No, Chief Zee’s Headdress Is Not Similar to Spanish Team’s ‘Slant Eyes’ Photo

spain_zee.jpg

On The Big Lead today, there is a totally self-righteous post about Spanish basketball’s offensive team photo. As far as I can gather, the gist is more or less, “who are Americans to point out racism abroad when we have our own issues with racism?” (Yes, it brings up slavery and Jim Crow.) Or maybe I’m missing the point of it. I’m not sure. Go read it for yourself and let me know.

Annnnyway, the part that we are concerned with is this:

Flowing from this was the proud to be American refrain. “I’m glad I live in a place where this type of thing can’t happen.”

Really? It can’t happen in the United States? Is there not a team in our capital called the Washington “Redskins”? Is the distortion of eye-shape not equivalent to wearing red-face and elaborate headdresses? Say what you want about European racism, but Spanish soccer fans aren’t galloping ignorantly through the gates in blackface to cheer on N—– FC.

First off, no one ever said it couldn’t happen in the U.S. — at least, I haven’t read or heard anyone make that claim. Second, please see this site; re: “Redskins”. Third, Chief Zee doesn’t wear a red-face. He’s black. Fourth, I have no clue what “N—- FC” is, so I cannot comment.

But lastly, and most importantly, no, the “slant-eye” gesture is not the equivalent of naming a team the Redskins and having superfan Chief Zee wear a headdress. It’s not the same at all. Unless there’s some evidence that the overwhelming majority of sampled Chinese peoples aren’t offended by the Spanish team’s photo. Because the survey says that American Indians aren’t offended by the Redskins.

A poll of American Indians found that an overwhelming majority of them are not bothered by the name of the Washington Redskins.

Only 9 percent of those polled said the name of the NFL team is “offensive,” while 90 percent said it’s acceptable, according to the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey, released Friday.

Annenberg polled 768 Indians in every state except Hawaii and Alaska.

Isn’t it a pain in the ass when all those pesky “facts” and “evidence” get in the way of make-believe?

39 thoughts on “No, Chief Zee’s Headdress Is Not Similar to Spanish Team’s ‘Slant Eyes’ Photo”

  1. Redskin is just as offensive as the word nigger. Plain and simple.

    Its amazing that one gets recognized as a racial slur while the other sells millions on NFL.com.

    And that’s what makes Chief Zee embarrassing. That he can be of a group of people that has historically been subjected to racism and maltreatment, and dress himself up like another race that has felt much of the same sting.

    You’re my boy, CM, but I can’t go there with you on this one.

  2. Jason McIntyre knows not of these “facts” you speak of.

    Seriously, the only reason to read the Big Lead is to get the links to articles, the only good thing he does over there. McIntyre knows absolutely nothing about sports, and he’s more interested in how people’s hair looks than backing up claims.

    He blows.

  3. The term “Redskins” refers to the red paint applied to an Indians face before battle.

    And reality is, more money has been made off the word Nigger than the word Redskins and thats a fact.

    The owner of the Redskins is Jewish and last time I checked they are not without their own stories of persecution.

    Its 2008, you can’t please everyone, but I think its time to put the “Redskins name is racist” shit to bed.

  4. –”Unless there’s some evidence that the overwhelming majority of sampled Chinese peoples aren’t offended by the Spanish team’s photo”

    I’ve heard that the Chinese are not as offended as the American media has supposed they would be. Apparently, a pretty large portion of the world think that Americans are PC prudes when it comes to this sort of stuff.

    –”Fourth, I have no clue what “N—- FC is,” so I cannot comment.”

    This is a joke right? You know a racial slur that begins with N right?

  5. Also, to your first point, Jeff: If Chinese aren’t offended by the Spanish photo and American Indians aren’t offended by Redskins, then TBL’s post was pointless to start with.

  6. If Chinese aren’t offended by the Spanish photo and American Indians aren’t offended by Redskins, then TBL’s post was pointless to start with

    RACK HIM

    Jim Rome

  7. I don’t think the vast majority of China is aware of the controversy at all. I doubt it’s been a featured story on the state run media.

  8. Seriously, is Jeff V the ONLY PERSON who knows what “N—- FC” could possibly mean? Now that he made me seem like an idiot for not knowing, I’m dying to find out.

    (In my best TBL voice) Anyone?

  9. As much as I hate to admit it, nigger has made a whole lot of people a whole lot of money, but that doesn’t make it a morally or sensibly acceptable practice.

    I don’t want to turn this joint into a commentary about race in America, and I’m not offended by anyone’s opinion thus far. What I will say, as a minority with emotions and experiences on the subject, is that it’s not as minor as many of us would like to think.

    The name is racist. There’s no other way to classify it. Black folks using the N word and justifying it doesn’t make it universally okay for universal usage or consumption. I don’t think everyone that prefers the name Redskin is a rope totin’ racist, but I would humbly submit that people consider the pain behind the name, and then see if that pain is worth more than a mascot or image.

    By the way N—FC is a poorly constructed, thinly veiled reference to NiggaFC.

  10. PS. Although I think we’ve all been mature enough — and hopefully haven’t offended anyone — with our use of the n-word and its variations here, let’s cut it out now. Jamie is gonna shit when he reads this.

  11. lolol anyone who would care about either the chinese impression or the word redskin probably has nothing better to worry about

  12. Stetisms…

    “Redskin is just as offensive as the word nigger. Plain and simple.”

    “I don’t think everyone that prefers the name Redskin is a rope totin’ racist, but I would humbly submit that people consider the pain behind the name, and then see if that pain is worth more than a mascot or image.”

    The evidence is: The majority of Native Americans don’t think the word Redskins is racist when used on a football team. That is a fact and it is at least as plain and simple as one as your merely unsupported assertion that the term is racist. Why? Because you said so?

    Consider this the right moment to explain your definition of racist language, because mine includes something at least along the lines of “found to be offensive BY THE PEOPLE IT ALLEGEDLY OFFENDS.” Not: “Whatev Stet says.”

    This is insane. Native Americans have spoken, overwhelmingly, in support of the term Redskins applied to this particular sports franchise. The people screaming from the hilltops that it is racist are overwhelmingly NOT Native American. What fucking right do you people have to speak on their behalf? Until someone brings hard data that says at least a majority of Native Americans are offended by the term Redskin, then I’ll happily ignore this PC bully nonsense.

    Anyways, the most bizarre part of TBL’s post was its title:

    Are Americans Qualified to Discuss Spanish Racism?

    My qualifications to discuss anything and everything don’t stem from my membership in America, but rather from the fact I’m a human being with a mouth. If your point is that Americans are insensitive, I think that point is made best without suggesting that insensitive people have somehow conceded their right to discuss for lack of qualifications. What a fucking disaster this is.

  13. Wow, hogshaven’s comment probably deserves a much longer reponse but as to his question:

    “what fucking right do you people have to speak on their behalf?”

    I think he answered it himself:

    “My qualifications to discuss anything and everything don’t stem from my membership in America, but rather from the fact I’m a human being with a mouth.”

  14. 1. American Indians are not offended by the term redskins. Chris has the facts. It is most likely referring to the war paint.

    2. If the Chinese people are not offended by the photo, where do they draw the line? Would they be offended if the Spanish team tucked their top lipped acted like they have buck teeth? Would they only been offended if the Spanish sang Deck the Halls ala a Christmas story ” Fa ra ra ra ra ”
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46WcFObgYhI

    It is not the same. End of story.

  15. Anyways, the most bizarre part of TBL’s post was its title:

    Are Americans Qualified to Discuss Spanish Racism?

    Especially when it’s an American post about … Spanish Racism.

  16. Re: Redskins — My preference is and has been that they change the name, even if it only offends 9 percent of American Indians surveyed.

    Re: The Big Lead — That he thinks Chief Zee wears “red-face” is the funniest thing I’ve read while catching up on the week in blogs.

  17. “Redskins — My preference is and has been that they change the name, even if it only offends 9 percent of American Indians surveyed.”

    Whoa. Anyone who posts such masterpieces like the Art Monk football card post surely cannot say that.

    When did you think this should happen?

    Why do you think this should happen?

    This is the first time I heard ANY Redskins fan say this.

    We all need a little explination.

  18. Actually, no Redskins fans that I know of wear redface (unless they’re painting their chest too). Feathered headdress sure, but not redface. But hey, Jason didn’t ask me when he wrote this.

  19. Jakes-

    “I think he answered it himself:”

    I have the right to speak on my own behalf in virtue of being a human being. That does not give me the right to speak on someone else’s behalf.

  20. hogshaven-

    Right, sure, my point was that you seem to be saying that because there was a poll saying Native Americans don’t find the term offensive that means that others, say people commenting on this post, aren’t allowed to find it offensive. I think its great that Native Americans don’t find Redskins offensive. I also happen to think its racist. I’m not sure anyone commenting here was assuming to speak on behalf of all Native Americans (ignoring the fact that I don’t think anyone commenting here is actually, you know, a Native American).

  21. I guess my question is: Why do you think it is offensive or racist if the people it is allegedly directed at don’t? If your definition of racist term is really “whatever I think is racist” than who cares?

    I’m trying to get a definition of racist language out of people who proclaim to be experts on the subject. It’s my position that for a term to classify as racist, it should, at a minimum, offend a substantial number of the people the phrase is directed at. I think a substantial number of people is probably some amount more than half, but I’m certain 10% won’t pass the smell test (which is about how many native americans take umbrage over the Redskins).

    If no one here is Native American, is not attempting to speak on behalf of Native Americans, why should anyone care what we think?

    In any event, I find it paternalistic and, shit why not, RACIST for white people to deem inappropriate language that isn’t even offensive to the people it is directed at. I also think you’re a racist, as is your name. And your mom is racist, too. So is this website. So are pants.

  22. A couple of things. First, I’m pretty sure I’ve never in my life proclaimed myself an expert in anything, and certainly not racism. I will say though that I think what people think is, and is not, racism is a fairly personal decision. There is no set definition of racism, and its silly to think otherwise. So I don’t care what the poll says (though again, I’m glad the number offended is so low), I don’t like the name.

    Why do I think Redskins is racist? My thinking is very simple: I’m not in favor of teams being named after the color of a group of people’s skin. Thats it. No Whiteskins, no Blackskins, no Greenskins and no Redskins.

    I think the problem here might be that while I think the name Redskins is racist, I don’t think Redskins fans, or the team, is racist (nor the people who like the name and/or want to keep it). I’m not going to stop wearing my #21 Taylor jersey or watching every game or (pathetically) writing long comments about the team on other people’s blogs while ignoring my own meager place on the internet.

    Anyway I think we’re going to have to agree to disagree, and, hopefully, respect that people can have different opinions.

  23. See this is the problem. 2 Redskin fans arguing about racism, when again, the name or term “Redskin”, as proven on this blogs comments section isnt racist.

    Is calling someone “colored” racist?

    Not really.

    In this PC world we live in, if Redskins was deemed racist, the name would have already changed.

    We are the Washington Redskins not the Washington Injuns.

  24. The survey was about the name. The survey wasn’t about 22 year old white chicks trying to dress like squaws. That creeps the hell out of me, and I don’t care what race I am: with our country’s history on that topic, it makes me uncomfortable. I’m not saying that means Daniel Snyder does or doesn’t have to act on my feelings–and obviously he doesn’t–but that’s how I feel.

    And if 89 percent of Jews said they’d have no problem with the Yankees renaming themselves the Bronx Kikes, I’d still probably prefer they didn’t go there.

    Props for no one having brought up Notre Dame yet.

  25. The most frightening part of this discussion? The Skins’ fans justifying the name with selective stats from polls instead of just saying: “I like the name. I know it’s racist, but it’s all I know.”

    And its not scary because I think the fellas are racist – I actually think the contrary. I just think this is the kind of conditioned thinking on race we’ve grown accustomed to in the U.S.

    At least we’re mature enough to air out our opinions for the sake of discussion, and not become emotionally undone on the subject.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>