Quote:
Originally Posted by MattyC
Here is a question though: Let's say the Canucks change their logo to Johnny Canuck or the lumberjack that Luongo hasdon his mask. I can see how some Canadians would find it offensive to be grouped into lumberjacks, although it may seem ridiculous to some. Because I look at the Johnny Canuck logo and the Indians' logo and don't see a lot of difference. A characature that is meant to represent a whole group of diverse people. That doesn't mean I find it offensive, just comparable style and intention. That is to say, I don't know that the Indians' logo is meant to be racist (taht doesn't mean it's not), it's a cartoon drawing of a Native person. If someone was tasked to come up with a cartoonish image of a Native, seems reasonable to come up with something like that (again, that doesn't mean it's not racist), but how else do you do it? It's the name that brings that issue about. If you change the name, the issue is avoided.
|
When the Canucks are owned by someone whose racial ancestors brutally murdered and dispossessed Canadians solely on the grounds that they were Canadian, then I might be concerned.