The Somewhat Serious Discussion Thread

Is that right? I have no idea.

I think they're still the Ole Miss Rebels but now there mascot is a black bear, makes no sense at all. I think you meant change from the Rebels period but I don't know why they didn't do that the first time.


As for whether i think they should or not, I don't think they should have to.
 
Understandable and I can appreciate why he felt that way.


Side question...Do you guys think that Ole Miss should change their nickname and mascot?

But seriously to answer your question, on the surface I don't have a problem with using the name Rebel as a mascot but when it also leads to almost every fan in the stands waving a small rebel flag, it becomes disconcerting.

I know this isn't an original thought or anything but I still don't understand how, prior to 5 years ago, UM ever got a black athlete who came to watch a game as a recruit to come to school there.
 
So where do we draw the line then? Every college football fan with a pulse knows where the nickname "Rebels" came from for Ole Miss, so if we've got such a problem with the flag then why don't we have a problem with the nickname?

And from there we can move on to the Redskins, Braves, Seminoles, Indians, etc.
 
On the one hand, I don't think "it won't be perfect" or "how far will it go" is a reason not to try.

On the other hand, I don't think I love overreaching on what can or cannot be sold, bought, displayed, etc.
 
So where do we draw the line then? Every college football fan with a pulse knows where the nickname "Rebels" came from for Ole Miss, so if we've got such a problem with the flag then why don't we have a problem with the nickname?

And from there we can move on to the Redskins, Braves, Seminoles, Indians, etc.

It's a fair question and I wish I had a great answer as to why there was a line in the sand where one thing was ok and the other was over the line.

And as a Washington professional football fan and a Braves baseball fan, I guess I'm just offensive as hell.
 
Saw this on Facebook...
 

Attachments

  • FB_IMG_1435300291852.jpg
    FB_IMG_1435300291852.jpg
    46.1 KB · Views: 0
It's a fair question and I wish I had a great answer as to why there was a line in the sand where one thing was ok and the other was over the line.

And as a Washington professional football fan and a Braves baseball fan, I guess I'm just offensive as hell.

I'm fine with names that are actually people groups like Braves, Warriors, Sioux, Irish, etc. Those were official names of legitimate people groups.

I do have a problem with Redskin though.
 
What parts of "being southern" do you think people associate with the flag? Like, those people you're referring to who are celebrating the positive things that go along with that... what do you think they have in mind when they fly that flag?

When I was growing up I had no idea there was any significant racial component to it at all. I mean, I knew the Civil War was largely waged over slavery and I knew that was the Confederate flag, but slavery was so obviously way back in history and so obviously wrong that it seemed irrelevant. I saw the Confederate flag in the Dukes of Hazzard and I knew Lynyrd Skynyrd (sp?) waved it around and I thought of it purely as a symbol of southern pride. In roughly the same way that Scotsmen proudly fly the St. Andrews cross even though they're part of the UK. Most of them don't want to secede, but they're still proud of being Scots.

But eventually I learned about lynching and the KKK and I figured out that that flag carries a whole different meaning for black people. And for me, that's the point where it started being an issue of courtesy -- why would anybody want to display a flag that made his neighbors think about hatred and death? It's hard for me to imagine anyone being so married to his southern-first identity that he'd be willing to say FU to 10-20 percent of the people he sees around him. As I said on the mothership, we're supposed to have better manners than that down here.
 
I'm fine with names that are actually people groups like Braves, Warriors, Sioux, Irish, etc. Those were official names of legitimate people groups.

I do have a problem with Redskin though.

I'm against demeaning caricatures. I'm okay with the "Braves" name but I'm glad Chief Noc-a-homa is gone, and I hate the tomahawk chop chant. I'm okay with the nickname "Indians" but Chief Wahoo is reprehensible. I think the nickname "Redskins" is awful but their logos are fine. I think the "Fighting Irish" logo with the guy with his fists up is over the line, because I've known several actual Irishmen from Ireland who think it's offensive. Etc etc etc. Basically for me it comes down to how respectful you're being towards the group you're "honoring." And erring on the side of being respectful.
 
I'm fine with names that are actually people groups like Braves, Warriors, Sioux, Irish, etc. Those were official names of legitimate people groups.

I do have a problem with Redskin though.

As do I. It probably makes me a hypocrite because I'm still a fan of the team but I wish it was changed. They could change to something along the lines of Washington Warriors, move back to the old school spear logo and keep just about everything else not involving the Native American face logo and the vast majority of the fan base wouldn't give two SHlTS.
 
When I was growing up I had no idea there was any significant racial component to it at all. I mean, I knew the Civil War was largely waged over slavery and I knew that was the Confederate flag, but slavery was so obviously way back in history and so obviously wrong that it seemed irrelevant. I saw the Confederate flag in the Dukes of Hazzard and I knew Lynyrd Skynyrd (sp?) waved it around and I thought of it purely as a symbol of southern pride. In roughly the same way that Scotsmen proudly fly the St. Andrews cross even though they're part of the UK. Most of them don't want to secede, but they're still proud of being Scots.

But eventually I learned about lynching and the KKK and I figured out that that flag carries a whole different meaning for black people. And for me, that's the point where it started being an issue of courtesy -- why would anybody want to display a flag that made his neighbors think about hatred and death? It's hard for me to imagine anyone being so married to his southern-first identity that he'd be willing to say FU to 10-20 percent of the people he sees around him. As I said on the mothership, we're supposed to have better manners than that down here.

War of the States wasn't largely waged on slavery, but restoring the Union.
 
War of the States wasn't largely waged on slavery, but restoring the Union.

The south left over slavery. The north invaded to force them back. I mean, we southerners try to cloak it in "states' rights" and all that stuff, but the reality is that it was pretty simple. The whole economy of the south was dependent on slavery, and once the as-then-constituted US became unwilling to let slavery expand into new states, the future of slavery was unacceptably murky. The south left so they could control their own destiny. There's a reason slavery was mentioned in paragraph one of just about all the states' declarations of secession.
 
The RF Football Talk is discussing whether a man should hit a woman. Some of those views are pathetic in there.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top