ChiefsPlanet
Page 25 of 29 « First 1521222324 25 26272829
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs Listen, people. We need to have a talk about a Chiefs name change at some point. (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=332134)

Mecca 07-06-2020 08:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties (Post 15053221)
That's not happening. The Chiefs run this town.
Yea...the Chiefs however don't run the NFL or the country as a whole. As soon as sponsors don't want to be associated with you though you're ****ed. So let's hope that doesn't happen because at that point there is no going back.

HayWire 07-06-2020 08:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevrunner (Post 15053076)
Here is a pretty good argument for those that want the Chiefs name changed. This is from a website supporting that:

[I][Chief - This is a word that is commonly given as a nickname which incorrectly labels Native American men. The term 'chief' itself is incorrect. American Indian leaders were never 'chiefs', but headmen, or clan mothers, and so on. Not 'chiefs'. Native leaders were highly disrespected by the USA. So calling someone 'Chief', is just a way to continue that disrespect. Trust us when we tell you, being called 'chief' carries with it the same insulting, belittling sting for a Native man as being called 'boy' does for African American men/I]
Wait, what? This is an argument for changing the name? By this logic the name should stay. It plainly states that "American Indian leaders were "never 'Chiefs'" so the term should be free to use.

I know some want it changed but come on. I make jokes about people being offended by everything but damn.

Mecca 07-06-2020 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HayWire (Post 15053231)
Wait, what? This is an argument for changing the name? By this logic the name should stay. It plainly states that "American Indian leaders were "never 'Chiefs'" so the term should be free to use.

I know some want it changed but come on. I make jokes about people being offended by everything but damn.
Of course their argument is how it's a derogatory American term for Indian leaders...it's a funny word to use in every day conversation, if you call anyone Chief they get super annoyed though.

Hammock Parties 07-06-2020 08:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 15053224)
Yea...the Chiefs however don't run the NFL or the country as a whole. As soon as sponsors don't want to be associated with you though you're ****ed. So let's hope that doesn't happen because at that point there is no going back.
Sponsors won't care. Chiefs run this town.

Why do you cave to everything the left wants? Are you that weak, that spineless? I assure you the Hunts aren't.

Mecca 07-06-2020 08:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties (Post 15053235)
Sponsors won't care. Chiefs run this town.

Why do you cave to everything the left wants? Are you that weak, that spineless? I assure you the Hunts aren't.
I'm telling you reality, the Redskins have resisted this and now they're screwed, the minute 1 team changes its name you should probably get ready for pressure for all of them to change.

BigRedChief 07-06-2020 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammock Parties (Post 15053221)
If the Chiefs were prone to caving to public pressure on bullshit, Tyreek wouldn't be here and we wouldn't be Super Bowl Champs.
You know that's not true. They didn't cave because they had the tape of that crazy bitch confessing it was BS the whole time. They knew he wasn't guilty. They had the tape. They wernt brave. They had the undeniable facts.

Mecca 07-06-2020 08:49 AM
The Chiefs are no different than any other corporation if they think the name will cost them money they'll change it.

OrtonsPiercedTaint 07-06-2020 08:55 AM
Change is only suppose to scare and upset the old. Young just roll with it

OrtonsPiercedTaint 07-06-2020 08:57 AM
Screw the Seahawks and Buccaneers!

HayWire 07-06-2020 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mecca (Post 15053234)
Of course their argument is how it's a derogatory American term for Indian leaders...it's a funny word to use in every day conversation, if you call anyone Chief they get super annoyed though.
I was just pointing out a major flaw in the argument that was posted. It make no sense. Based upon that the name should stay the same since it has nothing do with indians.

Mecca, I think it's obvious I don't post much and you're actually one of my favorite posters.

This shouldn't be a political term, a derogatory term, or any other ill conceived statement.

I'm home today if you're up to a good discussion.

Mecca 07-06-2020 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by HayWire (Post 15053259)
I was just pointing out a major flaw in the argument that was posted. It make no sense. Based upon that the name should stay the same since it has nothing do with indians.

Mecca, I think it's obvious I don't post much and you're actually one of my favorite posters.

This shouldn't be a political term, a derogatory term, or any other ill conceived statement.

I'm home today if you're up to a good discussion.
I personally don't think changing the name does anything, I don't find it derogatory but I'm not Indian either. The issue we have here is it bothers some Natives and others it doesn't..yet all it takes is for 1 person to be mad and here we are.

patteeu 07-06-2020 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevrunner (Post 15053076)
Here is a pretty good argument for those that want the Chiefs name changed. This is from a website supporting that:

[I][Chief - This is a word that is commonly given as a nickname which incorrectly labels Native American men. The term 'chief' itself is incorrect. American Indian leaders were never 'chiefs', but headmen, or clan mothers, and so on. Not 'chiefs'. Native leaders were highly disrespected by the USA. So calling someone 'Chief', is just a way to continue that disrespect. Trust us when we tell you, being called 'chief' carries with it the same insulting, belittling sting for a Native man as being called 'boy' does for African American men/I]
I don’t know where you got that, but it’s nonsense.

OrtonsPiercedTaint 07-06-2020 09:04 AM
The name could honor Lamar Hunt, if it had to change. So we will be called ****s, we will just ****'em silly!

jerryaldini 07-06-2020 09:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevrunner (Post 15053076)
Here is a pretty good argument for those that want the Chiefs name changed. This is from a website supporting that:

[I][Chief - This is a word that is commonly given as a nickname which incorrectly labels Native American men. The term 'chief' itself is incorrect. American Indian leaders were never 'chiefs', but headmen, or clan mothers, and so on. Not 'chiefs'. Native leaders were highly disrespected by the USA. So calling someone 'Chief', is just a way to continue that disrespect. Trust us when we tell you, being called 'chief' carries with it the same insulting, belittling sting for a Native man as being called 'boy' does for African American men/I]
Thanks for posting that. There is no good argument for keeping the name. Over the years the organization has associated it with imagery that locks native people in time as brutal savages, an image they have long struggled to overcome. That's not honorific. For some reason we've always thought it ok to caricature native people.

It's not political correctness to want to see the name changed. It's a matter of treating fellow citizens with respect. In this case, citizens who were pushed off their land and subjected to genocide. I hope the team changes the name and goes one step further by donating to organizations that work on behalf of native people.

Mecca 07-06-2020 09:08 AM
All of the things like warpaint, the chop, the drum etc don't help either.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:38 PM.
Page 25 of 29 « First 1521222324 25 26272829
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.