In the words of Ronald Reagan, there they go again…
And you thought the Kansas City Chiefs season was behind you. Not so fast, because the politically correct powers-that-be on Facebook are back.
They dug up a two year-old story about, “Understanding Native American perspective about KC Chiefs potential name change.”
Sound familiar?
“If I’m being honest, I had never given any real thought to a need for a new team name,” writer Lyle Graverson begins. “The term Chief isn’t derogatory like Washington’s former name (Redskins) and their insignia isn’t a racist image like the now retired ‘Chief Wahoo’ of Major League Baseball’s Cleveland Indians. So why would it ever need to change? I’m certainly not someone that’s quick to jump on the ‘cancel culture’ bandwagon just because it’s trendy.”
Then again…
“I often complain that one of the biggest problems with our society these days is that nobody listens to each other,” Graverson continues. “Social media has made everyone really good at stating their beliefs and criticizing the beliefs of others, but there is a severe shortage of people who are willing to really listen to and think about views different than their own.”
Fair enough…
So should the Chiefs change their name and if so, why?
“Hell, no, because it’s endless and it’s not about the changes themselves,” says Sutherland Lumber scion Dwight Sutherland . “It’s about forcing people to abide by laying a guilt trip on them. They have to keep atoning, atoning, atoning – and there’s no end to it. This is a sick, racist society, so get your checkbook out. Although even that won’t buy you redemption.”
Enter Dr. Stephanie Fryberg, a professor of psychology at the University of Michigan and a member of the Tulalip Tribes and author of The Psychological Consequences of American Indian Mascots.
“It gives license to fans to play Indian—to put on redface, wear chief headdresses, and imitate Native songs and dances,” Fryberg contends. “Then, by putting these mascots in the sporting domain, the other team wants to denigrate or demean the Chief…
“In addition, it is really important to draw a clear line between intent and impact. While the Chiefs may claim they intend to honor Native Peoples, the science does not support this assertion. The science clearly demonstrates that there are no benefits for Natives being used as mascots. Using natives as mascots is related to lower self-esteem, less achievement-related aspirations, greater anxiety, depression, and suicide. None of these things are what you would associate with something done in the name of honoring a group.”
Long story short, Fryberg claims – with questionable authority – that the majority of Native Americans find the Chiefs concept – along with Boy Scouts, who’s use of Indian imagery are among the worst offenders – unsavory and objectionable.
Meanwhile, back on Facebook, responses ranged from silly to just throw in the towel.
“If we were the KC Hot Potatoes we could all wear potato hats,” quipped one dude. “Or if it’s the chopping motion you love to do, we can be the Kansas City CHEFS, cutting the BBQ meat.”
“I think they should become the chefs, then we can BBQ our rivals,” said another.
Other “suggestions” ranged from the KC Jazz and KC Smoke to Pitmasters.
Can I get a “Lame” on those?
“I certainly can’t speak for Native Americans, but the thing that I always wonder about when this discussion comes up is, what about the fact that our city and neighbor state are both named for the Kansa tribe,” said another commenter. “Likewise the state of Missouri and many other states, cities, counties, are all named for various tribes. I always wondered if indigenous people find that offensive.”
“These replies remind me why I moved away and why I don’t watch football,” added Jennifer K. “If someone tells us something hurts, can we just pause and generate a bit of curiosity and compassion?”
Meaning, the Chiefs should succumb?
“Gawd, I hope not,” Sutherland says. “Then again, I was surprised that the Royals endorsed BLM two years ago…And David Hall of Hallmark Cards had like three BLM signs in his yard in Mission Hills at one time. I think he’s down to just one ‘We Believe’ sign now.”
Hell No!!!!!!!
Easy Jack -careful – don’t hold back!
People hate change. Hate! Did I mention they hate it? I really don’t have an opinion on whether the Chiefs is offensive. I’m a 62 year old white dude. I don’t think I have a say in it. I’d guess the treatment of native Americans over the last couple of centuries has a lot to do with it. If that history was different, you might not get the same blow-back. I doubt you could get a consensus among Native American tribes whether it’s offensive to them or not. Like I said, I don’t feel like I get a vote. Keep putting Lombardi trophies in the Chiefs display case and people wouldn’t care if they were called the KC Drag Queens.
Actually, everybody deserves and gets a vote…
Although, the KC Drag Queens?
What sort of costumes, fan dances and cheers might come with that?
Can you just imagine the possibilities for cheers/dances and advertising options from Hamburger Mary’s? And uniforms?! Classic. The shock value alone from all the right wing tight-asses in Missouri would be worth the change.
Here’s one vote for KC Drag Queens if we’re keeping score.
Well, about all I can say at this point is, I’m glad you’re having some fun with this
The adoption of the Chiefs’ mascot was a tribute to the courage and skill of Native American warriors. Many other people in this country ,white and African-American,have Native American blood and are proud of that heritage. Why is celebrating that heritage offensive to anyone , least of all to those who can claim it directly? I’m reminded of my two Cherokee law partners-graduates of Harvard and Michigan law schools,the two best in the country. When we would have a partners’meeting and the managing partner would say,’we have a problem.’ Danny and Bob would say,in unison, echoing Tonto in the Lone Ranger joke,”What do you mean we ,white man?” Lighten up,kemosabe!
Uh…interesting take
I think by the time this ride is over there will a unanimous decision to call this team “The Kansas City Mahomes”
Seems a tad extreme, but no doubt he’s wildly popular.
How about brother Jackson and his goofy wife? Where do they fit into all this?
Ok, “The Kansas City Goofnuts”, then.
Honestly, if we’re forced to change the name I’m ok with it because Chiefs was named after a KC mayor’s haughty unofficial title?
Other suggested team names:
– KC Westerners(not horrible)
– The Kansas City Diversifiers(PC)
– The KC Independence or Independants(Truman-esk)
– The KC Glazers(vile)
– The Kansas City Power(my favorite, + homage to Hank Stram making a huge mark on the NFL)
Got it out of your system now?
Good, because in the politically correct climate of today, it seems like more a question of if than when, they take on a name change.
Too bad, because if they hold some faux “naming contest” with the public, we’re likely end up with something ultra boring like the Cleveland Indians new name (that my Cleveland-raised wife and brother-in-law all hate).
The Cleveland Guardians.
More realistically, it could end up closer to something like, the Kansas City Pioneers or worse.
Careful, don’t call her goofy she’s attacking Joe Rogan about something his guests said. She can say what she wants but you don’t have the same right in her book of stupidity.
Not sure exactly where you’re coming from, Super…
That said, it’s funny how Patrick is so mature, smooth and focused – not to mention grounded – and yet somewhat similarly to Mahomes goofy brother, she’s kind of dumbly unhinged.
That said, of course with her husband’s incredible (and well-deserved) popularity, she’s pretty much bullet proof with local media.
Just saying those who speak ill or negative about Mrs. Mahomes are sometimes on the receiving end of her temper tantrums about free speech. She should be allowed in her mind to do or say whatever based on who she is while you and I can’t in so many words.
I don’t think anyone is suggesting she shouldn’t have the ability to speak her mind…
It’s more a matter of how little seems to be on that mind and how it contrasts with the level headedness of her husband.
On top of which how she’s chosen to hang with one of the least popular hangers-on in pro sports; Mahomes tacky, lame brother!
She’s an ignorant twat who has done nothing more than win the contest for sucking the right cock back in high school. That’s it. Had it not been for that, no one would know who this talentless obnoxious bitch is. That’s my only beef with Patrick Mahomes. His taste in women is total dogshit.
Yikes!
Maybe this is too obtuse but “Chief” to me means “boss” and “leader.” I am not sure of how native Americans got the term. Did they invent it or was it assigned? I need to research that. I guess if it was assigned I can understand the discomfort. I feel okay with the term Chiefs but I do think it’s ridiculous when they solely attribute the team name to Bartle. That looks kind of stupid.
Interesting angle…
Seeing as how “chief” seems to be an English word, hard to say what the actuaL native American word or words were.
So what’s with the Kansas City Indian Center, which apparently is a name that Native Americans still call themselves? If the group that is named a certain name, still keeps calling themselves by that name, how offensive can it be? All of this is just more liberal white people being offended on behalf of someone else.