|
|
Post by Blunashun on Dec 17, 2020 2:19:12 GMT
Cleveland's professional baseball team will play with their current name through the 2021 season, AP reports
On Monday, the organization released a statement saying in part that they have "decided to move forward with changing the current team name and determining a new, non-Native American based name for the franchise." Shortly after, team owner Paul Dolan told AP that the change will continue, but Cleveland will play with their current team name at least through the 2021 season. The decision follows years of protests from fans and Native American groups, as well as a recent decision in July by the NFL's Washington Football Team to stop using a name long considered a racial slur.
|
|
|
|
Post by Blunashun on Dec 17, 2020 2:41:51 GMT
Must be me. The only name that seemed offensive to me was Redskins. Braves is complimentary. Chiefs could be seen as complimentary. Golden State Warriors isn't an insult.
Since my father was half Miami Indian, I take offense at those & Boston Celtics, Minnesota Vikings, Pittsburgh Pirates (for the gay), Norte Dame Fighting Irish, USC Trojans, Michigan St. Spartans, Reds on behalf of communists everywhere, Brewers for alcoholics, Dodgers for Donald Trump in Vietnam (or not), Padres for pedophiles, Giants for little people, Patriots & Nationals for immigrants, Browns for obvious reasons, Texans because they don't like the way I vote, Raiders for protectors of the Lost Ark, Cowboys for Indians, Packers for the same reason I object to Pirates, Saints because it has religious overtones, Buccaneers because it's redundant with Pirates, Cardinals - see Saints above, Magic on behalf of sorcerers, Wizards too, Hornets for bees, there are no Kings in a democratic society, Canadians for profiling, why are there both Red & Black Hawks & or Wings but no Whitewings? Who actually wears Eed Sox? Devils sounds like a rip on Satanic worshipers, Knights brings back the aristocracy thing, & Canucks is incendiary.
How about the Cleveland No-Names? I like it.
|
|
jrgreene6
Legend
Married . . . With Cats
Posts: 7,438
|
Post by jrgreene6 on Dec 17, 2020 6:18:12 GMT
Must be me. The only name that seemed offensive to me was Redskins. Braves is complimentary. Chiefs could be seen as complimentary. Golden State Warriors isn't an insult. Since my father was half Miami Indian, I take offense at those & Boston Celtics, Minnesota Vikings, Pittsburgh Pirates (for the gay), Norte Dame Fighting Irish, USC Trojans, Michigan St. Spartans, Reds on behalf of communists everywhere, Brewers for alcoholics, Dodgers for Donald Trump in Vietnam (or not), Padres for pedophiles, Giants for little people, Patriots & Nationals for immigrants, Browns for obvious reasons, Texans because they don't like the way I vote, Raiders for protectors of the Lost Ark, Cowboys for Indians, Packers for the same reason I object to Pirates, Saints because it has religious overtones, Buccaneers because it's redundant with Pirates, Cardinals - see Saints above, Magic on behalf of sorcerers, Wizards too, Hornets for bees, there are no Kings in a democratic society, Canadians for profiling, why are there both Red & Black Hawks & or Wings but no Whitewings? Who actually wears Eed Sox? Devils sounds like a rip on Satanic worshipers, Knights brings back the aristocracy thing, & Canucks is incendiary. How about the Cleveland No-Names? I like it. I have a problem with the birds. Eagles, Ravens, Falcons, Cardinals - all offensive to other birds, like robins, wrens, seagulls, pigeons, etc. In all seriousness, I have started collecting a few of these “offensive” items, like the empty tub from Land O Lakes butter with the Indian lady on it, a empty Aunt Jemima syrup bottle; never was a fan of Uncle Ben’s rice. GO DODGERS!!! |
|
|
|
Post by El Pinguino on Dec 30, 2020 18:25:36 GMT
If we go down that train of thinking, wouldn't the Padres be considered offensive to California Native Americans? Maybe the Athletics are offensive to Obese people? I get the Redskins but the rest, come on....
|
|
