Edit: Meme has been slightly altered to be more accurate. Credit to @ininewcrow for the updated and better image.

  • Wogi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Context is important here.

    I wouldn’t be offended at a team called Caucasians, filled entirely with Indian players. But I don’t live in the same universe that Indian people do.

    But maybe if white people made up 2% of the population, after being systematically eliminated by Indians to make use of our land, maybe if white people were relegated to the poorest, least productive areas of the country and told to be thankful for it, and maybe if the word Caucasian was kind of a rude way to refer to my skin color, I could see myself being offended at the idea.

    • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      This one’s on me, because I was trying to make a point and be sarcastic at the same time.

      While I agree with you, I’ll quibble that context isn’t actually important here. The point of the shirt, and the point I was trying to make, was that reducing an entire culture to a caricature is offensive in any context (regardless of whether or not you would it offensive). The people who defend using native imagery for sports mascots often claim that the portrayal is intended as an honor, and that they are celebrating the culture instead of demeaning it.

      All of your points are correct, and each one compounds the offense. But even if you turn it around and use white people as the mascot, a people and culture who have not been systematically oppressed, deprived of life, liberty, and property, it’s still an inherently prejudicial and ignorant thing to do. So any argument about how mascots are intended to promote or celebrate or honor a culture or a people still fails to justify the practice.

      • Hyperreality@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Some of the most racist and bigoted people, are also very politically correct.

        Some of the least racist and bigoted people, are also very politically incorrect.

        PC language is often used by people who are awkward around minorities or want to disguise their true intentions.

        Political correctness has its place, but it’s better to judge people by what they do or say, not how they say it.

      • joel_feila@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        In the usa many do use the term Indian over native American. Not all it varries from place to place.

        • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          So you speak for ALL American Indians, then? Do I speak for ALL Germans? Or have I been in the US long enough that I’m no longer German? My grandmother was born in Germany, is that too far? Or is it just skin color, I speak for all whites, no matter the country or culture of origin? I’m curious to the rules here- I shouldn’t speak for American Indians because I’m not one, right? So who can speak for all American Indians and all 547 distinct tribes (federally recognized)? Do you speak for every tribe? If not you, then who? Your phrasing was “Unless you’re American indian”, so… yes? You speak for all 547 tribes and 5.2 million people?

            • PrinceHabib72@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Buuuuuut… you did say “Unless you’re American indian”, so that does imply that you or someone else CAN speak for all of a group. So I’m a bit confused here. I will call you whatever you’d like me to call you, including “Indian” on its own if that’s what you’d prefer to be called (even though that doesn’t make sense to me), but you didn’t actually answer my questions. Let me try again- how is it bigoted to not assume that a group of people would want to be called something that is fundamentally incorrect by definition, has a turbulent history, and is not what most federal programs call them- you yourself say that the benefits go to “American Indians”, not “Indians”.

              Thanks for the coloring page, is it one of your favorites?