What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

MLB 2020: We'll Play Ball, I Guess.

Status
Not open for further replies.
SJHovey said:
Knowing my own college hockey team preference you should understand no disrespect intended, but for obvious reasons you may not be the best person to make this post.
Click to expand...

Certainly you can spot the difference between the Indians nickname and the Sioux nickname?

But given your inability to spot the obvious in the political threads here, maybe not.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Certainly you can spot the difference between the Indians nickname and the Sioux nickname?

But given your inability to spot the obvious in the political threads here, maybe not.
Click to expand...

Given that no indigenous people on this continent call themselves Indians, and see it as a derogatory term as some invading Spanish guy (see what I did there?) slapped it on them out of sheer ignorance, I do not.
 
My point was not to vilify FS23. I have no ongoing disagreements with him, as far as I know, although based upon his response to me I'm no longer so sure about this.

But I thought his shot against Cleveland was uncalled for, frankly. I don't see the need to to take shots at people or organizations who have chosen to do the right thing, even if it's taken them longer to do so than we (or others) may have liked.
 
St. Clown said:
Given that no indigenous people on this continent call themselves Indians, and see it as a derogatory term as some invading Spanish guy (see what I did there?)
Click to expand...

Shoulda called him a "Mexican." That would have driven it home better. :-)
 
SJHovey said:
My point was not to vilify FS23. I have no ongoing disagreements with him, as far as I know, although based upon his response to me I'm no longer so sure about this.

But I thought his shot against Cleveland was uncalled for, frankly. I don't see the need to to take shots at people or organizations who have chosen to do the right thing, even if it's taken them longer to do so than we (or others) may have liked.
Click to expand...

My shot against Cleveland is that despite recognizing that using the Indians nickname is no longer acceptable, rather than go without a nickname (see Washington Football Team), they have elected to use an unacceptable nickname until such (as yet undecided) time where they will change their nickname.

In other words, they've recognized something they were doing was wrong, but they are not taking steps to immediately rectify that wrong.
 
St. Clown said:
Given that no indigenous people on this continent call themselves Indians, and see it as a derogatory term as some invading Spanish guy (see what I did there?) slapped it on them out of sheer ignorance, I do not.
Click to expand...

Given your post, it actually does appear you understand (at least in part) the difference I was pointing out.

I'm not sure what you meant by the Spanish guy reference, but perhaps you were alluding to the fact that Columbus was actually Italian?
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
My shot against Cleveland is that despite recognizing that using the Indians nickname is no longer acceptable, rather than go without a nickname (see Washington Football Team), they have elected to use an unacceptable nickname until such (as yet undecided) time where they will change their nickname.

In other words, they've recognized something they were doing was wrong, but they are not taking steps to immediately rectify that wrong.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I got that. But it didn't really answer my question. So, because you choose to be obtuse about it, I'll ask directly.

Why do you choose to cast stones at the Cleveland Indians for waiting a year before voluntarily changing their name, one that Native Americans find offensive, when you've elected to continue to use a similar name as your screen name for now five or six years after your school changed because, Native Americans found the name offensive?
 
SJHovey said:
Yeah, I got that. But it didn't really answer my question. So, because you choose to be obtuse about it, I'll ask directly.

Why do you choose to cast stones at the Cleveland Indians for waiting a year before voluntarily changing their name, one that Native Americans find offensive, when you've elected to continue to use a similar name as your screen name for now five or six years after your school changed because, Native Americans found the name offensive?
Click to expand...

To be fair.

The Sioux logo stays because it is forking amazing.
 
SJHovey said:
Yeah, I got that. But it didn't really answer my question. So, because you choose to be obtuse about it, I'll ask directly.

Why do you choose to cast stones at the Cleveland Indians for waiting a year before voluntarily changing their name, one that Native Americans find offensive, when you've elected to continue to use a similar name as your screen name for now five or six years after your school changed because, Native Americans found the name offensive?
Click to expand...

Since you apparently don't understand the difference...

The Indians nickname is derogatory, offensive, and, as Cleveland even admitted, unacceptable.

The Sioux nickname is the name of a group of people. It is similar to the Vikings or the Fighting Irish. Also, while I certainly understand the historical origins of the term Sioux, in today's society, I'm not aware of any significant faction who find the name Sioux, as it pertains to the group of people, to be offensive.

And I really don't think you get my issue with Cleveland. It is because they finally acknowledge that the use of a racist/derogatory/offensive nickname is unacceptable, but will continue to utilize it for (at least) another year. That is idiotic.
 
Fighting Sioux 23 said:
Since you apparently don't understand the difference...

The Indians nickname is derogatory, offensive, and, as Cleveland even admitted, unacceptable.

The Sioux nickname is the name of a group of people. It is similar to the Vikings or the Fighting Irish. Also, while I certainly understand the historical origins of the term Sioux, in today's society, I'm not aware of any significant faction who find the name Sioux, as it pertains to the group of people, to be offensive.

And I really don't think you get my issue with Cleveland. It is because they finally acknowledge that the use of a racist/derogatory/offensive nickname is unacceptable, but will continue to utilize it for (at least) another year. That is idiotic.
Click to expand...

You’re simply wrong. It was well documented during the UND nickname dispute that “Sioux” was a derogatory term applied by their enemies. As I recall it means “snake” or something similar.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
Waitwaitwaitwaitwait. I’m sorry, did I hallucinate the entire multiyear saga between the school and the tribes?
Click to expand...

Sort of. But it was not due to the term "Sioux" being derogatory or offensive. It had to do with the school using Native American imagery/logos coupled with using the nickname for its sports team. Also, the saga was not really between the school and the tribes, but that is best served for another topic/thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top