Is A Change Coming?..Attn: 4A North

[jha618]

Why is it up to you or the Morris school board to determine what is offensive to an entirely different group of people you are not a part of?

Growing up there, being a Redskin was a great sense of pride and I can say that no one ever used the term as derogatory, none of our opponents accused us of being insensitive or haters of Native Americans, corn fed hillbillies sure, but not insensitive towards Native Americans.

I dont think you see the irony in your post

 

[jha618]

Even sadder that people with no connections to any of that feel a need to go all around the country & change things. If they want change they can start with getting rid of all this rap & hip hop trash. Then again those are the people who demanded Baby It's Cold Outside be pulled yet Wet A-- P---- was the song of the year & they were fine with that 😒🤪

Again, the irony of someone making that comment while defending a high school thats 80+% Caucasian demanding they be called the Redskins.

 

[corey90]

Ok fine. Who gets to determine what's offensive, or racist or offends some ethnic or religious groups?

Apparently the professional non-working protesters. The Chicago Blackhawks will be next put to the fire.

 

[corey90]

I am a proud alum of the Master Batters Softball team.

I thought that was a fishing team? Hahahaha

 

[MC63]

All made the change from longtime mascot names in the name of political correctness.

Mike, you're a thoughtful, veteran poster on this board and I always respected your opinions.

However, in this case, I would point out that the name changes weren't made simply because of political correctness.. What started the name ball rolling was respect for other people.

Yes, I feel the same way about "the fighting Irish." I think that's one of the most offensive nicknames of all. How do they get away with it? It's a private school.

 

[MC63]

Crusader : a person who participated in any of the military expeditions undertaken by Christian powers in the 11th, 12th, and 13th centuries to win the Holy Land from the Muslims.

I don't know, seems pretty derogatory against those Muslims they ripped the Holy Land away from. Such blasphemy should not be accepted!!! 🤣 🤣 🤣

I know you intended to be funny, but what you say actually makes a great deal of sense.

 

[Sparty Jones]

No nickname was ever chosen to mock a certain group.

Indians? Must be changed.

Raiders, Pirates, Devils? All fine I guess.

 

[JCHillmen]

Mike, you're a thoughtful, veteran poster on this board and I always respected your opinions.

However, in this case, I would point out that the name changes weren't made simply because of political correctness.. What started the name ball rolling was respect for other people.

Yes, I feel the same way about "the fighting Irish." I think that's one of the most offensive nicknames of all. How do they get away with it? It's a private school.

Their status as a private school does not matter. Back in 2007 when the NCAA came down on North Dakota and Illinois and Florida State, ND was spared not because they were a private school but because "Irish" is not a protected enough class. Only Native American imagery was worth crusading against by the NCAA at that point. The only real pressure they had to exert was the loss of postseason hosting duties for those that maintained their imagery. It did not matter what type of institution it was, only their imagery. The NCAA was not sufficiently offended by Fighting Irish imagery.

Florida State was ultimately given dispensation and spared their chief with a flaming spear because there is a tribe that gives their blessing.

If it is about respect for people, how far back in history must that respect extend? Aztecs is Native American, but apparently not local or recent enough for the NCAA to come down on?

Trojans? Vikings? Crusaders? Scots? Quakers? Vandals? Gaels? Norse? Celtics?

And if some of these are problematic, who can be the arbiter of what is sufficiently offensive to desire change?

The names can certainly be criticized. But nobody ever has a sufficient answer for how to morally police this as there is no neutral arbiter of "respect for others." Perhaps simply a "no humans allowed, everyone is either a Tiger or Bulldog" is the way this is heading.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Their status as a private school does not matter. Back in 2007 when the NCAA came down on North Dakota and Illinois and Florida State, ND was spared not because they were a private school but because "Irish" is not a protected enough class. Only Native American imagery was worth crusading against by the NCAA at that point. The only real pressure they had to exert was the loss of postseason hosting duties for those that maintained their imagery. It did not matter what type of institution it was, only their imagery. The NCAA was not sufficiently offended by Fighting Irish imagery.

Florida State was ultimately given dispensation and spared their chief with a flaming spear because there is a tribe that gives their blessing.

If it is about respect for people, how far back in history must that respect extend? Aztecs is Native American, but apparently not local or recent enough for the NCAA to come down on?

Trojans? Vikings? Crusaders? Scots? Quakers? Vandals? Gaels? Norse? Celtics?

And if some of these are problematic, who can be the arbiter of what is sufficiently offensive to desire change?

The names can certainly be criticized. But nobody ever has a sufficient answer for how to morally police this as there is no neutral arbiter of "respect for others." Perhaps simply a "no humans allowed, everyone is either a Tiger or Bulldog" is the way this is heading.

I think throwing your hands up because the answer might be nuanced and not immediately clear isn't productive. To your last point, I would say not "never humans", but understand that any human depiction is more likely to come under scrutiny. A lot if that is just because the way language and culture work. To date it is still mainly human depictions that have remained under the most scrutiny (with Chicago Blackhawks a major exception). Generalized imagery like arrowheads or similar have some objectors, but are generally being left as is. See that with Aztecs and Illini.

But yea, local indegenious depictions from recent history and religious depictions is obviously way more potentially problematic than ancient ones from around the globe.

Anyways, hopefully its not everyone is a Bulldogs or Tigers. WAY too many of those. Get some more anachrids, insects, and cuddly mammals instead of carnivores, birds, and fighters. Mythical creatures... Astronomy/science... Concepts (think Heat).... Heck just study minor league baseball mascots lol.

 

[JCHillmen]

I think throwing your hands up because the answer might be nuanced and not immediately clear isn't productive. To your last point, I would say not "never humans", but understand that any human depiction is more likely to come under scrutiny. A lot if that is just because the way language and culture work. To date it is still mainly human depictions that have remained under the most scrutiny (with Chicago Blackhawks a major exception). Generalized imagery like arrowheads or similar have some objectors, but are generally being left as is. See that with Aztecs and Illini.

But yea, local indegenious depictions from recent history and religious depictions is obviously way more potentially problematic than ancient ones from around the globe.

Anyways, hopefully its not everyone is a Bulldogs or Tigers. WAY too many of those. Get some more anachrids, insects, and cuddly mammals instead of carnivores, birds, and fighters. Mythical creatures... Astronomy/science... Concepts (think Heat).... Heck just study minor league baseball mascots lol.

All true. It's all an exercise in futility as people claim to be right and know what should be allowed. But nobody can explain where the slippery slope should end.

I think Aztecs is fine. Many others are completely outraged by that depiction.

Someone can be offended and someone can be absolutely convinced it is a trivial argument with no merit. Both can be right. And the offended person can sometimes win. But they shouldn't always win just because they are offended.

Aztecs, Irish, and Vikings can all be offensive. But it has to be offensive to the right constituency with enough vocal supporters and the offended group must be in a protected enough class with a history close enough geographically and sad enough historically to be changed. Who defines "offensive," "protected," close enough," "recent enough," and "sad enough" is the issue. They are subjective ideals that can never be objectively measured or decided upon.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to root out truly ridiculous names. But also means the absolutist social justice warriors need to acknowledge the tediousness of this exercise and that there will be times people will be offended and that it's ok to be offended. And there are times where it's not. And there is no solid line indicating where that line has been crossed. In fact, some cross the line at the mere use of the term Vikings. Perhaps they are snowflakes who need to lighten up, perhaps not. And some don't even cross the line with Chief Osceola jamming a flaming spear into the 50 yard line. Perhaps they are heartless jerks and perhaps not.

 

[ramblinman]

If not supporting the use of tax dollars to promote a public school nickname based on racial skin color makes me politically correct or woke, I can live with that.

 

[4Afan]

If not supporting the use of tax dollars to promote a public school nickname based on racial skin color makes me politically correct or woke, I can live with that.

And what if those paying the tax dollars want the name to remain the same? What if the origins of the name are not racial and the term was coined by the Native Americans?

Here is an excerpt NPR article which speaks to the origin of the word and how Native Americans created the term to self identify. It was later used as derogatory in books and poems, but the origin cam from the Native Americans themselves.

"But where did the word "redskin" come from? Many dictionaries and history books say the term came about in reference to the Beothuk tribe of what is now Newfoundland, Canada. The Beothuk were said to paint their bodies with red ochre, leading white settlers to refer to them as "red men."

According to Smithsonian historian Ives Goddard, early historical records indicate that "Redskin" was used as a self-identifier by Native Americans to differentiate between the two races. Goddard found that the first use of the word "redskin" came in 1769, in negotiations between the Piankashaws and Col. John Wilkins. Throughout the 1800s, the word was frequently used by Native Americans as they negotiated with the French and later the Americans. The phrase gained widespread usage among whites when James Fenimore Cooper used it in his 1823 novel The Pioneers. In the book, Cooper has a dying Indian character lament, "There will soon be no red-skin in the country."

https://www.npr.org/sections/codesw...y-for-some-controversy-the-history-of-redskin

 

[ramblinman]

And what if those paying the tax dollars want the name to remain the same? What if the origins of the name are not racial and the term was coined by the Native Americans?

Here is an excerpt NPR article which speaks to the origin of the word and how Native Americans created the term to self identify. It was later used as derogatory in books and poems, but the origin cam from the Native Americans themselves.

"But where did the word "redskin" come from? Many dictionaries and history books say the term came about in reference to the Beothuk tribe of what is now Newfoundland, Canada. The Beothuk were said to paint their bodies with red ochre, leading white settlers to refer to them as "red men."

According to Smithsonian historian Ives Goddard, early historical records indicate that "Redskin" was used as a self-identifier by Native Americans to differentiate between the two races. Goddard found that the first use of the word "redskin" came in 1769, in negotiations between the Piankashaws and Col. John Wilkins. Throughout the 1800s, the word was frequently used by Native Americans as they negotiated with the French and later the Americans. The phrase gained widespread usage among whites when James Fenimore Cooper used it in his 1823 novel The Pioneers. In the book, Cooper has a dying Indian character lament, "There will soon be no red-skin in the country."

https://www.npr.org/sections/codesw...y-for-some-controversy-the-history-of-redskin

Doesn't make it right that the name should persist simply because the people paying the taxes want it or because of the origin of the word. Skin color is skin color.

By the way, Morris taxpayers pay roughly 50% of the cost of running Morris Community High School, and Illinois taxpayers pay the next highest chunk of the cost to run the school.

The term negro describing black skinned people of African descent was derived from the Latin, Spanish, and Portuguese word for the color black. What if a predominantly African American public school wanted a nickname of Whities or if a predominantly white school wanted to use their taxes to promote a nickname of Negroes or some derivation thereof?

Why should Redskins get a pass?

Morris is a public school, and it's 2023 not 1923. If a new public school was opened anywhere and wanted to use Redskins, or any other word used to describe a racial skin color as a nickname, it would never ever fly. So are you saying Morris should get a pass because of tradition or because you should be allowed to call yourselves whatever you want because it's your money? Spare me.

 

[Snetsrak61]

By the way, Morris taxpayers pay roughly 50% of the cost of running Morris Community High School, and Illinois taxpayers pay the next highest chunk of the cost to run the school.

Is there a source for that because I didn't think any IL school district is that heavily state funded. IL as a whole has one of if not lowest state funding for schools.

 

[crusader_of_90]

I would say not "never humans", but understand that any human depiction is more likely to come under scrutiny. A lot if that is just because the way language and culture work. To date it is still mainly human depictions that have remained under the most scrutiny (with Chicago Blackhawks a major exception).

How about the Zombies!!!!

 

[sac'em]

Is there a source for that because I didn't think any IL school district is that heavily state funded. IL as a whole has one of if not lowest state funding for schools.

Remember, funding is per pupil, not overall %. Illinois is probably in the top half of states that fund/pupil. Mostly, you will see the higher the $/pupil, the better the test scores are.

 

[ramblinman]

Is there a source for that because I didn't think any IL school district is that heavily state funded. IL as a whole has one of if not lowest state funding for schools.

https://www.illinoistax.org/index.p...mands-for-state-funds-loom-mike-klemensolten/

Whether it's 50% or 52% or 61%, the point is that local taxpayers are not the only ones funding their local public schools. By and large, the local community pays the biggest chunk and the state the next biggest.

 

[4Afan]

How about the Zombies!!!!

View embedded media

Or maybe...

 

[Snetsrak61]

All true. It's all an exercise in futility as people claim to be right and know what should be allowed. But nobody can explain where the slippery slope should end.

I think Aztecs is fine. Many others are completely outraged by that depiction.

Someone can be offended and someone can be absolutely convinced it is a trivial argument with no merit. Both can be right. And the offended person can sometimes win. But they shouldn't always win just because they are offended.

Aztecs, Irish, and Vikings can all be offensive. But it has to be offensive to the right constituency with enough vocal supporters and the offended group must be in a protected enough class with a history close enough geographically and sad enough historically to be changed. Who defines "offensive," "protected," close enough," "recent enough," and "sad enough" is the issue. They are subjective ideals that can never be objectively measured or decided upon.

Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to root out truly ridiculous names. But also means the absolutist social justice warriors need to acknowledge the tediousness of this exercise and that there will be times people will be offended and that it's ok to be offended. And there are times where it's not. And there is no solid line indicating where that line has been crossed. In fact, some cross the line at the mere use of the term Vikings. Perhaps they are snowflakes who need to lighten up, perhaps not. And some don't even cross the line with Chief Osceola jamming a flaming spear into the 50 yard line. Perhaps they are heartless jerks and perhaps not.

Yet in most cases there isn't actually a threat of any team or org being told what's right or wrong. At most its been the threat or actual financial leverage that forces a change.

The flip side is still the question of what's being lost. For pro teams and probably colleges, cyncially speaking, loss of brand equity is as much of the concern for decision makers as pleasing fan opinion. Because at the end of the day there isn't really any other objective or un-biased reason to cling to a name. For a local HS they probably less worried about brand equity, but may have concerns over cost of changing. In those cases you sometimes see a de-emphasis and slow movement away from a mascot until the costs are bearable enough to formally adopt a full change. That's actually pretty understandable, IMO.

I think the Blackhawks chief-head logo will come soon enough for example. Will be really interesting to see how much they cling to other native branding or the Blackhawks name in whole when that time comes... Because there's tons of brand equity there!

 

[Snetsrak61]

https://www.illinoistax.org/index.p...mands-for-state-funds-loom-mike-klemensolten/

Whether it's 50% or 52% or 61%, the point is that local taxpayers are not the only ones funding their local public schools. The local community pays the biggest chunk and the state the next biggest.

Yes not necessarily refuting the general point,that high of a state funding percentage just stood out to me. Off topic, sorry.

 

[Snetsrak61]

How about the Zombies!!!!

View embedded media

Zombie logo and branding would be awesome. Contract the marketing guys at Three Floyd's Brewery to do the artwork.

Morris Zombies! I love it

 

[4Afan]

Yet in most cases there isn't actually a threat of any team or org being told what's right or wrong. At most its been the threat or actual financial leverage that forces a change.

The flip side is still the question of what's being lost. For pro teams and probably colleges, cyncially speaking, loss of brand equity is as much of the concern for decision makers as pleasing fan opinion. Because at the end of the day there isn't really any other objective or un-biased reason to cling to a name. For a local HS they probably less worried about brand equity, but may have concerns over cost of changing. In those cases you sometimes see a de-emphasis and slow movement away from a mascot until the costs are bearable enough to formally adopt a full change. That's actually pretty understandable, IMO.

I think the Blackhawks chief-head logo will come soon enough for example. Will be really interesting to see how much they cling to other native branding or the Blackhawks name in whole when that time comes... Because there's tons of brand equity there!

Blackhawks aren't going anywhere. They are actually named after Chief Black Hawk, an individual, not a specific tribe or general term.

https://thehockeywriters.com/chicag...McLaughlin, founder of,Black Hawk War of 1832.

 

[ramblinman]

Yes not necessarily refuting the general point,that high of a state funding percentage just stood out to me. Off topic, sorry.

I actually didn't mention anything about a specific state funding percentage. I just said that the state pays the next biggest chunk after the local community.

 

[4Afan]

What if a predominantly African American public school wanted a nickname of Whities

I'm not as easily offended as some here seem to be. I would have zero issue with this. The possibilities for the logo are endless!

Zombie logo and branding would be awesome. Contract the marketing guys at Three Floyd's Brewery to do the artwork.

I mean, if they served Zombie Dust at the games attendance would sky rocket! Although the next morning I may feel very undead and I could be offended by that.

 

[crusader_of_90]

Or maybe...

View embedded media

But I think if you're going for a hype song, it has to be dudes singing, with one execption:

 

[4Afan]

But I think if you're going for a hype song, it has to be dudes singing, with one execption:

View embedded media

 

[Snetsrak61]

I'm just picturing the Morris football team running out, eye black like Zombies, with the irredescent-finish helmet like the Zombie dust label. Metal music blasting on the stadium speakers. They'd pysch out every opponent.

God I hate how much I love that idea lol. I'd suggest a branding change for Naz, but not the undead branding a good Catholic institution wants 🤣

 

[crusader_of_90]

I got turned off by Three Floyds when they started that bullcrap of giving liquor stores a half dozen six-packs to store at the register. With an unlisted threshold, the clerk would then haggle with customers to qualify for the sale.

GTFOH with that BS.

 

[4Afan]

I got turned off by Three Floyds when they started that bullcrap of giving liquor stores a half dozen six-packs to store at the register. With an unlisted threshold, the clerk would then haggle with customers to qualify for the sale.

GTFOH with that BS.

What shady liquor stores are you going to? You need to have your girls start stocking up for you. The Three Floyds is plentiful on the shelves here in the city.

 

[crusader_of_90]

What shady liquor stores are you going to? You need to have your girls start stocking up for you. The Three Floyds is plentiful on the shelves here in the city.

Random Apus several years ago when Zombie Dust first was brewed. Mostly stores between my office and home.

 

[corey90]

Zombie logo and branding would be awesome. Contract the marketing guys at Three Floyd's Brewery to do the artwork.

Morris Zombies! I love it

I am sure the school will welcome Zombie Dust!

 

[stripes13]

Believe me when I tell you: if Morris got zombie dust on tap the list of officials they’d get would stretch to Iowa.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Believe me when I tell you: if Morris got zombie dust on tap the list of officials they’d get would stretch to Iowa.

Few extra missed calls per game I think

"come on ref, are you drunk?!"
Well actually...

 

[stripes13]

Few extra missed calls per game I think

"come on ref, are you drunk?!"
Well actually...

It’s amazing how short my leash is on a Saturday morning. Take that as you will.

 

[UlbKA91]

Or maybe...

View embedded media

Based on recent events piquing the interest of a famous MMA fighter, some schools might pull a CICS. Last week Shane Macgowan of the Pogues was taken from us.

 

[crazylegs777]

He makes a good point.

WCSJ site on facebook is full of quite a few people who share my views & passion not going to waste my time arguing & get kicked off here. The same ones say I need help hinge on my every word lol. I think many of you need to head on down to Rush Street & find yourself a companion to help you find better things to do

 

[MIKEFTB]

Ok. Here is the latest via the Morris Daily Herald

The Morris Community High School Board held off on a decision to change the school's mascot Monday night, deciding..... that a better plan would be to come up with a mascot and logo the public can see......

 

[greatgig13]

Ok. Here is the latest via the Morris Daily Herald

The Morris Community High School Board held off on a decision to change the school's mascot Monday night, deciding..... that a better plan would be to come up with a mascot and logo the public can see......

Clearly this is the most pressing topic in town.

 

[Snetsrak61]

Ok. Here is the latest via the Morris Daily Herald

The Morris Community High School Board held off on a decision to change the school's mascot Monday night, deciding..... that a better plan would be to come up with a mascot and logo the public can see......

They must have already received my letter and drawings for the Zombies. All on hold until they can vote in it.