Dartmouth AD apology

[Rosey]

[quote Beeeej]Many people consider it part of the aforementioned "common decency" to reconsider what we previously thought to be completely innocuous once we are informed that it offended someone.  Not necessarily change our behavior every time someone gets bent out of shape, but at least reconsider our own views on the subject.  Which I think goes a little bit beyond "oh, well."[/quote]
No, I think that's about right.  I may simply be less inclined to change my behavior unless I see a really good reason to do so.

Usually my opinion, whether stated aloud or with rolling eyes, is that people should grow thicker skins.  Taking offense at almost anything that isn't a personal insult directed at you specifically is a sign of immaturity and/or low self-esteem.  Big Pharma makes drugs to help with that.

You know, I'd love for someone to start a team called "The Nerds" or "The Midgets": I'd be happy to be a fan of either. :-D

Cheers,
Kyle

[DeltaOne81]

[quote krose]Usually my opinion, whether stated aloud or with rolling eyes, is that people should grow thicker skins.[/quote]

Oh well, too damn bad for you.

:-P

[Robb]

[quote krose]
You know, I'd love for someone to start a team called "The Nerds"
[/quote]
"Engineers" doesn't count?

[Jim Hyla]

[quote krose][quote Beeeej]Many people consider it part of the aforementioned "common decency" to reconsider what we previously thought to be completely innocuous once we are informed that it offended someone.  Not necessarily change our behavior every time someone gets bent out of shape, but at least reconsider our own views on the subject.  Which I think goes a little bit beyond "oh, well."[/quote]
No, I think that's about right.  I may simply be less inclined to change my behavior unless I see a really good reason to do so.
[/quote]But of course you will only ever see a good reason to do something if you have an open mind to consider actions for someone's point of view other than your own. If you don't then of course behavior change is never needed, from your point of view.

To go back to my prior medical analogy, I try to do it myself and I'm happy that my own physicians are willing to try and understand what I may be experiencing, and then to try and help with finding a solution. I'm glad I don't go to someone who thinks, even if he doesn't speak it, that it's my problem and that's too bad.

[KeithK]

[quote Beeeej][quote krose]Out of common decency, I don't go out of my way to offend people; but if I happen to offend someone in the course of doing something I and most of my neighbors think is completely innocuous... oh, well.[/quote]

Many people consider it part of the aforementioned "common decency" to reconsider what we previously thought to be completely innocuous once we are informed that it offended someone.  Not necessarily change our behavior every time someone gets bent out of shape, but at least reconsider our own views on the subject.  Which I think goes a little bit beyond "oh, well."[/quote]I agree that it's appropriate and decent to reconsider your actions/words when someone is offended and see if their offense is reasonable.  Thing is, this act of reconsideration doesn't always mean that you'll agree that the offended were in the right.  Having thought about the issue of Indian team names manmy times over the years I have come to the conclusions that being offended by "Indians" or "Fighting Sioux" is not reasonable. Having come to this conclusion, I find it easy to laugh at some over-sensitive college official who feels the need to apologize for the nickname of an opponent. Returning to my original response, rooting for the Sioux and Green nee Indians when I'm not a fan of either seems to me a suitable way of making fun of something that I find entirely silly (the Dartmouth AD's statement).

[ugarte]

[quote KeithK]I find it easy to laugh at some over-sensitive college official who feels the need to apologize for the nickname of an opponent. [/quote]I'm with you here. On the other hand, after reading the article that RichH linked to, I think Dartmouth might be an exception to that general rule.


Or they would, if not for this excerpt from the article:

Dartmouth, founded in 1769 as a school for American Indians, graduated fewer than 20 American Indians during its first 200 years (emphasis added to accentuate hilarity)

Way to stick with the program! In light of that amazing theft of endowment money, perhaps Big Green is the more appropriate name anyway.

[Roy 82]

Dartmouth, founded in 1769 as a school for American Indians, graduated fewer than 20 American Indians during its first 200 years (emphasis added to accentuate hilarity)

Way to stick with the program! In light of that amazing theft of endowment money, perhaps Big Green is the more appropriate name anyway.

True enough but we have a kettle and pot situation here. Do you really think that Cornell has a long and proud tradition of admitting ANY PERSON?
 Not too mention the fact that we still don't admit people with low academic intelligence - unless they have a wicked slappah:)

[marty]

[quote DeltaOne81][quote Robb] words only hurt you as much as you allow them to.[/quote]

I agree you should never allow words to hurt your self-esteem, make you think less of yourself, have any impact on your life or actions, etc. That is in your control. But the topic of this discussion wasn't about being 'hurt' (although I admit the saying was), it was about being offended.

[/quote]

Not completely.  The AD at Dartmouth apologized for the pain caused.  That implies someone was hurt.  And that is why I have a problem with her (the AD's) statement more than if we just brought up the old Cowboys and Indians argument or whatever the argument is....if it is still OK to call them Indians...

The exagerated response by calling it pain causes me pain.  She is over the top.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote marty][quote DeltaOne81][quote Robb] words only hurt you as much as you allow them to.[/quote]

I agree you should never allow words to hurt your self-esteem, make you think less of yourself, have any impact on your life or actions, etc. That is in your control. But the topic of this discussion wasn't about being 'hurt' (although I admit the saying was), it was about being offended.[/quote]

Not completely.  The AD at Dartmouth apologized for the pain caused.  That implies someone was hurt.  And that is why I have a problem with her (the AD's) statement more than if we just brought up the old Cowboys and Indians argument or whatever the argument is....if it is still OK to call them Indians...

The exagerated response by calling it pain causes me pain.  She is over the top.[/quote]

Don't mistake anything I say on here for defense of the Dartmouth AD. It seems pretty silly, although I do admit I don't know the entire story at Dartmouth. But it seems like it'd be well overdone just about anywhere else.

[DL]

North Dakota may not have a team called The Asians, but (as was mentioned earlier) another ND school does have a fighting race as a mascot. But i guess that's ok, because we all know that the Irish are savages like bears and sharks.

[ugarte]

[quote DL]North Dakota may not have a team called The Asians, but (as was mentioned earlier) another ND school does have a fighting race as a mascot. But i guess that's ok, because we all know that the Irish are savages like bears and sharks.[/quote]The difference is that a bunch of Irish Catholics in Indiana named the school after themselves. There is a huge difference. I wish Elon College still called themselves the Fightin' Christians.

[RichH]

[quote ugarte]The difference is that a bunch of Irish Catholics in Indiana named the school after themselves. [/quote]

Except the University of Notre Dame was actually founded by Frenchmen.  Their teams officially competed with the names "Catholics" and "Ramblers."  The "Irish" nickname has fuzzy origins, but most likely started as a slur.  "Fighting Irish" became the official nickname in 1927.

Several links:
http://www.college-football--tickets.net/notre_dame/history.htm
http://www.nd.edu/~wcawley/corson/whyfightingirish.htm

There is a huge difference. I wish Elon College still called themselves the Fightin' Christians.

And I wish Penn's official team name were really "The Oxymoronic Fighting Quakers."

[Jeff Hopkins '82]

[quote KeithK]"Where Paleface and Redskin both turn chicken."

(Random, I know.  But I was just watching this. Reference anyone?)[/quote]

Since, you didn't get any takers, It's from "F Troop."

Gotta love the Heckawis.

[ugarte]

[quote RichH][quote ugarte]The difference is that a bunch of Irish Catholics in Indiana named the school after themselves. [/quote]

Except the University of Notre Dame was actually founded by Frenchmen.  Their teams officially competed with the names "Catholics" and "Ramblers."  The "Irish" nickname has fuzzy origins, but most likely started as a slur.  "Fighting Irish" became the official nickname in 1927.[/quote]I appreciate the correction but I think my point still stands. Other people used "Irish" as a slur but as the man said,

In narrow, little New England, it began as a slur -- a term of opprobrium. But we took it up and made of it a badge of honor -- a symbol of fidelity and courage to everyone who suffers from discrimination

Notre Dame reappropriated a slur against all Catholics into a rallying cry for Catholics. Calling a team the "Indians" takes a caricature of Native American culture and turns it into a rallying cry for those who created the caricature. It would have been equally offensive if, say, Harvard or Wesleyan had called themselves the "Fighting Irish."

[RichH]

[quote ugarte]I appreciate the correction but I think my point still stands.[/quote]

Well, that's all it was: a friendly correction.  But I think it did change your point slightly, which is fine given your clarification in this context.

[quote ugarte]Notre Dame reappropriated a slur against all Catholics into a rallying cry for Catholics. Calling a team the "Indians" takes a caricature of Native American culture and turns it into a rallying cry for those who created the caricature. It would have been equally offensive if, say, Harvard or Wesleyan had called themselves the "Fighting Irish."[/quote]

That is a significant difference.  To contribute to this line of thinking, I can think of three other examples of a group adapting a perjorative.

"Yankee." Probably the best parallel for the Notre Dame nickname.  While the origin is most likely based on Dutch names, there's no question that the British used it as a term of derision for the colonists. By the Revolution, what had been an insult had become a boast by those on this side of the pond.  The US South flipped it again to be an insult (I still don't understand how it's an insult today...baseball jokes aside).  We still use it with pride in the context of international war ("The Yanks are coming" in "Over There"), but when talking to a Southerner (Damn Yankee) or in Latin America (Yanquis go home) it's still a term of contempt.  It's a pretty interesting word when you look at the history.  Certainly innocuous enough to name a sports team after this historically "ethnic" phrase.

"Queer."  Quoth Homer Simpson: "Yeah, and that's another thing! I resent you people using that word. That's our word for making fun of you! We need it!"

The N-word.  um...I'm not going there.  Ask Michael Richards if it's a hot button in race relations today.  The point is that the African-American community adapted this hate term in various ways and degrees, and now there's a movement to reject it.

For the record, I don't have a strong stance one way or the other on the mascot controversy.  I personally don't get offended easily.  I just wish the NCAA would be consistent, if they're going to have a policy at all.