Should Pasatiempo change their logo?

[Kalen Braley]

Bill and JLhar,

Thanks for those posts. 

I was born and raised in an area of Northern California with a sizeable Mexican population.  I had several close friends who were Mexican and we grew up together taking the same classes, playing on sports teams, having summer adventures, etc. By far and away the prevailing stereotype was the aforementioned "Lazy Mexican" which couldn't be further from the truth in reality.  I found them to be hard working people with actual family values who could outwork almost anyone.

I don't know what the intent is behind the logo but I can definitely see how it would perpetuate that myth.

[Marty Bonnar]

Perhaps a tasteful illustration of Falco subbuteo might work?
F.

[PCCraig]

A club with a Spanish name has an outline of a guy in a Spanish hat taking a nap under a palm tree.

Well, Pat, first, it's not a Spanish hat, it's a Sombrero.  Spain isn't Mexico.


Second, there is a stereotype out there of "the lazy Mexican".  I am not Mexican, so it's not something I can really internalize.  But I was a student at UC Riverside in the early '90s, when there was national news around a fraternity t-shirt depicting a couple of Mexican stereotypes.  This was one of them, and at least on our campus, it was a big deal.  Now, I went to law school at a University with a Native American mascot that has had no shortage of controversy.  For me, if you can have a logo/mascot that offends very few people, or a logo/mascot that offends no one, the choice is pretty easy.   I'm not offended by Pasatiempo's logo, but that's not really relevant.  I also think they could come up with a perfectly acceptable logo that offended no one.

Apologies for my ignorance. Appreciate your insight. I tend to agree with you...it's just a golf course logo after all.

[Andrew Keddie]

It's long been one of my favorite logos. A spanish word for passing time as I understand it, so it's logically a mexican guy relaxing under the shade of a tree. I still really like it.

[Anthony Butler]

I won our ad agency tournament at Pasatiempo back in the 90s and got a $300 pro shop gift card. Both the polo shirts purchased with my winnings were somehow 'lost' by my girlfriend at the time within about a month. Fast forward 20 years later...  I have a different partner and my Philadelphia Cricket Club and Seminole hats seem to have disappeared as well...

As a white male of Irish Protestant and Norwegian Heritage I have come realize it's not really really my place to say what golf or sport teams logos are offensive... some people have obviously not made that connection.   When someone produces a logo of a Drunken Irishman in pool of his own vomit or someone with a beard and shoulder length hair defiling a young French girl, it will be my time to weigh in.

I will now go back to being offended by the fact my club is attempting to replace the NSW Coat of Arms with the Cypress Point Club logo drawn by a 5yr old.

[Tim Leahy]

Having lived in Cali practically my whole life if the logo really offended anyone the club would have been forced one way or another to change it. Stanford changed from the Indians to the Cardinal due to pressure and many schools in NoCal have been forced to change names from community pressure. I believe the logo may be much like the Fighting Irish leprechaun or Fla St Seminole and those who may be offended have come to embrace it.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

Philadelphia Cricket Club problem:


Philadelphia Cricket Club Asked to Discontinue Logo - Club + Resort Business (clubandresortbusiness.com)


Cricket Club logo ‘compromise’ gets mixed review | The Chestnut Hill Local


Philadelphia Cricket Club replaces sign that used a Native American image (inquirer.com)

[Anthony Butler]

Philadelphia Cricket Club problem:


Philadelphia Cricket Club Asked to Discontinue Logo - Club + Resort Business (clubandresortbusiness.com)


Cricket Club logo ‘compromise’ gets mixed review | The Chestnut Hill Local


Philadelphia Cricket Club replaces sign that used a Native American image (inquirer.com)

Steve from my half a dozen visits to the club, I noticed a distinct lack of Native Americans... and no sign of cricket being played on the property. They do use cricket balls for tee markers.

[Tim Martin]

The number of native American course logos in New England is many. Our town of 60,000 people in Connecticut just changed both high school mascots from Indian names in 2022. Much angst and a lawsuit accompanied the process.

[Steve_ Shaffer]

New sign at Cricket's entrance:

















Alumni from the University of Pennsylvania founded The Philadelphia Cricket Club and elected the first President, J. Dickerson Sergeant. According to the charter, the purpose of the Club was the "practicing and playing of the games of cricket and tennis and the promotion of the health of its members." As the Club's name implies, cricket was played at the Club from its inception until the 1920s. It was revived in the early 1990s and has enjoyed steady support since.

[Wayne_Kozun]

It's long been one of my favorite logos. A spanish word for passing time as I understand it, so it's logically a mexican guy relaxing under the shade of a tree. I still really like it.

There seems to be disagreement whether Pasatiempo stands for pastime, as in "Golf is my favorite pastime" or passing time. 

[Tim Martin]

New sign at Cricket's entrance:

















Alumni from the University of Pennsylvania founded The Philadelphia Cricket Club and elected the first President, J. Dickerson Sergeant. According to the charter, the purpose of the Club was the "practicing and playing of the games of cricket and tennis and the promotion of the health of its members." As the Club's name implies, cricket was played at the Club from its inception until the 1920s. It was revived in the early 1990s and has enjoyed steady support since.

My understanding is that the Indian references have always denoted a nod of reverence. The new sign although “maybe” politically correct doesn’t measure up to the otiginal.

[Cal Carlisle]

It's long been one of my favorite logos. A spanish word for passing time as I understand it, so it's logically a mexican guy relaxing under the shade of a tree. I still really like it.

There seems to be disagreement whether Pasatiempo stands for pastime, as in "Golf is my favorite pastime" or passing time.

"The Pasatiempo Story" by Margaret Koch


'The Pasatiempo Logo'


In 1954, for Pasatiempo's first Women's Invitational, Joseph W Gustavson, Santa Cruz businessman and Pasatiempo member, designed a tournament motif which in time became the Pasatiempo Golf Club logo.


An embroidered background shows a little man in a sombrero, curled up under a tree...after all, Pasatiempo means "pastime" or "passing the time." Marion Hollins chose the name. The sombrero carries on the Spanish/Mexican theme she was careful to preserve, and Marion Hollins loved trees. She would be pleased..."


I looked in the Marion Hollins biography "Champion in a Man's World" and there was no specific mention of the genesis of the name.

[Anthony Butler]

As the Club's name implies, cricket was played at the Club from its inception until the 1920s. It was revived in the early 1990s and has enjoyed steady support since.

Where do they play? I see no oval at either their Flourtown or St. Martins locations... I can't imagine the quality of cricket is any better than Americans trying to play rugby though...

[Will Spivey]

Anthony,


Should Notre Dame change their logo and mascot? I really don't understand the fuss. The logo isn't derogatory in any way. For a great discussion of why "pasateimpo" is important in certain parts of the world read David Landes excellent "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations."


Pasatiempo isn't about being lazy; it's about hard labor in warm climates.

I won our ad agency tournament at Pasatiempo back in the 90s and got a $300 pro shop gift card. Both the polo shirts purchased with my winnings were somehow 'lost' by my girlfriend at the time within about a month. Fast forward 20 years later...  I have a different partner and my Philadelphia Cricket Club and Seminole hats seem to have disappeared as well...

As a white male of Irish Protestant and Norwegian Heritage I have come realize it's not really really my place to say what golf or sport teams logos are offensive... some people have obviously not made that connection.   When someone produces a logo of a Drunken Irishman in pool of his own vomit or someone with a beard and shoulder length hair defiling a young French girl, it will be my time to weigh in.

I will now go back to being offended by the fact my club is attempting to replace the NSW Coat of Arms with the Cypress Point Club logo drawn by a 5yr old.

[Charlie Goerges]

Anthony,


Should Notre Dame change their logo and mascot? I really don't understand the fuss. The logo isn't derogatory in any way. For a great discussion of why "pasateimpo" is important in certain parts of the world read David Landes excellent "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations."


Pasatiempo isn't about being lazy; it's about hard labor in warm climates.

I understand what you're saying, but the question isn't only about whether the usage is meant in a derogatory way. It's also about autonomy and self-determination. It's highly unlikely that the group depicted by the logo had any say in its adoption (or derives much benefit from its continued use). This is was the same problem with the Cleveland and Washington sports teams (and any others of the same nature). There are obviously many additional considerations as well, but this is a start.

[Ben Hollerbach]

As the Club's name implies, cricket was played at the Club from its inception until the 1920s. It was revived in the early 1990s and has enjoyed steady support since.

Where do they play? I see no oval at either their Flourtown or St. Martins locations... I can't imagine the quality of cricket is any better than Americans trying to play rugby though...

On the grass tennis courts in front of the St. Martin clubhouse.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Anthony,


Should Notre Dame change their logo and mascot? I really don't understand the fuss. The logo isn't derogatory in any way. For a great discussion of why "pasateimpo" is important in certain parts of the world read David Landes excellent "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations."


Pasatiempo isn't about being lazy; it's about hard labor in warm climates.

I understand what you're saying, but the question isn't only about whether the usage is meant in a derogatory way. It's also about autonomy and self-determination. It's highly unlikely that the group depicted by the logo had any say in its adoption (or derives much benefit from its continued use). This is the same problem with the Cleveland and Washington sports teams (and any others of the same nature). There are obviously many additional considerations as well, but this is a start.

The issues is not if the depicted group had say, The issue is do these depicted groups continue to have a say.


Washington's original Native American head logo was designed by Walter Wetzel, the chairman of Blackfeet Nation and president of the National Congress of American Indians. While there was Native American support for the team for quite a long time, the voice of those who disproved became louder than those who approved.

Similarly, the North Dakota Fighting Sioux were forced to change their name even after receiving support to keep the name from a local Sioux tribe.

The Seminole nation of Oklahoma has tried for ages to force Florida State to change their mascot, but the support from the Seminole nation in Florida is strong enough to keep the name.

[Charlie Goerges]

Anthony,


Should Notre Dame change their logo and mascot? I really don't understand the fuss. The logo isn't derogatory in any way. For a great discussion of why "pasateimpo" is important in certain parts of the world read David Landes excellent "The Wealth and Poverty of Nations."


Pasatiempo isn't about being lazy; it's about hard labor in warm climates.

I understand what you're saying, but the question isn't only about whether the usage is meant in a derogatory way. It's also about autonomy and self-determination. It's highly unlikely that the group depicted by the logo had any say in its adoption (or derives much benefit from its continued use). This is the same problem with the Cleveland and Washington sports teams (and any others of the same nature). There are obviously many additional considerations as well, but this is a start.

The issues is not if the depicted group had say, The issue is do these depicted groups continue to have a say. Correct, this is why I refered to continued use.


Washington's original Native American head logo was designed by Walter Wetzel, the chairman of Blackfeet Nation and president of the National Congress of American Indians. While there was Native American support for the team for quite a long time, the voice of those who disproved became louder than those who approved.

Similarly, the North Dakota Fighting Sioux were forced to change their name even after receiving support to keep the name from a local Sioux tribe.

The Seminole nation of Oklahoma has tried for ages to force Florida State to change their mascot, but the support from the Seminole nation in Florida is strong enough to keep the name.

These are more good examples where these types of changes have been made or should be. It's not always easy to determine, I'm just trying to get people to move away from the instinctive, defensive reaction to say "but we meant no offense!" and try to think about issues of autonomy and self-determination. And that's only a first step, more thought is needed beyond that.


The question of whether Notre Dame needs to change its mascot was brought up. To that I'd say that it probably doesn't, but it wouldn't hurt for some research to be done on that account (maybe it has been) they certainly have the money to fund it.

[Craig Sweet]

If clubs want "honor" Indians simply give them back the land that was taken. And while at it, considering the damage done by the Jesuits in California, some reparations need to be made.

[Ben Hollerbach]

These are more good examples where these types of changes have been made or should be. It's not always easy to determine, I'm just trying to get people to move away from the instinctive, defensive reaction to say "but we meant no offense!" and try to think about issues of autonomy and self-determination. And that's only a first step, more thought is needed beyond that.

My concern is when a voice is not heard or not given enough weight when it should be. The reaction of "but we meant no offense" can be mirrored by an extreme level of offense by a contradictory party.

In the case of North Dakota, The NCAA declared the mascot "hostile and abusive" and demanded it be change. When the NCAA pushed for the mascot to be change, the movement to keep the mascot was was lead by the local Sioux reservations. One would think support from local groups being represented in the mascot would be sufficient to have the issue dropped, but the weight of the NCAA was too large and the the name was eventually changed.

The same would have occurred at Florida State, as the NCAA also deemed their name "hostile and abusive" but the higher profile nature of the university and the stronger economic weight of the Seminole tribe staved off the transition.

Its hard to say that how UND used the Fighting Sioux was any more hostile and abusive compared to how FSU uses the Seminole. The same way its hard to say that FSU is more respectful of the Seminole than UND was of the Fighting Sioux. It does appear that if the names truly are intended to honor the native people to the region, and the native people did not object to the use of the name for the university that both should have been able to keep the name. The Sioux don't have the same public perception or economic weight as the Seminole, by removing their name from the university I wouldn't be surprised if both those factors have only gotten worse.

[Max Prokopy]

Having lived in Cali practically my whole life if the logo really offended anyone the club would have been forced one way or another to change it. Stanford changed from the Indians to the Cardinal due to pressure and many schools in NoCal have been forced to change names from community pressure. I believe the logo may be much like the Fighting Irish leprechaun or Fla St Seminole and those who may be offended have come to embrace it.

The relationship between Florida State and Seminole nation is pretty impressive actually.  I can see where people get ideas and am sure some don't like the mascot, but there are formal agreements and acknowledgments extending far beyond the typical "indians" mascot references out there.  It's a different ball of wax. 

[Charlie Goerges]

These are more good examples where these types of changes have been made or should be. It's not always easy to determine, I'm just trying to get people to move away from the instinctive, defensive reaction to say "but we meant no offense!" and try to think about issues of autonomy and self-determination. And that's only a first step, more thought is needed beyond that.

My concern is when a voice is not heard or not given enough weight when it should be. The reaction of "but we meant no offense" can be mirrored by an extreme level of offense by a contradictory party.

In the case of North Dakota, The NCAA declared the mascot "hostile and abusive" and demanded it be change. When the NCAA pushed for the mascot to be change, the movement to keep the mascot was was lead by the local Sioux reservations. One would think support from local groups being represented in the mascot would be sufficient to have the issue dropped, but the weight of the NCAA was too large and the the name was eventually changed.

The same would have occurred at Florida State, as the NCAA also deemed their name "hostile and abusive" but the higher profile nature of the university and the stronger economic weight of the Seminole tribe staved off the transition.

Its hard to say that how UND used the Fighting Sioux was any more hostile and abusive compared to how FSU uses the Seminole. The same way its hard to say that FSU is more respectful of the Seminole than UND was of the Fighting Sioux. It does appear that if the names truly are intended to honor the native people to the region, and the native people did not object to the use of the name for the university that both should have been able to keep the name. The Sioux don't have the same public perception or economic weight as the Seminole, by removing their name from the university I wouldn't be surprised if both those factors have only gotten worse.

I’m glad you’re willing to discuss the subject.


That said, Sioux might not be the best example. It was a derogatory name imposed by outsiders on a group of several different tribes (at least as I was taught in school). As such, even if one tribe was fine with it, that could well have left many more on the other side of the argument. From what I heard changing it would have been the right choice.


If the situation is different with the Seminole, great.

[Ben Hollerbach]

Sioux might not be the best example. It was a derogatory name imposed by outsiders on a group of several different tribes (at least as I was taught in school). As such, even if one tribe was fine with it, that could well have left many more on the other side of the argument. From what I heard changing it would have been the right choice.


If the situation is different with the Seminole, great.

It’s my understanding that almost the exact same could be said about the Seminole name and the collection of I believe 5 different tribes.


I also recall that the Lakota Sioux were vocal about changing the UND mascot in a similar way the Okaloma Seminole have been at FSU. While the Dakota Sioux more were in favor of keeping it, they are significantly outnumbered compared to the Lakota. Leading to the distant voice outweighing the local voice.


But we’ve probably gone down this tangent enough for a 10 year old thread that was going down its own tangent.

[Max Prokopy]

At some point every organization has a collective set of voices meant to (relatively) speak for the group(s).  Since many indigenous peoples were subjected to scattered settlements AND had their own internal conflicts, there is inevitably going to be conglomeration to some extent.  Surely us golf enthusiasts can appreciate that "Scotland" was a collection of clans who, at some point, found a collective sensibility and bargaining power to be worth the tradeoffs.  The point here is that the governance of some tribes express support for the mascots and logos while others do not.  Not all are created equal. 


The NCAA is not exactly a terrific arbiter of fairness or common sense, so I don't put any stock in their labels whatsoever. 


With that said, I'm more than willing to allow these issues and outcomes to evolve over time, so if a tribe wants to withdraw support/consent, I am behind that as well.