Chiefs Woman behind the Redskins name change says the Chiefs should be on guard - Page 30

**BigRedChief** · 06-25-2014, 11:01 PM

The fight took a monumental shift at a protest nine years at Arrowhead Stadium and it’s about to come full circle. No matter what you think of the issue, it will soon be ubiquitous in and around Kansas City’s greatest obsession other than barbecue.

The Chiefs are aware of it, and are preparing accordingly.

Back in 2005, a group calling itself Not In Our Honor protested before the Chiefs played Washington. The protesters were predominately American Indians, united in their anger over what they perceived as offensive stereotypes passed off as nicknames for sports teams. An older woman, Suzan Harjo, one of the leaders of the protest, met a younger woman named Amanda Blackhorse, then a student at Kansas.
They bonded over their passion for the issue, and that’s how the case known as Blackhorse et al v. Pro-Football Inc. came to be. Last week the plaintiffs prevailed when the United States Patent and Trademark Office canceled the trademarks of the Washington Redskins.

The case is under appeal, but you should know that the woman who took on and (at least for the moment) defeated the corporate entity that owns Washington’s NFL team would like to see the same type of case brought against the Chiefs.
As she says, the spark that started back in 2005 at Arrowhead has created a fire that will probably soon return.

“What happens there, it’s just insane the things they allow to go on,” Blackhorse says of the Chiefs and Arrowhead. “They are definitely in the group (of offensive teams), for sure.”

For now, the Chiefs are publicly silent on this. But they know the fight is likely coming, and they hope a few things work in their favor — most notably that it’s tough to compare their nickname with the one in Washington that is a dictionary-defined racial slur. Blackhorse’s group has also protested baseball’s Cleveland Indians, and that team has greatly scaled back its use of the cartoonish Chief Wahoo logo.

The Chiefs have similarly scaled back some of their more obvious plays on Indian stereotypes, and they hope they have some other advantages when the fight comes. The team is named after H. Roe Bartle, the mayor who was key in Kansas City landing the team from Dallas in 1962. Bartle’s nickname was “The Chief.”

The team stopped using a man dressed in traditional headgear as a mascot during pregame festivities many years ago. In the early 1990s, many of the Chiefs’ defensive players posed for a poster that today both looks absolutely ridiculous and would never be recreated.
The team does, however, play the tomahawk chop during games and welcomes fans in headgear and other stereotypes of Native American dress.

Those are some of the parts of the game day experience that Blackhorse calls “insane,” and why she expects a fight that’s gaining momentum and support nationally to come to Kansas City.

She knows that the vast majority of Chiefs fans will oppose her, but she also knows that the vast majority of fans in Washington opposed her, as well.

She says there is “no middle ground with this issue,” that once an ethnic group is used as a nickname for a sports team, the people in that ethic group lose control of their identity and humanity.

“I don’t want people to think I’m going around pointing fingers, like, ‘You’re a racist, you’re a racist, you’re a racist,’ ” she says. “That’s not the point. The point is we’re offended. You can love Native Americans to death. You can have admiration, love what we do, how we are, whatever, and still (hijack) our culture without understanding it that way.”

Wherever you stand on this issue, there is no denying that Blackhorse’s side is making progress. Teams are sensitive to and aware of perpetuating stereotypes so much more than in the past, in response to public sentiment.

The issue is further complicated by context, that this is a fight centered around Indians, who make up about 1 percent of the nation’s population and who, in Blackhorse’s words, “are invisible sometimes to people.”
That makes getting the message out a bit more difficult. A group of people that feels offended by widespread stereotyping isn’t big enough to get critical mass on its own.

That’s why Blackhorse says the movement needs the help of non-Indians, and part of why she’s so encouraged by developments in Congress and with the trademark case.

There is a lot of momentum here, which can be dangerous for teams like the Chiefs that will likely soon find themselves directly in the fight.
“I’m not sure there’s anything the (Chiefs) can do at this point other than look for another name,” Blackhorse says. “They could be the team that says, ‘You know what? We understand the issue and we don’t want to be Dan Snyder and fight this in court forever. We want to do the right thing and move forward and avoid this entire battle.’ I’m sure fans will be upset, but still, that’s doing the right thing.

“If they want to be sensitive to Native American people, that’s the thing to do.”

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt...#storylink=cpy

Early 90's

|Zach| · 06-27-2014, 08:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isupportthename

It may be your fight soon.

Nobody gives a shit about a butthurt Washington fan sad enough to go from message board to message board like we care.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 06-27-2014, 08:32 AM

First, if we had to change, I'd take back "Kansas City Kings".

Second, this was my response to this utter bullshit:

Quote:

Dear Native Americans who find our team offensive,

As you may or may not be aware, the name "Chiefs" derives from former Kansas City Mayor H. Roe Bartle, who was instrumental in helping bring the team and the early AFL to Kansas City Missouri. Bartle's nick name was "Chief". The name was submitted in a contest in the local paper, and "Chiefs" was the popular vote of the citizenry. So, we became the Kansas City Chiefs.
I understand that you are offended by the use of Native American imagery( the arrowhead, the chant, and the chop )by both the team and our fans, and I'm going to tell you something that may shock you:

I am in complete agreement.

You see, there was a time when being a Native meant being a tough-skinned, self-sufficient, buffalo-hunting, ass-whipping warrior in life. As I look at what your culture has become, I realize that we do in fact need to change. Not because you wish to be distanced from us, but rather because we need to be distanced from YOU. We run a football team comprised of top-shape athletes who earn their money training 11 months of the year, followed by 20 weeks of warrior-level contact sport that the average modern-day Native wouldn't last a day in. Why should we promote a culture that's gone from "warrior of the plains", to "excuse me sir, do you have some change so I can get a drink at my casino's bar"?

Thank you for opening my eyes, and congratulations on our mutual victory.

Sincerely,

Me.

Isupportthename · 06-27-2014, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native

Many internet nerds, like you, like to post on CP.

I didn't make that up.

There are a lot of things that could possibly be offensive to people out there. A LOT of things. Heck, the state of Oklahoma supposedly means Red Face or something along those lines. In Washington the "alternate nname" that's always been floated out there is WARRIORS. In a sense it would probably work given that the logo could remain the same as well as the colors. But if they now have a problem with CHIEFS, would they not also then have a problem with WARRIORS? The whole argument is the result of the uber-PC world in which we live, where simple football fans can be branded as racist simply for supporting their team. THAT'S a scary thought if you ask me.

KC native · 06-27-2014, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 505 Chief

First, if we had to change, I'd take back "Kansas City Kings".

Second, this was my response to this utter bullshit:

Your response is bullshit.

Not all tribes were warriors. Pick up a history book sometime.

KC native · 06-27-2014, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Isupportthename

There are a lot of things that could possibly be offensive to people out there. A LOT of things. Heck, the state of Oklahoma supposedly means Red Face or something along those lines. In Washington the "alternate nname" that's always been floated out there is WARRIORS. In a sense it would probably work given that the logo could remain the same as well as the colors. But if they now have a problem with CHIEFS, would they not also then have a problem with WARRIORS? The whole argument is the result of the uber-PC world in which we live, where simple football fans can be branded as racist simply for supporting their team. THAT'S a scary thought if you ask me.

Redskin is a racial slur. Chiefs is not. There is nothing uber-PC about that.

The Chiefs will not lose a court case like the Redskins have.

InChiefsHeaven · 06-27-2014, 08:49 AM

I guess it's interesting to contemplate that many of the Native American tribes were warring among themselves before the white man showed up. Now, they are standing in solidarity. More good stuff brought to you by the white man.

duncan_idaho · 06-27-2014, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loochy

Many Italians view mustachioed pizza box guys as a racial/ethnic slur, which puts them in the same category.

See, I can make up facts too!

You're disputing that many Native Americans view "redskin" as a slur?

The National Congress of American Indians - which represents over 1 million people - considers it one. I'm not making up facts.

KC native · 06-27-2014, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by duncan_idaho

You're disputing that many Native Americans view "redskin" as a slur?

The National Congress of American Indians - which represents over 1 million people - considers it one. I'm not making up facts.

loochy is all sarcasm all the time.

Halfcan · 06-27-2014, 08:56 AM

I am offended by gaudy Indian casinos and Smoke shops that litter every town in Oklahoma.

Consider yourselves on notice!!

Isupportthename · 06-27-2014, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native

Redskin is a racial slur. Chiefs is not. There is nothing uber-PC about that.

The Chiefs will not lose a court case like the Redskins have.

The fact that they're even considering going after a name like CHIEFS should tell you their true motive. And for the record it's not the first time that the Redskins have been stripped of the trademark. And each time it's happened it's been overturned.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 06-27-2014, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native

Your response is bullshit.

Not all tribes were warriors. Pick up a history book sometime.

So maybe the Navajo should go back to making pottery, and

?

Kiss my ass.

**loochy** · 06-27-2014, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native

Many internet nerds, like you, like to post on CP.

I didn't make that up.

I am an internet nerd, although I am much less nerdy than many.

Also, "internet nerd' is quite offensive. I will slap you with a lawsuit now.

Garcia Bronco · 06-27-2014, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InChiefsHell

I guess it's interesting to contemplate that many of the Native American tribes were warring among themselves before the white man showed up. Now, they are standing in solidarity. More good stuff brought to you by the white man.

About the time my ancestors got here the Powhatans had destroyed the Chesopians....oh shit I just realized...we'll need to change the name of the Chesapeake Bay.

KC native · 06-27-2014, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loochy

I am an internet nerd, although I am much less nerdy than many.

Also, "internet nerd' is quite offensive. I will slap you with a lawsuit now.

I will be retaining patteau as my counsel. Have fun playing semantics with him.

KC native · 06-27-2014, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 505 Chief

So maybe the Navajo should go back to making pottery, and

?

Kiss my ass.

Don't get butt hurt because I pointed out how terrible your response was.

06-25-2014, 11:01 PM
BigRedChief Has a particular set of skills Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: On the water Casino cash: $1588962 VARSITY	Woman behind the Redskins name change says the Chiefs should be on guard The fight took a monumental shift at a protest nine years at Arrowhead Stadium and it’s about to come full circle. No matter what you think of the issue, it will soon be ubiquitous in and around Kansas City’s greatest obsession other than barbecue. The Chiefs are aware of it, and are preparing accordingly. Back in 2005, a group calling itself Not In Our Honor protested before the Chiefs played Washington. The protesters were predominately American Indians, united in their anger over what they perceived as offensive stereotypes passed off as nicknames for sports teams. An older woman, Suzan Harjo, one of the leaders of the protest, met a younger woman named Amanda Blackhorse, then a student at Kansas. They bonded over their passion for the issue, and that’s how the case known as Blackhorse et al v. Pro-Football Inc. came to be. Last week the plaintiffs prevailed when the United States Patent and Trademark Office canceled the trademarks of the Washington Redskins. The case is under appeal, but you should know that the woman who took on and (at least for the moment) defeated the corporate entity that owns Washington’s NFL team would like to see the same type of case brought against the Chiefs. As she says, the spark that started back in 2005 at Arrowhead has created a fire that will probably soon return. “What happens there, it’s just insane the things they allow to go on,” Blackhorse says of the Chiefs and Arrowhead. “They are definitely in the group (of offensive teams), for sure.” For now, the Chiefs are publicly silent on this. But they know the fight is likely coming, and they hope a few things work in their favor — most notably that it’s tough to compare their nickname with the one in Washington that is a dictionary-defined racial slur. Blackhorse’s group has also protested baseball’s Cleveland Indians, and that team has greatly scaled back its use of the cartoonish Chief Wahoo logo. The Chiefs have similarly scaled back some of their more obvious plays on Indian stereotypes, and they hope they have some other advantages when the fight comes. The team is named after H. Roe Bartle, the mayor who was key in Kansas City landing the team from Dallas in 1962. Bartle’s nickname was “The Chief.” The team stopped using a man dressed in traditional headgear as a mascot during pregame festivities many years ago. In the early 1990s, many of the Chiefs’ defensive players posed for a poster that today both looks absolutely ridiculous and would never be recreated. The team does, however, play the tomahawk chop during games and welcomes fans in headgear and other stereotypes of Native American dress. Those are some of the parts of the game day experience that Blackhorse calls “insane,” and why she expects a fight that’s gaining momentum and support nationally to come to Kansas City. She knows that the vast majority of Chiefs fans will oppose her, but she also knows that the vast majority of fans in Washington opposed her, as well. She says there is “no middle ground with this issue,” that once an ethnic group is used as a nickname for a sports team, the people in that ethic group lose control of their identity and humanity. “I don’t want people to think I’m going around pointing fingers, like, ‘You’re a racist, you’re a racist, you’re a racist,’ ” she says. “That’s not the point. The point is we’re offended. You can love Native Americans to death. You can have admiration, love what we do, how we are, whatever, and still (hijack) our culture without understanding it that way.” Wherever you stand on this issue, there is no denying that Blackhorse’s side is making progress. Teams are sensitive to and aware of perpetuating stereotypes so much more than in the past, in response to public sentiment. The issue is further complicated by context, that this is a fight centered around Indians, who make up about 1 percent of the nation’s population and who, in Blackhorse’s words, “are invisible sometimes to people.” That makes getting the message out a bit more difficult. A group of people that feels offended by widespread stereotyping isn’t big enough to get critical mass on its own. That’s why Blackhorse says the movement needs the help of non-Indians, and part of why she’s so encouraged by developments in Congress and with the trademark case. There is a lot of momentum here, which can be dangerous for teams like the Chiefs that will likely soon find themselves directly in the fight. “I’m not sure there’s anything the (Chiefs) can do at this point other than look for another name,” Blackhorse says. “They could be the team that says, ‘You know what? We understand the issue and we don’t want to be Dan Snyder and fight this in court forever. We want to do the right thing and move forward and avoid this entire battle.’ I’m sure fans will be upset, but still, that’s doing the right thing. “If they want to be sensitive to Native American people, that’s the thing to do.” Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/spt...#storylink=cpy Early 90's
Posts: 79,885

06-27-2014, 08:49 AM	#441
InChiefsHeaven Rockin' yer FACE OFF! Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Omaha, Nebraska Casino cash: $2555437	I guess it's interesting to contemplate that many of the Native American tribes were warring among themselves before the white man showed up. Now, they are standing in solidarity. More good stuff brought to you by the white man. __________________ We have a million reasons for failure, but not one excuse... Die Donks, DIE!! Holy Crap fellas!!! We did it!!! THREE TIMES!!!
Posts: 26,261

06-27-2014, 08:56 AM	#444
Halfcan In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2005 Casino cash: $7327995	I am offended by gaudy Indian casinos and Smoke shops that litter every town in Oklahoma. Consider yourselves on notice!!
Posts: 43,200