Jeppalepala's Webpin - The 1946 Philadelphia Warrior

by jeppalepala on Jul 18, 2007 2:56 AM PDT Comment 99 comments

The Philadelphia Warriors

The History

The Warriors were founded in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1946 as the Philadelphia Warriors, a charter member of the Basketball Association of America. They were owned by Peter Tyrrell, who also owned the Philadelphia Ramblers of the American Hockey League. Tyrell hired Eddie Gottlieb, a longtime basketball promoter in the Philadelphia area, as coach and general manager. He named the team after an early professional team in the city.

Led by early scoring sensation Joe Fulks, they won the championship in the league's inaugural 1946-47 season by defeating the Chicago Stags, four games to one. (The BAA became the National Basketball Association in 1949.) Gottlieb bought the team in 1951.

The Warriors won their only other championship as a Philadelphia team in the 1955-56 season, defeating the Fort Wayne Pistons four games to one. The stars of this era in the team's history were Paul Arizin and Neil Johnston. In 1959, the team signed draft pick Wilt Chamberlain. Known as "Wilt the Stilt," Chamberlain quickly began shattering NBA scoring records and changed the style of play forever. On March 2, 1962, in a Warrior "home" game played in Hershey, Pennsylvania, Chamberlain scored 100 points against the Knickerbockers, a single-game record.

Taken From : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philadelphia_Warriors

During the birth of the franchise, I believe they wanted our mascot to represent power, something that represents purity and the struggle of our country. The Native American mascot was used, I believe to represent our fight to become stronger to become a better nation, and that even though the way we mistreat others, it does not matter since WWII was coming to an end. We looked to end the terrible genocides, and had realized our own mistakes in history, and I believe this is somewhat a patron for the Native Americans, a sort of tribute to them.

Just a filler I got really bored so I decided to go kinda deep with it. LOL!

This mascot was represented by one of the G.O.A.T!

Wilt "The Stilt" Chamberlain!

The masot was upgraded and given color!

I mean this mascot is even on the Mitchell & Ness Throwback Jacket which retails for $350 A-Thank You! (I own one of these!)

All I want to know is why? Why do you all want me to remove my webpin? Because it's racist? I believe that it has nothing to do with degredation of any people. This mascot represents our FIRST NBA CHAMPIONSHIP TITLE EVER!
But that doesn't matter you still want me to take it down.

Don't worry it will be gone. I agreed to comply with what has been asked of me, and I will gladly remove it since it makes so many people here in GSoM so uncomfortable.

Thanks ya'll for the input in advance.

So what's my replacement HAHAHA Someone help me fnd a webpin! anyone got any replacement webpins???

Poll

Should Jeppalepala get to keep his webpin?

Yes!

45 votes

No!

13 votes

58 votes | Poll has closed

This FanPost is a submission from a member of the mighty Golden State of Mind community. While we're all here to throw up that W, these words do not necessarily reflect the views of the GSoM Crew. Still, chances are the preceding post is Unstoppable Baby!

0 recs | Comment 99 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

you should

keep it! alot of peole here dont understand the history of the name. that was the original warrior. heck all the people who like, "the city" appearl they dont act racist when they see that indian headdress. Thunder is suppose to be the modern day of the indian guy. i think you should keep it but like have words after it saying "when the warriors were actually great!" or something that says never forget the history/past. but yeah keep that webpin i dont find it racist

by 24k state fan since 87 on Jul 18, 2007 3:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I went to De La Salle high school...

and there mascot is the Spartans...are they being racist to Sparta? What about the USC Trojans? These mascots are used as a sign of strength and ability. If anything calling a native american a "warrior" should be considered a compliment. Hell, in many tribes they called themselves WARRIOR chiefs! I'd be down to have me or my lineage be considered warrior-esque. Jepepepepllalalape, put that pin up and wear it with pride

by BaronForPrez on Jul 20, 2007 3:36 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

a little education

i think this is a must-read for everyone who has an opinion on this topic:

http://www.aics.org/mascot/truth.html

it deals with the "spartan" and "trojan" question:

"Trojans," "Spartans" and "Vikings" are popular sports team names that pick out groups according to nationality, race or ethnicity, but these are also fundamentally different from Indian mascots. These names do not depict existing peoples and cannot, therefore, affect the lives of those they depict (for better or for worse) - neither can they be regarded as appropriate or inappropriate by the groups in question.

native americans are the only living race/religion/ethnicity respresented as mascots today.

more importantly it deals with the supposed "respect" issue:

Assuming that respect and honor really were the true motives in naming such a great variety of items and teams after American Indians, we might encourage (or even expect) a more even distribution of such use of group imagery and theme. After all, respect ought not be demonstrated only for Indians - all peoples deserve to be respected similarly. But a world in which groups are respected by being mascotized would be absurd and even comical. This is easily confirmed when we suppose even isolated instances of similar treatment of other groups. One never sees a "Jeep Grande Jew" on the highway, for example, but one regularly sees "Jeep Grande Cherokees;" one cannot drive a "Plymouth Holy Communion," or camp in an "African-American," but one can drive a "Plymouth Sundance" and camp in a "Winnebago;" neither can one purchase Martin Luther King, Jr. malt liquor or Angel Gabriel wine (as one can Crazy Horse malt liquor or Thunderbird wine); there are no Blackskins, Yellowskins or Whiteskins playing football anywhere, but there are Redskins. Tim Giago (Lakota), former editor in chief of The Lakota Times and Indian Country Today puts it this way: "Would you paint your face black, wear an afro wig and prance around the football field trying to imitate your perceptions of Black people? Of course not! That would be insulting to Blacks, so why is it OK to do it to Indians?"

people, let's stay on topic. we're discussing the clownish charicature of the old warriors logo. sorry, you simply can't argue that it's respectful. and if you didn't get it at first, you need to educate yourself to understand why it's not ok.

by TMC Forever on Jul 20, 2007 8:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the education...

Do I get units for this or what?

by BaronForPrez on Jul 20, 2007 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This is rediculous

I never liked the logo, simply because I always thought it looked silly. However, it is an old Warriors logo on a Warriors site.

I mean, what is offensive about it? It's a smiling Indian dribbling a basketball. As Coma pointed out, it's no more offensive then the Redskins or the Indians.

Let's take a look at the "complaints" that brought this about.

#13 That dude with the racist Indian logo as his webpin (sorry man, it is just plain ugly).

I HATE THE INDIAN

yeah man
i cruise by this site like 3 to 5 times a day and its cool, i love hearing what other warrior fanatics think. but the indian is a little out of control.

This was all of THREE comments that brought the destruction of the dude's webpin. They all total barely 100 words. I'd even bet money that these guys aren't even Indian (or, if you'd prefer, Native American). One probobly doesn't even know it's and old Warriors logo, and one was probobly joking.

In an effort to salve some of the tensions going on right now, jeppalepala has graciously agreed not to cause any trouble. I asked him if he'd do it, with no repercussions, and he stepped up to the plate.

So, first of all it sickens me that the dude would actually wimp out and take down his webpin. But second of all, what angers me more is that OZ said, "with no repercussions." So, if he refused, he would have had punishment? Punishment for posting a Warriors logo on a Warriors site? I don't even want to think about it.

So, then, he proceeds to tell us that criticism is no longer accepted here at GSoM.

In the future, however, I don't really want to see more diaries about how the site is run, and I don't want to see off-hand comments about any of the GSoMers (atma, me, anyone).

Can anyone say "Police state?" The GSoM crew has always been open to suggestions about their site, and previous suggestions have actually resulted as major improvements on the site. Now you are closing the door?

Furthermore, he goes on and tries to limit what we can/cannot talk about here at the site.

Let's get back to writing diaries about the Warriors and Basketball.

I think we have better things to talk about: The Warriors, the NBA, Being Unstoppable

GSoM, as we all know, has been an open forum where we can discuss politics, food, and other things outside of the world of Warriors. Hell, Atma and the crew have even posted things that are off-topic on the main page.

Then, OZ turns his tail between his legs, and says we, in fact, CAN post criticism.

Getting called out on content is fine. People are free to post their opinion on the substance of writings. Questioning the system, even, is acceptable- but to a point. There is no system that will please everyone, and attempting to do so results in no system at all. Isn't it possible to participate in the community and respect how it operates even while disagreeing personally with some aspects of it? We could spend all of time debating the finer points of organization of blogs and whatnot, but then we'd have no time for basketball. Just suck it up, do your best to play along, and take whatever fun you can out of it.

First of all: It's JULY, man. Wake up. We haven't even sniffed the Pre-Season yet. All things going on basketball worthy right now are rumours and the International Tournaments set to start in a few days.

Second of all, you say "Getting called out on content is fine....Questioning the system, even, is acceptable- but to a point." Contradicts what you said earlier, "In the future, however, I don't really want to see more diaries about how the site is run...." OZ is Waffling. I will now call OZ Waffles.

What brings the whole thing down and puts thr icing on the cake is when Atma bows down to Waffles' judgement:

"Everything wrong w/GSOM"? Come on man. Don't you think that's a little misleading to new visitors of this site who see your diary title? It seems like the majority of your beef is with other community members, not the writers or the main blog. I'd appreciate it if you specified that with your title.

Atma, I don't think you should be too concerned about newcomers....in July. To a basketball site. You know well that this has usually been the time to talk about improvements for the upcoming season. If you don't like the diary titles, you should ask Waffles to patrol them or institute a rule. I've been saying this a loong time, man.

You did make a lot of constructive points and I give you a ton of credit for that. However, I can honestly tell you that the misdirected and mislabeled rants that are becoming all to commonplace here and all the negativity about GSoM from GSoMers are really starting to annoy me.....
If there's so much wrong with GSoM that deserves a diary or two a week filled with rants, then the other sports team blogs must really, really be screwing up. Either that or we're doing something right...

No doubt there's tons for this entire community to improve upon, but I'm proud of what we've achieved in a little over 2 years.

I think that GSW Rico wrote the PERFECT response.

Im sorry...
Someone has to say this....this post is ridiculous. Fighting on here about a certain topic is what DRIVES this site. If everyone just danced around and talked about "how nice Adonal Foyle is" or "isnt baron davis great?" all day, Atma wouldnt HAVE to retire because he would have fallen asleep already. This site is exciting cause of the diversity, and your theory about how we all need to be one happy family to make it a better site, is off the wall.

As a matter of fact....if nobody fired back at you about this, YOUR diary would have had no responses, and would have been boring...how ironic.

It wasn't directed at Atma, but I'm 100% sure it applies.

So, Zorgon has been ranting and complaining for a long time now. What should we do, you ask? I say this:

* Waffles stops testing his new bat.

I think right now he's in a period where he just got his new job, and wants to test out everything he can do. Kind of like when you get a new computer and when you want to test every function of it. Eventually, at least I think, he'll learn to step off and handle situations more properly and lightly.

Don't worry, Waffles. I've done the exact same thing when I started being Commissioner of my own Sim League. A lot of the times I jumped the gun and screwed things up. We all grow with experience. It happens to everyone.

Okay, I feel obligated to give one last example. A policeman gets put out on the force for the first time. A dude walks by, and he looks suspicous because he's got a lot of tatoos. The new cop stops him only to discover he has nothing dangerous and was just chillin'. The cop learns, life goes on.

* Atma eats his Cinnamon Toast Crunch

Atma needs to step back and realise that arguement is a large part of GSoM, and that while people may complain, most GSoMers have a deep, profound respect for him and his writings.

Another solution could be to go through his recent posts and diaries and count all of the negative comments and all of the positive ones. I think that he'd find that one outnumbers the other, and its not the negative comments.

* jeppalepala gets his webpin back

There is NO reason why this should not happen. Warriors site, Warriors logo. DONE DEAL.

Shoutouts to my boys eshock, Lat We N Trash, Backtoback51s, gswrico, Mike D, Bake Da Ripper, Coma, and Atma.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 4:47 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

the indian is a little out of control.

Ha, That's what makes this place interesting. Hell, we're Warriors fans, barely housetrained and suddenly they want us to be miss manners?
I liked chief dribbles like a snake just cause he was different. I don't understand why naming a team after an Indian would be offensive anyway? They name teams after things that are powerfull, tough, or inspiring. Things that come to play! They don't call them the Golden state accountants or the Sacramento nursemaids. Warriors and Kings on the same platform, what could be more respectfull?

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 18, 2007 6:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

really, I totally agree on that. However, I'm white, and I can never really totally understand the complexities of the monority soul. There's either something major I'm missing, or I'm right. I hope I'm right. lol

I just don't understand. Well, we're Knights now anyway, aren't we?

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 7:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I can never really totally understand

" the complexities of the monority soul"

How about when you were down there all alone in Dallas, only warrior fan in the buidling? How'd that feel? Actually Z I think you do pretty good understanding the underdog, look how you stick up for Adonal when everyone's hating on him. Keepon keepin us real.

by Skeptic con Urquell on Jul 18, 2007 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

You just tried to equate what non-whites deal with everyday of their existence in this country to sitting at a Mavs' game for 3 hours as a Warriors fan. That's just ignorant.

Again, why are you still posting here? You didn't follow the community guidelines. You're not welcome here for at least a month.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Noooooooooo

Not Skeptic too!

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

I have to disagree with this. As both a minority and one of the few Warrior fans at game one in Dallas (in a Mavs owners box, no less), comparing the two is ludicrous. Zorgon, who lives in Oklahoma (home to many Native Americans), is probably much more sensitive to their situation than the regular "white guy." I'm not a fan of mascots that depict people groups, but I also recognize the history behind the Phila Warriors logo, so I'm torn. In the end I don't think it's a huge deal, but I respect jeppalepala for taking his pin down for the sake of those who might be offended by it.

I like you, Skeptic, but this time Atma got it right.

by xacto on Jul 18, 2007 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah

I have to say, it's a bad comparison.

Rascism > Teamism.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

What's your point?

What brings the whole thing down and puts thr icing on the cake is when Atma bows down to Waffles' judgement:

Um, how did I bow down to anyone's judgement? All I say is that diary title was just silly. Also, thank you for telling me what I should be concerned about (?) Actually last July is when we grew the fastest at that time period, so that debunks your point.

* Atma eats his Cinnamon Toast Crunch

Atma needs to step back and realise that arguement is a large part of GSoM, and that while people may complain, most GSoMers have a deep, profound respect for him and his writings.

When did I ever say argument was not acceptable here? I've posted countless times how boring this place would be if everyone thought the same way.

This was never a police state. Never will be.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think you're about

to pull your hair out, so I'll just let it settle.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:45 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

dude

your the man

by Proof on Jul 18, 2007 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Terminate em'...

... With This! (LOL jk!) I don't mind the Indian, maybe if he was in a webpin format that would be fine... I remember when Zorgon had that big Foyle image of the shampoo ad, it weirded me out, esp. when his comment was a sentence long and the foyle pic was all huge on my browser... my co-workers would say "Ohhh, is that a new Keith Sweat Album?" Than he switcehd over 2 a webpin formatted signature... now I don't think twice about his comments lol.

by Tony.psd on Jul 18, 2007 7:36 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

XD

I made that webpin because I found that old pic and it made Adonal look all relaxed and stuff.

It's the same type of humor as the old Georghe Muresan cologne commercial. It's funny because Adonal is big and ugly, and the product he's advertising is supposed to be nice and pretty.

And yes, that's another awesome webpin! Terminator 2 is my favourite movie of all time!

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 7:51 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

lol- I never said I hated it

it was just a huge pic! Thx for the T2 webpin comment... Since the Robocop one yesterday I wanted to try something new, tis ones make or break... I sorta like it and I sorta don't!

by Tony.psd on Jul 18, 2007 8:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I found that webpin hilarious

because it was a Shampoo ad, and Adonal is bald.

Ronald Reagan was a jerk.

by Nooob on Jul 18, 2007 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha

That too.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It was wrong then, its still wrong today...

First of all, thank you to Jeppalepala for considering others by taking down your web pin.

I decided to post my opinions and experiences from working with communities of color to shed some light on why its important that we (a diverse community of ethnic and religious proportions) must consider others in this matter.

The history and the warriors basketball legacy that the mascot was a part of was a great thing, however the importance to recognize that racialized mascots are just bad in general for not only Native Americans, but all people of color in general.

For the sake of all Native Americans and all people of color, the use of racialized mascots should not be used IMO ever. Racial/ethnic mascots are usually comprised of racial stereotypes (something we shouldn't be promoting or supporting the use of) The portrayal of this NA mascot isn't even of a real Native American tribe, actually it is a mix of stereotypes of many NA's all mixed into one!

Just for some perspective, if the teams name was the "Dynasty Warriors" and the mascot was a cartoon of a Chinese person with all sorts of painful stereotypes ("chinky" eyes, buck teeth, rice patty hat) it would not last! In fact, if it were any other ethnic group (black, asian, latino) or religious group (Christian, Hindu, Islamic,Buddhist) and the mascot is insanely wrong, people would not stand for it.

Unfortunately there are very few Native Americans left in the US to speak up against these issues that are so common in today's sporting world so teams like the Clevelend Indians and Atlanta Braves get to keep their mascots around.

IMO, thats why the mascot has to go. That mascots supports racial stereotyping, and stereotyping is just bad in general in a free world. Thank you for considering others feelings!

Go Warriors.

by q00pster on Jul 18, 2007 7:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

GSDubz

would have a lot to say about this.

I see where you're coming from, but when you come down to it, it's an old Warriors logo, and it's a part of our past, like it or not.

I really think the logo in question is cast in a positive light, as Skeptic mentioned, you know, powerful.

I, personally, wouldn't mind if someone had a "White People" mascot or something, but then again, there are a lot of things that I don't mind.

I say keep it because it's Warriors history. It reps our time in Philly, and our BAA Championships.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 7:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"....White People" mascot"

Like the mascot/logo for the Boston Celtics?

by Ace Fury on Jul 18, 2007 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Ace Fury

I love you!

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 8:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Apples and Oranges

It's ridiculous to compare the Celtics' Irish mascot when Irish have been assimilated as the dominant white category in America to a caricature of a group that has faced genocide in this country's "illustrious" history and an unfathomable amount of struggle even today.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

And the Native Americans Havn't?

I am as powerful as 100 times 100 times 100 times 13 Stilts!

by jeppalepala on Jul 18, 2007 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haven't what?

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Tip

Zorgon I know you used to be tight with GSDubz, but the man's no expert on racial and ethnic issues. I don't think people care. I know I don't

I say keep it because it's Warriors history. It reps our time in Philly, and our BAA Championships.

That's the same argument racists in the South make about holding up the Confederate flag because it takes them back to their "glory days".

You're bigger than that to make these silly points.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:09 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay

I'll agree with you, it's a bad logo, and it was a bad idea.

The GSDubz reference was to say that he would have a huge field day on this. I don't desire him here, and I'm glad he's not.

But how are we supposed to represent the 40s,50s, and 60s? I mean, we used THAT logo.

Not using it is just covering up our past.

It's NOTHING like the Confederates. They did evil during those times. WE won championships while they enslaved blacks. It is like you said, apples and oranges.

And if you're really going to ban it from the site, you should ban the Washington Redskins logo which I must mention you USED when we did the NFL predictions.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:23 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Much respect

Very good lines man. I think you nailed it about how mascots like this essentialize a whole group's identity and giving some context about why the Braves and Indians mascot still unfairly exists.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are any of you Native American?

I'm might only be 25%, but I like the logo. It's an honor for a team to think of you highly enough to chose you as their mascot. A mascot is chosen because it represent strength, power, unity, ... I don't see this logo representing anything wrong. In fact it's the orgins of our beloved team and should be held with respect and honor. I'm all for keeping of the webpin. I remember the first time I saw it, it brought joy to me. I was so stoked to see someone else here knew what our first mascot looked like and now everyone at GSoM would too. Don't make this logo into smething it's not. This logo rocks keep it!!!!!!!!

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 11:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The name is fine

I think its ok to have the team NAMED Warriors. However, the depiction create an imprint of a highly stereotypical and racialized image in our minds. You'd be amazed, but when the word native american comes up, I bet that the cartoon image comes up.

The real problem, in my mind, is the erasure of history. The reservation system and the ethnic cleansing have demolished the idea of native american nations. Even terms like native american erase history, because they imply a singular nation of Native Americans, which simply never existed.

Images and words control history. The more often essentialized images of the native american appear, the more they become the way we understand native american ideas. The fact that we've isolated them to reservations by herding them at gunpoint is enough of a stain on our history that we should be ashamed to depict racially stereotyping imagery of native americans. How many of you realize we killed 4000 people of the Cherokee nation in the Trail of Tears Alone? How bout testing nuclear weapons on reservation land?

Again, the name warriors has a different and less loaded message, and is fine. The new logos are great, and we can celebrate the worthy PLAYERS in our history, not the worst parts of our country's history.

by ohmangoAs on Jul 19, 2007 10:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Razor sharp

Thanks for posting those thoughts. It's great to hear such thoughtful commentary from GSoMers. These are the kind of posts that keep me going.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 19, 2007 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some history you cherish, some you fix

That is an absurd reason to keep it. Thats the same reasoning people in the South want to keep the confederate flag around for pride despite many Black Americans and other racial groups in the south despising the flag for its ties to slavery.

Its just uncomfortable.

Sports and these issues are connected. Just watch Outside the lines on ESPN! =)

by q00pster on Jul 18, 2007 8:07 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank you

Stephen A Smith had some Native Americans on his show talking about this same issue on Quite Frankly. It was extremely provocative. That's how it should be done.

Sorry but hearing reasoning about how the former Native American caricature the Warriors used is okay from whites, Blacks, and Asians without a diverse set of thoughts from Native Americans is just stupid. That's like hearing about how pregnancy feels from a male.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Atma, I'm not arguing

But tell me how its ANY different from,say, the Boston Celtics, Michigan State Spartans, or the Providence Friars.

In fact, ANYBODY tell me how it's different.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wow

If you need an explanation of how wrong this country has treated and depicted Native Americans, there's nothing I can do for you. Try reading Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:10 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Even more of a reason!

This mascot rocks. It showes that atleast this team believes what happened to Native Americans was wrong. Also it show that this team has respect and wants to honor the Native
Americans!

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

See my post above

N.A. history is more explosive. Also, at most, I think your argument simply implies that we should abandon group-based/racial names and images, not that all those names and images are ok.

by ohmangoAs on Jul 19, 2007 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Alright...

Since people are crying about the Indian, Im going to have ask all the people with THUNDER WEB PINS, to please remove those also, because it offends my "wierd blue muscular xmen look-a-like" friends.

Crying about Indian logos = lame

by gswrico on Jul 18, 2007 8:37 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ignorant

Did you just compare a depiction of a subordinate ethnic group that the US government has tried to exterminate since its founding, to a fictional Thunder character?

Ignorance at its worst. I'm ashamed to see a GSoMer posting something that foolish.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 8:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

ignorance would be welcome

as someone who has lived a little, i've come to learn that nothing is 100% this way or that. "racism" definitely falls into that category. today, we label things "racist" that range from the innocent misunderstanding of another culture (slight ignorance) to the out and out hatred/superiority/disrect of other cultures.

i wish this guy's statement was just "ignorant". i actually think it comes with a lot more malice and knowledge than that.

like you feel, it's a bummer we have people like that on here.

having said that, i can actually understand a young person not understanding at first why the old warriors logo was not ok. maybe they come to it with positive feelings about what an native american indian represents. however, i'd expect that once they are told that it offends native americans, they should say "ok, my bad, thanks for telling me".

to answer zorgon's question earlier....tests include a) whether the image is a respectful one or a demeaning one and b) whether the group represented is offended or not. i doubt any "friars" are offended.

every culture has their "warriors". trojans, spartans, americans (cowboys) and native americans, to name a few. so, zorgon, while i'm hoping you're saying that you think of a native american warrior with the same respect you do of a spartan warrior, a trojan warrior, or an american warrior, you have to understand that there is a really negative history with native americans on this soil, including the way they have been treated and stereotyped. the old warrior logo isn't respectful....it's demeaning. and you should respect if that group doesn't like it.

by TMC Forever on Jul 18, 2007 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

This logo is total respect!

mas·cot (mskt, -kt) KEY

NOUN:

A person, animal, or object believed to bring good luck, especially one kept as the symbol of an organization such as a sports team.

teams chose a mascot to look up t and respect not to look down on.

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sorry didn't leave link

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/mascot

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

thanks for proving my point

i know you're trying to come from a good place

but....your definition says nothing about respect. in fact it implies that it is a tool of the team, without any consideration for the mascot. according to your interpretation of the definition, i could pick ANYTHING as my mascot...and that would be ok because it's a mascot. nope, that's not logical.

if it's offensive to a reasonable amount of people that represent the group in question (and native american representatives have long argued that using "indians" as mascots is offensive), then it's offensive.

by TMC Forever on Jul 19, 2007 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm 25% Native American

And I say the mascot rocks!

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're one of 10%

the overwhelming majority of native americans disagree with you.

In a survey by Indian Country Today, 81 percent of respondents indicated use of American Indian names, symbols and mascots are predominantly offensive and deeply disparaging to Native Americans.

"Indian mascots, by today's standards, would be offensive to any other race if portrayed in a similar manner," wrote Fred Blue Fox, Sicangu Lakota. "Indian peoples are no different in regarding the depiction of eagle feathers, face paints and war objects such as tomahawks. These are all sacred to the people and therefore have no place in any sort of public display, let alone mascots."

Only 10 percent of respondents indicated use of American Indian mascots is a respectful gesture and predominantly honors Natives. Nine percent of respondents did not know if American Indian mascots either honored or offended Natives."

http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=43

by TMC Forever on Jul 19, 2007 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Props to TMC Forever

I give you a lot of credit for digging this up man. I'm passionately on the side that these Native American caricatures and the silenced and discounted indigenous perspective in the sports world as well in this country in general are deplorable.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 19, 2007 7:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

good luck?

In my opinion you have to respect something that you beleive is good luck!

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 2:50 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you're ok with it.....i get it

you think it's respectful...and 10% of native americans agree with you.

now, the question is this: do you wish to disrespect the wishes of the 80% of native americans (your people) who genuinely find it offensive and painful?

by TMC Forever on Jul 19, 2007 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

By The Way...

Thanks for quoting my clip there Zorgon. Wasent sure if anybody read that. One.

by gswrico on Jul 18, 2007 8:38 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I am not that offended by it

I just ahte looking at it, its ugly and creepy

THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE W'S

by dallaswarrior on Jul 18, 2007 8:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

MWahahah!

My rampage continues!

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

*hate... sorry

THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE W'S

by dallaswarrior on Jul 18, 2007 8:48 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Thoughts from a White Guy

I realize that I don't understand what it feels like from the Native American perspective, but I think it is a little silly that he should have to remove it based on comments that from what I can tell were either half-serious or from people who just thought the webpin was ugly. If there is a Native American or someone else on this site who is truly offended, they should contact Jeppalepala privately and ask him to remove it. Otherwise everybody is making a big deal and getting all riled up about nothing.

by OaklandWarriors on Jul 18, 2007 9:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

jeppalepala

Sorry man it's an ignorant logo and unless you're trying to make some kind of political repurposing of the logo (like a the indigenous folk using the dumb "Indian" misnomer as a rallying point), then you're just making the same mistake the Warriors did in the 50's.

This is 2007. I'd hope you weren't at the conscious (or lack thereof) of people in power from the 50's.

I hate to say it but your diary didn't make any convincing argument whatsoever why the logo isn't racist. I'm not saying that it's impossible to construct and fabricate some well flushed argument about the logo isn't racist, but you didn't do that all at.

You cited a quote from Wikipedia about the history of the Warriors which is nice, but has nothing to do with the logo in question
Then you went on with a chain of "I believe" statements that are your opinion about what people from the 50's (in a much more racist climate than today) were thinking when they used the logo. I have no idea why you'd even do this.
Then you posted a Chamberlain 100 pic (isn't that a much better throwback pic to remember the old time Warriors than a racist logo?)
Next a bunch of pictures of the mascot in use as if that's to say it's okay.
Your line about "I believe that it has nothing to do with degredation of any people. This mascot represents our FIRST NBA CHAMPIONSHIP TITLE EVER!" is just curious. That's nice that you believe that. Are you a member of the group being depicted? Do you personally know the people who created that caricature? Your sentiment also reeks of Southern "pride" and the Confederate flag where those racists celebrated when "times were good" (e.g. when they enslaved Black folk and their economy was much more prosperous because of it)

I'm not here to censor you or tell you that you can't use the web pin- that's not my business. But I will tell you that you've failed to make any reasonable argument about why this logo ISN'T racist in the face of the many obvious points. I will also tell you that I as well as many other people unfortunately think much lower of you because you have it- sorry, but that's what happens when you cling onto a racist logo from a really racist time in this country's history.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

As long as you don't prevent him

from using it, I'm fine.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 9:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not racist

How can you compare to the Confederate flag? This flag was hung by people that in slaved the blacks. There for it represents the poeple would did the wrong doing. Now a logo of a Native American is represnt the Native American, the one who was wronged. This is showing respect to the Native Americans saying we see you in a good light. A team choses a Mascot of something they respect not something they look down at. Like I said earlier I might only be 25% native American and I love this mascot, keep the logo!

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

In what way does it represent them?

I'm not sure they want to be represented as an extremely stereotypical cartoon...

by ohmangoAs on Jul 19, 2007 10:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I've Changed it Atma Happy?

Can't believe having a webpin gets people to think lower of me and yes i am part native american so whatever its changed its F'in wilt the stilt arrite?

Go GSoM

RIP first webpin

I am as powerful as 100 times 100 times 100 times 13 Stilts!

by jeppalepala on Jul 18, 2007 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bring back the old webpin!!!!!!!!!!! This coming from someone who is 1/4 Native American. Atma doesn't have any Native American in him and doesn't seem to understand how this mascot is ay honor. I find it offensive he doesn't want you to use this webpin. Long life the Warriors(all warriors)! It's an honor to be seen as a warrior now and not looked down on!

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

me 2 im a quarter but i guess that doesnt matter

were still opressed

I am as powerful as 100 times 100 times 100 times 13 Stilts!

by jeppalepala on Jul 18, 2007 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

It doesnt really matter what you are on this site. If one person doesnt like the logo, then people will soon follow, then it becomes a chain reaction, and it all ends up like what has just happened.

Just for the record, Im not Indian, Im 100% Latin...and my comment was nothing of ignorance, so I apologize for whoever took it that way. I didnt clown on Indians...I didnt compare them to Thunder in anyway...all I did, was joke about how the complaining was getting so bad, that I was going to file a complaint about all the webpins involving Thunder because it offended my XMEN friends.

I...GSWRICO pledge never to joke around again.

Signed,
Sarcastic >>> Ignorant

by gswrico on Jul 18, 2007 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I thought your comment was hella funny!

This is coming from someone with some Native American blood in their veins. I thought your point(even though funny)was right on. People are being ridiculous and taking things the wrong way. There is nothing wrong with the Warriors' old school logo.

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

gswrico

its hard to tell tone online, sometimes it seems like people are joking, sometimes not, but i see where you're coming from (at least some parts). something i've noticed from this thread is the argument that "if no one from X community complains, then as it stands we can say what we want about X community" (not in those words). I speak in generalizations (with a hint of hyperbole) here, but that almost sounds like "its not racist/sexist/homophobic/etc as long as X person isn't around to hear it." And also, if one 1 person from X community says "i'm fine with it" does it necessarily make it okay? Or vice versa if one person from X community doesn't find it okay, does it make it wrong? i'm more with the former than the latter, but it seems problematic to seek the exception as a legitimation of the desire for the random mascot or for other potential weird racial representations (i.e. people wanting to say the N word). honestly, why are people fixated one these images/representations?

by dj fuzzylogic on Jul 18, 2007 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mascot

mas·cot (mskt, -kt) KEY

NOUN:

A person, animal, or object believed to bring good luck, especially one kept as the symbol of an organization such as a sports team.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/mascot

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 10:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

when does "warrior"

automatically become equated with Native American imagery? does it have to? Why could a warrior an military figure? Don't they exhibit "warrior" like attributes? As Atma has mentioned before, the history of Native Americans in this country (yes they are still alive) is one filled with white people deliberately and strategically EXTERMINATING people through physical violence or cultural genocide (uh.. do people remember the trail of tears or throughout the twentieth century where native american and black women were forced to take "birth control" which was actually used to make them sterile). To celebrate this lone image that is often misrepresented anyway with inappropriate mixing and melding of what white people think are native american symbols is not only bad taste, but actually ignores/hides/obscures the continual, present exploitation of Native Americans in American history and life. if we all forget, we are on their land ya know.

and to address how this differs from Spartans, Fighting Irish, Thunder, etc? Well for one, Thunder is a fake character in no way connected to real life. it is seriously ridiculous to compare the two. The fighting Irish is a caricature too. but celebration of Irish imagery celebrates a group of people that have become privileged and accepted directly against the subordination of native americans and others.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jul 18, 2007 9:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

It's ironic

Great insights dog!

I just wanted to add that it's so ironic how the indigenous folk are painted as the "savage warrior" with so many of these sports logos when the Europeans are the ones who came over and maliciously tried and continue to exterminate them. I think it's pretty clear who the savage warrior is.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 9:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

GSOM is dope

there are 100's of sports blogs to go to if you want to be sexist or racist, but this ain't one. i love the perspective of the people who run this show, and the memebers-- usually. I think this type of debate is worthwhile and I'm impressed that Jeppalepala is choosing to change his webpin, and I'm impressed that atma kept up a good civil argument... so cool.

by airport son on Jul 18, 2007 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Was"

It may be best not to mix tenses here, lest we be misunderstood (and there's a helluva lot of that going around at GSoM these days).

Another simple matter of semantics, or perhaps just the varying perception of language: colonial Europeans could probably be more considered "exterminators", "murderers", etc, but the term "warrior" can connote, at least for me, a certain level of reverence or honor, thus not necessarily making it a negative term. As for "savage", I think it's probably fair to say that ALL combatants in American colonial days used a fair amount of savagery.

by ffgolden on Jul 18, 2007 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

"Was"

I think you're referring to my last line. I just see the Indian reservations as deplorable living conditions. I feel like they're just another step in the neverending genocide of the indigenous folk. It's depressing.

Again, that's my perspective, no one has to agree with it, but I'm giving you my honest take on the situation.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

But "Savage Warriors"?

Sure, the current treatment and condition of American Indians is still deplorable, but are you calling all Americans of European descent "savage warriors" because of it? Because that's just as much a generalization as anything else that's been said around here.

by ffgolden on Jul 18, 2007 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No

I'm not, but every single American should realize that they have benefitted in some way, but the ongoing extermination of the indigenous people in this country either economically, politically, or socially. It's messed up.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I certainly agree

No arguments with any of your points. Just wanted to get clarification on the language used, as clearly we've moved into a very sensitive realm; I'm sure you wouldn't want community members to think that you had a distinctly anti-white agenda, rather than a pro-minority agenda, which I think are two very different things.

Frankly I'm appalled that the Redskins, Cleveland Indians, and Braves names and mascots are still allowed to exist. Especially the Redskins--the football team of our nation's capitol, and the name itself is a racial slur. How the hell is that acceptable?

by ffgolden on Jul 18, 2007 11:28 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I'd venture and say that you couldn't have those names for a sports team in the Bay. That's something (if even hypothetical) to be proud of.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't really get it.

I'd get this whole "take it down" agenda if it wasn't one in four people who was annoyed. Clearly the vast majority doesn't care. Which leads me to believe that the 5 people who read the site right now, and do care, need to settle down.

http://westcoastbiased.blogspot.com

by coma on Jul 18, 2007 10:17 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Tyranny of the majority

Just because the majority think something doesn't mean it's right. Look the indigenous population is incredibly outnumbered on every issue in this country. Doesn't mean their perspectives or interests aren't correct (not that my perspective is a substitute for their very diverse and not uniform thoughts either).

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

sd.

This is not a right or wrong issue. This is a matter of opinion. There are different levels of desensitization to racism. Some people will see it as blatant racism, and some won't. It's politically incorrect, yes. But it's not your place to say it's out and out wrong. Clearly the Indian community does not garner the respect it deserves for being the pioneer of the land across this nation, I agree. But in the end, this is nothing more than a mascot.

Once again I really couldn't agree more with the naysayers of the webpin. I just think this was all brought about the wrong way. If I was using it, I'd probably take exception to the fact that I had to change it just to avert the wishes of a few sensitive Warriors fans. And I would write a half baked diary trying to convince those sensitive fans to let it go.

I don't think the sig should be changed per se, but I think the logo does have some value in history whether it offends you or not, and I don't think the warriors outlook in the 50's was to out and offend the Indian community in 2007. So lighten up a bit.

http://westcoastbiased.blogspot.com

by coma on Jul 18, 2007 10:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i like one aspect of the logo...

on one hand i agree that these native american mascots are offensive to many natives, because that's what they have publicly stated!

i would kindly ask him to change it if, any member of the GSoM COMMUNITY FOUND IT OFFENSIVE.

but, I do like that he is representing the history of the warriors. i wish more people would rep the great warriors of the past.

holla!

" Sleepy Floyd is Superman!!!"

by CoachBarry on Jul 18, 2007 10:28 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

why are you not upset?

Not understanding why people are upset-- what a privilege. I've often wondered if it is privilege that makes people stupid (i.e. less aware, less perceptive) I know others have said it better than me, but I've read a lot and want a turn to speak (just to satisfy myself even if no one listens :)

How can you not understand that this is a huge deal? I lived in China and I observed how the Chinese government is destroying Tibetan culture while idealizing it. As Zizek says, people want the "other" without all the messy parts. Like they can be good dancers, make good food, have interesting clothes, make nice mascots/webpins, but of course they cannot demand to be respected or autonomous or treated like other humans.

Also of course we must ignore the violent history already mentioned (forced sterilization, rape, kidnap, murder) allowed and perpetrated by our government. I know the history lesson is tiring, but if you know this how can you be ok with this?

Its horrifying,embarrassing, and this seemingly innocuous little picture is a remnant of that history. It is a symbol of that process of dehumanization, much more than any "sign of respect". Would it be ok for a German team to have the Happy Jews as their mascot?

by airport son on Jul 18, 2007 10:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Great insights

I really applaud you for this reality in particular:

Exactly. It's the curious logic of let's celebrate the "smiling" native, when this country did absolutely nothing to bring he and his people a smile to their faces. It's trivializing and mocking the reality.

by Atma Brother ONE on Jul 18, 2007 10:53 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

more to add

since it has gone political in here i have something to add to this line of thought...

what if an israeli basketball team was named the bombers? what if that team had a logo that resembled a simple palistinian man that was waiting in line at a checkpoint(maybe with a soldier or 2 as additional decoration)? would that offend anyone? i assume hell yes, but then again maybe not.

by stedanko on Jul 18, 2007 1:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

So...

Im surprised the GSoM people have claimed this one as ignorant yet...

Let me get this straight...MY comparrison early was CLEARLY a joke...if anyone took the Thunder thing seriously, you should check your self at the keyboard.

However..you are comparing a bomber standing a checkpoint ready to blow more Americans away to an Indian smiling with a basketball in his hand?

And I can guarentee you...for every Native American who is mad about this...there is another Native American who would feel the sports world is "neglecting its pastime." The minute the NFL changes the Redskins to the Turtles...and MLB changes the Indians to the Green Sox, you will have Native Americans knocking at Goodell and Seligs door in like 10 seconds, wondering how they could do that.

by gswrico on Jul 18, 2007 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i would welcome

doing away with all native american mascots

by stedanko on Jul 18, 2007 4:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's too bad.

It's an honor to be a mascot of a team. We look up to our mascots not down on them. It hurts me that you can't see it as an honor. We should be proud that teams have chosen Native Americans as their mascots to put up on the shoulders.To be respected and looked up to.

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

there seems like a fine line

between honoring and fetishistic. the university of illinois native american mascot recently banned was awful because it was a misrepresentation of any tribe and based off stereotypes of what white people thought to be native american cultures. why would you want to perpetuate inaccurate, demeaning, parodic gestures of native american life? i think what needs to be probed in addition to whther its "right" or "wrong" is why people feel so attached to these horrible, ahistoric representations of native americans not in the present as they are, but etched in a "pre-modern" past forgotten. If we respect native americans so much as mascots, then we shoudl also give them respect in terms of political and historical representation, not just as some trope to help our team win.

by dj fuzzylogic on Jul 18, 2007 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Mascot

mas·cot (mskt, -kt) KEY

NOUN:

A person, animal, or object believed to bring good luck, especially one kept as the symbol of an organization such as a sports team.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/mascot

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 10:49 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Got it bro

I think we see the definition.....

THE HEART AND SOUL OF THE W'S

by dallaswarrior on Jul 19, 2007 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'd just like to say

after defending the mascot that my views on the white mans destruction of the Native American homeland are firmly against. It was a terrible, the trail of tears, the small pox blankets, everything that happened.

Just so everyone doesn't see me as horrible.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 18, 2007 11:10 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm 25% Native American

Pawnee, from Oklahoma, through my Grandfather and his side of the family.

The webpin was fine, but the stupid comments toward it such as it being a queer/gay Indian weren't okay.

If I was still in High School and in the area you're from Zorgon, I'd use it as a type of survey for a History Report or something and take down numbers and opinions from the Native Americans there.

See what it adds up to, old or young, see who is offended by such a mascot and who isn't. Get a variety of opinions, not just from Native Americans, but because its an area with a higher population of Native Americans, the motivation and ability to get a good sample size is there-along with people who have been around Native Americans and would generally be more respectful and knowledgeable about the cultures and history.

You don't have to change your opinion on the webpin, but after getting better informed by all the cool diverse crowd of GSoM'ers you can better decide it yourself.

Understand why someone might think its a hurtful stereotype that needs to stay in the past and hopefully be forgotten in 2007, whether the person has Native American Ancestry or not.

I don't think anyone saw you as horrible here since after a firm opinion you listened to everyone else and seem to have a better understanding out of all of this, which is all anyone can ask out of you right?

by back2back51s on Jul 18, 2007 9:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

great!

love the comment!

mas·cot (mskt, -kt) KEY

NOUN:

A person, animal, or object believed to bring good luck, especially one kept as the symbol of an organization such as a sports team.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/mascot

by Psion on Jul 19, 2007 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I suppose

I agree with most of it. But my opinion remains unchanged.

It would be nice for a history report.

Tony aka Drawlz600 is AWESOME!!!!

by Zorgon on Jul 19, 2007 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i am offended by the mascot

i thought i was reading a warriors blog, but if the discussion is like this and if people do not understand after almost 60 posts, then please read the words of possibly the only native american among you... me! i am part mohican.

my mother's family has it's known roots dating back to the 18th century in what is now the state pennsylvania. my great, great grandmother, and her husband, were the first generation of either of their families to work and eventually move off an iroquois reservation. the families had been living on the reservation for over 60 years, but very poorly and more than 1000 miles from their native lands.

if you are wondering how i can know so much about my family, it is because the youngest daughter of that small family who left the reservation was my great grandmother and she told me the stories. she was the last 100% in our family and died in 2001 at the age of 102; she was blind for most of her elderly life, but she outlived her husband by 22 years and all but 1 of her 7 children.

my grandmother, as well as her brother and sisters, were all fathered by a man of questionable background, most likely mexican or central american native, a career criminal(bandito), but i actually did not know any of that until i was an adult; he was just a nice, old man to me. my grandfather was mexican and my mother was the first of any of these families to work with whites in a semi-professional/technical workplace. my dad was the first to serve in the armed forces(navy). i am the first college educated and now, my oldest daughter was the first white(irish american) member of our family, but there are several of these little multi cultural.

i will admit to being accused of racism, literally almost as many times as i have been the subject of it. i am absolutely NOT trying to say anyone is racist for not being "aware" of the offending logo's p.c. meaning. however, you pointed out that a native american had not contacted you to report being offended by the logo and now i am doing exactly that.

by stedanko on Jul 18, 2007 12:59 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

arrite bro point made

im part native american as well and i didnt find it offensive arrite everythings opinion based so lol yea done deal got your wish pat on the back wrote a 4 page letter saying im sorry... i guess in your case you want me 2 say sorry to myself to.. sorry jeppalepala

I am as powerful as 100 times 100 times 100 times 13 Stilts!

by jeppalepala on Jul 18, 2007 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

It Is

All opinions. If everyone thought the same, this bulletin would have never existed.

by gswrico on Jul 18, 2007 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i appreciate it

i read the other posts too, but it is a dead issue now so i will let it lie

by stedanko on Jul 18, 2007 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

stedanko

We see it in different lights. I see the mascot representing a Warrior to look up to and is respected now. Yes this government treated our people badly in the past. Now I see the mascot representing nothing but good(who wants a moscot that makes them look bad or is looked down on). I see it as a symbol of the most respected Warrior of all time! I'm sadened that you think this way of the mascot, I wish it brought honor to your heart as is does mine.

by Psion on Jul 18, 2007 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

great

those were great words psion your a cool guy glad i met you. though you did do that one thing after the warriors made the playoffs ewww lol! but yeah you know im a person of color, geez i cant believe its 2007 and everyone here and actually this country is making it look as if you talk about something of someones race your automatically saying a racist remark? i dont understand how people go from saying we are all the same, but than we do the things that actually diversifies us as being from all differnt parts of the world than if you find that the difference from your race than you talk about it you have become bad. geez everyone is making that web pin into a racist thing when they shouldn't and actually see it as a time that the warriors were back when they were in Philadelphia born and raised in the gym were they use to live all of there days going relaxing acting all cool shooting some bball inside of the gym, were a couple a couple of guys who were up to no good started making shots like they were not from the neighborhood, they got it one little fight and there mom got scared she said you are moving with your uncle in the bay area. geez make this Indian mascot be something proud not turn it into a bad thing, because making it look bad to me is just degrading it to something that makes a warrior something that is ridiculed and embarrassing. turn this into an honor of them. forget how and when it use to be bad but make it sound great!

by 24k state fan since 87 on Jul 18, 2007 4:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

that is somethin

i'll never understand

-this way how americans are fightin with words (Nwords Fwords) and pictures @ the time when they have to change the just attitude and fight with reasons what makes people shovinistic (marginalism and unedjukated space)

this webpin was like soap on the floor for some persons
-and dos some persons taked it up