Exeter Chiefs chop and imagery

[Margin__Walker]

Bit of an aside but when I first saw Exeter's mascot I thought the mouth was a mustache so he looked a bit like Blakey from On The Buses.

Ha, I thought the same. Mouth definitely looks like a tache.

[Slick]

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-ne ... al-1139539

Comments from a Native American who lives in Exeter and is a former cultural ambassador to a Sioux tribe, so knows what she's talking about. It should clear up some of the questions.

but I would say to her or him, would you be willing to do exactly the same thing on a Native American Reservation or Reserve? Or would you feel embarrassed?

This is a good point that even the most stupid could relate with.

Although this spoils it a bit as I think most people in the UK would just piss themselves laughing.

How might you feel if your culture/people were reduced to the cliche of a military pith helmet? Or a Mary Poppins chimney sweep?

[Yeeb]

Plenty of pith helmets visable when English / British teams tour, so not a bad option. Exeter Helmets has an appropriate ring to it !

[Un Pilier]

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-ne ... al-1139539

Comments from a Native American who lives in Exeter and is a former cultural ambassador to a Sioux tribe, so knows what she's talking about. It should clear up some of the questions.

I thought her point about whether an Exeter fan would feel comfortable doing the “chop” in a Native American reservation was a good one as a ready made acid test.

Edit : see Slick got there first a few minutes ago.

[FujiKiwi]

Is somebody of pure European heritage, now in NZ and performing the Haka, any different in terms of cultural appropriation ? Certainly some of the hand movements are similar to a chopping motion done at exeter.

Good question.

This depends on the context. As non-Maori, there have been times when Maori have urged me or ordered me to participate in haka, whaikōrero (oratory on the marae) and karakia (prayers). This is because the situations (usually formal, or cultural) have required it. I took it seriously in those cases (I was always a bit scared of giving offense/getting in trouble) and am proud I did.

At other times, I have been an ass. For example, at a barbecue, saying a karakia grace just to show off that I could. Or once at a karaoke here in Japan (I shudder to admit this) where I included a couple of kapa haka moves in a song to impress some girls.

I think it should be clear the what the difference is. Any cultural elements like haka, karakia and whaikōrero performed by non-Maori should be done respectfully and seriously, and probably under some sort of tutorage.

It's not supposed to be a joke. I hate to admit, for many kiwis it often is, but we have grown a lot, on the whole, in recent years, and I hope we grow more.

[sockwithaticket]

There's been a good few alternative designs thought up for a "Chiefs" logo that refers to the Dumnonii tribes that used to be in the area. The designs looked neat, just amateur stuff but looked a lot better than the native American caricature.

Have you got any links? The few I've turned up haven't got much to do with that historical period/people. The closest is this heavily Romanised one

[FujiKiwi]

Although this spoils it a bit as I think most people in the UK would just piss themselves laughing.

How might you feel if your culture/people were reduced to the cliche of a military pith helmet? Or a Mary Poppins chimney sweep?

She's struggled to come up with good examples. I have friends from Sheffield and Birmingham who don't like their accents mocked. I have a colleague from Doncaster who bristles when it's pointed out the books in the school curriculum tend to be written by "dead white guys". He actually erupted in a rage when this expression was used. My point is, you in the UK might not all be as thick-skinned as you think.

But even if this weren't true, the fact remains that—some obvious exceptions aside—white people in the UK, US, Australia and NZ etc. don't really carry the trauma of having been in the oppressed minority. It hasn't left any scars that these kinds of jokes and caricatures would pick at. They're recent heirs to an empire on which the sun never set. Of course they can laugh off a pith helmet joke.

[Woddy]

A big difference, I guess, is that the pith helmets etc are worn by the Brits themselves, so mocking themselves. Not that Exeter fans are (one hopes) actually wanting to mock Amerindian heritage but I can see how the cartoon depictions might give that impression to someone who cared about it. I think that article covered it well and did so without getting morally high on the subject - great kudos for local papers vs some of the self-regarding moralists in the broadsheets.

The wider topic of cultural appropriation is tricky though, as put by a poster above - I don't think he was meaning to equivalise playing golf to ridiculing specific cultural images, btw. If someone is genuinely interested in Amerindian shamanic culture, for example, to what extent should they go with that and take on cultural rituals, imagery etc without being asked about appropriation? The Chicago Bulls head coach actively used it as part of his mental training for the squad in the mid-90s. He appeared to do it sincerely and with all due reverence. A bit more difficult is the question of someone going to a fancy-dress party: can they dress as an Indian brave or a Zulu warrrior? Personally, if I were to, I would do so in some reverence, as for me both are bye-words for brave fighters from proud cultures and do not think of them as menacing (as opposed to a Viking by way of contrast). However, I would not dare these days as I suspect that it may not be taken that way. To be clear, I say all this as a white person,.

[Yeeb]

Is somebody of pure European heritage, now in NZ and performing the Haka, any different in terms of cultural appropriation ? Certainly some of the hand movements are similar to a chopping motion done at exeter.

Good question.

This depends on the context. As non-Maori, there have been times when Maori have urged me or ordered me to participate in haka, whaikōrero (oratory on the marae) and karakia (prayers). This is because the situations (usually formal, or cultural) have required it. I took it seriously in those cases (I was always a bit scared of giving offense/getting in trouble) and am proud I did.

At other times, I have been an ass. For example, at a barbecue, saying a karakia grace just to show off that I could. Or once at a karaoke here in Japan (I shudder to admit this) where I included a couple of kapa haka moves in a song to impress some girls.

I think it should be clear the what the difference is. Any cultural elements like haka, karakia and whaikōrero performed by non-Maori should be done respectfully and seriously, and probably under some sort of tutorage.

It's not supposed to be a joke. I hate to admit, for many kiwis it often is, but we have grown a lot, on the whole, in recent years, and I hope we grow more.

Fair enough - but where you mention Exeter ‘mocking those who sufferered genocide’ I should point out that the intentionally mocking part is somewhat debatable , but that anyone from Exeter is a lot more removed geographically and time wise for treating native Americans badly, than NZ is that still has treaty arguments going on well after ww2.
And as you admit, you weren’t always ‘respectful or serious’ so you can see why you come across a bit of a hypocrite.

[Yeeb]

A big difference, I guess, is that the pith helmets etc are worn by the Brits themselves, so mocking themselves. Not that Exeter fans are (one hopes) actually wanting to mock Amerindian heritage but I can see how the cartoon depictions might give that impression to someone who cared about it. I think that article covered it well and did so without getting morally high on the subject - great kudos for local papers vs some of the self-regarding moralists in the broadsheets.

The wider topic of cultural appropriation is tricky though, as put by a poster above - I don't think he was meaning to equivalise playing golf to ridiculing specific cultural images, btw. If someone is genuinely interested in Amerindian shamanic culture, for example, to what extent should they go with that and take on cultural rituals, imagery etc without being asked about appropriation? The Chicago Bulls head coach actively used it as part of his mental training for the squad in the mid-90s. He appeared to do it sincerely and with all due reverence. A bit more difficult is the question of someone going to a fancy-dress party: can they dress as an Indian brave or a Zulu warrrior? Personally, if I were to, I would do so in some reverence, as for me both are bye-words for brave fighters from proud cultures and do not think of them as menacing (as opposed to a Viking by way of contrast). However, I would not dare these days as I suspect that it may not be taken that way. To be clear, I say all this as a white person,.

Yup, I wasn’t equivalising golf to anything, was just the most honky invented in a European country thing that sprang to mind. A maypole dance or a Morris dance is probably better

[bessantj]

Bit of an aside but when I first saw Exeter's mascot I thought the mouth was a mustache so he looked a bit like Blakey from On The Buses.

Ha, I thought the same. Mouth definitely looks like a tache.

Thick eyebrows as well, give him some glasses and call them 'Exeter Marx'.

[sockwithaticket]

A big difference, I guess, is that the pith helmets etc are worn by the Brits themselves, so mocking themselves. Not that Exeter fans are (one hopes) actually wanting to mock Amerindian heritage but I can see how the cartoon depictions might give that impression to someone who cared about it. I think that article covered it well and did so without getting morally high on the subject - great kudos for local papers vs some of the self-regarding moralists in the broadsheets.

The wider topic of cultural appropriation is tricky though, as put by a poster above - I don't think he was meaning to equivalise playing golf to ridiculing specific cultural images, btw. If someone is genuinely interested in Amerindian shamanic culture, for example, to what extent should they go with that and take on cultural rituals, imagery etc without being asked about appropriation? The Chicago Bulls head coach actively used it as part of his mental training for the squad in the mid-90s. He appeared to do it sincerely and with all due reverence. A bit more difficult is the question of someone going to a fancy-dress party: can they dress as an Indian brave or a Zulu warrrior? Personally, if I were to, I would do so in some reverence, as for me both are bye-words for brave fighters from proud cultures and do not think of them as menacing (as opposed to a Viking by way of contrast). However, I would not dare these days as I suspect that it may not be taken that way. To be clear, I say all this as a white person,.

They should go as far as people from that culture advise them is permissable. No one should be taking on those things you list without talking to suitable representatives of the people.

No, you can't dress up like that for a party. Simple. Unless you are actually from one of those cultures it is effectively black face (and actually is in the Zulu case) even if you don't literaly black up. Even if you're not doing it as a caricature you are taking the semblance of someone from another cultural group for the purpose of entertainment. However much you might admire Native Americans using a likeness for a party is trivialising. If the theme is some sort of 'warriors through history' type deal, you as a white person have an incredible array of options before those two examples or similar should even be part of the thought process.

[FujiKiwi]

Is somebody of pure European heritage, now in NZ and performing the Haka, any different in terms of cultural appropriation ? Certainly some of the hand movements are similar to a chopping motion done at exeter.

Good question.

This depends on the context. As non-Maori, there have been times when Maori have urged me or ordered me to participate in haka, whaikōrero (oratory on the marae) and karakia (prayers). This is because the situations (usually formal, or cultural) have required it. I took it seriously in those cases (I was always a bit scared of giving offense/getting in trouble) and am proud I did.

At other times, I have been an ass. For example, at a barbecue, saying a karakia grace just to show off that I could. Or once at a karaoke here in Japan (I shudder to admit this) where I included a couple of kapa haka moves in a song to impress some girls.

I think it should be clear the what the difference is. Any cultural elements like haka, karakia and whaikōrero performed by non-Maori should be done respectfully and seriously, and probably under some sort of tutorage.

It's not supposed to be a joke. I hate to admit, for many kiwis it often is, but we have grown a lot, on the whole, in recent years, and I hope we grow more.

Fair enough - but where you mention Exeter ‘mocking those who sufferered genocide’ I should point out that the intentionally mocking part is somewhat debatable , but that anyone from Exeter is a lot more removed geographically and time wise for treating native Americans badly, than NZ is that still has treaty arguments going on well after ww2.
And as you admit, you weren’t always ‘respectful or serious’ so you can see why you come across a bit of a hypocrite.

It's right across a well-traveled ocean and the Native American people are living with the results of oppression in the present day.

And I don't see the hypocrisy in the stance I'm taking here. I'm pissed off with myself at having treated indigenous people disrespectfully. I'm pissed off that Exeter fans are knowingly joking about tomahawk chops and that godawful mascot.

If they didn't know it was upsetting people, that would be one thing. But the awareness is there now. It's in the zeitgeist. It isn't going to hurt anyone to choose a different image for the club.

[Woddy]

So no one can learn about another culture without permission? Or dress up in the clothes of another culture at all?

[assfly]

Some serious virtue signalling happening on this here thread.

[FujiKiwi]

Some serious virtue signalling happening on this here thread.

You have a lot of knee jerk catch phrases you like to use, don’t you? If you disagree with a point made, why not address it instead of hiding behind a pejorative phrase you learned off the internet?

[sockwithaticket]

So no one can learn about another culture without permission? Or dress up in the clothes of another culture at all?

Learning about is a whole different ballpark to adopting cultural rituals and imagery as you described. Equally dressing up in clothes from another culture is different to replicating specific dress of specific figures as you stated. Garbing as a Native American brave isn't the same thing as incorporating something that might have Native American origin into an outfit.

A white friend of mine is married to a Tamil guy, they had two ceremonies one of which was a traditional Hindu one and she wore the appropriate dress for that because it was part of the ceremony her in laws explicitly wanted her to take part in. Outside of that why why would you feel the need to dress up in a way that is so culturally specific? It's not a show of respect, it's something you'd be doing for you.

[Yeeb]

Good question.

This depends on the context. As non-Maori, there have been times when Maori have urged me or ordered me to participate in haka, whaikōrero (oratory on the marae) and karakia (prayers). This is because the situations (usually formal, or cultural) have required it. I took it seriously in those cases (I was always a bit scared of giving offense/getting in trouble) and am proud I did.

At other times, I have been an ass. For example, at a barbecue, saying a karakia grace just to show off that I could. Or once at a karaoke here in Japan (I shudder to admit this) where I included a couple of kapa haka moves in a song to impress some girls.

I think it should be clear the what the difference is. Any cultural elements like haka, karakia and whaikōrero performed by non-Maori should be done respectfully and seriously, and probably under some sort of tutorage.

It's not supposed to be a joke. I hate to admit, for many kiwis it often is, but we have grown a lot, on the whole, in recent years, and I hope we grow more.

Fair enough - but where you mention Exeter ‘mocking those who sufferered genocide’ I should point out that the intentionally mocking part is somewhat debatable , but that anyone from Exeter is a lot more removed geographically and time wise for treating native Americans badly, than NZ is that still has treaty arguments going on well after ww2.
And as you admit, you weren’t always ‘respectful or serious’ so you can see why you come across a bit of a hypocrite.

It's right across a well-traveled ocean and the Native American people are living with the results of oppression in the present day.

And I don't see the hypocrisy in the stance I'm taking here. I'm pissed off with myself at having treated indigenous people disrespectfully. I'm pissed off that Exeter fans are knowingly joking about tomahawk chops and that godawful mascot.

If they didn't know it was upsetting people, that would be one thing. But the awareness is there now. It's in the zeitgeist. It isn't going to hurt anyone to choose a different image for the club.

Wtf does the ocean have to do with it ?
Does seawater magically stop disparaging attitudes or racism ?!
And you telling us here with a straight face that nobody of Maori or islander heritage is ‘living with the results of oppression’ in NZ today ?

It also would not harm anyone if NZ stopping calling themselves ‘All Blacks’ or stopped anyone who is not of Maori heritage doing the Haka. Does that seem fair and equitable to Exeter ?
(Exeter is quite near an ocean of that helps)

[JM2K6]

There's been a good few alternative designs thought up for a "Chiefs" logo that refers to the Dumnonii tribes that used to be in the area. The designs looked neat, just amateur stuff but looked a lot better than the native American caricature.

Have you got any links? The few I've turned up haven't got much to do with that historical period/people. The closest is this heavily Romanised one

Lost in the mists of Twitter but along the lines of this (geographically inaccurate) one:

[sockwithaticket]

There's been a good few alternative designs thought up for a "Chiefs" logo that refers to the Dumnonii tribes that used to be in the area. The designs looked neat, just amateur stuff but looked a lot better than the native American caricature.

Have you got any links? The few I've turned up haven't got much to do with that historical period/people. The closest is this heavily Romanised one

Lost in the mists of Twitter but along the lines of this (geographically inaccurate) one:

Yeah I saw that one too, it's a pretty straightforward Saxon design rather than anything Briton or Dumnonii specific.

[assfly]

You have a lot of knee jerk catch phrases you like to use, don’t you? If you disagree with a point made, why not address it instead of hiding behind a pejorative phrase you learned off the internet?

That's rich coming from the person who still hasn't answered my question.

[FujiKiwi]

Wtf does the ocean have to do with it ?
Does seawater magically stop disparaging attitudes or racism ?!
And you telling us here with a straight face that nobody of Maori or islander heritage is ‘living with the results of oppression’ in NZ today ?

It also would not harm anyone if NZ stopping calling themselves ‘All Blacks’ or stopped anyone who is not of Maori heritage doing the Haka. Does that seem fair and equitable to Exeter ?
(Exeter is quite near an ocean of that helps)

I am sorry you were unable to understand my post. You had said that "Exeter was geographically removed from treating Native Americans badly" and I pointed out that it's just across the Atlantic. There has been constant interaction between the UK and America, so your suggestion that people in Exeter have no connection to what's happening in the States was stupid.

And you telling us here with a straight face that nobody of Maori or islander heritage is ‘living with the results of oppression’ in NZ today ?

No. Every person with Maori or Islander heritage is living with the results of oppression.

It also would not harm anyone if NZ stopping calling themselves ‘All Blacks’ or stopped anyone who is not of Maori heritage doing the Haka. Does that seem fair and equitable to Exeter ?

This is garbled nonsense, and I don't know what it means.

[Yeeb]

Wtf does the ocean have to do with it ?
Does seawater magically stop disparaging attitudes or racism ?!
And you telling us here with a straight face that nobody of Maori or islander heritage is ‘living with the results of oppression’ in NZ today ?

It also would not harm anyone if NZ stopping calling themselves ‘All Blacks’ or stopped anyone who is not of Maori heritage doing the Haka. Does that seem fair and equitable to Exeter ?
(Exeter is quite near an ocean of that helps)

I am sorry you were unable to understand my post. You had said that "Exeter was geographically removed from treating Native Americans badly" and I pointed out that it's just across the Atlantic. There has been constant interaction between the UK and America, so your suggestion that people in Exeter have no connection to what's happening in the States was stupid.

And you telling us here with a straight face that nobody of Maori or islander heritage is ‘living with the results of oppression’ in NZ today ?

No. Every person with Maori or Islander heritage is living with the results of oppression.

It also would not harm anyone if NZ stopping calling themselves ‘All Blacks’ or stopped anyone who is not of Maori heritage doing the Haka. Does that seem fair and equitable to Exeter ?

This is garbled nonsense, and I don't know what it means.

You really are a dumb self loathing mofo - so much presumption that anyone from Exeter was responsible for treating native Americans badly. Fact is , honky kiwis like yourself have far more recently and directly treated maoris worse, and more directly mock their culture as you’ve admitted, yet you don’t see yourself as hypocritical in any way.

White guys doing the Haka, is just as mocking / racist / unacceptable / offensive, as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers and making chopping motions - that clear enough for you matey?

[FujiKiwi]

You have a lot of knee jerk catch phrases you like to use, don’t you? If you disagree with a point made, why not address it instead of hiding behind a pejorative phrase you learned off the internet?

That's rich coming from the person who still hasn't answered my question.

I did answer your question, but maybe you didn't like the answer so deliberately misunderstood it.

Wouldn't it be silly to say "Who decides 2+2+4"? Or, "Who decides that bees sting"?. Those would be idiotic questions. Your question as to "Who decides what is mockery" is similarly fatuous.

The thing is, you think it's a clever qyestion, because you read it somewhere on the internet and it sounded good to you. It reinforced your need to keep thinking the way you always have. No doubt, "Social Justice Warrior" and "Politically Correct" are also expressions you use often along with "Virtue Signaling". They're handy expressions for you to hide behind, because it means you never have to really engage in the discussion, and you can keep on thinking and living the way you always have.

[Woddy]

So no one can learn about another culture without permission? Or dress up in the clothes of another culture at all?

Learning about is a whole different ballpark to adopting cultural rituals and imagery as you described. Equally dressing up in clothes from another culture is different to replicating specific dress of specific figures as you stated. Garbing as a Native American brave isn't the same thing as incorporating something that might have Native American origin into an outfit.

A white friend of mine is married to a Tamil guy, they had two ceremonies one of which was a traditional Hindu one and she wore the appropriate dress for that because it was part of the ceremony her in laws explicitly wanted her to take part in. Outside of that why why would you feel the need to dress up in a way that is so culturally specific? It's not a show of respect, it's something you'd be doing for you.

Learning would be the start of the process. So is that ok, and then incorporating e.g. feathers / stones from another culture's rituals into your own?

Re dressing up: sometimes just for fun. Doing so does not have to mean disparagement or disrespect. It would be for the sense of the occasion but yes, ultimately for "me". But then so is everything any of us does, so that is rather meaningless. It does not bear comparison to a different sort of occasion like a wedding, which is smarter and taken more seriously. For those, even within the context of standard, formal UK weddings you take your cue from the bride & groom, and might not turn up in morning dress if told everyone else is in lounge suits.

[FujiKiwi]

You really are a dumb self loathing mofo - so much presumption that anyone from Exeter was responsible for treating native Americans badly. Fact is , honky kiwis like yourself have far more recently and directly treated maoris worse, and more directly mock their culture as you’ve admitted, yet you don’t see yourself as hypocritical in any way.

White guys doing the Haka, is just as mocking / racist / unacceptable / offensive, as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers and making chopping motions - that clear enough for you matey?

Being angry and regretful isn't the same as self loathing, Yeeb. Yes, I do think that anyone who goes on making fun of Native Americans through stupid mascots and tomahawk chops should stop doing that. That's not as bad as the original genocide of course (just as playing the haka for laughs isn't as bad as the atrocities committed against Maori, but should still be left out).

A white guy doing a haka as a joke IS just as bad as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers. Sure. But a haka can be performed by anyone, respectfully under the right circumstances. So you're dragging out a false equivalence here, deliberately ignoring the nuance of the situation. You have to, because your argument is untenable.

[JM2K6]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

[Yeeb]

You really are a dumb self loathing mofo - so much presumption that anyone from Exeter was responsible for treating native Americans badly. Fact is , honky kiwis like yourself have far more recently and directly treated maoris worse, and more directly mock their culture as you’ve admitted, yet you don’t see yourself as hypocritical in any way.

White guys doing the Haka, is just as mocking / racist / unacceptable / offensive, as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers and making chopping motions - that clear enough for you matey?

Being angry and regretful isn't the same as self loathing, Yeeb. Yes, I do think that anyone who goes on making fun of Native Americans through stupid mascots and tomahawk chops should stop doing that. That's not as bad as the original genocide of course (just as playing the haka for laughs isn't as bad as the atrocities committed against Maori, but should still be left out).

A white guy doing a haka as a joke IS just as bad as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers. Sure. But a haka can be performed by anyone, respectfully under the right circumstances. So you're dragging out a false equivalence here, deliberately ignoring the nuance of the situation. You have to, because your argument is untenable.

You miss the point entirely that the equivalence is that neither are racist or negative in any way - you are choosing to polish a halo and make out NZ = good, Exeter = bad

You are also stewing in self appointed faux outrage at exeter, and for that reason alone I hope they continue as will annoy self appointed guardians of what is allowed , whilst genuinely far more liberal people like me, couldn’t give a monkeys toss either way.

[Mr Bungle]

There's been a good few alternative designs thought up for a "Chiefs" logo that refers to the Dumnonii tribes that used to be in the area. The designs looked neat, just amateur stuff but looked a lot better than the native American caricature.

Even though I’ve since seen the American Indian mascot, I originally thought Exeter Chiefs were named after brit history. It’s incredible they haven’t made that shift years ago.

[Yeeb]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Agreed re dawson

But kiwis allowed opinions about Native Americans is allowed - got it

[Mr Bungle]

You really are a dumb self loathing mofo - so much presumption that anyone from Exeter was responsible for treating native Americans badly. Fact is , honky kiwis like yourself have far more recently and directly treated maoris worse, and more directly mock their culture as you’ve admitted, yet you don’t see yourself as hypocritical in any way.

White guys doing the Haka, is just as mocking / racist / unacceptable / offensive, as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers and making chopping motions - that clear enough for you matey?

Being angry and regretful isn't the same as self loathing, Yeeb. Yes, I do think that anyone who goes on making fun of Native Americans through stupid mascots and tomahawk chops should stop doing that. That's not as bad as the original genocide of course (just as playing the haka for laughs isn't as bad as the atrocities committed against Maori, but should still be left out).

A white guy doing a haka as a joke IS just as bad as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers. Sure. But a haka can be performed by anyone, respectfully under the right circumstances. So you're dragging out a false equivalence here, deliberately ignoring the nuance of the situation. You have to, because your argument is untenable.

You miss the point entirely that the equivalence is that neither are racist or negative in any way - you are choosing to polish a halo and make out NZ = good, Exeter = bad

You are also stewing in self appointed faux outrage at exeter, and for that reason alone I hope they continue as will annoy self appointed guardians of what is allowed , whilst genuinely far more liberal people like me, couldn’t give a monkeys toss either way.

Being a rude cunt doesn’t necessarily make one liberal.

[Mr Bungle]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Agreed re dawson

But kiwis allowed opinions about Native Americans is allowed - got it

What is the Exeter link to Native American Indians?

[Sandstorm]

Calm down everyone, these threads don't always have to descend into a "You're more racist than me!" shitfight.

[Biffer]

Although this spoils it a bit as I think most people in the UK would just piss themselves laughing.

How might you feel if your culture/people were reduced to the cliche of a military pith helmet? Or a Mary Poppins chimney sweep?

She's struggled to come up with good examples. I have friends from Sheffield and Birmingham who don't like their accents mocked. I have a colleague from Doncaster who bristles when it's pointed out the books in the school curriculum tend to be written by "dead white guys". He actually erupted in a rage when this expression was used. My point is, you in the UK might not all be as thick-skinned as you think.

But even if this weren't true, the fact remains that—some obvious exceptions aside—white people in the UK, US, Australia and NZ etc. don't really carry the trauma of having been in the oppressed minority. It hasn't left any scars that these kinds of jokes and caricatures would pick at. They're recent heirs to an empire on which the sun never set. Of course they can laugh off a pith helmet joke.

If you turned up in Glasgow dressed as Willie the Groundskeeper from the Simpsons and just went on and on about various Scottish stereotypes in a really bad accent I think you'd probably end up in bloody pulp down an alley.

[Yeeb]

Being angry and regretful isn't the same as self loathing, Yeeb. Yes, I do think that anyone who goes on making fun of Native Americans through stupid mascots and tomahawk chops should stop doing that. That's not as bad as the original genocide of course (just as playing the haka for laughs isn't as bad as the atrocities committed against Maori, but should still be left out).

A white guy doing a haka as a joke IS just as bad as white guys in Exeter wearing feathers. Sure. But a haka can be performed by anyone, respectfully under the right circumstances. So you're dragging out a false equivalence here, deliberately ignoring the nuance of the situation. You have to, because your argument is untenable.

You miss the point entirely that the equivalence is that neither are racist or negative in any way - you are choosing to polish a halo and make out NZ = good, Exeter = bad

You are also stewing in self appointed faux outrage at exeter, and for that reason alone I hope they continue as will annoy self appointed guardians of what is allowed , whilst genuinely far more liberal people like me, couldn’t give a monkeys toss either way.

Being a rude cunt doesn’t necessarily make one liberal.

This is true - but I’m actually fairly liberal if a European descent chap admits to doing Hakas in a non respectful way , that doesn’t offend me any more than Exeter fans do.

[JM2K6]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Agreed re dawson

But kiwis allowed opinions about Native Americans is allowed - got it

Yes, of course they are. Everyone is allowed an opinion. That particular Kiwi's opinion is that Exeter Chief's logo, mascot, and crowd chant are caricatures of Native Americans with no redeeming link to Native Americans to excuse it. He's objectively correct, and, just as importantly, there's Native American agreement from an authoritative source. So it boils down to how much you care about these things. He does, you don't. That doesn't make you "more liberal" or make his comments "self appointed faux outrage". If you don't care, why are you even bothering to post so much about it?

[Biffer]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Nail, head.

[Yeeb]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Agreed re dawson

But kiwis allowed opinions about Native Americans is allowed - got it

What is the Exeter link to Native American Indians?

Apparently , lots of Exeter types went over there and oppressed them.

[FujiKiwi]

You miss the point entirely that the equivalence is that neither are racist or negative in any way - you are choosing to polish a halo and make out NZ = good, Exeter = bad

You are also stewing in self appointed faux outrage at exeter, and for that reason alone I hope they continue as will annoy self appointed guardians of what is allowed , whilst genuinely far more liberal people like me, couldn’t give a monkeys toss either way.

I think because I have "kiwi" in my moniker you are assuming I think NZ=good? Not at all. There's a thread on PR where I got crucified by the Canterbury lads for pointing out the horrific nature of the Crusaders name and imagery. That's worse, in my opinion, than the Exeter Chiefs thing. And that's just one shameful thing that continues in NZ to this day.

That said, I did spend an evening here last night or the night before on a thread insisting that "NZ is the birthplace of democracy". It was just a gentle wind up.

[Yeeb]

Hi just a quick public service announcement to say that people who don't have a clue about Maoris, hakas, or non-Maori New Zealanders' relationships to both probably shouldn't be making pronouncements on whether non-Maori Kiwis doing a haka is offensive.

Matt Dawson's mocking haka was offensive.

White NZ schoolkids doing a haka as a funeral send-off to a much loved teacher, obviously not.

Hakas are inclusive in NZ precisely because there's been a level of compromise, communication, respect, and understanding that simply doesn't exist when something like the Exeter Chiefs appropriating a caricature of Native American life happens, and no amount of bad faith posting and disingenuous whataboutery will change that.

Agreed re dawson

But kiwis allowed opinions about Native Americans is allowed - got it

Yes, of course they are. Everyone is allowed an opinion. That particular Kiwi's opinion is that Exeter Chief's logo, mascot, and crowd chant are caricatures of Native Americans with no redeeming link to Native Americans to excuse it. He's objectively correct, and, just as importantly, there's Native American agreement from an authoritative source. So it boils down to how much you care about these things. He does, you don't. That doesn't make you "more liberal" or make his comments "self appointed faux outrage". If you don't care, why are you even bothering to post so much about it?

Because I’m ‘at work’