The Sami People and Cultural Sensitivity

[Vyn]

Spurred by a tongue-in-cheek conversation between Charger and I in the Weather thread, I thought I'd pull this out into its own topic.

Excuse the lack of diacritic on the word Sami, it's a pain the ass to type so I won't.

I did some poking around to see if the Sami people of Lapland were any more or less sensitive to their cultural heritage than any other "group".

I'll start off by stating that I knew there was a group of people in north Scandinavia, and I knew them as Lapps. To be sure, though: this was never a topic of conversation in my day-to-day life - I think I learned it in grade school as part of a social studies class. So, I learned it, filed it away, and left it at that.

What I found in my recent internet foray was eye-opening. The Sami people have a HUGE chip on their shoulder when it comes to their culture, and when Charger stated they'd probably skin me alive if they caught me wearing one of their native shirts...he was not kidding.

But that attitude of the Sami people was developed, and seems to continually be developed, through a HUGE amount of prejudice against them in the countries they live - Norway, Sweden, Finland.

So, there are a lot of folks with Sami heritage who hide that fact, while at the same time being very proud of it. I guess the ones living in predominately Sami-populated areas can let it all hang out, so to speak. But it seems to be a thing.

Since I don't deal with Sami folks, I'll file what I've learned away and move on. But I have learned a HUGE amount about those people, especially as it relates to officially (and unofficially) sanctioned efforts at erasing them from the planet.

Amazing what can be learned from a random comment on an internet message board, just talking about the weather

I wonder, though - is what I've read an accurate portrayal? No doubt there is some truth there, but is it at the Sudan level of hate that much of the material I read suggests it is? I can look at how the USA has treated various ethnic groups over the years and draw parallels - especially with native Americans and efforts to erase their culture in some cases. But in 2025, is there THAT MUCH prejudice against Sami? I can look at today's native Americans and yeah, there's a small percentage that run around talking about cultural sensitivity, and sometimes, rarely, they get their agenda turned into action (Washington Redskins -> Commanders, for example), but most native Americans, including the handful that I know, don't really care. And no one I personally know is prejudiced against them. If they want to wear feathers and dance around, more power to them. Is it the same for Sami and the non-Sami they live among/have to deal with?

[Charger]

I think there is some merit to their anger but up to a degree....and most of it goes back to the late 1800s and the gold rush when a bunch of "southeners" came in and took their land to mine gold. And ofcourse what the nazis did when the Finns (finally) drove them out in 1944.

In day to day life nowadays there is absolutely no prejudice against them that I have seen...certainly not down here in the south quite the opposite even...what the situation is up north in Lapland, I cannot say with any certainty. Although I do know that their Raindeer farming operations is causing some problems with other people living in the area, as the Sámi have pretty much unlimited control over the raindeer.

The thing at the moment is that the Sámi people are causing a constant ruckus with their demands and their law suits against the finnish government and what not that is actually (in my opinion) causing them much more harm than good....and it's more like they try to milk every cent from their "victimhood"....and now they have become quite prejudice against everyone else...

I have always been fascinated by their culture and I think most of them are good honest and really hard working people...sadly they have chosen the wrong people to advocate for them as all they do is try to cause strife and find cause to fight the Finnish government. And they're trying very hard to create issues even when there are none. Not the right way to find a resolution.

I do not personally know any Sámi people, but damn I sure would like to!

[Typhon]

I can look at today's native Americans and yeah, there's a small percentage that run around talking about cultural sensitivity, and sometimes, rarely, they get their agenda turned into action (Washington Redskins -> Commanders, for example), but most native Americans, including the handful that I know, don't really care.

It is my understanding that natives were not bothered by the name.  It was the A-holes whose hobby it is to get offended by anything they can find, that wanted the name changed.

It turns out that the very first coach of the Washington football team was an American Indian, and they were named the Washington Redskins to honor him.

[Vyn]

Yeah - I think there were three Indians operating under an organization name I don't recall who lobbied a complaint against the Redskins name, as part of an annual "complaint list" that they sent out regarding all kinds of shit. The KC Chiefs are on that list. Most of the noise was coming from the professionally offended folks you mentioned.

Ultimately, the accountability falls on the ownership of the Redskins team who went ahead and changed the name. Or, rather, dropped the Redksins name without having a replacement thought up and thus making them a laughing stock for a while. Which made the whole thing doubly stupid.

[Zzzptm]

I would have preferred "Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons", myself. Make those broadcasters WORK when they say a team name!

As for offensiveness... I like the philosophy of my Station Manager at KNON. Our streaming station isn't governed by FCC rules, so if there's cursing, we won't be fined if it's on the streaming station. However, he puts it like this: "People who are offended by profanity will switch it off and likely not come back. We lose them as an audience. People who aren't offended by profanity won't switch it off if they don't hear it, they keep listening." So it's station policy to keep the listeners and avoid profanity, even where we could say it and not be hit with a big ol' FCC fine.

In the case of the team name, it's part of a larger sports story to be found in trying to get younger generations to connect with games that have a large fanbase of aging supporters. If the rising generation is saying it's not happy with a team name and risks dropping the habit of viewership or not developing the habit, then it's a smart business move to make the change and to not have it be an obstacle to people enjoying the sport - and watching all the ads that go with it, buying all the team merch, and so forth. It's in the same line of thinking that got Major League Baseball to adopt things like the pitch clock and other changes - make the game more enjoyable to watch, and more people will watch it, including those all-important younger viewers.

So if changing a team name keeps the kiddos a-watching, change the team name. For that matter, if you buy a team from Chainsaw Dan, change the name just to make it clear that it's under new management. Washington attendance is on an upward trend since Dan Snyder left the building in 2022.

[Typhon]

^^^^^^
Win a lot of games and they will watch, no matter what the team name is.   

[Vyn]

An interesting note about the KC Chiefs. Even though the fans are known for the native American themed accoutrements, and the team itself at one time or another doing the same (for years the mascot was Warpaint, a horse that would trot out and run a lap after each Chief's touchdown, the big drum they still use, etc.) supposedly it was named after a fire or police chief...not an indian chief

[Zzzptm]

That Chiefs origin story goes with how the football teams would go with baseball team names or names adjacent to those team names. Like the Detroit Lions because Detroit Tigers baseball team. And what is KC's baseball team? The Royals. Similar to a Royal? A Chief!

And, frankly, they needed a change, as "The Kansas City Texans" just wouldn't have rung true, if they kept the name the team had back in Dallas...

[Typhon]

^^^^^^
What do you mean "back in Dallas"?  I believe the KC Royals were an expansion team that began in KC.

[Zzzptm]

The KC Chiefs were the Dallas Texans, sorry for my unclear antecedent. It was the Chiefs that needed a new name after leaving Texas. Houston Oilers were in a similar situation, as Tennessee isn't known for its petrochemical industry.