PC culture rewrites history.
-
@dirtybob007_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Mods can we shut this thread down. This is to devolve very quickly.
The original post was the epitome of devolution.
-
Why are baseballs white? Baseballs are so racist.
-
@mr7brown_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@dirtybob007_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Mods can we shut this thread down. This is to devolve very quickly.
The original post was the epitome of devolution.
The original post was stupid as it lacked a cogent argument. However, it seems the other side isn't looking for a healthy debate.
-
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
I'm just glad you aren't figuratively married, that would be tough.
-
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
"You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf"
Hmmm... does seem like you're tying to imply that because your wife is indigenous and not offended, then it's not an issue. Either that, or you're not making a point relevant the the discussion at hand.
I'm not speaking for anyone but I get the impression you don't really care to read in a haste to argue with anyone who challenges your view (either real or imagined). Oddly enough, I didn't even take a position on the matter, aside from your argument is logically flawed.
The original reply was to the statement that natives deserve to be treated better than a mascot follow by an exploitive remark towards the poster... I provided a personal view of someone close to me who is actually impacted in the matter as a response that was contrary to the person speaking on her behalf.... That persons view was then dismissed because it didn't agree with the narrative pushed by yourself and the other poster. You also strangely seem to be taken aback that she doesn't like to be spoken for on the matter, before you decided to dismiss her thoughts.
This was never presented as authority or speaking for others, what-so-ever, those are wild assumptions you made far beyond written word or context, rather than just taking it for what it is, which is a person's viewpoint from someone directly impacted.
I actually did take a position which you didn't bother to read, which was either include the uniforms as they were, or don't include them in the game at all if you don't want that imagery, but altering them crosses the line. Seems fair enough, include the actual uniform, or if you don't want the imagery then don't include them in the game, that simple.
I'll be waiting for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish protesters... Any day now...
Just because you put extra effort into trying to sound articulate didn't make you right. It also doesn't give you the right to be dismissive of someone directly impacted.
Have fun arguing with people over the silly cartoon and good luck on your next crusade brave white knight.
-
@lucas8181_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
I'm just glad you aren't figuratively married, that would be tough.
This is the winner
-
It has always been my understanding that it was the "Mascot" that most people found offensive, not the team name itself. And there remains the debate, if the team name came out of respect for Louis Sockalexis a member of Penobscot Nation, who was the first Indian who played for Cleveland, but when it comes to rewriting history, he wasn't treated well by the fans during his playing days. I do know his family, don't want his contributions to the game to be lost as a result of the name change. There is still a statute there to honor him, but I certainly can understand how people find the mascot offensive.
-
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
"You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf"
Hmmm... does seem like you're tying to imply that because your wife is indigenous and not offended, then it's not an issue. Either that, or you're not making a point relevant the the discussion at hand.
I'm not speaking for anyone but I get the impression you don't really care to read in a haste to argue with anyone who challenges your view (either real or imagined). Oddly enough, I didn't even take a position on the matter, aside from your argument is logically flawed.
The original reply was to the statement that natives deserve to be treated better than a mascot follow by an exploitive remark towards the poster... I provided a personal view of someone close to me who is actually impacted in the matter as a response that was contrary to the person speaking on her behalf.... That persons view was then dismissed because it didn't agree with the narrative pushed by yourself and the other poster. You also strangely seem to be taken aback that she doesn't like to be spoken for on the matter, before you decided to dismiss her thoughts.
This was never presented as authority or speaking for others, what-so-ever, those are wild assumptions you made far beyond written word or context, rather than just taking it for what it is, which is a person's viewpoint from someone directly impacted.
I actually did take a position which you didn't bother to read, which was either include the uniforms as they were, or don't include them in the game at all if you don't want that imagery, but altering them crosses the line. Seems fair enough, include the actual uniform, or if you don't want the imagery then don't include them in the game, that simple.
I'll be waiting for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish protesters... Any day now...
Just because you put extra effort into trying to sound articulate didn't make you right. It also doesn't give you the right to be dismissive of someone directly impacted.
Have fun arguing with people over the silly cartoon and good luck on your next crusade brave white knight.
So maybe you can clear this up for me(preferably as succinctly as possible): Your wife is indigenous. She does not find the team name or mascot offensive. Does this mean that it is not offensive to other indigenous people?
-
@dirtybob007_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@mr7brown_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@dirtybob007_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Mods can we shut this thread down. This is to devolve very quickly.
The original post was the epitome of devolution.
The original post was stupid as it lacked a cogent argument. However, it seems the other side isn't looking for a healthy debate.
A healthy debate would take some-what-intelligent discussion. I would believe that an internet forum, especially a forum about a video game, isn't the epicenter of intellectual conversation. However, I will agree with your sentiment.
-
Its honoring the groups of people to name the team after it! Its not like we're calling Redskin garbage company or something. Its the name of a team, its supposed to be honorable
-
@alwaysswoosh_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Its honoring the groups of people to name the team after it! Its not like we're calling Redskin garbage company or something. Its the name of a team, its supposed to be honorable
If it was meant to honor them, then why was the mascot a caricature for so long instead of something that shows respect?
-
@alwaysswoosh_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Its honoring the groups of people to name the team after it! Its not like we're calling Redskin garbage company or something. Its the name of a team, its supposed to be honorable
Thats not their name though. They're Native Americans, not truly Indians. They were only coined that because Columbus thought he landed in Indonesia. We don't even "honor" them with their proper heritage.
-
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
"You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf"
Hmmm... does seem like you're tying to imply that because your wife is indigenous and not offended, then it's not an issue. Either that, or you're not making a point relevant the the discussion at hand.
I'm not speaking for anyone but I get the impression you don't really care to read in a haste to argue with anyone who challenges your view (either real or imagined). Oddly enough, I didn't even take a position on the matter, aside from your argument is logically flawed.
The original reply was to the statement that natives deserve to be treated better than a mascot follow by an exploitive remark towards the poster... I provided a personal view of someone close to me who is actually impacted in the matter as a response that was contrary to the person speaking on her behalf.... That persons view was then dismissed because it didn't agree with the narrative pushed by yourself and the other poster. You also strangely seem to be taken aback that she doesn't like to be spoken for on the matter, before you decided to dismiss her thoughts.
This was never presented as authority or speaking for others, what-so-ever, those are wild assumptions you made far beyond written word or context, rather than just taking it for what it is, which is a person's viewpoint from someone directly impacted.
I actually did take a position which you didn't bother to read, which was either include the uniforms as they were, or don't include them in the game at all if you don't want that imagery, but altering them crosses the line. Seems fair enough, include the actual uniform, or if you don't want the imagery then don't include them in the game, that simple.
I'll be waiting for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish protesters... Any day now...
Just because you put extra effort into trying to sound articulate didn't make you right. It also doesn't give you the right to be dismissive of someone directly impacted.
Have fun arguing with people over the silly cartoon and good luck on your next crusade brave white knight.
So maybe you can clear this up for me(preferably as succinctly as possible): Your wife is indigenous. She does not find the team name or mascot offensive. Does this mean that it is not offensive to other indigenous people?
This should have been clear already don't know how many times I have to say she doesn't speak for everyone...
I will say it again and be as clear as possible:
No, it doesn't mean it's not offensive to other native americans.The fact that people are so eager to lump all people of a single ethnic group together as a single voice is part of the problem today.
-
@abbyspapa_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
But..Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.
I knew my high school reading list would eventually come in handy.
-
People are offended by everything these days. Makes me glad I’m old and I’ll die before I get to see the climax of it all.
-
@allmustfall16 said in PC culture rewrites history.:
People are offended by everything these days. Makes me glad I’m old and I’ll die before I get to see the climax of it all.
Id rather be part of the movement that isnt okay with any aspect of racism than be part of the community that is just okay with everything as is. Can't be afraid of change man, without change nobody gets better.
-
Good lord the snowflake is real here. Everyone is so quick to get [censored] hurt about stuff now a days.
-
@mr7brown_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Hey FBI, you could probably find a capital stormer or two in this thread. FYI.
Your an idiot
-
@sean_87__psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@mr7brown_xbl said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Hey FBI, you could probably find a capital stormer or two in this thread. FYI.
Your an idiot
Irony, thy name is this one.
-
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@duiaintez_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@notoriousheb_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@bigfes902_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
@x-alec_j-x_psn said in PC culture rewrites history.:
Just FYI -- The "Throwback" 1989 Cleveland Indians uniforms -- which are famous because of the "Major League" movie franchise -- are not accurate in the game.
I get that SDS would never use the real logo that appeared on that uniforms hat -- Its a dang logo but it might offend someone. God forbid. (Or it may be banned from official use by the MLB for all i know)
BUT THEN DONT INCLUDE THE UNIFORM.
Rewriting history by CHANGING the uniform and including a version that NEVER EXISTED is is dishonest.
Either include the whole uniform as it existed or dont....but changing it and then using it to make money while never mentioning that its not really the 1989 uniform is dishonest..
If you cant use the logo because of MLB rules...just say so. If you did it because of your own sensibilities...have the guts to say that too.
Or just dont use a uniform that is not acceptable to current standards.
People deserve better than to be spoon fed, a sanitized, fake version of baseball.
IMHO
Natives deserve better than being a mascot. [censored] you, how about that?
Do you also protest Notre Dame Fighting Irish? Their logo is a cartoon caricature drawing of a funny looking short squatting irishman with two fists up...
I'm Irish and I'm not upset by it, you know why? It's a cartoon caricature.
You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf.
The fact is they did alter history, if they don't want it in the game then just don't put those uniforms in the game... That simple. But re-designing their old uniforms? That's messed up and next level historical revision.
Finding someone who has indigenous heritage who isn't offended doesn't mean she doesn't get to speak on behalf of all of them.
She never claimed to. Ever. And I didn't go find someone for an opinion, we are literally married and I gave you insight to what she thinks on the topic. Thanks for letting everyone know her opinion on her own culture doesn't matter but you get to speak for her. I mean you should really step back and listen to yourself right now.
"You know who isn't upset about indian team names and logos? My wife who is native american. Why? Because it's a cartoon, and she's tried of people being offended on her behalf"
Hmmm... does seem like you're tying to imply that because your wife is indigenous and not offended, then it's not an issue. Either that, or you're not making a point relevant the the discussion at hand.
I'm not speaking for anyone but I get the impression you don't really care to read in a haste to argue with anyone who challenges your view (either real or imagined). Oddly enough, I didn't even take a position on the matter, aside from your argument is logically flawed.
The original reply was to the statement that natives deserve to be treated better than a mascot follow by an exploitive remark towards the poster... I provided a personal view of someone close to me who is actually impacted in the matter as a response that was contrary to the person speaking on her behalf.... That persons view was then dismissed because it didn't agree with the narrative pushed by yourself and the other poster. You also strangely seem to be taken aback that she doesn't like to be spoken for on the matter, before you decided to dismiss her thoughts.
This was never presented as authority or speaking for others, what-so-ever, those are wild assumptions you made far beyond written word or context, rather than just taking it for what it is, which is a person's viewpoint from someone directly impacted.
I actually did take a position which you didn't bother to read, which was either include the uniforms as they were, or don't include them in the game at all if you don't want that imagery, but altering them crosses the line. Seems fair enough, include the actual uniform, or if you don't want the imagery then don't include them in the game, that simple.
I'll be waiting for the Notre Dame Fighting Irish protesters... Any day now...
Just because you put extra effort into trying to sound articulate didn't make you right. It also doesn't give you the right to be dismissive of someone directly impacted.
Have fun arguing with people over the silly cartoon and good luck on your next crusade brave white knight.
So maybe you can clear this up for me(preferably as succinctly as possible): Your wife is indigenous. She does not find the team name or mascot offensive. Does this mean that it is not offensive to other indigenous people?
This should have been clear already don't know how many times I have to say she doesn't speak for everyone...
I will say it again and be as clear as possible:
No, it doesn't mean it's not offensive to other native americans.The fact that people are so eager to lump all people of a single ethnic group together as a single voice is part of the problem today.
So if you admit you know its offensive to others, what was your objective in pointing out that your wife doesn't find it offensive?
