Minnie and Paul Changing for Twins?

Today WCCO posted a story regarding the Minnesota Twins longstanding logo of Minnie and Paul shaking hands. The depiction is of two individuals representing Minneapolis and St. Paul coming together over what would be the Mississippi River. In the ongoing effort to advance diversity and inclusion however, the imagery is now be called for questioning.

While not a Twins employee, Dr. Charles Crutchfield acts as the Twins consulting dermatologist. He offers that the pair need a fresh look that, “honors and reflects the team’s players and its fans from different backgrounds. He goes on to say the change is “long overdue.”

Although I initially posted my thoughts on Twitter saying in short, “This is a no for me,” there’s a bit more nuance to unpack here. I couldn’t be more supportive of initiatives looking to drive a heightened opportunity for diversity and acceptance. Further, I remain open to the idea that we can revisit history and even change the way we both celebrate and cherish it. What I think those avenues provide however, are legitimate opportunities for growth and advancement. What I think should be avoided is an agenda designed solely to spark a false sense of need.

In short, the imagery of Minnie and Paul couldn’t be more unassuming and less offensive. While there is no indication of a female or person of color within the logo, suggesting a need to create that storyline for the sake of diversity falsely applies an impact of presumed consciousness. We don’t need to be told whether the two individuals are trans, their sexual orientation, or their political beliefs. It’s a picture of two communities coming together to support one Twins Territory.

This story appears to be the work of WCCO sports reporter Norman Seawright. I didn’t see a name attached in the byline, but he chimed in on Twitter. The initial response was that a change in skin tone of the individual on a logo could “inspire someone who looks like me (Norman is African America) and isn’t into baseball to give it a shot.”

I have no idea what the world looks like through the eyes of someone in a minority class, and I’ll never pretend to understand. What I think is fair is suggesting that there’s a leap in believing inclusivity is spawned more by creating a talking point in an image moreso than actual initiatives that reflect genuine action. Almost more than any other sport, baseball’s on-field diversity is unmatched. We still need to do a better job stretching that to all other facets of the game and that remains a work in progress.

Maybe I’m way off on this, but channeling focus into something that should be found in no way offensive looks like a hollow workaround to a greater good. What are your thoughts?