I wasn't comparing the two incidents or equating them, or claiming that one is just as offensive as the other. That part is an open question in my mind. I was just using an illustration of some actions that were CLEARLY offensive and that were CLEARLY known to be offensive by the perpetrator, but where the individual still claimed it "was all in good fun." I'm just saying that that's not an effective counter to accusations of offensiveness. It can "be all in good fun" and still be offensive and inappropriate. People who claim to have done things "all in good fun" are also usually lying.

LOL. OK. You still don't have any response to my argument that "it's all in good fun" is not a way to get out of this situation - and that it's usually a lie.

Kevin, I don't understand how the GPhiB incident is related to a cheesy western movie that you keep trying to relate this to.

Every article I can find on that doesn't ever mention anything about Cowboys.

The girls showed up in Indian "maiden" dresses, and guys showed up in makeshift loinclothes and red 'war' paint.

Oh! And the Gamma Phi house is right next door to The American Indian Student Services House.

But hey, they shouldn't have been put on TEMPORARY social probabation because "it was all in good fun".

Actually, if you actually buy the premise that anyone, at least from a logical standpoint where someone is reacting to something which was actually portrayed because that portrayal means something or does something bad, has anything to be offended over [I don't], the "it's all in good fun" line, if true, mitigates "intent to offend," which is apparently a class C felony on college campuses these days.

In this case, I'm definitely buying that this is true in this case.

TP: I really don't care what the school did. That they did what they did doesn't make it right.

I agree, social probation at the end of the semester, only a few weeks away from finals probably isn't going to affect the sorority that much. It's the principle of the thing which makes me wish they'd fight it, but really, when a punishment so light is on the table, sometimes, it's best to just take the path of least resistance.

No. They don't.....and that really shouldn't matter. Maybe the people that really want to cry and whine over a bunch of college students having a party should start filing law suits and taking on some of the bazillion places that manufactures and sells Indian and Western costumes.

The ridiculous amount of PCness that is expected of everyone in this country is ludicrous.

I bet no one in this thread was a member of Indian Princesses? Boy, those little girls and their daddies sure were racist! :rolleyes:

Why? Why are you not allowed to harmlessly participate in a party meant completely for fun. It's almost like you are saying that this isn't possible, you have to be lying.....you're party was certainly meant to be highly offensive and mocking.

What's next? Should we start threatening 3 year old trick or treaters who want to dress up like Pocohantas for Halloween?

No, they were ignorant by participating in something that promotes racial stereotypes.

"Red Face" does not honor us
On Indian Princesses

And on the Y program Indian Princesses

^^^ Thanks for that info!

Even Florida Governor Jeb Bush has weighed in on the controversy, expressing his disappointment that Florida State will have to give up the name "Seminoles."

"How politically correct can you get?" the governor asked of those who fought for the change. "These people need to get out more."


Kudos to Jeb.

It just amazes me. People actually worship and truly love these institutions and professional teams that have names, logos, and mascots influenced by Indians.........and it upsets people. Personally I'd feel honored.

Your "personally" doesn't really matter, though.

No other racial and ethnic minority group would feel honored if there were caricatures of them. The "red sambo" mascot from the Washington Redskins would've been axed from the jump.

http://www.aics.org/mascot/mascot.html
http://www.bluecorncomics.com/wahoo.htm

Some mascots and "tributes" are perceived as less offensive because Native Americans actually participate in them directly. However, only until Native Americans actually feel honored instead of mocked by their representation can anyone legitimately say they should feel honored.

So all Native Americans agree on this, or are we talking about fringe groups which claim to speak for the whole?

This distinction is unimportant.

There have always been offensive images targeting blacks that not every black person finds offensive or gives a darn enough to speak out against. As long as there's more than one person who feels a certain way, there's a reason to speak out and they are within their right to say that "we" are offended. "We," to everyone with common sense, means that it is potentially degrading in general even if every PERSON within that group doesn't feel offended or doesn't agree that it should be addressed.

You know, when white people stop getting so defensive over other people getting somewhat offended, the people getting offended won't wield nearly as much power.

Also, sub in any other race for white, but I think we're the worst about this stuff. "Really, they dressed up like Indians?! Well, I'm certainly not a racist like them, so kick them all off campus (this will show I'm not one of those racists, right?)."

Example #1356409870 (and counting) of white people thinking they hold the key to all that is powerful and therefore are LOANING nonwhites power.


Nah, don't sub because you called it accurately but for more reasons than you know. :) You probably didn't intend for your words to be interpreted a certain way...but...hey.

Yes, I'm simply perpetuating the hierarchy. (vomits)

White people loan power to charges of racism because they're fearful of it. Anybody can use it, including whites.