~Buccos~ asked in SportsBaseball · 1 decade ago

POLL: Is the Chief Wahoo offensive?

I think it is - It generalizes Native Americans as idiots:

http://www.bsattler.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/20...

And now that I think of it why are they called the Cleveland "Indians" - the correct name would be the Cleveland Native Americans - or something like that.

What do you think?

Update:

PS - I'm not Native American at all.

14 Answers

Relevance
  • jreb64
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    It generalizes nothing in my opinion. But I usually generalize the "politically correct" as worse than idiots.

    Do you call Southerners rednecks? Think about it.

    Actually, native american is not appropriate since the people being referred to are only from a small part of the North and South American continents if I am understanding you. And it was the Europeans that named the place America. So that is probably wrong also.

    Good luck.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I don't claim Indian origins. My great-grandmother was a full blood Navajo, though, and I've Cherokee blood and lived in the capitol in Tahlequah, Oklahoma. Almost ALL the the Indians I know have the same opinions.

    1.) Ask us. Just once. Don't go naming your team The Blood Thirsty Reds and then claim that it honors us. Ask us.

    2.) The n word for Indians is Redskins.

    3.) We are not Native Americans. We're American Indians. They are not called Native Reservations or American reservations.

    4.) The Redmen of Northeastern State University in Oklahoma and the Seminoles in Florida have granted the names to those schools. No one else has.

    Ask us. Braves? Sure. Indians? All right. Cut out the stupid Hollywood music and Hollywood images and we're cool with it.

    Wahoo? What do you think? Does it even LOOK any bit dignified?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • ?
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    No, they changed their name to honor a Native American from the great pine tree state of Maine who played for their team in the early 1900s. Before they were the Indians they were the Spiders.

    http://www.baseballreliquary.org/story_of_sockalex...

    I don't by any of that generalizes them as idiots stuff. Now that you know the story did you change yr mind?

    Redskins is pretty racist tho, the original owner of that team George Preston Marshall was infamously racist, they were the Boston Redskins first.. they used to name football teams after the cities most popular baseball team (Braves at that time in Boston) so that football would gain a following. They also used to play at the baseball stadiums b/c they didn't have football stadiums everywhere yet. They were the Braves first then they moved to Fenway and changed their name to Redskins... yada yada Redskins is racist...

    see the difference btwn their history and the Indians, Marshall is doing it as a racial slur, the Cleveland Indians did it to honor their player, look at "Socks" and look at the original chief wahoo, they look the same. All that matters is intent.

    Edit: Bert they still have the drums in ATL... they have a whole drum line there and its so much fun!!!! They have a guy that bangs a huge drum in CF.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    To me, it is not offensive.

    If I were Native American, I do not think I would find it offensive, but I cannot be sure.

    It's been around for many years. If any Native Americans have had issues with it, then it would have been brought up by now. If past generations have not seemed to see it as offensive (or at least didn't say anything about it), then Chief Wahoo should be able to be kept.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Being a white Indians fan. I dont really see it as offensive. I guess it really depends though.

    Originally, the Indians were named in honor of a player, who happened to be a Native American, Louis Sockalexis.. so I dont see how the name of the team is offensive.But I guess, Cheif Wahoo could be.. although Wahoo just means "loud yell".. so I dont know where you got idiots from.. its just a logo.. but people have opinions.

    The only sports team, that I see as offensive toward Natives would be the Washington Redskins, of the NFL.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    The only real way to get an answer to this question is to ask it to the people it would most significantly affect. We aren't them. We're just baseball fans and have as many varied or coinciding opinions as any other set of sports fans. I don't even think our's therefore even count.

    I'd tell you though in response to your question that I don't find Chief Wahoo offensive. Cartoonish, yes.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Does it really matter? They have been the Cleveland Indians forever, and out of the ENTIRE Native American population, probably about 5 of them actually care. Keep it the same, and everyone just enjoy the best sport on the face of the earth.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I think they should change the "Chief Wahoo" logo if it offends people. How hard is it to just draw something else?

    Indians is a common name for sports teams. People probably wouldn't complain about that if they ditched Wahoo.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I would think the Atlanta Braves are more offensive, with the drums that they used in the playoffs in 1991 and 1992, and that Apache war chant that they still use. Why did Chief Nokahoma go away? Did he die, or did they get rid of him when they got rid of the drums.

    The St Johns basketball team used to be called "Redmen," and now they're the "Red Storm."

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    LMAO. Their is a lawsuit between Washington Redskins and Native Americans between their logo!

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.