Giving in!!!!!

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by markg

Yes I agree the times are changing. But are they truly changing for the better? Its a fair question. Some may think yes they are. I dont agree. I see our current changes like those that happened before the fall of Rome.

Devalue Currency / Check

Unfettered imigration / Check

Moral decay/ Check

Gender blurring / Check

Abandon history and culture /Check

Vilify the masuline / Check


Just guessing on this one, decrease testorone probably according to art from the different periods

like I mentioned in an earlier post seems things are changing when the pendulum has swung to extremes and making decisions during this time is not the best....things gotta settle down so proper well thought decisions can be made...if actions move now then you will see a revolt shortly after from another angle...just saying....

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

The Eskimoes are not named to demean the Inuit people. The team was named after a group of people that live in the toughest environment and overcome and excel. Seems like a good spirit for a team wouldn't you say?

It is a place of honour bestowed upon that group.

The Inuit are not upset with the Edmonton Eskimoes. The team have consulted Inuit leaders of Canada like 3 times in the past decade to see if this is an offensive name. Each time the group has resoundingly replied back no it is not offensive. It is a point of pride and honour for them. SO if its not offending the Inuit who is it offending?

Nobody. But a social justice insurance company wants a feather to stick in their cap as a trophy of virtue to signal out to the world. That is all this amounts to.

So much like the folks that just had their AR's banned, and the shotgunners quietly said nothing. They will come for the statues, monuments and entire history next. Don't kid yourself if you think they are done at sports teams.

Then we will get into the millions in tax dollars when towns, schools, monuments, roads, trails, yada yada yada needs to paid for to be renamed. Perfectly good money wasted to whitewash reality.

Enjoy the decline.

Also, Canadians have no idea what a conservative is. Socialism with a blue tie doesn't make one a conservative. (This was directed at everyone playing the liberal/conservative token. I'm making this note as I was scared it may have felt like I was picking on, or singling out EZM)

This has been my understanding as well.
The team name is derived From being the most northerly team in the cfl.
Basically it pays homage to the people of the far north.
And they are honoured and understand what the name represents.
Too bad the people it offended (not them) couldn’t direct their false anger in a more productive direction.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

This has been my understanding as well.
The team name is derived From being the most northerly team in the cfl.
Basically it pays homage to the people of the far north.
And they are honoured and understand what the name represents.
Too bad the people it offended (not them) couldn’t direct their false anger in a more productive direction.

Lefty snowflakes do not want to accept this or the truth of the matter. For if they did they'd have nothing to bitch and complain about.

This latest controversy is the result of a CTV reporter looking for something to do, so he called up the sponsor and asked it they'd continue to sponsor the Eskimos. Caught them off guard and with what is going on with the Redskins, they caved to media pressure.

If I had the final say for the Eskimos, I'd tell the sponsor to go pound sand, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

ESKIMOS is not offensive to the Inuit in either Canada or Alaska. Giving up the ESKIMOS moniker is a slight to the proud Inuit nation in Canada.

BW

[sns2]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Alaskan Natives still call themselves Eskimos . There are Indian Reserves in the lower 48 and nobody gets excited.

Grizz

Hey feel free to share with us some of the pictures you took in those 48 states where you talked to all the native Americans about this issue.

[sns2]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

I hate rainy, high windy days....not enough lake time

one thing is for sure we are going through some fast paced times....

You got that right. Round and round we go. Where she stops, nobody knows.

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

The Inuit are not upset with the Edmonton Eskimoes.

Nobody. But a social justice insurance company wants a feather to stick in their cap as a trophy of virtue to signal out to the world. That is all this amounts to.

I realize this is a complex question but Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Nunavut NDP MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq have objected to the use of the name Eskimos by the Edmonton team.

This is a much bigger question than what you describe as virtue signalling by an insurance company.

[barbless]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

The Eskimoes are not named to demean the Inuit people. The team was named after a group of people that live in the toughest environment and overcome and excel. Seems like a good spirit for a team wouldn't you say?

It is a place of honour bestowed upon that group.

The Inuit are not upset with the Edmonton Eskimoes. The team have consulted Inuit leaders of Canada like 3 times in the past decade to see if this is an offensive name. Each time the group has resoundingly replied back no it is not offensive. It is a point of pride and honour for them. SO if its not offending the Inuit who is it offending?

Nobody. But a social justice insurance company wants a feather to stick in their cap as a trophy of virtue to signal out to the world. That is all this amounts to.

So much like the folks that just had their AR's banned, and the shotgunners quietly said nothing. They will come for the statues, monuments and entire history next. Don't kid yourself if you think they are done at sports teams.

Then we will get into the millions in tax dollars when towns, schools, monuments, roads, trails, yada yada yada needs to paid for to be renamed. Perfectly good money wasted to whitewash reality.

Enjoy the decline.

Also, Canadians have no idea what a conservative is. Socialism with a blue tie doesn't make one a conservative. (This was directed at everyone playing the liberal/conservative token. I'm making this note as I was scared it may have felt like I was picking on, or singling out EZM)

Then lets have them speak up to the media and all the nay sayers that it does not bother them and put that one to rest. Maybe others will follow suit.
CFL could be no more from the way it's going and teams with money problems anyways. Maybe just call them by they're city names and leave the novelty part out. No harm done, no feelings hurt from history

[sk270]

As I pointed out in my earlier post, not all the affected people are happy with the name of the Edmonton CFL team.

We are talking about a name change, for crying out loud. In our society, many women still go through this process when they get married. It is a big change but it does not have to be as painful as some sports fans seem to think it is.

A far more important issue is the matter of statues honouring historic figures without showing their feet of clay.

This is not the same as changing the name of a team whose purpose is entertainment for the public, money for the players and team personnel, and a lot of money for the owners.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by sk270

I realize this is a complex question but Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Nunavut NDP MP Mumilaaq Qaqqaq have objected to the use of the name Eskimos by the Edmonton team.

This is a much bigger question than what you describe as virtue signalling by an insurance company.

I can’t speak to everyone but among Inuit living in the western half of Canada it has been a resounding backing of support. Especially since the Eskies do visits with the northern communities annually.

Does that mean everyone is happy, definitely not. I mean an NDP MP is upset, sounds like keeping the name is the right direction then. As the path to success is in the broken dreams of NDP slaves.

Also, most negative feedback has been rebranded complaints from US teams. As they say that Eskimo/Inuit are not mascots. Well I can’t honestly recall in the last 40 years where the Eskimos have used an Inuit/Eskimo mascot. The name of a team is not a mascot. They have the igloo and a polar bear named with the Inuit language if I’m not mistaken. There has never been disrespect in the CFL about the Inuit people.

I hope you people are proud of yourselves. You made a true-blue rider fan defend the Eskimos. I feel so dirty. Better that I defended the Eskimos than the “Edmonton Politically Corrects” though.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by sk270

As I pointed out in my earlier post, not all the affected people are happy with the name of the Edmonton CFL team.

We are talking about a name change, for crying out loud. In our society, many women still go through this process when they get married. It is a big change but it does not have to be as painful as some sports fans seem to think it is.

A far more important issue is the matter of statues honouring historic figures without showing their feet of clay.

This is not the same as changing the name of a team whose purpose is entertainment for the public, money for the players and team personnel, and a lot of money for the owners.

So is one person within the Inuit community (any community or group for metaphoric reasons) that supports the name less important than the one who does not support it? Why does the minority always have to be appeased to help. If you are upsetting others by making a change why is that change “better”. Like I said, if you think this ends at sports teams get your head out of the sand.

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

Like I said, if you think this ends at sports teams get your head out of the sand.

As I did point out in my post, there are much more important questions being raised than the names of sports teams. I think we should be discussing those issues.

The name of a sports team, in itself, is no more important than an actor adopting a stage name instead of the one they were born with.

[jungleboy]

Maybe we could just name all the CFL teams the Rough Riders and just insert a city name in front. And All the NHL teams could be the Maple leafs. That way nobody gets butt hurt over a name, all are Equal.

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

So is one person within the Inuit community (any community or group for metaphoric reasons) that supports the name less important than the one who does not support it?

This question is really difficult to answer.

Is everything to be decided by a 50% plus one vote on a given day? This doesn't seem to be the right way to do most things. I would like to see us forget about trivia like the name of a sports team and go on to more important things.

[does it ALL outdoors]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

The Eskimoes are not named to demean the Inuit people. The team was named after a group of people that live in the toughest environment and overcome and excel. Seems like a good spirit for a team wouldn't you say?

It is a place of honour bestowed upon that group.

The Inuit are not upset with the Edmonton Eskimoes. The team have consulted Inuit leaders of Canada like 3 times in the past decade to see if this is an offensive name. Each time the group has resoundingly replied back no it is not offensive. It is a point of pride and honour for them. SO if its not offending the Inuit who is it offending?

Nobody. But a social justice insurance company wants a feather to stick in their cap as a trophy of virtue to signal out to the world. That is all this amounts to.

So much like the folks that just had their AR's banned, and the shotgunners quietly said nothing. They will come for the statues, monuments and entire history next. Don't kid yourself if you think they are done at sports teams.

Then we will get into the millions in tax dollars when towns, schools, monuments, roads, trails, yada yada yada needs to paid for to be renamed. Perfectly good money wasted to whitewash reality.

Enjoy the decline.

Also, Canadians have no idea what a conservative is. Socialism with a blue tie doesn't make one a conservative. (This was directed at everyone playing the liberal/conservative token. I'm making this note as I was scared it may have felt like I was picking on, or singling out EZM)

Couldn't agree more, well said.

My understanding is the name roughly translates into "eater of raw meat" how is that possibly offensive? Just to SJW I guess, and as long as we keep pandering to them, the bigger and more frequent the demands. The organization should tell them to take a hike.

I am 100% against Bel Air Direct, either support the team or don't, but they don't get a say in how the organization is run. They are free to buy into the league and name a team whatever they want. This is a dangerous precedent they are trying to set, and a very slippery slope.

#BOYCOTTBELAIRDIRECT.

[barbless]

This whole thread is not just about sports teams. It was an example of what would and could be changed. Whatever change of names that will happen will involve an amount of money and a new page in the history books. What was written then will be rewritten to reflect the age of 2020. Better start another time capsule. What's in a name anyways? Beijing has had it's name changed over time several times. Depends who's in charge at the time.

[BuckCuller]

Originally Posted by sns2

Before I go, I am going to let you all in on some inside info regarding the Redskins' new name and logo. Here it is...

Sent from my SM-A705W using Tapatalk

Whenever I see Trumps hair all I can think of as a wood Duck.

When I heard what Ottawa changed their CFL teams name to I thought that was one of the most offensive names in sports. Then I seen the uniforms and it made more sense.
I don’t care about sports teams names but other things like erasing and rewriting factual history will not educate humanity.
There are some exceptions where history has been written incorrectly however.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by sk270

As I did point out in my post, there are much more important questions being raised than the names of sports teams. I think we should be discussing those issues.

The name of a sports team, in itself, is no more important than an actor adopting a stage name instead of the one they were born with.

What are these important questions? I’m yet to hear a single valid question that the snowflakes are raising. Signalling virtue doesn’t necessarily raise important questions it allows the social justice crowd feel self important. Self-important, isn’t important questions. Now I’m not saying that there aren’t mistakes made in the past and by certain people, but please tell me an important question being raised by the changing of the Eskimos name. Other than virtue signalling or complaints by small minorities I’m yet to see and outpouring of important questions.

Originally Posted by sk270

This question is really difficult to answer.

Is everything to be decided by a 50% plus one vote on a given day? This doesn't seem to be the right way to do most things. I would like to see us forget about trivia like the name of a sports team and go on to more important things.

So, if the majority ruling doesn’t suit you, how do you please everybody? Do we always appease the population that cries when they don’t get their way? Is that the best solution to organizing humanity? If the majority doesn’t rule what do you propose is best for society? Why is one segment more important than another? Why wouldn’t things be done to appease the majority at the expense of a vocal minority. Now this goes to a point of reason and respect of course.

[HyperMOA]

Originally Posted by barbless

Then lets have them speak up to the media and all the nay sayers that it does not bother them and put that one to rest. Maybe others will follow suit.
CFL could be no more from the way it's going and teams with money problems anyways. Maybe just call them by they're city names and leave the novelty part out. No harm done, no feelings hurt from history

They can speak up, but will the media broadcast it if it doesn’t suit their “message”?

[Twisted Canuck]

Hey, I put in a full days work today, and have more lined up for the next three! Awesome! Anybody else working? What did I miss besides the typical AO SlagFest?

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

What are these important questions? I’m yet to hear a single valid question that the snowflakes are raising.

I'm suggesting that team names are trivial. A more important question is very clearly asked in the US context. What, if anything, should be done about a statue that honours a person who owned other human beings and treated them in the same way that he treated his horses and dogs?

In a Canadian setting, what, if anything, should be done about books, museums and other exhibitions that praise the accomplishments of various public figures without mentioning the negative aspects of their public lives? "Written" history in the modern era should be based on the facts, not the celebrations of the victorious.

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

So, if the majority ruling doesn’t suit you, how do you please everybody? Why wouldn’t things be done to appease the majority at the expense of a vocal minority. Now this goes to a point of reason and respect of course.

We cannot please everybody. However, some decisions can be based on facts or science, if you prefer. Others can be made based on human rights and dignity, applying our virtues of understanding, empathy and kindness. Lending strength to those who feel weak in our society does not diminish the rest of us.

[trigger7mm]

The whole problem with all of this is that today’s society has become utterly ridiculous. Just a bunch of cry baby, entitled, whiners. Rant complete!

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by EZM

First off, agree 110% with your original post. I would also add it seems like us "old white guys" are the ones with our feelers hurt just as much as the people we have bene offending all these years and the shoe on the other foot doesn't fit does it … lol.

Your last comment struck another cord too. Many of us on here have been accused of being liberals or whatever yet, I have to laugh, as people who really pay attention will know that's not the case.

If being socially conscious and aware of issues we have and need to correct makes me a liberal - then we are all missing the point.

I just want my kids to grow up in a better world without (or at least with less) bigotry, racism, sexism, corruption and want them to value truth and credibility and all the other things that have seemly gone into the toilet in recent years.

I also won't raise snowflakes. And that's a tough balancing act for a parent.

If the Redskins become the Warriors - I'm 100% cool with that. The only guys complaining are the old white guys who are acting like snowflakes.

It's time for us to evolve. For the better - and comments like "enjoy the decline" cut both ways.

Good post and nailed it!

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by trigger7mm

The whole problem with all of this is that today’s society has become utterly ridiculous. Just a bunch of cry baby, entitled, whiners. Rant complete!

Nailed it.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by trigger7mm

The whole problem with all of this is that today’s society has become utterly ridiculous. Just a bunch of cry baby, entitled, whiners. Rant complete!

Ohhh the irony.

[HalfBreed]

The Alberta Albertans.

Edmontonians are too stupid to move away from a two letter logo.

[Battle Rat]

How about the Washington Whiteskins and the Edmonton Crackers.
I would'nt be affended.
If the first nations don't want to be honored, don't honor them.

[HyperMOA]

Well as this thread was specifically about the Eskimos I hadn’t gone way out there to consider the issues you bring up. I wasn’t speaking of US civil war generals.

Now where does one draw a line for morality? Does morality evolve? Is it fair to judge a person by today’s moral compass that lived a century or centuries before? Should your future ancestors be held to account for your actions after a couple centuries? Will the burning of gasoline or the act of hunting be looked upon as poorly as those who legally owned slaves in a century or two? (No I’m saying that burning gas is anywhere in the neighbourhood of the slave trade, I’m just trying to make a point. How will it be viewed in 200 years?)

If somembody worked hard or sacrificed or what-have-you to the point of being honoured and commemorated, then that statue or whatever should remain. Having a statue erected does not mean that the individual is perfect or without sin. It means that person achieved or sacrifices to earn that place. Who in the world is without sin; especially with 200 more years of moral compass movement.
Nobody is perfect. When I was young, Brazil nuts were never called Brazil nuts. So does that blunder of basically a few generations mean none of us can be memorialized? And I mean EVERYONE used a different name.

As a segue this would be an example where I support a name change as it was blatantly in poor taste. I don’t think people said it to be racist, but just never gave it much thought. Much like when you haggle a price down. As for the Eskimos I don’t believe there has ever been a time where the team demeaned the Inuit people.

Now back on track. If somebody is worthy of being memorialized it was obvious that a large group felt it was due. I have no problem also displaying or educating people about their faults or even how society evolves. Pointing out how we change morally I think is an important part of education too. I feel that those that are memorialized should have the focus on their achievements not shortcomings however. By people’s standards Jesus is the only statue we should be allowed. Being memorialized on the Stanley cup means you achieved greatness in hockey, it doesn’t mean you are a saint.

Originally Posted by sk270

I'm suggesting that team names are trivial. A more important question is very clearly asked in the US context. What, if anything, should be done about a statue that honours a person who owned other human beings and treated them in the same way that he treated his horses and dogs?

In a Canadian setting, what, if anything, should be done about books, museums and other exhibitions that praise the accomplishments of various public figures without mentioning the negative aspects of their public lives? "Written" history in the modern era should be based on the facts, not the celebrations of the victorious.



We cannot please everybody. However, some decisions can be based on facts or science, if you prefer. Others can be made based on human rights and dignity, applying our virtues of understanding, empathy and kindness. Lending strength to those who feel weak in our society does not diminish the rest of us.

Let’s put anti vaxxers into the comment above. Science says we should force them to vaccinate. So do you feel you should force them to vaccinate? Should they continue to decide for themselves? Who’s right is it? I also agree that helping the weak doesn’t necessarily diminish our strengths. There is however a difference between helping the weak and limiting all to the lowest common denominator. Where is that balance?

You should spend some time on an HOA board or a community league and just see how hard it is to keep a very small group happy.

[Talking moose]

Being that oil is evil, how long till my oilers jersey becomes a collectors item?

[sk270]

Originally Posted by HyperMOA

Well as this thread was specifically about the Eskimos I hadn’t gone way out there to consider the issues you bring up. I wasn’t speaking of US civil war generals.

Is it fair to judge a person by today’s moral compass that lived a century or centuries before?

And I mean EVERYONE used a different name.

Let’s put anti vaxxers into the comment above. Science says we should force them to vaccinate. So do you feel you should force them to vaccinate? Should they continue to decide for themselves?

You should spend some time on an HOA board or a community league and just see how hard it is to keep a very small group happy.

You bring up many good points. I think that I moved to civil war generals and Macdonald vs Riel because some posters on this and other threads were suggesting that resisting team name changes made someone a snowflake or some other derogatory term. Team name changes are trivial, but some of these other changes are not.

I've always had a problem with applying today's morality to past behaviour. However, that doesn't mean that we should continue to heap nothing but praise on certain historical figures. Nor does it mean we should vilify them for living according to the mores of their day. I do think we should be sure we present a more balanced picture, particularly in schools compared to what I was told when I was in school.

The anti-vaxxers are, indeed, a big problem. It is clear that their magical mind-sets are impervious to logic and science. My parents were so happy to get me immunized against anything they could that the question didn't arise, of course. In order to come to Canada we all had to be immunized against smallpox, for example.

Anti-vaxxers pose a tough question because I believe that people should have freedom of choice. We should convince them to make rational decisions. With anti-vaxxers that is impossible by definition. Balance that against the harm that their choice does to the rest of us. We force them to wear motorcycle helmets and wear vehicle seat belts and drink pasteurized milk. If it were an either-or question I would vote for enforced vaccination. Flame away, as they say.

I have worked with boards at different times and know just what you mean.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by trigger7mm

The whole problem with all of this is that today’s society has become utterly ridiculous. Just a bunch of cry baby, entitled, whiners. Rant complete!

This is a solid gold post and the best part was complaining about complaining and ending it with "rant over".

Thank you, I literally laughed so hard when I read that .....