Sfdebris.net

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... me-1103217

Oh hell yes.

Well, lets hope they have a new name in line and they don't have to go as "The Cleveland Baseball Team". They probably don't do they?

I think it's available if they go that route.

This got me thinking, had the Washington Redskins been called the Washington Indians and the Cleveland Indians been the Cleveland Redskins, would Washington had to have their name and logo changed? I mean, I don't think the Kansas City Chiefs are changing their name or logo right? Maybe I'm not remembering the redskins logo correctly, but I remember it not looking cartoonish. Cleveland Indians has always looked weird to me, especially since they had that whole "Tomahawk Chop" thing at their games.

Chiefs as far as I know are not doing anything about their logo and name. I suppose that is above the line of Native American political correctness?

I guess since it's a role in a tribe, rather than a general descriptor of all Native Americans, it's not offensive? Maybe had Washington called themselves the Powhatans, the confederation of tribes that first met colonists in Jamestown, they may have gotten a pass.

Beelzquill wrote: ↑Sat Dec 19, 2020 4:56 am I guess since it's a role in a tribe, rather than a general descriptor of all Native Americans, it's not offensive? Maybe had Washington called themselves the Powhatans, the confederation of tribes that first met colonists in Jamestown, they may have gotten a pass.

Well that is different. Redskins is an offensive term for Native Americans. Indians (I am not that sure how they feel about that) but I do know they hate the mascot/logo.

Perhaps it's generic and not offensive to them. The Chiefs logo is just feathers anyway.

McAvoy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 19, 2020 4:43 am Chiefs as far as I know are not doing anything about their logo and name. I suppose that is above the line of Native American political correctness?

I personally doubt it lol. Just from observation from discrete studies it seems like most anything iconic of natives that's not of their hands is kind of offensive.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:53 am

McAvoy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 19, 2020 4:43 am Chiefs as far as I know are not doing anything about their logo and name. I suppose that is above the line of Native American political correctness?

I personally doubt it lol. Just from observation from discrete studies it seems like most anything iconic of natives that's not of their hands is kind of offensive.

I suppose it's their pergotive in what they feel. It's not like pirates or vikings will care about being called that.

McAvoy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 25, 2020 3:05 am

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 3:53 am

McAvoy wrote: ↑Sat Dec 19, 2020 4:43 am Chiefs as far as I know are not doing anything about their logo and name. I suppose that is above the line of Native American political correctness?

I personally doubt it lol. Just from observation from discrete studies it seems like most anything iconic of natives that's not of their hands is kind of offensive.

I suppose it's their pergotive in what they feel. It's not like pirates or vikings will care about being called that.

I think society's more familiar with obscene things taken out of the commercial spectrum, but I feel like issues of this more just come down to indecency.