The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 06, 2007, 12:04am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
You're not exactly correct about the U of I's symbol; it is based upon the Illinwek tribe, which was largely based in Illinois, but is a currently extinct tribe.
Well that may or may not be true based on who you talk about. I am just repeating what has been said by many representatives in the Native American community. That is a debate we can have, but I do not claim to be the most knowledgable about the entire debate. But I have lived in this state pretty much all my life and I do remember many battles over this mascot and many other issues involving Native Americans and it has always been said that the Chief Illinwek does not belong to a bonefided tribe. We will just have to disagree on this one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
So, there just seems to be a bit of hypocrasy in the NCAA's position. It is very obvious it is a money issue, not a moral one. If Indian mascots are offensive, then they all are, not just the ones who didn't contribute large amounts of money to the (apparently non-offended) tribe. In the case of the U of I, since there are no current tribe members available to contribute towards, that symbol must be offensive. But who's offended? Certainly not any of the specific tribal members. It was just extremely ironic that the situation played out where the U of I, home of the (offensive?) Chief Illiniwek, was not allowed to host that game, and had to travel to Florida State, home of the (non-offensive?) Seminoles?
I will put it this way. When people who look nothing like the depictions of the mascot have a problem with the depiction then that is a completely different issue than a bunch of people that are not depicted telling everyone how non-offensive something is. There are not a lot of Native Americans that go to that school or that attend games.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
So, who gets to make the decision as to what is offensive and what isn't? You and I might have differing opinions, so if we're working a game together with a player that has a Confederate flag tatoo, it might be offesive to you but mean absolutely nothing to me. Should we arm-wrestle to see if you get to tell the player it should be covered, or I get to tell him to play on? Rock, paper, scissors, perhaps?
Remember I did not say I would not allow a kid to play. I might draw a conclusion about that kid and his behavior, but he/he would still play in my game. Remember the Pekin nickname was not offensive to a lot of people and they had to change it in the end.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jan 06, 2007, 01:37am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Just to answer a few of the points that were brought up - I still believe the basic issue with the NCAA has to do with money. Maybe not directly with the NCAA's bottom line, but it's financial nontheless. You can draw many similarities between the Chief Illiniwek symbol at the U of I, and the Chief Osceola symbol at Florida State. Both are portrayed by members of completely different race. Both do a "routine" not necessarily based on total historical accuracy (although I believe Chief Osceola is based upon an actual person in history). Both are considered offensive by (some? many?) Native Americans. So why is Florida State allowed to keep Chief Osceola, and host post-season NCAA tournament games (and thus the revenues associated with them), while Illinois is not? Because Florida State contributes a large amount to the Seminole Tribe; in return the Tribe agrees to accept the symbol. Money rules. If the NCAA was pure in their intention that they rid their member schools of all possible offensive symbols, then it should be all of them. Not just the ones that haven't bribed (oops, contributed to) the right causes.

HawkeyeCubP - the article you suggested: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/edi...ive_americans/ has a great final paragraph about a survey done by Sports Illustrated in 2002. It shows 81% of Native Americans that responded said they disagreed with the suggestion that schools stop using Native American mascots.

So who is being offended?

Ok, I didn't mean to hijack the topic, but just wanted to point out it's very difficult to define what's offensive. So we, as officials, shouldn't be put in a position to have to rule on such items in a game situation. That should be handled at a school, district, state or federal level.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
drawn on tattoos refjef40 Basketball 8 Thu Feb 26, 2004 02:56pm
Tattoos Just Curious Basketball 11 Mon Feb 14, 2000 06:36pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:52am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1