Exeter Chiefs chop and imagery

[MoreOrLess]

Here's another conundrum.

What if you and I find it racist, but a Chinese person finds it funny?

I'm not trying to be obtuse, just pointing out there are lots of grey areas in this debate.

In Kenya, it is quite common for for young Kenyans these days to make fun of Nigerians including impersonations of their accents and mannerisms. I laugh along nervously, but obviously wouldn't dare do an impersonation myself. So does that mean the Kenyans are being racist?

Is racism in the eye of the beholder?

I think that if you're mocking a trait that you believe is distinct to an ethnic group then you're being racist. It doesn't matter if someone in that ethnic group finds if funny, or even if you're part of that ethnic group yourself. Those things just influence the consequence of your racist act.

If someone physically attacks you then you've been assaulted. It's up to you whether you laugh or press charges, but that doesn't change the fact that someone has just punched you in the face.

Mocking yes but mimicking? At worst that is culturally insensitive which i believe is what the Chiefs are doing and it should be stopped, but it cannot by any measure be considered racist.

OK then....deliberately antagonising a ethnic group or race using a trait you believe to be distinct to them?

Were the Chiefs using the imagery to promote awareness and understanding of native American history, or some other positive aim, I'd agree that it wasn't racist.

However, if the chiefs are aware that their acts are causing offence to a racial group and choose to continue then the semantic distinction between mocking and mimicking is essentially that they aren't being offensive enough to be considered racist?

I'm not sure that putting a threshold on how racist is racist enough to be racist is a good idea.

[ASMO]

Is racism in the eye of the beholder?

I think that if you're mocking a trait that you believe is distinct to an ethnic group then you're being racist. It doesn't matter if someone in that ethnic group finds if funny, or even if you're part of that ethnic group yourself. Those things just influence the consequence of your racist act.

If someone physically attacks you then you've been assaulted. It's up to you whether you laugh or press charges, but that doesn't change the fact that someone has just punched you in the face.

Mocking yes but mimicking? At worst that is culturally insensitive which i believe is what the Chiefs are doing and it should be stopped, but it cannot by any measure be considered racist.

OK then....deliberately antagonising a ethnic group or race using a trait you believe to be distinct to them?

Were the Chiefs using the imagery to promote awareness and understanding of native American history, or some other positive aim, I'd agree that it wasn't racist.

However, if the chiefs are aware that their acts are causing offence to a racial group and choose to continue then the semantic distinction between mocking and mimicking is essentially that they aren't being offensive enough to be considered racist?

I'm not sure that putting a threshold on how racist is racist enough to be racist is a good idea.

The problem is you are using your own interpretation of what racisnm actually means, the Oxford Dictionary definition is

"Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

Now i note the word antagonism is in there, but in the context that it is used to somehow portray the native American culture as inferior, it clearly does not do that in the Exeter case so how can that be classed as racism, they are not showing everyone how they are somehow better than Native Americans. (Of course if you can point out where they are i would be happy to accept that). It is however clearly insensitive and should be stopped as it is offending Native Americans, i have no issue with that, i do take issue with the R word being bandied around simply because it is trendy to do so and easier just to lump it all under a single banner.

[Raggs]

The problem is you are using your own interpretation of what racisnm actually means, the Oxford Dictionary definition is

"Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior."

Now i note the word antagonism is in there, but in the context that it is used to somehow portray the native American culture as inferior, it clearly does not do that in the Exeter case so how can that be classed as racism, they are not showing everyone how they are somehow better than Native Americans. (Of course if you can point out where they are i would be happy to accept that). It is however clearly insensitive and should be stopped as it is offending Native Americans, i have no issue with that, i do take issue with the R word being bandied around simply because it is trendy to do so and easier just to lump it all under a single banner.

Where are you getting that definition?

Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.

https://www.lexico.com/definition/racism

That site is the site that Oxford English Dictionary uses.

No need for any sort of superiority.

EDIT - Quite a big discussion over the change from the looks of it. Basically the superiority thing wasn't satisfactory in describing many of the issues that people were facing clearly due to their race.

[ASMO]

And therein lies the issue, no single clearly agreed definition, the goalposts seeminly moving all over the place, people will never agree, it is subjective which is where i am going to let it lie, i fundamentally disagree that what Exeter are doing is racist, but others will strongly disagree with that stance, so be it.

[Raggs]

And therein lies the issue, no single clearly agreed definition, the goalposts seeminly moving all over the place, people will never agree, it is subjective which is where i am going to let it lie, i fundamentally disagree that what Exeter are doing is racist, but others will strongly disagree with that stance, so be it.

Where did you get your definition? You said Oxford, I'd suggest you had an old Oxford definition. So Oxford has disagreed with itself, and now updated. They don't disagree with themselves now.

Yes, things change. It doesn't mean both sides have an equal argument though. Native Americans have told Exeter it's offensive to them, surely if something is based on race, offensive to that race, it's racism.

[Kawazaki]

If Brits are characterised by the French as men in bowler hats and pinstripe suits using an umbrella as a walking stick - is that racist? Is portraying a Frenchman wearing a beret and a Breton shirt with a string of onions around his neck racist? An Australian with a hat with corks dangling down? Wearing clogs to imitate a Dutchman? A Viking helmet to imitate a Norwegian? Etc etc etc.

[Niegs]

Honest question - will anybody in the new world even know what a Native American was/looked like 50 years from now?

Sure, why not? Many still live on Reservations and I've read that birth rates there (in parts of Canada, at least) tend to be a little higher than the national average.

Oh I'm sure they'll still exist, but that wasn't what I asked.

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

[Kawazaki]

Sure, why not? Many still live on Reservations and I've read that birth rates there (in parts of Canada, at least) tend to be a little higher than the national average.

Oh I'm sure they'll still exist, but that wasn't what I asked.

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

[sturginho]

Oh I'm sure they'll still exist, but that wasn't what I asked.

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

Wow, we had better thank Exeter for keeping Native American culture alive then

[Niegs]

Oh I'm sure they'll still exist, but that wasn't what I asked.

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

Will the caricatures and stereotypes disappear? Yes, eventually. Will the genuine and specific representations of unique cultures disappear? No, they’re steadily becoming more common (again, in Canada). More people are embracing their mixed heritage, you see more depictions of cultural events/stories in media, and in this province at least, I think Gr 11 has dedicated courses to indigenous history and literature.

You’d have to have your head in the sand to miss it. I think in the next generation or two, we’ll progress further toward New Zealand levels of indigenous cultural awareness.

[Kawazaki]

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

Will the caricatures and stereotypes disappear? Yes, eventually. Will the genuine and specific representations of unique cultures disappear? No, they’re steadily becoming more common (again, in Canada). More people are embracing their mixed heritage, you see more depictions of cultural events/stories in media, and in this province at least, I think Gr 11 has dedicated courses to indigenous history and literature.

You’d have to have your head in the sand to miss it. I think in the next generation or two, we’ll progress further toward New Zealand levels of indigenous cultural awareness.

The point I think I'm making is that cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring. If the English started an online protest every time somebody rolled out a hackneyed stereotype about them then it would overload the internet. Embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

[Tichtheid]

Won’t anyone think of the English?

[Biffer]

Oh I'm sure they'll still exist, but that wasn't what I asked.

Your question is vague. I could also interpret that to say: "We'll all be dead so what's the point of any of this?" Or maybe, because 'new world' isn't capitalized, you mean the new world (i.e. planet) rich people will migrate to and for whatever reason, won't take Native Americans with them?

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

That’s quite a take.

[Slick]

The Native American imagery is iconic. Without it, they will eventually completely leave public consciousness. They then won't have any voice.

That's how this will eventuate.

Will the caricatures and stereotypes disappear? Yes, eventually. Will the genuine and specific representations of unique cultures disappear? No, they’re steadily becoming more common (again, in Canada). More people are embracing their mixed heritage, you see more depictions of cultural events/stories in media, and in this province at least, I think Gr 11 has dedicated courses to indigenous history and literature.

You’d have to have your head in the sand to miss it. I think in the next generation or two, we’ll progress further toward New Zealand levels of indigenous cultural awareness.

The point I think I'm making is that cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring. If the English started an online protest every time somebody rolled out a hackneyed stereotype about them then it would overload the internet. Embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

Arrogant posting

[Kawazaki]

Will the caricatures and stereotypes disappear? Yes, eventually. Will the genuine and specific representations of unique cultures disappear? No, they’re steadily becoming more common (again, in Canada). More people are embracing their mixed heritage, you see more depictions of cultural events/stories in media, and in this province at least, I think Gr 11 has dedicated courses to indigenous history and literature.

You’d have to have your head in the sand to miss it. I think in the next generation or two, we’ll progress further toward New Zealand levels of indigenous cultural awareness.

The point I think I'm making is that cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring. If the English started an online protest every time somebody rolled out a hackneyed stereotype about them then it would overload the internet. Embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

Arrogant posting

I'm a realist.

[Kawazaki]

Name an enduring culture that doesn't have a vivid or powerful caricature attached to it.

[Tichtheid]

The point I think I'm making is that cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring. If the English started an online protest every time somebody rolled out a hackneyed stereotype about them then it would overload the internet. Embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

Arrogant posting

I'm a realist.

"I'm a realist"...

is usually seen an an arrogant take on something

[Tichtheid]

Name an enduring culture that doesn't have a vivid or powerful caricature attached to it.

Classical oboe

[Kawazaki]

Name an enduring culture that doesn't have a vivid or powerful caricature attached to it.

Classical oboe

I don't know what that means but I assume it's shorthand for 'I can't'.

[Tichtheid]

Name an enduring culture that doesn't have a vivid or powerful caricature attached to it.

Classical oboe

I don't know what that means but I assume it's shorthand for 'I can't'.

to be honest it was a response to your obfuscation

The point itself is pretty clear, wearing feathers and headdresses in Exeter makes you a dick

[Kawazaki]

Classical oboe

I don't know what that means but I assume it's shorthand for 'I can't'.

to be honest it was a response to your obfuscation

The point itself is pretty clear, wearing feathers and headdresses in Exeter makes you a dick

I thought we were all grown up enough in here to move on from the childlike Twitter binary world view and discuss the grey bits in between that exist in reality but clearly not.

[Tichtheid]

I don't know what that means but I assume it's shorthand for 'I can't'.

to be honest it was a response to your obfuscation

The point itself is pretty clear, wearing feathers and headdresses in Exeter makes you a dick

I thought we were all grown up enough in here to move on from the childlike Twitter binary world view and discuss the grey bits in between that exist in reality but clearly not.

Isn't the point of this thread the iconography Exeter use?

If you have accepted their fans are wholly in the wrong and moved on from that then fair enough, my mistake.

Do you accept that?

[Kawazaki]

to be honest it was a response to your obfuscation

The point itself is pretty clear, wearing feathers and headdresses in Exeter makes you a dick

I thought we were all grown up enough in here to move on from the childlike Twitter binary world view and discuss the grey bits in between that exist in reality but clearly not.

Isn't the point of this thread the iconography Exeter use?

If you have accepted their fans are wholly in the wrong and moved on from that then fair enough, my mistake.

Do you accept that?

What part of 'binary view of the world' didn't you understand?

[Tichtheid]

I thought we were all grown up enough in here to move on from the childlike Twitter binary world view and discuss the grey bits in between that exist in reality but clearly not.

Isn't the point of this thread the iconography Exeter use?

If you have accepted their fans are wholly in the wrong and moved on from that then fair enough, my mistake.

Do you accept that?

What part of 'binary view of the world' didn't you understand?

Dearie me, this is not the point of the thread.

It's not about what you think my view is, it's about Exeter and their use of the iconography of several cultures and how they mix them up and make it all a bit of a laugh.
It's nothing to do with you trying to score internet points over me, I really don't give a flying fuck about that - take 1000 points if you like, there, you've beaten me.

Now, shouldn't Exeter ditch the feathers?

[Kawazaki]

Isn't the point of this thread the iconography Exeter use?

If you have accepted their fans are wholly in the wrong and moved on from that then fair enough, my mistake.

Do you accept that?

What part of 'binary view of the world' didn't you understand?

Dearie me, this is not the point of the thread.

It's not about what you think my view is, it's about Exeter and their use of the iconography of several cultures and how they mix them up and make it all a bit of a laugh.
It's nothing to do with you trying to score internet points over me, I really don't give a flying fuck about that - take 1000 points if you like, there, you've beaten me.

Now, shouldn't Exeter ditch the feathers?

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

[Tichtheid]

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

But they should ditch them, yes?

[Kawazaki]

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

But they should ditch them, yes?

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

[Tichtheid]

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

But they should ditch them, yes?

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

Well, I'm more about alignment and agreement, even with those from whom I'm standing on the other side of the field.

There's always a chance to get them/you on my side if we start with the one thing, and if that one thing is the feathers and tom toms, then we start from there

[Kawazaki]

But they should ditch them, yes?

Probably, but not for the reasons you want them to.

Well, I'm more about alignment and agreement, even with those from whom I'm standing on the other side of the field.

There's always a chance to get them/you on my side if we start with the one thing, and if that one thing is the feathers and tom toms, then we start from there

Of course you are. Who wouldn't be?

However, the Native American culture will get weaker without the likes of the Exeter Chiefs, not stronger.

[Tichtheid]

However, the Native American culture will get weaker without the likes of the Exeter Chiefs, not stronger.

WTAF

You are joking?

[Kawazaki]

However, the Native American culture will get weaker without the likes of the Exeter Chiefs, not stronger.

WTAF

You are joking?

No. The thread does run in sequence. It's not a great revelation if you've read the earlier posts.

[Tichtheid]

However, the Native American culture will get weaker without the likes of the Exeter Chiefs, not stronger.

WTAF

You are joking?

No. The thread does run in sequence. It's not a great revelation if you've read the earlier posts.

I just find it incredible, the idea that Exeter rugby are the bulwarks keeping those cultures going?

That's a stretch

[Kawazaki]

WTAF

You are joking?

No. The thread does run in sequence. It's not a great revelation if you've read the earlier posts.

I just find it incredible, the idea that Exeter rugby are the bulwarks keeping those cultures going?

That's a stretch

The term 'bulwarks' misunderstands the why completely.

[Tichtheid]

No. The thread does run in sequence. It's not a great revelation if you've read the earlier posts.

I just find it incredible, the idea that Exeter rugby are the bulwarks keeping those cultures going?

That's a stretch

The term 'bulwarks' misunderstands the why completely.

Honestly, I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing. You’ve said the feathers and headdresses at Exeter are wrong, that’s fine, leave it at that.

[Kawazaki]

I just find it incredible, the idea that Exeter rugby are the bulwarks keeping those cultures going?

That's a stretch

The term 'bulwarks' misunderstands the why completely.

Honestly, I think you are arguing for the sake of arguing. You’ve said the feathers and headdresses at Exeter are wrong, that’s fine, leave it at that.

I'm not arguing with you. I've been hypothesising about the scope of cultures that aren't robust enough to withstand caricatures of themselves.

[Biffer]

You’re talking utter shite, basically. But you’re so embedded in your sense of right that you’ve created this ridiculous structure to try to give yourself a logical backup to the nonsense you’re vomiting up.

But hey, carry on being wrong, it’s fine.

[Kawazaki]

You’re talking utter shite, basically. But you’re so embedded in your sense of right that you’ve created this ridiculous structure to try to give yourself a logical backup to the nonsense you’re vomiting up.

But hey, carry on being wrong, it’s fine.

Yeah sure, everyone's racist. Evil world.

[Ymx]

I’d say the less robust cultures would be those who were historically oppressed. Especially where the characterisations are styled during such a period of history.

And so if you’re not offended you’re an oppressor.

QED

[yermum]

1995 this isn't a new thing...

[Sinkers]

[media] [/media]

Seems they’ve doubled down