the same thing as the mascot itself? I oppose the costumed mascot and its actions on the field, but I do not oppose the mascot being embroidered in clothing. Is this hypocritical of me?
2006-09-17 21:28:43 · 4 answers · asked by bansri47 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The mascot is not offensive, but some consider the field representation a mockery.
2006-09-17 21:32:59 · update #1
Who cares about mascots? They are representations of fierce fighting teams that are meant to be used as a MARKETING tool. If these teams used silly mascots that did not invoke emotion or pride, then they probably would not be very popular and thus would not exist. Which makes you more passionate, hearing the word buccaneer or peacock?
2006-09-17 21:35:43 · answer #1 · answered by DLUVDAIMPERIAL 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's not hypocritical but it is inconsistent. If you think somebody might find the emblem insulting, you don't want to wear it. If you don't think anybody minds, why object to the mascot?
2006-09-18 04:35:41 · answer #2 · answered by chilixa 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Controversial mascots can be worn as long as it is not against law, morals and public order.
2006-09-18 04:31:22 · answer #3 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know if wearing a letterman's jacket for the "Fightin' Vaginas" is a good idea.
2006-09-18 04:36:25 · answer #4 · answered by Chuck Dhue 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋