NPR

FujiKiwi wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:18 pm

So because we have to go back further for the many, many invasions of England we treat people unequally?

Well I was being a bit flippant. But the oppression a group has faced for the past two hundred years, right up to the present moment isn’t the same as a few Vikings pillaging a monastery a thousand years ago. An obvious difference.

That comes across as a bit flippant too, considering that you're about something more that a few Vikings pillaging a monastery. Still, it's hard to see what it's got to do with modern people who are likely descended from both Vikings and their victims, and a whole bunch of other peoples too. I think there may have been time for the evil effects of the various invasions of Britain to have diffused across society or even faded away altogether. The same can't be said for what was done to Native Americans.

Tilly Orifice wrote: ↑Mon Aug 03, 2020 2:45 am

FujiKiwi wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 1:18 pm

So because we have to go back further for the many, many invasions of England we treat people unequally?

Well I was being a bit flippant. But the oppression a group has faced for the past two hundred years, right up to the present moment isn’t the same as a few Vikings pillaging a monastery a thousand years ago. An obvious difference.

That comes across as a bit flippant too, considering that you're about something more that a few Vikings pillaging a monastery. Still, it's hard to see what it's got to do with modern people who are likely descended from both Vikings and their victims, and a whole bunch of other peoples too. I think there may have been time for the evil effects of the various invasions of Britain to have diffused across society or even faded away altogether. The same can't be said for what was done to Native Americans.

100% agree.

What this thread shows is that most arguments starting "But what about...." are stupid arguments.

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:53 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:05 pm

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 4:45 pm

And if one looks at the power dynamics resulting from invasion and counter invasion, from serfdom through to low paid labour, are we happy to say everyone has escaped oppression? For sure we've got a certain amount of social mobility, but so have Native Americans

This sort of sophistry is kinda aggravating just FYI.

Luckily for me I'm supportive of a norm people can be offensive, otherwise I shudder to think how worried I'd have been

Can I have that again in English?

Rhubarb & Custard wrote: ↑Sun Aug 02, 2020 9:53 pm
Luckily for me I'm supportive of a norm people can be offensive, otherwise I shudder to think how worried I'd have been

It's not so much your brave stand for freedom of speech that is being criticized in this case. It's the vacuous idiocy of your argument.

FujiKiwi wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:15 am

.OverThere wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 pm I'm always a bit wary of the concept of cultural appropriation as something that is to be frowned upon.
It has been part of the make up of human society since the very beginning. Without continuous cultural appropriation our civilisation would not exist.
Without appropriation a culture will die.

A staggeringly stupid post, in context.

There's a difference between sharing ideas around, and mocking and ridiculing cultures that have suffered from genocide.

why do you think they are being mocked or ridiculed??

Openside wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 8:21 pm

FujiKiwi wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:15 am

.OverThere wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:29 pm I'm always a bit wary of the concept of cultural appropriation as something that is to be frowned upon.
It has been part of the make up of human society since the very beginning. Without continuous cultural appropriation our civilisation would not exist.
Without appropriation a culture will die.

A staggeringly stupid post, in context.

There's a difference between sharing ideas around, and mocking and ridiculing cultures that have suffered from genocide.

why do you think they are being mocked or ridiculed??

1) Because Chiefs' imagery is a brazen caricature, however well intentioned, and people who don't get that only know about native Americans from movies
2) Actual native Americans (possibly Canadians, I can't quite recall) have told Chiefs they find the appropriation offensive.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:01 pm

Openside wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 8:21 pm

FujiKiwi wrote: ↑Wed Jul 15, 2020 3:15 am

A staggeringly stupid post, in context.

There's a difference between sharing ideas around, and mocking and ridiculing cultures that have suffered from genocide.

why do you think they are being mocked or ridiculed??

1) Because Chiefs' imagery is a brazen caricature, however well intentioned, and people who don't get that only know about native Americans from movies
2) Actual native Americans (possibly Canadians, I can't quite recall) have told Chiefs they find the appropriation offensive.

Hey Ho

I forget the exact exchange Exeter people had with the Iroquois Roots rugby program here, but it wasn't positive. I wish they'd have actually tagged the club in this tweet.

Niegs wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:49 pm I forget the exact exchange Exeter people had with the Iroquois Roots rugby program here, but it wasn't positive. I wish they'd have actually tagged the club in this tweet.

That is genius!

It’s such an interesting topic this.

For me, cultural appropriation is a bull shit and counterproductive concept

It is highly subjective, and designed to lend moral superiority to historically oppressed people.

Sounds good on the surface, but giving superiority to one group over another, especially on subjective criteria, is the enemy of equality for me.

Might feel good in the short term, but it feels inevitable that it’ll lead to segregation and the sense of ‘other’. It’s ultimately divisive in the medium and long term.

Moreover, the concept is completely unnecessary - humans already have this covered!

The topic of the chiefs is a good one for me, as I agree it should be changed. But not under the banner of appropriation. The chiefs’ logo, chant etc are, frankly, rude. Plain and simple, it’s crassly rude to native Americans and should be changed.

But if a white person wants to wear dreadlocks, or a white person wants to dress in the way they do in the Far East, then they should be allowed to, without censor, as long as they’re doing it as a homage to those other cultures, not as a piss take.

... from the comments: “Devonshire Dickheads”. Will be adopting that!

Also interesting to note that exeter, who are emphatic in their insistent that they’re celebrating Native American culture, did nothing to note world indigenous peoples day.

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:01 pm 2) Actual native Americans (possibly Canadians, I can't quite recall) have told Chiefs they find the appropriation offensive.

How many? Serious question. Because how many of a group needs to express feelings of being offended for it to merit consideration? 1%? 10%? 51%... because that's a majority line?

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:48 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:01 pm 2) Actual native Americans (possibly Canadians, I can't quite recall) have told Chiefs they find the appropriation offensive.

How many? Serious question. Because how many of a group needs to express feelings of being offended for it to merit consideration? 1%? 10%? 51%... because that's a majority line?

I don't think anyone will know how many, but one of them was a cultural ambassador for a Sioux tribe, who happens to live in Exeter, so someone whose opinion carries a lot of weight when it comes to talking about what's offensive to native american tribes.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:50 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:48 pm

sockwithaticket wrote: ↑Wed Jan 06, 2021 9:01 pm 2) Actual native Americans (possibly Canadians, I can't quite recall) have told Chiefs they find the appropriation offensive.

How many? Serious question. Because how many of a group needs to express feelings of being offended for it to merit consideration? 1%? 10%? 51%... because that's a majority line?

I don't think anyone will know how many, but one of them was a cultural ambassador for a Sioux tribe, who happens to live in Exeter, so someone whose opinion carries a lot of weight when it comes to talking about what's offensive to native american tribes.

Been reading A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies in 1542 which is not North America but spun me out into looking at North American indigenous peoples and how many distinct tribes there were. And it's a sh*tload!

So, I agree that the guy you mention obviously carries more gravity than the blogger in the post above but he's one rep of one tribe amongst literally hundreds. Interestingly, very few tribes wore feathered head dresses (technically war bonnets) a la Washington Redskins, Exeter or Little Plum (is he still a Beano character?!) and one of them was the Sioux so maybe he/they have more right to be offended and that chucks my numbers out of kilter.

But you already know where I am on this stuff i.e. small groups seeking to be offended supported by non members seeking to be indignant by proxy get on my tits! It's all about intent and context and no-one is going to convince me Exeter are a closet racist club. Context here also: Washington is in North America. Devon is not.

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:12 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:50 pm

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 12:48 pm

How many? Serious question. Because how many of a group needs to express feelings of being offended for it to merit consideration? 1%? 10%? 51%... because that's a majority line?

I don't think anyone will know how many, but one of them was a cultural ambassador for a Sioux tribe, who happens to live in Exeter, so someone whose opinion carries a lot of weight when it comes to talking about what's offensive to native american tribes.

Been reading A Short Account of the Destruction of the Indies in 1542 which is not North America but spun me out into looking at North American indigenous peoples and how many distinct tribes there were. And it's a sh*tload!

So, I agree that the guy you mention obviously carries more gravity than the blogger in the post above but he's one rep of one tribe amongst literally hundreds. Interestingly, very few tribes wore feathered head dresses (technically war bonnets) a la Washington Redskins, Exeter or Little Plum (is he still a Beano character?!) and one of them was the Sioux so maybe he/they have more right to be offended and that chucks my numbers out of kilter.

But you already know where I am on this stuff i.e. small groups seeking to be offended supported by non members seeking to be indignant by proxy get on my tits! It's all about intent and context and no-one is going to convince me Exeter are a closet racist club. Context here also: Washington is in North America. Devon is not.

She, not he.

You're right, Exeter is not in North America. So why the fuck are they branding themselves with a caricature of a native american and engaging in gross cultural stereotypes?

If I recall correctly the full war bonnets were earned and only some could wear them.

The UK equivalent would be pinning a Victoria Cross on your chest, after all, it's just a bit of fun, eh?

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:25 pm You're right, Exeter is not in North America. So why the fuck are they branding themselves with a caricature of a native american and engaging in gross cultural stereotypes?

It's not like Exeter just woke up and decided to deep dive into native American culture. I think Hollywood has a lot more to answer about this than Exeter.

assfly wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:31 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:25 pm You're right, Exeter is not in North America. So why the fuck are they branding themselves with a caricature of a native american and engaging in gross cultural stereotypes?

It's not like Exeter just woke up and decided to deep dive into native American culture. I think Hollywood has a lot more to answer about this than Exeter.

Sure, at the time I'm sure it was seen as a harmless fun thing. But that was a long time ago now and there's genuinely no excuse for this shit any more.

assfly wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:31 pm

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:25 pm You're right, Exeter is not in North America. So why the fuck are they branding themselves with a caricature of a native american and engaging in gross cultural stereotypes?

It's not like Exeter just woke up and decided to deep dive into native American culture. I think Hollywood has a lot more to answer about this than Exeter.

Buffalo Bill, a thousand ten cent pamphlets and General Custer too. It still doesn't excuse them though.

I would also stress that this is page 6 of a thread where all this stuff has been discussed already, so people should probably read it first

Tichtheid wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:27 pm If I recall correctly the full war bonnets were earned and only some could wear them.

The UK equivalent would be pinning a Victoria Cross on your chest, after all, it's just a bit of fun, eh?

I was quite ambivalent before but now we're taking about stolen valour I'm all aboard the outrage train.

JM2K6 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 1:25 pm
She, not he.

And women weren't allowed to wear war bonnets so maybe she has a case against her own peoples for sexism too?

We should extend this to
- Crusaders. Clearest case of all given the root of the world's major strifes currently.
- Saints. Absolutely offensive to god botherers.
- Saracens. Hard to see how this differs from the Chiefs scenario.
- English fans singing "Swing Low".

I don't follow South African football at all, but it's interesting that (as far as I know) this has never even been a talking point over here for Kaiser Chiefs, the one of the biggest football teams in South Africa.

https://www.kaizerchiefs.com/



Personally I don't mind the name, but it's the Native American association that is problematic.
Should do what the NZ Chiefs team did and keep the name, but adopt locally relevant symbols for it.

The issue isn't with the word chief, chief has been used in many circumstances to describe many leaders.

It's the symbols used etc.

Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

Niegs wrote: ↑Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:11 pm


... from the comments: “Devonshire Dickheads”. Will be adopting that!

Youtube wrote:This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Exeter Chiefs

sturginho wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:22 am

Niegs wrote: ↑Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:11 pm


... from the comments: “Devonshire Dickheads”. Will be adopting that!

Youtube wrote:This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Exeter Chiefs

Carlsberg don't do irony...

BlueCollarRugby wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:50 pm Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

How many Lions live in England?

sturginho wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:22 am

Niegs wrote: ↑Wed Aug 11, 2021 7:11 pm


... from the comments: “Devonshire Dickheads”. Will be adopting that!

Youtube wrote:This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Exeter Chiefs

It’s up again now

This will keep coming up again and again. I don't know why they don't just get ahead of it at Exeter and deal with it.

This thread on their board amused me. Any talk of branding has the thread deleted. Posters banned etc.

https://swww.rugbynetwork.net/boards/re ... 458,page=1

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:48 am This will keep coming up again and again. I don't know why they don't just get ahead of it at Exeter and deal with it.

This thread on their board amused me. Any talk of branding has the thread deleted. Posters banned etc.

https://swww.rugbynetwork.net/boards/re ... 458,page=1

Has Jake got the role there too?

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:56 am

Margin__Walker wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:48 am This will keep coming up again and again. I don't know why they don't just get ahead of it at Exeter and deal with it.

This thread on their board amused me. Any talk of branding has the thread deleted. Posters banned etc.

https://swww.rugbynetwork.net/boards/re ... 458,page=1

Has Jake got the role there too?

Possibly. The Exeter lad definitely loves his new banhammer!

Torquemada 1420 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 7:43 am

BlueCollarRugby wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:50 pm Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

How many Lions live in England?

That’s a good point.

I don’t even know how Lions came to be the symbol of England though I will now go and research.

But as to the point Lions are not people. American Indians are.

The whole use of such a caricature seems ridiculous and offensive to me, and I am as far from woke as you can get.

Get a decent, non offensive and relevant branding ffs and be done

BlueCollarRugby wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:50 pm Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

As a slight aside, Iranians don’t wear ties as a little thumb of the nose to western culture

Slick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 3:59 pm

BlueCollarRugby wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:50 pm Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

As a slight aside, Iranians don’t wear ties as a little thumb of the nose to western culture

Really?!

Brazil wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 4:04 pm

Slick wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 3:59 pm

BlueCollarRugby wrote: ↑Thu Aug 12, 2021 11:50 pm Use of American Indian imagery is stupid, what tribes of that sort were there in Devon ffs… why not just use a Celtic Chieftain and symbology instead…

On the topic of cultural appropriation though… hehe, I guess we can expect all non white peoples to stop wearing clothes as we know them then… Even the likes of Saddam and the Chairman of the CCP wear suits and ties

As a slight aside, Iranians don’t wear ties as a little thumb of the nose to western culture

Really?!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6528881.stm

I have worked with Iranians for nearly twenty years, and have always just assumed they'd forgotten to pack them.

Brazil wrote: ↑Fri Aug 13, 2021 4:28 pm I have worked with Iranians for nearly twenty years, and have always just assumed they'd forgotten to pack them.

FM. Does this mean all these years I've subliminally being supporting the Ayatollah Promise Not To Khomeni Closer?