Not sure if this needs to go here or controversial issues, but an LSU student has started a petition to make LSU change their mascot because Tigers represents racism and "white privilege."

 

LSU students say school’s ‘Tigers’ mascot is a symbol of racism and ‘white privilege’ – TheBlaze :woot::woot::woot:

 

Here's an excerpt:

 

The petition then goes on to explain that the white men who chose the confederate symbol were known at the time for their violent and racist nature.

 

“These powerful white males choose the Tiger [sic] as a symbol to honor a confederate regiment called Louisiana’s Tigers,” it says. “They were known for their propensity for violence on and off the battle field. They were just as violent to the black slaves they owned, and later even more violent once those slaves were set free.

 

 

“It is incredibly insulting for any African American to have to attend a school that honors confederate militantism. It is already hard enough to be black at LSU, and these symbols must be changed,” the petition says before addressing the issue of white privilege.

 

The petition also objects to the live “Mike the Tiger” mascot which is kept on campus in a state-of-the-art $3 million habitat that is among the largest and most well-equipped tiger habitats in the world.

 

“It’s also cruel to cage a wild animal for the amusement of privileged white people. They’ve never been in a cage,” the petition read, although LSU is far from the only university to cage their live animal mascot.

Tigers are racist? That's a new one. :lol2:

Tigers are racist? That's a new one. :lol2:

 

I read it twice and I'm still not making a connection between tigers and the Confederate South.

Per Mike the Tiger's Wikipedia page (which I'm linking because it references a book as its source which isn't available for online viewing):

 

"LSU first adopted its "Tigers" nickname in the fall of 1896.[2] The moniker is a reference to the state's Confederate heritage; the Louisiana troops of Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia became known as the Tigers during the Civil War in recognition of the bravery of two New Orleans brigades, the Tiger Rifles and the Washington Artillery (whose logo featured a snarling tiger's head).[3]"

 

So, I guess while that part is true, who in the world would even know that and associate the two at this point? It's a Tiger!

They should do like Stanford and change their name to a color, Purple, and their mascot to a tree, the Bald Cypress, and be done with it.

I guess I can see a little bit of cringing when you look back at the why's and when's of choosing the mascot, but I'm with DragonFire...at this point, who even knows to associate the "Tigers" with that?

 

And man...if that's offensive...Ole Miss better be watching out!

Makes sense to me. I get it.

The world is full of NUTS.

 

Guess UK will have to change their mascot because of the Logan Wildcats.

Makes sense to me. I get it.

Ok be honest, are you offended by it though? Did you even know about it before this? Because I can guarantee you nobody at LSU even knew about it until it was researched.

It is not for me to tell someone what they should or shouldn't be offended by, particularly when I haven't traveled the same path he has. The history of the Tigers' name, while over a century ago, certainly is cringe-worthy at the very best.

 

However, the caged animal deal is where he loses me. Should we free every animal at every zoo in America? I've been on that campus, that tiger's enclosure is SWEET, plus, with the moronic poachers hitting Africa, he has no rich dentists from the midwest shooting at him (in case you don't get the reference Dentist Who Killed Cecil the Lion Poached in US). He has it pretty good.