Fighting Illini fighting for own name

GOKATS · Post by **GOKATS** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:20 pm

Ponycat wrote:
And for the record and I am a full blooded Viking.

And for the record I am a full blooded 'Raider', though this weekend I will be a half-blooded 'Seahawk'.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:23 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:How do you campare the Fighting Illini to the "Montanans paraded around as inbred shotgun-totin' hillbillies with holes in their britches and a jug of moonshine under their arm and no teeth, with a belt made out of squirrel skins?" There is no way you can lichen that absurd description to the Illini. How is an Illini portrayed unfairly?

Read the book or do some research on the topic. It might surprise you when you learn that my analogy is quite appropriate.

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:25 pm

GOKATS wrote:
Ponycat wrote:
And for the record and I am a full blooded Viking.
And for the record I am a full blooded 'Raider', though this weekend I will be a half-blooded 'Seahawk'.

Well I'm a Seahawk by choice but my family tree doesn't branch from Scandanavia so a Viking by blood.

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:26 pm

As a Native American, I am offended with few exceptions to the use of the various depictions of our people and customs. How can one argue after looking at the Cleveland Indian mascot? (I know--that's pro.)

I would attempt to explain further, but suffice it to say the very reason one should rightly assume Dana Conway, Tamarra Guardipee, and Mike Chavez chose to go 202 miles west can be found in the tone throughout this thread. And yeah, Loree Payne never considered anywhere other than Missoula or Seattle. We have a girl who left here and is in Washington state finishing her high school career: she's been offered by North Carolina and Tennessee among others after her visits. Think she ever got around the attitude so prevalent in this thread to even consider going to MSU?

All I'd ask is for you to detach yourself, step back and reread what ya'll have written. Do you also feel we need to ensure we have a quota of Montana kids playing for MSU, especially Gallatin Valley kids to ensure we have decent crowds at the expense of our won-loss records? I mean, you all know if we're going to get the attendance of our basketball games up, we need the local community

Bit of advice: once you say something, you can't take it back and it probably is a reflection of your true beliefs.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:50 pm

Cat Grad wrote:As a Native American, I am offended with few exceptions to the use of the various depictions of our people and customs. How can one argue after looking at the Cleveland Indian mascot? (I know--that's pro.)

I would attempt to explain further, but suffice it to say the very reason one should rightly assume Dana Conway, Tamarra Guardipee, and Mike Chavez chose to go 202 miles west can be found in the tone throughout this thread. And yeah, Loree Payne never considered anywhere other than Missoula or Seattle. We have a girl who left here and is in Washington state finishing her high school career: she's been offered by North Carolina and Tennessee among others after her visits. Think she ever got around the attitude so prevalent in this thread to even consider going to MSU?

All I'd ask is for you to detach yourself, step back and reread what ya'll have written. Do you also feel we need to ensure we have a quota of Montana kids playing for MSU, especially Gallatin Valley kids to ensure we have decent crowds at the expense of our won-loss records? I mean, you all know if we're going to get the attendance of our basketball games up, we need the local community Bit of advice: once you say something, you can't take it back and it probably is a reflection of your true beliefs.

Can you please explain what this has to do with the topic?

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:54 pm

It appears that he is suggesting that MSU is a hotbed for racial ignorance, and is referencing this thread as support for that assertion ... and then layering on suggestions that it is hurting our recruiting of Native American athletes.

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:02 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that he is suggesting that MSU is a hotbed for racial ignorance, and is referencing this thread as support for that assertion ... and then layering on suggestions that it is hurting our recruiting of Native American athletes.

If Native Americans do not want to come here, so be it. They can make their decision based on whatever they want. Same goes for anyone. There will always be someone not choosing this school for one reason or another and that goes for every school.

Post by **rtb** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:06 pm

[quote="Cat Grad"]And yeah, Loree Payne never considered anywhere other than Missoula or Seattle. We have a girl who left here and is in Washington state finishing her high school career: she's been offered by North Carolina and Tennessee among others after her visits. Think she ever got around the attitude so prevalent in this thread to even consider going to MSU?
quote]

Quick Question, what does Loree have to do with the discussion? She isn't Native American is she?

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:07 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that he is suggesting that MSU is a hotbed for racial ignorance, and is referencing this thread as support for that assertion ... and then layering on suggestions that it is hurting our recruiting of Native American athletes.
If Native Americans do not want to come here, so be it. They can make their decision based on whatever they want. Same goes for anyone. There will always be someone not choosing this school for one reason or another and that goes for every school.

Sure ... but I would expect that you would agree that if you came to discover that MSU's campus (as alleged by Cat Grad) was hostile towards Native Americans, you would like that situation to be changed so that it was less hostile. Is that a correct statement?

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:09 pm

i have a quick question. Mainly for Cat Grad. Just because I question the decisions that the NCAA makes that I don't agree with, does that make me racially ignorant?

longhorn_22 · Post by **longhorn_22** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:11 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
longhorn_22 wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that he is suggesting that MSU is a hotbed for racial ignorance, and is referencing this thread as support for that assertion ... and then layering on suggestions that it is hurting our recruiting of Native American athletes.
If Native Americans do not want to come here, so be it. They can make their decision based on whatever they want. Same goes for anyone. There will always be someone not choosing this school for one reason or another and that goes for every school.
Sure ... but I would expect that you would agree that if you came to discover that MSU's campus (as alleged by Cat Grad) was hostile towards Native Americans, you would like that situation to be changed so that it was less hostile. Is that a correct statement?

Of course I would want it to be less hostile. But the point I am getting at is, if I am reading Cat Grad correctly, do we need to make a special effort to recruit Native Americans just because they are Native American?

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:15 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:i have a quick question. Mainly for Cat Grad. Just because I question the decisions that the NCAA makes that I don't agree with, does that make me racially ignorant?

Although not specifically requested, I will offer my opinion:

It doesn't have anything to do with disagreeing with the NCAA. It's the way in which one makes the case for disagreeing with the NCAA that would show whether one is racially ignorant.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:18 pm

longhorn_22 wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:
longhorn_22 wrote:
Bay Area Cat wrote:It appears that he is suggesting that MSU is a hotbed for racial ignorance, and is referencing this thread as support for that assertion ... and then layering on suggestions that it is hurting our recruiting of Native American athletes.
If Native Americans do not want to come here, so be it. They can make their decision based on whatever they want. Same goes for anyone. There will always be someone not choosing this school for one reason or another and that goes for every school.
Sure ... but I would expect that you would agree that if you came to discover that MSU's campus (as alleged by Cat Grad) was hostile towards Native Americans, you would like that situation to be changed so that it was less hostile. Is that a correct statement?
Of course I would want it to be less hostile. But the point I am getting at is, if I am reading Cat Grad correctly, do we need to make a special effort to recruit Native Americans just because they are Native American?

I don't think that was the point he was making. Similar the posts above about minorities "forcing their race on people," I think it is important to remember that all people just want to be treated with respect and would ideally love to be treated as perfect equals. In this country, that has not happened for non-whites in the past, and that is often still the case today.

catamaran · Post by **catamaran** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 9:25 am

rtb wrote:
Cat Grad wrote:And yeah, Loree Payne never considered anywhere other than Missoula or Seattle. We have a girl who left here and is in Washington state finishing her high school career: she's been offered by North Carolina and Tennessee among others after her visits. Think she ever got around the attitude so prevalent in this thread to even consider going to MSU?
quote]

Quick Question, what does Loree have to do with the discussion? She isn't Native American is she?

Loree went to the PAC-10 because she could, not because of the racial overtones; unless of course people on campus discriminate against 5'6" caucasions. I also believe Dana Conway chose UM because 1)they are better at WBB and 2)her brother was "mistreated" by the coaching staff (as I understand it)

NavyBlue · Post by **NavyBlue** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:44 am

BAC, I am sorry for the most part I don't buy that many American Indians are all that offended, most of this is being brought on by white liberals.

Whenever I have been on the Flathead Reservation, I have only seen Native Americans wearing appearal of two NFL teams. The Washington Redskins (which is probably the worst of all) and the Kansas City Chiefs. Now, if they were so offended why are they wearing shirts, jackets, and hats of the Redskins.

I am not trying to be argumentative, but that American Indians are offened by these nick names just does not jive with my own experience.

Post by **SonomaCat** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:24 pm

NavyBlue wrote:BAC, I am sorry for the most part I don't buy that many American Indians are all that offended, most of this is being brought on by white liberals.

Whenever I have been on the Flathead Reservation, I have only seen Native Americans wearing appearal of two NFL teams. The Washington Redskins (which is probably the worst of all) and the Kansas City Chiefs. Now, if they were so offended why are they wearing shirts, jackets, and hats of the Redskins.

I am not trying to be argumentative, but that American Indians are offened by these nick names just does not jive with my own experience.

Rather than extrapolating your own experiences in polling Native Americans, wouldn't it be easier to read the articles about people complaining about these mascots? It seems that most of the people doing the complaining are members of the tribes in question. They raised this issue, and people (yes, liberals more so than conservatives) have begun to agree with them. Finally, some progress is being made to actually give the tribes a say in how their culture is represented.

It has also been said that blacks in the south were perfectly content with Jim Crow, but that the Northern liberal agitators coming into the south were the only ones making a big deal out of things. Our problems are becoming less severe, but the cycle remains the same.

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:35 pm

Quick Question, what does Loree have to do with the discussion? She isn't Native American is she?[/quote]Loree went to the PAC-10 because she could, not because of the racial overtones; unless of course people on campus discriminate against 5'6" caucasions. I also believe Dana Conway chose UM because 1)they are better at WBB and 2)her brother was "mistreated" by the coaching staff (as I understand it)[/quote]

5'6" caucasion

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 5:59 pm

Cat Grad wrote:As a Native American, I am offended with few exceptions to the use of the various depictions of our people and customs. How can one argue after looking at the Cleveland Indian mascot? (I know--that's pro.)

I would attempt to explain further, but suffice it to say the very reason one should rightly assume Dana Conway, Tamarra Guardipee, and Mike Chavez chose to go 202 miles west can be found in the tone throughout this thread. And yeah, Loree Payne never considered anywhere other than Missoula or Seattle. We have a girl who left here and is in Washington state finishing her high school career: she's been offered by North Carolina and Tennessee among others after her visits. Think she ever got around the attitude so prevalent in this thread to even consider going to MSU?

All I'd ask is for you to detach yourself, step back and reread what ya'll have written. Do you also feel we need to ensure we have a quota of Montana kids playing for MSU, especially Gallatin Valley kids to ensure we have decent crowds at the expense of our won-loss records? I mean, you all know if we're going to get the attendance of our basketball games up, we need the local community :roll: Bit of advice: once you say something, you can't take it back and it probably is a reflection of your true beliefs.

Isn't "Pistol" Pete Conway just as much Native American as Dana Conway?

theblackgecko · Post by **theblackgecko** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:12 pm

Bay Area Cat wrote:
NavyBlue wrote:BAC, I am sorry for the most part I don't buy that many American Indians are all that offended, most of this is being brought on by white liberals.

Whenever I have been on the Flathead Reservation, I have only seen Native Americans wearing appearal of two NFL teams. The Washington Redskins (which is probably the worst of all) and the Kansas City Chiefs. Now, if they were so offended why are they wearing shirts, jackets, and hats of the Redskins.

I am not trying to be argumentative, but that American Indians are offened by these nick names just does not jive with my own experience.
Rather than extrapolating your own experiences in polling Native Americans, wouldn't it be easier to read the articles about people complaining about these mascots? It seems that most of the people doing the complaining are members of the tribes in question. They raised this issue, and people (yes, liberals more so than conservatives) have begun to agree with them. Finally, some progress is being made to actually give the tribes a say in how their culture is represented.

It has also been said that blacks in the south were perfectly content with Jim Crow, but that the Northern liberal agitators coming into the south were the only ones making a big deal out of things. Our problems are becoming less severe, but the cycle remains the same.

By the same token, one should ask Native Americans what they think about tribal mascots rather than the liberal academic types that write articles. Florida State and Utah were intially on the list of offensive mascots, despite having permission from the Seminole and Ute tribes for their mascots.

I'm not defending schools that use tribal mascots without permission, I'm pointing out that the issue is complex. There are those in Indian country who are offended by team names like the Chiefs, but there are also those who are proud of the same mascots.