Exeter Chiefs chop and imagery

[I like neeps]

Otago Highlanders seems a bizarre point of comparison given they're a team in a part of the world in part founded by Highland emigrants and play in a city called Dunedin ffs.

This was my point and then yermum said Scottish Highlanders were a persecuted people which I thought was mental unless you misunderstood the Highland clearances very badly. To clear up for slick.

I think it's at best a misunderstanding of the entire debate.

[yermum]

Curious that you don't view the statutes of Iona as being persecution of Highland culture.

[inactionman]

Let he who is without sin...

Nobody asked the bloody wasps, did they now?

I'm not sure if the wasps would take offence, but my eyes certainly do.

I'm surprised Exeter don't just switch their iconography to an old English/early Britannic tribal chief - they could be truly woke and go for Boadicea.

Plenty of fun and games to be had with that, they could wheel the team out in chariots and grow long straggly beards and not wash. Although we perhaps wouldn't want to run the risk of accusations of appropriation from the Welsh. Looking at the barnets on show in the first XV they'd be all over the matted dreads look.

Boudicca was an Essex girl.

It appears geographic locale isn't that important to the club.

[Sinkers]

I posted you all a fucking map on the previous page - while you were all still tucked up in bed

Boudicca was a queen of the Iceni supposedly - ie Norfolk. Although she did fuck up colchester pretty bad on her way to London

In Roman times Exeter was a actually the capital of the Dumnonii kingdom and later it was maybe Tintagel.

Exeter was also part of Anglo Saxon Wessex I think.

So they’ve got two really good choices closer to home than red indians

[inactionman]

I posted you all a fucking map on the previous page - while you were all still tucked up in bed

Boudicca was a queen of the Iceni supposedly - ie Norfolk. Although she did fuck up colchester pretty bad on her way to London

In Roman times Exeter was a actually the capital of the Dumnonii kingdom and later it was maybe Tintagel.

Exeter was also part of Anglo Saxon Wessex I think.

So they’ve got two really good choices closer to home than red indians

I was making a point about woke, and having a female chief.

I was probably being far too clever for my own good.

[Biffer]

Curious that you don't view the statutes of Iona as being persecution of Highland culture.

Or kids being beaten at school for speaking gaelic (in the 20th century).

[Sinkers]

I posted you all a fucking map on the previous page - while you were all still tucked up in bed

Boudicca was a queen of the Iceni supposedly - ie Norfolk. Although she did fuck up colchester pretty bad on her way to London

In Roman times Exeter was a actually the capital of the Dumnonii kingdom and later it was maybe Tintagel.

Exeter was also part of Anglo Saxon Wessex I think.

So they’ve got two really good choices closer to home than red indians

I was making a point about woke, and having a female chief.

I was probably being far too clever for my own good.

I’m only messing about too. Just be facetious.

[Mahoney]

The leaders of Wessex definitely thought of themselves as kings. Not sure what term we usually apply to the leader of the Dumnonii - post Rome, Gildas calls Constantine of Damnonia a Rex & a Tyrannus, but I've found a few articles on the web referring to pre-Roman British leaders like Caratacus as chieftains.

[Slick]

Curious that you don't view the statutes of Iona as being persecution of Highland culture.

Or kids being beaten at school for speaking gaelic (in the 20th century).

Yeah, I still don't get the point neeps is making.

[Dogbert]

I actually thought the whole beating kids af school for speaking Gaelic was an urban myth , until my father recounted himself being beaten at Boroughmuir in the 1920's

[Biffer]

I actually thought the whole beating kids af school for speaking Gaelic was an urban myth , until my father recounted himself being beaten at Boroughmuir in the 1920's

A lot of people think that. My father was beaten for it in the 40s. In Lewis.

[sockwithaticket]

Tony Rower decides to add his tuppence

Alongside Tony Rowe’s office desk in Exeter sits a black box-file stuffed with letters. “See that there,” he says, slapping it with his right hand. “That’s 10,000 people who wrote in support two years ago. There were 6,000 against it but I even have correspondence in support of us from people who represent Native American tribes. They’re warriors and we admire their guts and determination. We modelled ourselves on them.”

Welcome to the debate currently swirling around the saloons of Devon and beyond. This week’s strong statement from Wasps, urging the Rugby Football Union to consider a ban on fans wearing Native American headdresses and standing firm against cultural appropriation – “the act of taking or using things from a culture that is not your own” – has further upped the ante and ruffled feathers at Sandy Park. If the Chiefs’ visit to Coventry promises much on the field, it could be even livelier in the boardroom.

It is certainly not how Rowe wanted to mark either this weekend’s first anniversary of one of club rugby’s all-time great achievements or Exeter RFC’s 150 years of existence. If it feels longer than 12 months since once-homely Exeter brought home the European Champions Cup it is because so much else has happened. Covid-19, financial headaches, stadium building delays, angry petitions: the romantic glow that once clung to Exeter’s every move is in danger of disappearing.

As their director of rugby, Rob Baxter, observed this week, there are far more pressing worldwide issues just now than a rugby club badge. But try telling that to the vocal dissenters who accuse Exeter and Rowe of being, at best, tone deaf to shifting modern attitudes. Having never sought a dull life – he was once a British powerboating champion while his real father (whom he never knew) was a lion tamer and a ringmaster with Billy Smart’s Circus – the Exeter chairman is enjoying scant respite in his 70s.

His argument is that the word “Chiefs” has long been synonymous with the club’s first team – “We’ve been known as Exeter Chiefs for well over a century … we didn’t create the name just for branding” – but the distinctive big chief motif, in place since 1999, is more problematic. What happens, furthermore, if a world club championship starts in 2024 and the global focus intensifies further?

The debate now extends way beyond fancy dress “war bonnets” or toy inflatable tomahawks. Differing worldviews, pot-stirring, wilful intransigence or virtue signalling? Rowe feels the “do-gooders” are overthinking it. “There’s nothing racist about it. We’re not trying to belittle the image or ancestry of anyone. We want to be like those Indian chiefs. On that basis, if I go to church on Sunday and praise God am I doing something wrong? Are all these people really getting upset in North America? I don’t quite believe that. At the end of the day, what is the real harm? If you take 100 people and ask them to draw you a picture of a chief, what are they going to draw? They’re going to draw you a Native American chief.”

Rowe, as it happens, has always had an interest in history. “I’m a historian. It was my best subject at school … I was crap at everything else.” He is rather less of a fan of what he sees as modern revisionism. “People want to try and change history. It’s like when they pulled down the statue in Bristol. You can’t paint over history and pretend it didn’t happen.”

But for those still hoping that Exeter will belatedly take a lead from American sport where the Washington Redskins, among others, have renamed themselves, here is a significant newsflash. Rowe says that club members will be invited to have their say at the club’s scheduled AGM on 24 November.

“Although I run what I jokingly call a democratic dictatorship, I do listen to people. If the membership says we have got to change, I will change. Money doesn’t come into it at all.” What does he think the outcome will be? “I’ve got a sense that the members are going to tell me to stay where I am. I’ve had a lot of correspondence from a lot of supporters.” OK, so what about the players? Are they all onside? “I have never had one of my current or past players ever say to me they have a problem calling themselves an Exeter Chief or wearing the kit.”

This is perhaps not the moment to glance at the wall behind Rowe’s desk and see a carving of a Native American chief, complete with Exeter-themed face paint, staring back. Visitors also still walk past a totem pole in reception and the post-match Wigwam bar does not commemorate Devon’s hairpiece wearers. Harmless fun or crassly offensive?

What no one disputes is Rowe’s colossal contribution to the club since he first became a sponsor in 1993. Notwithstanding the Baxter family, Exeter’s rise would not have happened without him. Which is why he remains bitter about recent media stories seeking to conflate the lack of a new main shirt sponsor – another of Rowe’s companies has since filled the breach – with the branding furore. “I don’t think you’re in a very nice profession. There are a lot of people who just want to talk about the crap and the shit. They don’t want to talk about the positive things in life.”

He also reckons outsiders have underestimated the stress of keeping afloat a business, including a new women’s squad, in the era of Covid. “We were haemorrhaging £1m a month,” says Rowe. “In the year to June 2020 we lost £2.26m. We haven’t had the accounts for 2020-21 yet but I wouldn’t mind betting we’re going to lose another £8-9m. I am surprised a couple of the other clubs are still here. The owners and chairmen don’t get a lot of credit and we’re always getting knocked but they’re the people having to put their hands in their pockets.”

Even fewer would have had a pacemaker fitted during the week of Exeter’s European triumph, been discharged from hospital on game day to rush up to Bristol and still shared full-on bear hugs with his players after the final whistle. “There’s a picture of me doubled over after Stuart Hogg slapped me on the chest … it wasn’t pleasure, it was pain.”

Happier times all round, unlike this week’s diplomatic wasps’ nest. With hindsight, would he have done anything differently? The riposte is instant: “I’ve no regrets about anything.” Once Rowe digs in his heels, he is an extremely hard man to shift.

[Kawazaki]

Tony Rower decides to add his tuppence

Alongside Tony Rowe’s office desk in Exeter sits a black box-file stuffed with letters. “See that there,” he says, slapping it with his right hand. “That’s 10,000 people who wrote in support two years ago. There were 6,000 against it but I even have correspondence in support of us from people who represent Native American tribes. They’re warriors and we admire their guts and determination. We modelled ourselves on them.”

Welcome to the debate currently swirling around the saloons of Devon and beyond. This week’s strong statement from Wasps, urging the Rugby Football Union to consider a ban on fans wearing Native American headdresses and standing firm against cultural appropriation – “the act of taking or using things from a culture that is not your own” – has further upped the ante and ruffled feathers at Sandy Park. If the Chiefs’ visit to Coventry promises much on the field, it could be even livelier in the boardroom.

It is certainly not how Rowe wanted to mark either this weekend’s first anniversary of one of club rugby’s all-time great achievements or Exeter RFC’s 150 years of existence. If it feels longer than 12 months since once-homely Exeter brought home the European Champions Cup it is because so much else has happened. Covid-19, financial headaches, stadium building delays, angry petitions: the romantic glow that once clung to Exeter’s every move is in danger of disappearing.

As their director of rugby, Rob Baxter, observed this week, there are far more pressing worldwide issues just now than a rugby club badge. But try telling that to the vocal dissenters who accuse Exeter and Rowe of being, at best, tone deaf to shifting modern attitudes. Having never sought a dull life – he was once a British powerboating champion while his real father (whom he never knew) was a lion tamer and a ringmaster with Billy Smart’s Circus – the Exeter chairman is enjoying scant respite in his 70s.

His argument is that the word “Chiefs” has long been synonymous with the club’s first team – “We’ve been known as Exeter Chiefs for well over a century … we didn’t create the name just for branding” – but the distinctive big chief motif, in place since 1999, is more problematic. What happens, furthermore, if a world club championship starts in 2024 and the global focus intensifies further?

The debate now extends way beyond fancy dress “war bonnets” or toy inflatable tomahawks. Differing worldviews, pot-stirring, wilful intransigence or virtue signalling? Rowe feels the “do-gooders” are overthinking it. “There’s nothing racist about it. We’re not trying to belittle the image or ancestry of anyone. We want to be like those Indian chiefs. On that basis, if I go to church on Sunday and praise God am I doing something wrong? Are all these people really getting upset in North America? I don’t quite believe that. At the end of the day, what is the real harm? If you take 100 people and ask them to draw you a picture of a chief, what are they going to draw? They’re going to draw you a Native American chief.”

Rowe, as it happens, has always had an interest in history. “I’m a historian. It was my best subject at school … I was crap at everything else.” He is rather less of a fan of what he sees as modern revisionism. “People want to try and change history. It’s like when they pulled down the statue in Bristol. You can’t paint over history and pretend it didn’t happen.”

But for those still hoping that Exeter will belatedly take a lead from American sport where the Washington Redskins, among others, have renamed themselves, here is a significant newsflash. Rowe says that club members will be invited to have their say at the club’s scheduled AGM on 24 November.

“Although I run what I jokingly call a democratic dictatorship, I do listen to people. If the membership says we have got to change, I will change. Money doesn’t come into it at all.” What does he think the outcome will be? “I’ve got a sense that the members are going to tell me to stay where I am. I’ve had a lot of correspondence from a lot of supporters.” OK, so what about the players? Are they all onside? “I have never had one of my current or past players ever say to me they have a problem calling themselves an Exeter Chief or wearing the kit.”

This is perhaps not the moment to glance at the wall behind Rowe’s desk and see a carving of a Native American chief, complete with Exeter-themed face paint, staring back. Visitors also still walk past a totem pole in reception and the post-match Wigwam bar does not commemorate Devon’s hairpiece wearers. Harmless fun or crassly offensive?

What no one disputes is Rowe’s colossal contribution to the club since he first became a sponsor in 1993. Notwithstanding the Baxter family, Exeter’s rise would not have happened without him. Which is why he remains bitter about recent media stories seeking to conflate the lack of a new main shirt sponsor – another of Rowe’s companies has since filled the breach – with the branding furore. “I don’t think you’re in a very nice profession. There are a lot of people who just want to talk about the crap and the shit. They don’t want to talk about the positive things in life.”

He also reckons outsiders have underestimated the stress of keeping afloat a business, including a new women’s squad, in the era of Covid. “We were haemorrhaging £1m a month,” says Rowe. “In the year to June 2020 we lost £2.26m. We haven’t had the accounts for 2020-21 yet but I wouldn’t mind betting we’re going to lose another £8-9m. I am surprised a couple of the other clubs are still here. The owners and chairmen don’t get a lot of credit and we’re always getting knocked but they’re the people having to put their hands in their pockets.”

Even fewer would have had a pacemaker fitted during the week of Exeter’s European triumph, been discharged from hospital on game day to rush up to Bristol and still shared full-on bear hugs with his players after the final whistle. “There’s a picture of me doubled over after Stuart Hogg slapped me on the chest … it wasn’t pleasure, it was pain.”

Happier times all round, unlike this week’s diplomatic wasps’ nest. With hindsight, would he have done anything differently? The riposte is instant: “I’ve no regrets about anything.” Once Rowe digs in his heels, he is an extremely hard man to shift.

My observation that communicating a message to Rowe via social media is not very smart doesn't appear any less valid after reading that article does it.

[Raggs]

So after asking Rowe to stop using caricatures depicting American Indians as noble savages, Rowe retorts that they're respecting the fact that these people are noble savages, and he doesn't see what's wrong with that....

[Kawazaki]

So after asking Rowe to stop using caricatures depicting American Indians as noble savages, Rowe retorts that they're respecting the fact that these people are noble savages, and he doesn't see what's wrong with that....

He does add that he has letters from members of the Native American population saying they are ok with it. I didn't see where he described them as 'noble savages', I must have missed that bit.

[sockwithaticket]

I would be very interested to see those letters of his. In addition to the various groups who've denounced Yank sport teams like the (now former) Washington Redskins or the general principle of appropriating native culture there are several who've given quotes to Exeter Chiefs For Change specifically about the Exeter situation.

[JM2K6]

I would be very interested to see those letters of his. In addition to the various groups who've denounced Yank sport teams like the (now former) Washington Redskins or the general principle of appropriating native culture there are several who've given quotes to Exeter Chiefs For Change specifically about the Exeter situation.

You wouldn't know them, they're from Canada

[Tichtheid]

I don't know anything about Rowe, but if he's been bankrolling a premiership rugby team he is probably a successful businessman, would that be accurate?

These guys don't really like to be in the wrong, or to put it another way, they don't like to be told they are in the wrong. The path of least resistance would have been to move away from the iconography, make a small scale announcement and encourage a new way of supporting Exeter Chiefs. These alternatives have been covered in this thread already, but Rowe has chosen not to. He calls the shots so this is all, or mostly, on him and his advisors.

He's not making a stand against "wokeism" neither is anyone speaking in their favour, cowboys and indians are for kids of the Hollywood 20th century, not today.

[fishfoodie]

So after asking Rowe to stop using caricatures depicting American Indians as noble savages, Rowe retorts that they're respecting the fact that these people are noble savages, and he doesn't see what's wrong with that....

He does add that he has letters from members of the Native American population saying they are ok with it. I didn't see where he described them as 'noble savages', I must have missed that bit.

Did Tony show the letters to the interviewer ?

Did he verify that it actually came from a Native American ?...

And does Tony consider a single letter from a single unconfirmed source sufficient justification for ignoring the general case ?

..

So if he got; say five letters from, "Native Americans", who called his teams brand a despicable, & racist characterization; would he drop the whole bullshit ?

[Niegs]

So after asking Rowe to stop using caricatures depicting American Indians as noble savages, Rowe retorts that they're respecting the fact that these people are noble savages, and he doesn't see what's wrong with that....

He does add that he has letters from members of the Native American population saying they are ok with it. I didn't see where he described them as 'noble savages', I must have missed that bit.

I believe Raggs was referring to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noble_savage

[Niegs]

Speaking of 'letters of support', I saw someone defend Exeter (I think in Brian Moore's tweet about the issue) using this same kind of reference and mentioning a certain group (Native Americans Guardians Association - NAGA) that have said mascots are just fine. Well, I was interested to know more about them and found that they're supposedly run by Native Americans from one of the Dakotas and they actively lobby institutions saying that sport images honour their culture and history. Digging a bit deeper, I found this long but comprehensive article on who'd been defending the Redskins:

https://www.si.com/nfl/2020/07/08/washi ... ed-mission

TL:DR ... some of the Indigenous people behind the defence of such things are potentially in it for the money fans are happy to send them for support or do genuinely feel that it's not such a bad thing, but don't necessarily have the full support of their communities.

Another article about one such person: https://deadspin.com/is-the-redskins-vi ... 1642991295

... which I found on this political activism site that has a good list of why such mascots simply need to go: https://www.suitupmaine.org/indian-mascots/

[Kawazaki]

So after asking Rowe to stop using caricatures depicting American Indians as noble savages, Rowe retorts that they're respecting the fact that these people are noble savages, and he doesn't see what's wrong with that....

He does add that he has letters from members of the Native American population saying they are ok with it. I didn't see where he described them as 'noble savages', I must have missed that bit.

Did Tony show the letters to the interviewer ?

Did he verify that it actually came from a Native American ?...

And does Tony consider a single letter from a single unconfirmed source sufficient justification for ignoring the general case ?

..

So if he got; say five letters from, "Native Americans", who called his teams brand a despicable, & racist characterization; would he drop the whole bullshit ?

I've no idea who the letters are from. The point that struck me was more that Rowe keeps letters in a box file on his desk. Note, he didn't show the journalist an email inbox or a social media post with lots of likes.

[Kawazaki]

TL:DR ... some of the Indigenous people behind the defence of such things are potentially in it for the money fans are happy to send them for support or do genuinely feel that it's not such a bad thing, but don't necessarily have the full support of their communities.

I wrote a post akin to that weeks ago...

cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring...

...embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

Taking vicarious offence at things is a full-time occupation for many people nowadays.

Toga parties will be next on the hitlist.

[Niegs]

TL:DR ... some of the Indigenous people behind the defence of such things are potentially in it for the money fans are happy to send them for support or do genuinely feel that it's not such a bad thing, but don't necessarily have the full support of their communities.

I wrote a post akin to that weeks ago...

cultures that can live with caricatures of them are more robust and enduring...

...embrace the caricature, it shows that you mean something outside of your own environment - that's priceless. Without it, you're forgotten about.

Taking vicarious offence at things is a full-time occupation for many people nowadays.

Toga parties will be next on the hitlist.

Yes, but if it comes to down to being 'remembered' as a caricature or 'forgotten' by much of the world, I think many people would rather the latter. I seem to recall that I replied to that post saying the Canadian education system and our public media outlets are doing a much better job of promoting REAL indigenous culture. So, locally, things are improving significantly without the need for this kind of warped and shallow 'promotion' (even when you strip away the things that are arguably 'racist' or in poor taste / stereotypical).

Having grown up near a Reservation myself and studied history of the people who occupied the Eastern Woodlands, I cringe when I see old depictions and the things that still persist that, at best, are wildly inaccurate if not racist.

If the branding is so vital, work with the people to get their support and promote the culture with their input like Florida State university seems to have with the Seminole people ... but, again, we're talking about a place in the UK which has zero connection to the culture being depicted. The whole "we're honouring them" argument is a sham when an organization a) never consulted them in the first place b) don't even try to listen and say "We'd like to keep this, tell us how to be more respectful." ... or empathize / read the room and actually go "Know what? This is dated, isn't it? How about 'honouring' our actual Devonian heritage for a change?" (Reminds me that Rowe said in that article he's an 'historian' ... what a joke. )

[Kawazaki]

I suspect this really all comes down to just paying a fee to use the Chief image. If they did that then Exeter Chiefs could get an officially authorised stamp of approval from the native American people in the USA (who haven't got a clue where Exeter is). I doubt that would appease the white middle-class millennials in Warwickshire but it would at least perhaps reframe the outrage properly, i.e Exeter are getting a brand for free.

[Niegs]

I suspect this really all comes down to just paying a fee to use the Chief image. If they did that then Exeter Chiefs could get an officially authorised stamp of approval from the native American people in the USA (who haven't got a clue where Exeter is). I doubt that would appease the white middle-class millennials in Warwickshire but it would at least perhaps reframe the outrage properly, i.e Exeter are getting a brand for free.

How pathetic would that be for both sides? Exeter buying favour and a tribe/band selling out their soul to a foreign entity that’s shown it doesn’t care … if they did, I’d expect that it’d mostly serve to highlight that they’re so desperate for money due to poor living / economic conditions on their reserve. A whole other issue, but what self respecting sports team would want to be part of that?

[Raggs]

I suspect this really all comes down to just paying a fee to use the Chief image. If they did that then Exeter Chiefs could get an officially authorised stamp of approval from the native American people in the USA (who haven't got a clue where Exeter is). I doubt that would appease the white middle-class millennials in Warwickshire but it would at least perhaps reframe the outrage properly, i.e Exeter are getting a brand for free.

How pathetic would that be for both sides? Exeter buying favour and a tribe/band selling out their soul to a foreign entity that’s shown it doesn’t care … if they did, I’d expect that it’d mostly serve to highlight that they’re so desperate for money due to poor living / economic conditions on their reserve. A whole other issue, but what self respecting sports team would want to be part of that?

It would also suggest they're using a single tribes imagery. I doubt anyone in the chiefs boardroom could honestly claim they're representing a particular tribe.

[Kawazaki]

I suspect this really all comes down to just paying a fee to use the Chief image. If they did that then Exeter Chiefs could get an officially authorised stamp of approval from the native American people in the USA (who haven't got a clue where Exeter is). I doubt that would appease the white middle-class millennials in Warwickshire but it would at least perhaps reframe the outrage properly, i.e Exeter are getting a brand for free.

How pathetic would that be for both sides? Exeter buying favour and a tribe/band selling out their soul to a foreign entity that’s shown it doesn’t care … if they did, I’d expect that it’d mostly serve to highlight that they’re so desperate for money due to poor living / economic conditions on their reserve. A whole other issue, but what self respecting sports team would want to be part of that?

To you I guess it's not a great look but I don't think it's as bad at you make out. There will be bodies and associations in the USA that collectively represent all the native American people. Paying them a gratuity strengthens the Exeter brand, it's little more than a tax deductible marketing expense really.

[Biffer]

That's only worked when there's a specific tribe name involved. It's a pretty stupid idea but you've only got to look at the source to understand why.

[sockwithaticket]

Rugby Tonight with some actual Native American's discussing why Exeter's branding is offensive. Very few people should be able to claim it doesn't matter or they don't know why it's inappropriate now.

[Kawazaki]

Rugby Tonight with some actual Native American's discussing why Exeter's branding is offensive. Very few people should be able to claim it doesn't matter or they don't know why it's inappropriate now.

I didn't get to watch Rugby Tonight.

What were the reasons given?

[sockwithaticket]

Rugby Tonight with some actual Native American's discussing why Exeter's branding is offensive. Very few people should be able to claim it doesn't matter or they don't know why it's inappropriate now.

I didn't get to watch Rugby Tonight.

What were the reasons given?

Same ones that have been repeated in here multiple times but with a bit more detail and from the mouths of people whose opinions on it matter. Head dresses and warpaint on non-Native Americans is the equivalent to stolen valour and sacrilige given how they are obtained by and what they represent to Native people. Chants are generally used in specific rituals and ceremonies, so to have a made up one for a sporting event is also bordering on sacrilege and is certainly insulting.

Using a caricatured composite image of a generic Native American is reductive and an insult to the 600+ distinct tribes. It's inappropriate and offensive for non-Native Americans to appropriate the imagery even if the decision was made from a place of benign ignorance.

[Kawazaki]

Rugby Tonight with some actual Native American's discussing why Exeter's branding is offensive. Very few people should be able to claim it doesn't matter or they don't know why it's inappropriate now.

I didn't get to watch Rugby Tonight.

What were the reasons given?

Same ones that have been repeated in here multiple times but with a bit more detail and from the mouths of people whose opinions on it matter. Head dresses and warpaint on non-Native Americans is the equivalent to stolen valour and sacrilige given how they are obtained by and what they represent to Native people. Chants are generally used in specific rituals and ceremonies, so to have a made up one for a sporting event is also bordering on sacrilege and is certainly insulting.

Using a caricatured composite image of a generic Native American is reductive and an insult to the 600+ distinct tribes. It's inappropriate and offensive for non-Native Americans to appropriate the imagery even if the decision was made from a place of benign ignorance.

I'm assuming that BT didn't get any representation from native Americans who don't mind to comment as part of the discussion?

[Happyhooker]

I didn't get to watch Rugby Tonight.

What were the reasons given?

Same ones that have been repeated in here multiple times but with a bit more detail and from the mouths of people whose opinions on it matter. Head dresses and warpaint on non-Native Americans is the equivalent to stolen valour and sacrilige given how they are obtained by and what they represent to Native people. Chants are generally used in specific rituals and ceremonies, so to have a made up one for a sporting event is also bordering on sacrilege and is certainly insulting.

Using a caricatured composite image of a generic Native American is reductive and an insult to the 600+ distinct tribes. It's inappropriate and offensive for non-Native Americans to appropriate the imagery even if the decision was made from a place of benign ignorance.

I'm assuming that BT didn't get any representation from native Americans who don't mind to comment as part of the discussion?

Ridiculous and stupid response.

I'll leave it to dolly parton to give the rebuttal to this:

As soon as you realise that [something] is a problem, you should fix it. Don’t be a dumbass’

When she realised that the lyrics in one of her songs were vaguely offensive to a segment of society.

This 'for balance' argument is ludicrous

[Kawazaki]

It's not a ridiculous or stupid response. If BT are going to use precious broadcast time to address something that really isn't the biggest story in English rugby then at least do it properly.

And to your Dolly Parton quote, perhaps try this Stephen Fry quote (for balance of course...);

“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."

[sockwithaticket]

BT's stated intention with that program was to explain why Exeter's branding is considered problematic, not to provide a comprehensive 'both sides' debate in 20 minutes.

Besides which, we don't always need both sides as sometimes one side is a contrary minority who don't add anything (flat earthers, climate change deniers) of substance.

I'm not convinced there really are many Native Americans who are fine with it, those who keep claiming they exist have manifestly failed to produce any while those taking the opposite position seem to be easy to get hold of. There's also a difference between not caring and advocating in favour of. If you put the apathy of some against the firm disagreement of others, go with the latter. The apathetic won't care either way.

'Not the biggest issue' is such a mealy-mouthed dismissal. Plenty of things aren't the most pressing issue or don't affect that many people, but are still worth doing. What more worthwhile cause do you feel has been in any way set back by BT using a fraction of their overall rugby broadcast to cover this?

[eldanielfire]

I'm surprised the imagery is still a thing. I would have thought a Exeter team, being proud of being local would and should have picked something local to them for their brand. It was a relatively recent brand creation wasn't it. Smacks of hiring a bad American/americanised PR firm or consultant on it. I always thought the Native American imagery was very cheesy and at odds with the club and regions identity.

Regardless they should see that this is an opportunity to pick something more appropriate and true to the club, it's obvious that this will rumble on and on. They may as well save what good faith they have and change the image, even if they make it a case of phasing it out over time.

[Biffer]

It's not a ridiculous or stupid response. If BT are going to use precious broadcast time to address something that really isn't the biggest story in English rugby then at least do it properly.

And to your Dolly Parton quote, perhaps try this Stephen Fry quote (for balance of course...);

“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so fucking what."

'precious broadcast time'

There aren't just three channels anymore. Given the amount of shite there is on hundreds of channels I don't think your handbag clutching 'think of the airtime' nonsense is a particularly good line for you.

[Biffer]

I'm surprised the imagery is still a thing. I would have thought a Exeter team, being proud of being local would and should have picked something local to them for their brand. It was a relatively recent brand creation wasn't it. Smacks of hiring a bad American/americanised PR firm or consultant on it. I always thought the Native American imagery was very cheesy and at odds with the club and regions identity.

Regardless they should see that this is an opportunity to pick something more appropriate and true to the club, it's obvious that this will rumble on and on. They may as well save what good faith they have and change the image, even if they make it a case of phasing it out over time.

It basically goes back to Tony Rowe. He can't accept he's in the wrong so is digging his heels in, and making it worse by doing do. He seems to think this will all blow over. It won't.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Rugby Tonight with some actual Native American's discussing why Exeter's branding is offensive. Very few people should be able to claim it doesn't matter or they don't know why it's inappropriate now.

I didn't get to watch Rugby Tonight.

What were the reasons given?

Same ones that have been repeated in here multiple times but with a bit more detail and from the mouths of people whose opinions on it matter. Head dresses and warpaint on non-Native Americans is the equivalent to stolen valour and sacrilige given how they are obtained by and what they represent to Native people. Chants are generally used in specific rituals and ceremonies, so to have a made up one for a sporting event is also bordering on sacrilege and is certainly insulting.

Using a caricatured composite image of a generic Native American is reductive and an insult to the 600+ distinct tribes. It's inappropriate and offensive for non-Native Americans to appropriate the imagery even if the decision was made from a place of benign ignorance.

Of course most of those 600 tribes appropriated it themselves. If they're free to do so then so is everyone else. And if we're not free to wear, sing, cook, style hair, use make up, write, print ideas others thought of first then there are some quite shocking restrictions coming in our lives.

The idea of owning ideas is problematic, even in instances where sharing and enjoining of those ideas gives rise to offence, and whether that offence is intended or not