Poll: Controversy over a schools mascot (or: how people are seeing racism where there is none present)

[theultimateend]

Just to put things into perspective.

Abraham Lincoln was a vigorous racist. He was abhorently against any sort of white and black sexy time amongst anything else. However! He was against slavery of any kind against any group of people regardless of color.

So Pennies are racist...

You should read the thread--there's actually a discussion of this going on about how to 'put things into perspective' when historical figures would be racist by today's standards.

Besides, if we're going to go after money, there is always 'injun killer' Jackson on the twenty, and Japanese internment FDR on the dime.

I probably should. I just think its funny that its only racist when we don't like it.

 

[boyitsme95]

Whenever anyone I know sees something that is not explicitly racist, they have never actually said "That is offensive." Only "That might be offensive."
You never start out with a group of people who say, "Ok, now I hate black people. So lets put a star on a high school mascot. All in favor?" That's like refusing to eat any other flavor of ice cream but vanilla because it's white, and never telling anyone the real reason you do it. Its useless.

 

[Anarchy In Detroit]

http://www.news14.com/content/local_news/charlotte/611206/mascot-controversy-continues-as-supporters-ready-to-meet/Default.aspx

In short: A school used to have as a mascot a confederate symbol and the name "The Rebels" which seems normal given that this is the American southeast. However using a soldier from another country as a mascot (especially one which wanted slavery) seemed racist. so that was removed. The new logo is a P with a sword under it. The name is still the rebels. Apparently people think the name "The Rebels" is racist. I would like to point out that it does not say any specific rebels so it could be the Americans during the American Revolution, the Rebels from Star wars, the rebels from the French Revolution, any rebels at all.

Regardless, should they change the name/moscot?

The Confederacy is repugnant on two fronts.

1) Buncha lazy racists who couldn't handle doing their own damn work so they decided to ruin the lives of others so they could sit on the porch swilling whiskey and sweet tea.

2) They got half a million Americans killed. Something to be fiercely proud of... you know because it was the rebellious and independent thing to do.

Anyone with a Confederate flag on anything should be beaten if you ask me. You don't see Germans going around with Nazi flags using some half ass excuse like, "Well I'm proud to be German!" They admit when they did dumb stuff and they move on in a better direction shunning the symbols of those who brought only ruin and death to their home. But gee, not Southerners.

Obviously I'm not a big fan of the South (And yes I've been there. All over.).

BUT

They changed the logo. How can you fault them for merely being called the Rebels? A hokey name sure, but certainly not racist without the flag giving the name context.

 

[Aur0ra145]

The Civil War was about states rights, don't let anyone tell you differently. Not to mention a majority of the dying was done by southerners who never owned a slave.

 

[NewGeekPhilosopher]

I pity the school who uses Cthulhu as there mascot, God forbid somebody might find Lovecraftian imagery racist. (even though some of it actually is) But would we BAN Lovecraft's books? Hell no. I don't know much about the Confederacy or the Northern States in the American Civil War, but it appears a similar thing happened in Australia with the White Australia Policy being removed. Aussies can't throw stones at racist houses because many of our laws were pretty racist. Federation in Australia was helped by racists who wanted to keep the Chinese out of Australia, and let's not get started about the Stolen Generations (which I have been in discussion with a friend about recently, really it's an ugly mess where there is no winning in the argument, because universally it was a dick move on the Aust. Government's part).

 

[Anarchy In Detroit]

The Civil War was about states rights, don't let anyone tell you differently. Not to mention a majority of the dying was done by southerners who never owned a slave.

I don't disagree and I know most Southerners never owned a slave. However to try to seperate slavery from the issue entirely is purely inaccurate.

They were just dumb enough to fight out of pure state-based patriotism in a war in which they stood to gain NOTHING while their leaders, the slave owners, stood to profit alone. A war based purely on the South's typically inflated sense of self worth.

Man, it was sure worth it wasn't it?