UI prof arrested for SFC incident

Status
Not open for further replies.
#76      
wma500
Ransom Stoddard said:
Unless and until the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma engages, there is no new ground to cover.
Click to expand...

Soooo......how about some renewed or updated discussions with the Peoria Tribe? How about the University endorsing discussions with the Peoria Tribe? How about the University, it's boosters, faculty, students and alums getting involved with the Nike N7 fund?

All these resources and paths are available to consider. All seem like better options that the current environment.
 
#77      
wma500
mattcoldagelli said:
Yes, you do that when the whole is not achievable....not when the whole has already been achieved.

There are obsessives on both sides. Rosenstein pursuing a suspected Chief into the bathroom is a mirror image of the ridiculousness that is a shadow mascot society doing events and crashing football and basketball games.
Click to expand...

One has been arrested, one has not.

Practicing the form of free speech in question at a basketball game involves zero obsession or ridiculousness. Particularly when that form of free speech has meaningful ties to the University.

Going into a bathroom on the other hand....
 
#78      
Ramrod2010
mattcoldagelli said:
Yes, you do that when the whole is not achievable....not when the whole has already been achieved.

There are obsessives on both sides. Rosenstein pursuing a suspected Chief into the bathroom is a mirror image of the ridiculousness that is a shadow mascot society doing events and crashing football and basketball games.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is that one side has, more or less, achieved what they wanted to do (and then some with the war chant) leaving the other side with nothing other than this group. And honestly I'm surprised the student section still does it to the degree they apparently do. I would have guessed that after 10 years that yelling chief would have become extinct.

It's not a guarantee, and it's too late now, but maybe if there was a more middle ground response initially (between keep the chief and remove him) then this wouldn't keep popping up like it dows. And the fringe representatives would be viewed as they truly are.

Edit: And yes, I realize the very strong irony of all this. But I still think something could have or still could be done that appeases both sides.
 
Last edited:
#79      
Ransom Stoddard
wma500 said:
Soooo......how about some renewed or updated discussions with the Peoria Tribe? How about the University endorsing discussions with the Peoria Tribe? How about the University, it's boosters, faculty, students and alums getting involved with the Nike N7 fund?

All these resources and paths are available to consider. All seem like better options that the current environment.
Click to expand...

Lot's of how 'bout's there. The University isn't interested. The Peoria's leadership isn't interested. The only people interested are a bunch of alums (like me) who want our "traditions" back. I am as saddened as anyone about how the university handled the retirement and how they've responded since then, but Chief is gone, and the current PC climate (just read the links in this thread to statements from student government leaders and other activists) he's not coming back.

At some point it's best just to move on.
 
#80      
Vermilion Slim
mattcoldagelli said:
To people who have already successfully retired the symbol, that is not "middle ground." That is undoing their achievement.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I’ve always felt the only way you go back to having the chief symbol (not the dance) reinstated is to have a large percentage (like almost all) of the merchandise profits go towards developing a robust American Indian Studies Program at UIUC as well as towards tons of regional outreach efforts to secondary schools regarding American Indian history and culture.

Theoretically both sides gain something at that point. Pro-chief folks get the symbol back, anti-chief folks get a revenue stream to support what has become a dilapidated department at UIUC, and the university (supposedly) would get more donations from people who have held back money due to this issue.

Doing that, however, would require tons and tons of other moving parts with the NCAA, tribes, etc. that nobody seems to have the stomach for at this point.
 
#81      
wma500
Ransom Stoddard said:
At some point it's best just to move on.
Click to expand...

Totally fair point. But what does "move on" look like? 11 years later and this is still an issue. Maybe most of the time it simmers under the surface, but we still have examples like the removal of War Chant, the homecoming parade entrant and protests, the student government proclamation and now Rosenstein in the bathroom that are happening. And yes, Chief still makes an appearance at sporting events and his name is notably chanted. All of this is just within the last six months for crying out loud.
 
#82      
mattcoldagelli
wma500 said:
But what does "move on" look like?
Click to expand...

Probably a new mascot. I thought this idea was silly when it was first broached, and that we would be fine just living life with our "I" (and the SHIELD, y'all), but I've been proven wrong. This has somehow remained a source of contentiousness and embarrassment for over 10 years.

I don't know about anybody else, but I would like to keep the name "Fighting Illini" and from my understanding of its origins, it is ambiguous at best. Losing the Chief made it more likely that we'd be able to keep it, not less (despite what everybody crying "slippery slope!" would have you believe), because without the Chief imagery, there's a pretty strong case to be made that "Fighting Illini" came into existence as a sort of demonym for Illinoisans or Illinois students, and it can easily return to being just that.

Continuing to fight these pitched battles over the War Chant and these rogue Chiefs is detrimental to that goal and is providing people who would do away with "Illini" plenty of ammo to say "See? They said it was just the Chief, but it's something deeper, and more change needs to happen."
 
#83      
ILL in IA
As a fan of Illinois athletics from a young age, but choosing to attend college elsewhere, I have never understood what the Chief means to so many. Can someone explain how the lack of Chief takes away from the game day experience or the attachment you feel to Illinois athletics?
 
#84      
bobbob
ILL in IA said:
As a fan of Illinois athletics from a young age, but choosing to attend college elsewhere, I have never understood what the Chief means to so many. Can someone explain how the lack of Chief takes away from the game day experience or the attachment you feel to Illinois athletics?
Click to expand...

For starters, I am now forced to pay more attention to the product on the field. Which is painful.
 
#86      
Shane Walsh
Thanks for the continued conversation on this everyone.

I love Chancellor Jones' response on Sunday to that gross Jim Dey opinion piece.

"The next time Mr. Dey chooses to write about what I learned as a black man growing up in the South, here are a few things for him to think about."
http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion...st-commentary-what-ive-learned-listening.html

And of course, Jim Dey responds by further drawing a line in the sand.
"The pro-Chiefs have listened to the anti-Chiefs for years, and vice versa. They hear each other fine. They just don't agree.

Is that really so hard for Jones and the rest of the UI's bureaucratic army to understand?"
http://www.news-gazette.com/opinion...learned-few-things-well-chancellor-jones.html

One man wants to unite, engage, listen, and support while the other is clearly only interested in attacking and trying to deepen the divide.
 
#87      
FiveStar
Shouldn’t number one on the list be something like

“The chief is agreed upon by the appropriate Native American groups/tribes and the university and iit is understood and accepted as that the intention to honor Native Americans.”

Cause when it’s not number one, who is the chief really for?
 
#88      
sbillini
Let's start our own IllinoisLoyalty compromise session. I'll take a stab using the above as a starting point. I'm fine with the above in general but would want some key changes:

  1. All of the above would need to be explicitly approved and condoned with Peoria leadership - particularly the key areas where we're supposedly honoring the tribe - imagery, dances, chants, etc. If we're representing a certain people, the people that we're representing need to agree to be represented. The approval should also require to be renewed. Maybe every 5 or 10 years. If some or all of the representations are not approved, we cannot use it.
  2. Any student officially selected by the university to represent the chief (i.e. Illiniwek) is required to be trained by the Peoria tribe itself and have their approval. The tribe could rescind that approval at any time.
  3. Related to (1), for revenue sharing, the revenue sharing should guarantee a portion to the Peoria tribe. At the end of the day, the representation of the Illini will be in a capitalistic construct, and they should reap benefits from it. Looking at the Seminole/FSU system there.

There's some other more minor suggestions i'd have (mostly related to the wording of some of the points), but the main suggestions are covered.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
#89      
redwingillini11
It makes way too much sense to do this, so of course it will never happen. People like Rosenstein would rather the University make ZERO efforts to better the Native American community and lock up anyone who dares wear Chief merchandise.

It just boggles the mind why the University wouldn't want to take this approach...
 
#90      
ILL in IA
redwingillini11 said:
It makes way too much sense to do this, so of course it will never happen. People like Rosenstein would rather the University make ZERO efforts to better the Native American community and lock up anyone who dares wear Chief merchandise.

It just boggles the mind why the University wouldn't want to take this approach...
Click to expand...

To look at this from the other side, do you only want to better the Native American community if you get to have a chief dance at halftime? All this does, is pose the question; how much will it cost for you to look past something you have been offended by.

I don't see this as simple and common sense as you want it to be. JMO
 
#91      
redwingillini11
ILL in IA said:
To look at this from the other side, do you only want to better the Native American community if you get to have a chief dance at halftime? All this does, is pose the question; how much will it cost for you to look past something you have been offended by.

I don't see this as simple and common sense as you want it to be. JMO
Click to expand...

I don't know why any outreach should be assumed to be disingenuous. The fact is that the anti-Chief side has never suggested or pushed for any charitable efforts, scholarship funds, or knowledge outreach for the Native American community. They just want to sweep the past under the rug and get some dude squirrel costume to dance on the sidelines. That helps no one. There's no reason why we cannot find an outcome that benefits everyone involved. I honestly don't even care about the dance. I care about the University of Illinois not becoming a university that bans certain symbols from being worn at sports events, from being displayed in professor's offices, from being worn on the streets. I don't want my alma mater to think that banning a melodic beat or throwing some idiot in a furry costume out there is the best solution. Or to be a place that allows professors to harass students or alums in bathrooms.

I'm not saying any party should accept any deal that we offer. I'm saying its stupidly closed-minded of the University to refuse to consider these options.
 
#93      
Deleted member 29907
Hoppy2105 said:
I found this interesting:



So he broke a law...but because someone with a biased interest didn't want to charge him with breaking the law, he didn't break the law.

Oh how I wish I had corruptible friends in high enough places to let me do whatever I wanted.
Click to expand...

No, you didn't read it well enough. He was "acting as a journalist" in going into the restroom to film. Apparently if you are 'acting' as a journalist - the law does not apply. ;)
 
#94      
JoseyWales83
VAIllini35 said:
No, you didn't read it well enough. He was "acting as a journalist" in going into the restroom to film. Apparently if you are 'acting' as a journalist - the law does not apply. ;)
Click to expand...

This is what angers me is that if it was one of us we would be in jail or least fined. The law needs to apply to all whether you agree with the person or not.
 
#97      
Deleted member 3875
Hoppy2105 said:
I found this interesting:



So he broke a law...but because someone with a biased interest didn't want to charge him with breaking the law, he didn't break the law.

Oh how I wish I had corruptible friends in high enough places to let me do whatever I wanted.
Click to expand...

A soft States Attorney is a large part of this story.
 
#98      
wma500
carmelillini said:
A soft States Attorney is a large part of this story.
Click to expand...

What below 'soft'? I think it pretty unethical what she did. Like others have said, anybody else does that, they're arrested and charged.
 
#99      
redwingillini11
Shane Walsh said:
I guess I missed the stories of everyone getting arrested for wearing Chief merchandise?
Click to expand...

As noted above, I never said that was happening. My point was that the group led by Rosenstein and Shamseldin have such a radical attitude towards the Chief supporters.

I do have such little faith in the administration, and think that we are dangerously close to the Chief logo being banned from sporting events and elsewhere on campus.
 
#100      
BillyBob1
redwingillini11 said:
As noted above, I never said that was happening. My point was that the group led by Rosenstein and Shamseldin have such a radical attitude towards the Chief supporters.

I do have such little faith in the administration, and think that we are dangerously close to the Chief logo being banned from sporting events and elsewhere on campus.
Click to expand...

Band members are not allowed to wear any chief gear during their practices.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back