Controversial names and logos in North American major leagues

[Ghostsof1915]

37 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackhawk_(DC_Comics)

 

Actually it would be cool if they just slightly altered their logo (and of course pay a license fee to whoever currently owns it) to match this.

 

"Led by a mysterious man known as Blackhawk, the Blackhawks (or more formally, the Blackhawk Squadron) are a small team of World War II-era ace pilots of varied nationalities"

 

 

That was my other suggestion, but you beat me to it. 

Grumman Skyrockets are a wild design too. 

[Tortorella's Rant]

14 hours ago, drummer4now said:

 

First off now you’re putting words into my

mouth. 
 

I never once mentioned FN oppression or anything to that matter.

 
What I meant by “never ending” was about cancel culture and how it will never end with one thing to another till everything has been white washed. 
 

Also I suggest you brush up on history as the “Indian act” is widely opposed by FN people as nothing but hostile, any bad word imaginable. 
 

 

Racist. Why not black washed? What do you have against black washing? Clearly bigoted and privileged. 

[Tortorella's Rant]

12 hours ago, CBH1926 said:

On average indigenous person in Canada will die 9-10 years earlier than non indigenous person of the same age. Also in many regards FN population in Canada is in worse position than gasp………..AA population in the U.S.

 

Who cares about the sports, if Native Americans and First Nations are offended by these logos, go ahead and change them. In the meantime how about working on real problems that affect above mentioned population.

 

 

Doing something positive, making actual positive change, actual progress, requires actual work. Who wants to work. It's far easier to sit on social media and virtue signal all day long which is all this ever is

[Gurn]

19 minutes ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

Doing something positive, making actual positive change, actual progress, requires actual work. Who wants to work. It's far easier to sit on social media and virtue signal all day long which is all this ever is

A quick check of the Residential Schools thread will confirm your thoughts.

A lot of moaning, but it seems only 2 or 3 people have actually tried doing something.

Shout out to the poster formerly known as @Jimmy_McGill now known as  JM

[Gurn]

18 hours ago, JM_ said:

Is Nashville Nazi's OK?

It has the whole 'alliteration' thing going for it.

"If the glove don't fit, you must acquit".     People  like simple rhymes and such.

[MikeBossy]

22 hours ago, drummer4now said:

I’m sorry but this is cancel culture.. because a name is not infringing on someones rights. 
 

The communities in question should be honoured to have the name “blackhawks” as a team name as that term is not culturally incorrect unlike “Indians” or “Eskimo’s” 

Canceling something because you don’t like it is the definition of cancel culture. 
 

I can understand changing names or logos for the very racist names but not for simple names like “blackhawks” or braves like come on grow pair and be proud that the name is being used. 
 

Next thing you know the Canucks logo will have to be changed because it is cultural appropriation…. 
 

Removing a name or term because it is offensive/derogatory to a group of people (Minorities etc) is not cancel culture. As I said before it's called progress. 

[MikeBossy]

16 hours ago, 4petesake said:

It’s not my job to try to guess or tell First Nations and indigenous people what should offend them. My job is to listen to them when they tell me what does offend them and then help to bring about the change. If particular team names and logos are offensive and at the top of their list then that’s what we should be doing. If health care, modern schools, access to clean drinking water, etc are the real issues that need addressing we shouldn’t be wasting energy or losing focus by debating names and logos. It’s more important that we learn how to listen because it just might be more offensive that we are choosing the conversation for them.

You nailed it 100% in this post - its funny how terms like cancel culture etc tend to come from the offending party and usually not the offended party or culture affected. You will hear a million excuses of why we can't get rid of something which leads to  the people actually affected by it having their concerns trivialized. Or they come up with a way to justify it. Things like "Oh it's just a sports logo or a name" - but hey I am realistic - teams that have changed their names didn't do it as some form of social justice - they did it because sponsors told them to which comes down to the almighty dollar.

 

[JM_]

16 hours ago, 4petesake said:

. It’s more important that we learn how to listen because it just might be more offensive that we are choosing the conversation for them.

I would imagine like any diverse group of people, the opinions would vary from apathy to outrage. 

 

But I think we can have the conversation about whether or not we want to see a logo that clearly has racial overtones and not wait for or expect some kind of consensus or vote of confidence on which way to act. The Chicago logo clearly has a lot of potential for being a crappy logo with bad overtones. 

 

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, JM_ said:

I would imagine like any diverse group of people, the opinions would vary from apathy to outrage. 

 

But I think we can have the conversation about whether or not we want to see a logo that clearly has racial overtones and not wait for or expect some kind of consensus or vote of confidence on which way to act. The Chicago logo clearly has a lot of potential for being a crappy logo with bad overtones. 

 

Sure the Chicago logo has the potential to be offensive and conversation is always good, it gives us all a chance to look a little closer at our own POV. But at the end of the day I don’t think that First Nations people want us deciding what should offend them. I think they’d prefer to tell us and have our support and understanding. 

[JM_]

54 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

Sure the Chicago logo has the potential to be offensive and conversation is always good, it gives us all a chance to look a little closer at our own POV. But at the end of the day I don’t think that First Nations people want us deciding what should offend them. I think they’d prefer to tell us and have our support and understanding. 

But who do we contact... there isn't one voice or one place to ask first nations people a question like this. At some point we need to use our own judgement. That logo wouldn't be put out today, I don't think thats in question at all. So to me its more about why should it keep going? 

[lmm]

13 hours ago, Tortorella's Rant said:

Doing something positive, making actual positive change, actual progress, requires actual work. Who wants to work. It's far easier to sit on social media and virtue signal all day long which is all this ever is

is virtue signalling the new buzzword?

Never heard that one before 

and now twice in one page.

now at least I can tell my gf I learned something on CDC today

 

[RUPERTKBD]

There are plenty of First Nations team nicknames and logos out there.....Seminoles, Fighting Sioux, Fighting Illini, Utes, Chippewas, Choctaws, Aztecs....there's also names like Chiefs, Warriors and Warhawks....

 

IMHO, those are different that outright racist tropes like "Redskin" and "Indian".....and many of them operate with the approval of the Nations they derive their names from....

 

That being said, there are some logos out there that could do with some upgrading, even if the nickname remains as is.

[CBH1926]

On 9/1/2021 at 9:15 PM, Ghostsof1915 said:

 

They can say it's this as Black Hawks. 

This is AH 64 better known as the Apache, Sikorsky UH 60 is known as the Black Hawk.