4 ms·
Since you say this is progress, do you mind elaborating on what exactly this is progress toward? Even if the ASF fully changed their name tomorrow, what actual
by mightyham 2y ago
Since you say this is progress, do you mind elaborating on what exactly this is progress toward? Even if the ASF fully changed their name tomorrow, what actual positive impact is that going to have on Native Americans?
- rectang 2y agoIt gains Native Americans agency when they are able to determine how their culture is portrayed and represented, rather than be told that they have no choice but to have bear the representation that is foisted on them. Self-determination doesn't show up as a bank sheet entry, but it's not meaningless.
- mightyham 2y agoNative Americans have the agency/self-determination to portray themselves however they want regardless of the name of ASF. You seem to be arguing that Native Americans should have an exclusive right in determining how they are portrayed which is not only the opposite of progress, but is also treats them as a monolithic group, which is ignorant of sheer amount of diversity among Native Americans.
- atonse 2y agoAlso in this case, we don’t have to generalize “Native Americans” but specifically the Apache peoples/tribes. What have they said about this?
- ktm5j 2y agoAs a member of a marginalized minority group myself, I'd like to think that the answer to this question would be obvious..
- mightyham 2y agoThen state the obvious for me please because I don't think it is. I don't see how, in a multi-ethnic nation, making the neutral use of a name (in the case the use is actually positive) exclusionary to specific ethnicities is progress. It seems like a regression in our culture that we are having tribal quibbles over immaterial usage of language.