?

Log in

No account? Create an account

[icon] ok, so I guess I"ll have to say my piece. i'm not just pissed at the… - As the drum major counts off...so are the days of my life.
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.

Security:
Time:03:40 pm
ok, so I guess I"ll have to say my piece.

i'm not just pissed at the NCAA because of the obvious against the U of I. I"m talking about other schools as well. I'm talking about Florida State, who has a long standing relationship with members of the seminole tribes. But what is infuriating enough is that NC Pembroke can use the term "braves" because they have over 20% native american population in their school. what if some of those students don't like their mascot? but then again. Bradley can't use the term "braves" even though they have NO mascot depicting any native american. in fact, they have no mascot at all.

these mascots the NCAA has "deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin" could include ANY mascot if someone bitches enough. my friend Ben mentioned the mascots from MSU and Notre Dame. say I was Irish and I didn't like that Notre Dame showed a little fighting man everywhere as their mascot. could I get that particular symbol taken away? No, because I would be crazy for trying to fight something like that.

so my whole point is that the NCAA seems to have taken some sort of stance without even really defining what they think is hostile or abusive. and I have a problem with it. and thats my piece for nwo seeing as my time at the comp lab is up.


double grr.
comments: Leave a comment Previous Entry Share Next Entry


livingluster
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 09:19 pm (UTC)
If people were offended by the Notre Dame angry leprechaun, I would say do away with it. But they aren't. Maybe because the Irish weren't exterminated by the ancestors of those now affiliated with Notre Dame. Maybe not.

You are right that the NCAA needs to have some specific language on what constitutes hostile and abusive just so that there are standards for this sort of thing.

The Florida Seminole issue is a very complicated one. Native American groups with in the state do support the use of the mascot and receive money from the university. Some view that money as a way of supporting the culture of the native americans. Some see it as a cheap way to keep people quiet by taking advantage of the less than optimal state of their culture. There are other groups from outside of Florida that are also descendants of the Seminoles that oppose the use of the mascot.

What really gets me is of all the people that talk of honoring the chief I wonder how many of them have actually talked to a Native American or have been to the Native American House or taken a class on Native American culture. I know this number for the last one is small because I TRIED to take a class on Native American culture and the university offers two.... two classes with a combined total of 60 seats for a university of 37,000 people. This fact actually makes my stomach turn.
(Reply) (Thread)


thorshammer
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 10:52 pm (UTC)
Maybe because the Irish weren't exterminated by the ancestors of those now affiliated with Notre Dame. Maybe not.
But the Irish were exterminated and opressed for centuries by the ancestors of those affiliated with Notre Dame. The British. Not to mention that their treatment upon arriving here wasn't much better.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


livingluster
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 11:14 pm (UTC)
Oppression, yes. Extermination, no. Perhaps the British would have liked to exterminate the Irish, but they did not succeed in that. The Irish still have a culture and country of their own, not to mention many descendants. You can't say the same for Native Americans. Their languages have be forgotten, their way of life lost, their lands taken away, their culture degraded. It's almost inappropriate to compare the two.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


thorshammer
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 11:50 pm (UTC)
I would disagree that it is inappropriate (or almost as such) to compare the two. The Irish may have their own country back now, but they did lose it for quite a long while, nor have they ever regained the all of it. Irish, while still an official language of the country, has been all but overrided by English. Their lands were taken away as punishment for trying to rebel from the British, they were then given to British settlers. If you're looking for degraded and forgotten culture, then you have to look no further than the Irish Celts.

I'm not saying the Native Americans haven't suffered, or that our actions against them aren't an inexcusable travesty - because they are. Plain and simple. I am saying that there are a lot of parallels between the Irish and Native Americans, it's a sad repeated event across history. See also the Japanese and the Ainu or the Aryans and the Indians.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


livingluster
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-09 03:19 pm (UTC)
I still think there is a large difference due to the outcomes of both situations. The Irish still exist in great numbers and thus their culture continues. The same can not be said of the Native Americans.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)


thorshammer
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 10:48 pm (UTC)
I wrote a college paper about the Mascot issue and used Notre Dame as an example (me being part Irish myself).

My viewpoint has always been that banning mascots is a violation of free speech. People have the right to offend and people have the right to be offended. I have always been against any form of mandatory political correctness. (Though it would be a much nicer world if people did repsect one another) To declare some things offensive and others not is a slippery slope. Because how many people does it take to be offended for something to be considered offensive? What if the President took offense to any criticism of his policies? Would dissent become a crime?
(Reply) (Thread)


livingluster
Link:(Link)
Time:2005-08-08 11:32 pm (UTC)
The first amendment gives individuals the freedom of speech. The University of Illinois is not an individual. It is an public, governmentally run entity. It's perfectly legal for an individual to say that Irish are stupid, lazy, drunkards, but it's quite a different thing if a governmental agency were to say the same thing.

I wrote a college paper on the mascot issue as well, except I wrote mine about the similarities between it and issues concerning state sponsored use of the confederate flag, another symbol that represents traditions that many people hold dear.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

fuu3
Link:(Link)
Time:2013-02-17 03:10 am (UTC)
Meet your perfect lover and Be Naughty today! Go Here welcomemyhomecat.blogspot.com
(Reply) (Thread)

[icon] ok, so I guess I"ll have to say my piece. i'm not just pissed at the… - As the drum major counts off...so are the days of my life.
View:Recent Entries.
View:Archive.
View:Friends.
View:Profile.