Originally Posted by IrishLake (Post 2270385)

My thoughts of "a few" are base solely on my experiences and conversations of those who know first hand in their own home environments that the offensive stance is owned by "a few." So if one culture deems it offensive, and another culture says it's not, the first has more valid feelings? Who is right? Which Nation should the mascot's organization honor? Spare the feelings of one, shun the feelings of the other?

Originally Posted by IrishLake (Post 2270370)

I always thought "The Eries" would be a cool team name. But Erie was a tribe of Indians themselves... so I suppose that wouldn't work, even though the lake shares the name?

Which brings me to a new thought, though it's extreme. Does that mean businesses that are named for Native tribes should change their name? What about cities and geological features? If they have Native based names that the Native people themselves didn't designate, should they be changed? Should Miami Valley Plumbing change its name? Miami University? Cuyahoga Valley National Park? What about the Chillicothe Paints baseball team? (The Paint is a breed of horse that is commonly associated with Natives)? Tecumseh Serveying? Is the naming of a place or business acceptable, the line is crossed only when it's depicted as a mascot?

Just thinking aloud at this point.

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2270380)

It's 2014. Move if you don't like it.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2270387)

It has historically been less difficult for assimilated white ethnicities to "get over it" but don't tell that to ethnically Jewish whites in the U.S. and abroad. Shhhhhhhhhh....

Schools and teams that chose people/groups mascots generations ago SHOULD rethink that when "climates" change. What was considered appropriate 50+ years ago is often no longer appropriate. If idiots can't handle that, select an animal or other nonhuman as a mascot.

Originally Posted by shirley1929 (Post 2270398)

Double posting, but the Houston situation brings up an interesting one with the name "Rebels". I know a private school in Houston changed their mascot several years ago from Rebels to something else. Looks like a public HS has done the same now. I know there are other "Rebel" mascots out there in public schools (one outside Austin comes to mind?). I'm curious as to why that hasn't garnered as much attention as it should (ahem, Ole Miss!)...?

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2270403)

I remember when that contest went on over the new Ole Miss mascot. My best friend from residency is an Ole Miss Alum. The choices for the new mascot were very limited so the Black Bear (which is technically the Louisiana Black Bear, btw ;) ) was the only decent option. I'm still wishing that George Lucas had okay'd Admiral Akbar for the new mascot.

Originally Posted by thetalady (Post 2270401)

The University lost a lot of alumni support over it.

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2270394)

Climates didn't necessarily change.

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2270394)

We're talking about organized groups deeming things offensive.

Originally Posted by Kevin (Post 2270394)

It's not as if all of the Sioux Tribes got together and had some sort of discussion and decided they all should condemn this name.

Originally Posted by thetalady (Post 2270401)

Colonel Rebel was removed as the Ole Miss mascot several years ago. Now we have the incredibly stupid Ole Miss Black Bear. There was a HUGE uproar over the change. A lot of people still won't accept the bear. The University lost a lot of alumni support over it. It caused pain that will take many years to heal. Trust me, there was plenty of attention back when it happened.