribesmen? I thought it was a native word for "bloodthirsty" (or something like that), and that other tribes called them that as an insult.

 

Did I completely make that up?

[adamb0719]

I could be wrong on this, but isn't the term "Sioux" inherently offensive when used to describe Lakota, Nakota, and Dakota tribesmen? I thought it was a native word for "bloodthirsty" (or something like that), and that other tribes called them that as an insult.

 

Did I completely make that up?

 

The name Sioux was created by the French Canadians, who abbreviated the frenchified Algonquin word Nadouéssioux (from 'naadawesiwag' 'little snakes (Iroquois)', singular 'naadawesi', 'naadawe' 'snake' = 'enemy', 'Iroquois' - e = ē [long e, similar to 'a' in 'late'] in Ojibwe/Ottawa), by which a neighboring Ojibwa tribe, or the Ottawa, referred to the Dakota to the west and south. This term is popularly interpreted as an insult but it could refer to a time when the Dakota people, like other southeastern tribes, were known to revere serpents (see Serpent Mounds in Ohio, feathered serpent, water serpents - unktehi/uktena, etc.) Today many of the tribes continue to officially call themselves 'Sioux' which the Federal Government of the United States applied to all Dakota/Lakota/Nakoda people in the 19th and 20th centuries.

this was in widipedia. Not sure if that really answers your question or not.

Does anyone know about Wikipedia. I am not sure if it is considered to be reliable or not. I know some of my professors have not allowed it to be used a sources for papers, but it seems to have alot of info. I think the fact that you can edit any entry takes away from its credibilty (yet I still continue to use it :-k )

[treebird]

I don't know about Sioux, but I know that the word Apache actually is just the word for "enemy" in a neighboring tribe's language.

[stuy119]

Just to bring this thread back to where it should be, let's talk about how much the NCAA makes arbitrary decisions after 4 years of research.. I want to see who gets fired over this lack of fact-checking.

 

 

And, on another note, I'm not surprised to see that many of you hate FSU football. It would be tough not to, when the majority are stuck watching bad football. Same reason not many people like the Yankees. I would lose my sanity if I were forced to watch Big (we can't count past) Ten football every weekend either. Thank God for satellite!

[GaryWoods]

I found this quote from the article interesting:

 

"It's important to note that one particular group stating that they don't have a problem with the use of imagery or a mascot doesn't necessarily mean that everybody else in the country would feel the same way," he said.

 

The article states that neither the Seminole tribe of Florida or Oklahoma have a problem with FSU using "Seminoles" as a nickname.

 

So, Bob, if neither group that shares a name with the FSU athletic teams has an problem with it, why does anyone care how the rest of the country feels?

 

If it's the Indians, Redskins, Redmen, Chiefs, etc, then sure, decendents of all Native American peoples should have a voice.

 

But we're talking about the specific monniker of a specific nation; actually two nations, in this case. But since both are in agreement that it's not a problem, then it shouldn't be a problem.