Always a Wasp

Author Topic: Wasps to 'review policies' after ban plea for 'novelty Native American headdress  (Read 14829 times)

Rossm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7453
  • Hey, Slow Down.
    • View Profile
Exeter Chiefs came under pressure in the summer of 2020 to follow Washington Redskins and change their club name

Bobby Bridge reports:

https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/rugby/wasps-review-policies-after-ban-21366764

SLAVA UKRAINI!
HEROYAM SLAVA!

WonkyWasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5923
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
Well done Wasps.  I hope others will follow where you lead.

Rossm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7453
  • Hey, Slow Down.
    • View Profile
Just to provide a little background information on Native American headresses.

When most people think of Native American headdresses, they think of the full eagle-feathered war bonnet. This is the type of headdress seen in movies, and it is the best-known type of headdress. The Sioux were probably one of the first tribes to use these headpieces. The Native American headdress was worn only by the most powerful and influential members of the tribe.

Commonly used feathers came from crows, hawks, and eagles. In many Native American cultures, the golden eagle feather was a mark of an honored warrior. The eagle was considered a messenger from God. Young native American boys had to prove they were brave enough to be worthy of wearing an eagle feather in their hair. An eagle feather was never given to a boy, but had to be earned. An eagle had to be trapped and a single feather removed without harming the bird.

A warrior earned a feather for each courageous act he accomplished. The more brave acts he completed, the more feathers he earned. Each feather had special meaning to the warrior, and binding feathers together into a headdress was particularly meaningful. The more feathers in a headdress, the braver the warrior was.

There are many different styles of headdresses, and tribes could often be identified by the shape or color of their distinctive headdress. Different types of feathers were symbolic of different virtues. All headdresses could be considered works of art. A headdress was deeply meaningful to the wearer, and was an extension of his beliefs. Native Americans believed that a person acquired the powers of an animal or bird by taking part of it to wear or carry. Wearing a headdress made of eagle feathers was believed to be a way to gather wisdom and duplicate the power and strength of the eagle.
SLAVA UKRAINI!
HEROYAM SLAVA!

Mellie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 403
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
So if the Exeter Chiefs were native North Americans they could have earned a feather for each title they've won. However, they are not!

backdoc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
IMO it makes us look foolish and rather petty.

JonnyD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
IMO it makes us look foolish and rather petty.

Yeah I’m not sure about it... the issue has been well documented with the Redskins rightly rebranding in the US as well as in rugby with the Crusaders - Exeter went through all of this in response last season and voted against any change.
For individual teams to then get involved a long time afterwards and try and block this imagery when Exeter visit them or whatever the plan is sounds like an opening of a massive can of worms.
For me it’s ridiculous Exeter voted against any change in the first place, not sure if the RFU were involved at that stage but now sounds like they will have to engage when the dust has already settled

Wiltshire Wasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 787
  • Loving Coventry
    • View Profile
I don’t think it makes us look petty. 

I consider reviewing and deciding on a course of action the reasons for which are clear is a sensible and proportionate thing to do.

Personally I think Exeter Chief’s logo and the supporters associated clothing is so wrong.  We should know better now.  I would be in favour of a ban at our stadium and on the television screens.

Robert.
“In a world full of Kardashians be an Audrey”.

mike909

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2430
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
I don’t think it makes us look petty. 

I consider reviewing and deciding on a course of action the reasons for which are clear is a sensible and proportionate thing to do.

Personally I think Exeter Chief’s logo and the supporters associated clothing is so wrong.  We should know better now.  I would be in favour of a ban at our stadium and on the television screens.

Robert.

+1 I'm of an age when I clearly remember some pretty shoddy language that was used about people from abroad alongside characterisations and cliché. Often on primetime TV too....And I really think that we ought to have no need to use such imagery when there are so many options. I think Exeter really ought to have moved on, and some time ago. 

Bloke in North Dorset

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2468
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
I think Wasps are getting in to some very dangerous territory and I don't like the look of where this could lead.

I think a lot of the cultural appropriation stories are nonsense, driven by professional offence takers looking for some fame and even a bit of grifting, however I don't think that applies here. I don't know if the issue was first raised by a professional offence taker or whether it was raised by a native American, but once raised Exeter's Board made the wrong decision. This is a lot more serious than a bunch of students complaining about someone wearing a Mexican hat.

They should have realised that now the issue has entered the public conscience it won't be going away and they will be dealing with it until they are forced to change and that will look worse, they'll just look like a bunch of stubborn middle class boors. How they became know as the Chiefs may be lost in the mists of time but once they to use it to create their native American branding that now doesn't matter. They should have gone all in and changed the whole thing and become the Exeter Titans or some other name that's supposed to be catchy.

As to Wasps' position, I really hope they don't go down the route of trying to ban anything, but do ask that fans voluntarily don't wear any headdress or bring other symbols, and don't make that moronic chant (although it should be put more politely). I don't think we have a right to ask the team to remove it from their kit and certainly can't see how we can ban them from wearing it in the stadium without risking forfeiting the game and then we'd be morally obliged not to go to Sandy Park.

If we start banning symbols or logos what next? What if a club is sponsored by a company with links to Israel? How do we respond to someone from the Muslim community in Coventry and Birmingham complaining because of the Palestinian issue? There's probably dozens of political issues that could be opened up once that route is taken.

Maybe this isn't the world we want to live in, but its the world that now exists.

Rossm

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7453
  • Hey, Slow Down.
    • View Profile
Interesting view by Tony Perry who is an author and citizen of the Chickasaw Nation living in England. Published November 3rd, 2020.

The Exeter Chiefs’ branding perpetuates a long, dark history of racism against Native Americans.


The south west of England has been celebrating. The Exeter Chiefs rugby team completed a historic season and won two major championships in as many weeks – the European Cup and the Premiership – just 10 short years after being promoted to the top flight of English rugby.

Sadly, not everyone feels the joy of Exeter’s triumph and rugby’s rags-to-riches fairytale. Many of us Native Americans around the world feel dismay and disgust for the club who claim to honour us.

Exeter adopted the ‘Chiefs’ moniker in 1999 as English rugby union started to turn professional. Some of the early rugby clubs in the south west called themselves “chiefs”, but there was no connection with the stylised Native American chief image the club chose for a logo. Over the years, they have added to the theme, with a Native American chief mascot, fans started wearing headdresses and singing the “Tomahawk chop” mock war chant. Bars around the grounds have stereotyped names like “pow-wow”.

In June, as the #BlackLivesMatter movement grew, a group of Exeter fans called Exeter Chiefs for Change raised concerns that were building over several years. They petitioned their team to replace the Native American-themed branding. Pressure from fans and sponsors had finally pushed some US teams, like the Washington R*dskins now known as the Washington Football Team, to make this choice. These fans wanted Exeter to follow suit.

When more than 4,000 supporters signed a petition by Exeter Chiefs for Change, the Exeter Chiefs Board considered the request. The Board retired their mascot, “Big Chief”, but refused to change the logo, which they bafflingly declared “was in fact highly respectful”.  The Board claimed that they spoke with various stakeholders to reach their decision, but seemed to ignore the communications from those directly affected: Native Americans.

The Exeter Chiefs’ branding perpetuates a long, dark history of racism against Native Americans. As Philip Deloria argued in his book Playing Indian, early settlers to what became the United States used Native mascots to affirm their identity as being not British, but something different. Native Americans represented a sense of freedom and idyllicism that the colonists longed for in their new lives in their new home.

The use of Native American mascots marks a sense of “progress” for colonists. Mascots frame Native Americans as peoples of the past, symbols of a bygone era consumed in the onward march toward the Americans’ “manifest destiny” to settle and “civilise” the land they occupied. This march to progress saw many Native Americans, like my ancestors, removed from their homelands and forced to assimilate into the lives of their oppressors.

Relegating Native Americans to a stereotyped mascot or a logo denigrates our past and ignores our struggles and triumphs today.

There’s overwhelming evidence that these outdated images perpetuated by Native American mascots and imagery are causing proven harm to the well-being of Indigenous communities, contributing to stereotyping and undermining true representation. This is particularly damaging to Native American youth, who already face an uphill struggle for true equality.

The Chiefs’ decision to keep their logo and branding is anything but the “respect” they claim to give.  Relegating Native Americans to a stereotyped mascot or a logo denigrates our past and ignores our struggles and triumphs today.  The Exeter Chiefs cannot say they did not know better; they made a conscious choice to offend and oppress.  Their logo remains, the “tomahawk chops” continue and their supporters still band together as a “tribe”.

We Native Americans are still here and our lives matter.  We have survived, against the odds, and we thrive.  Some of us, like me, are also British, members of a multicultural society that recognises the diversity of its peoples.  We seek the respect and protections afforded other minority ethnic peoples.

Many supporters continue to spew their hateful bile that shows a complete disregard for the people they so steadfastly claim to “honour” in ways they wouldn’t dare to do with other minority groups.  I’ve dealt with it personally. Their actions cast light upon a dark hole in British society and in rugby in particular. It is unacceptable. We can do better, and we must.
SLAVA UKRAINI!
HEROYAM SLAVA!

InBetweenWasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1010
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
I’m not convinced this is genuinely a Wasps viewpoint and instead it is more a response to an open letter from The Wasps Report Twitter account.

Despite the good intentions, I’m not sure it’s a reflection of Wasps fans in general and IMO opens a can of worms.

Where does it end? - Should they now lobby Saracens to change their name which is presumably offensive to the Muslim community within the UK given the historic connotations?

hopwood

  • Guest
I’m not convinced this is genuinely a Wasps viewpoint and instead it is more a response to an open letter from The Wasps Report Twitter account.

Despite the good intentions, I’m not sure it’s a reflection of Wasps fans in general and IMO opens a can of worms.

Where does it end? - Should they now lobby Saracens to change their name which is presumably offensive to the Muslim community within the UK given the historic connotations?

I agree.
Currently there are so many bored people being heavily offended on behalf of people they’ve never met nor had a conversation with.
Yes…there needs to be some sensitivity here and there. Absolutely.
But if Wasps get involved, it’s opening a can of worms.

Barbarians next?
Saracens?
Sharks?
And then what about White Anglo Saxon Protestants?

The world is becoming hyper sensitive and offended by everything. It’s a very destructive pathway to be following where we all pander to a few outraged people who have too much time on their hands.
If a group of genuine Native Americans were highly offended, I would sit down and listen to everything they had to say and find suitable solutions.
But that’s not the case here.

WonkyWasp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5923
  • Wasps Rugby Fan
    • View Profile
'But how do we know that?  I am definitely not a snowflake but  I would not wish to offend any other person's belief or religion.

MarleyWasp

  • Guest
I’m not convinced this is genuinely a Wasps viewpoint and instead it is more a response to an open letter from The Wasps Report Twitter account.

Despite the good intentions, I’m not sure it’s a reflection of Wasps fans in general and IMO opens a can of worms.

Where does it end? - Should they now lobby Saracens to change their name which is presumably offensive to the Muslim community within the UK given the historic connotations?

I agree.
Currently there are so many bored people being heavily offended on behalf of people they’ve never met nor had a conversation with.
Yes…there needs to be some sensitivity here and there. Absolutely.
But if Wasps get involved, it’s opening a can of worms.

Barbarians next?
Saracens?
Sharks?
And then what about White Anglo Saxon Protestants?

The world is becoming hyper sensitive and offended by everything. It’s a very destructive pathway to be following where we all pander to a few outraged people who have too much time on their hands.
If a group of genuine Native Americans were highly offended, I would sit down and listen to everything they had to say and find suitable solutions.
But that’s not the case here.

The label White Anglo-Saxon Protestant was first used in 1922, 55 years after Wasps were founded. The term WASP to describe White Anglo-Saxon Protestant was first used in 1956, 89 years after Wasps were founded.

So unless the person who first used the phrase WASP was an Atlantic hopping time traveller who went back in time, to establish a Rugby club in London, it's safe to say there's no like between the phrase and our club.

Vespula Vulgaris

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2992
    • View Profile
If a group of genuine Native Americans were highly offended, I would sit down and listen to everything they had to say and find suitable solutions.
But that’s not the case here.

Did you read Rossm's post?
Please consider supporting the forum in 2022! Donate Here