Quote:
Originally Posted by Textcritic
These points are helpful, but this particular one has me wondering about the extent of ethnic caricatures geographically. While you posit that "Fighting Irish" is acceptable in North America by virtue of the specifics in their immigration history, would the same hold in the UK where Ireland was occupied and marginalized by the English for centuries? Or does the treatment of the Irish at the hands of the English preclude the same usage in the UK?
|
Without getting into insulting, just think how
absurd it would be to have an English team called the Irish (without them having Irish roots.) And yeah, if it had an Irish caricature logo, it would probably be considered pretty offensive... but it would definitely be extremely weird. Because you know, the Irish exist, and the team aren't Irish or in Ireland, so why are they called the Irish..? It would be confusing.
Or how bizarre it would be to have a Californian team called the Texans, without any actual Texas connection. Or a German team called the French.
The way native American imagery and names have been used speaks most of all of the fact that native Americans aren't, or weren't, considered
people the way Texans or French are people. They were semi-mythical Others. Nobody would ever have thought that a team called "the Indians" could be "actual Indians". They weren't a part of the society.