Read Identity Theft on pages 295-296 in Coakley and read the article on the NCAA ban of Native American Mascot nicknames (click here) and (click here) for an additional article on the topic.
In 2005, the NCAA banned the display of Native American names, logos, and mascots on uniforms and other clothing. However, they made an exception for Florida State University. This controversy has carried on down into the high school and middle schools. When I was in Junior High School, our school was named Chief Joseph Middle School, our mascot was the Warriors, and on the gymnasium wall was a picture of a Native American swinging a hatchet. What are your thoughts on the topic of Native American mascots? Is this ok? Do you have a personal example to enhance your response?
To access the blog click on: http://trendsinsport.blogspot.com/
I grew up in northwest Minnesota where the UND Fighting Sioux logo was very prominent. I watched as billionaire Ralph Englestad built a new hockey arena on campus and peppered it with Indian head logos. As I recall, or at least as my impression was, the use of the logo and the name "Fighting Sioux" was done with tribal approval. My thought always was, "if it's okay with them, it's okay with me." At that point, the general impression was that the use of the name and logo were a point of pride for everyone involved.
ReplyDeleteLately, things have changed. There clearly is no longer tribal concensus on the use of the logo and name at UND. The NCAA ruling also impacts the situation, although I think the NCAA's "half-way" position is terribly weak.
For me, this is and always has been a matter for the affected group to determine. If the Sioux tribes in North Dakota no longer feel comfortable with the name and logo at UND, then it needs to change. I don't believe I'm in any position to suggest otherwise.
I grew up in north dakota where the sioux nickname is obviously a big deal. I played on a high school team that was called the sioux(still is today). I personally think it is wrong to keep the logo. I have seen the Sioux logo demeaned by both people we played against in high school and also by opponents of UND. Anybody who has been to a Sioux-Bison game has seen some pretty demeaning things done to the Sioux logo. I remember hearing people joke about after going to a sioux hockey game against wisconsin or minnesota and the sioux fans would throw dead gophers and badgers on the ice, and people would say what do they do when the sioux play them? Throw dead indians on the ice. As far as the NCAA allowing some schools to do it and some not. They screwed up when they made the blanket statement that all were offensive. I do think each tribe should be able to determine if they are ok with it or not. But if there is any decension among the tribes involved it should be not used. As with most things in life it is about communication and being able to comprise. Florida State has done a very good job of providing large sums of money to the Seminole tribe. In sense making them partners with the university. UND has made no such effort until recently when the logo came into jeopardy and actually the university and their fans have held a very arrogant opinion in the matter. For them to say they are honoring the tribe when the tribe doesn't completely believe that themselves makes that statement a very self-serving statement.
ReplyDeleteI would tend to agree that the tribe(s) should have some say if a school is going to use their name as a nickname/mascot. But, what if the school isn't a specific tribe, just the generic "Indians?" It is hard for me to agree that all schools with native american nicknames should have to change them, because it is such a complex problem without a generic solution.
ReplyDeleteAn issue I foresee if schools/teams are forced to change is, would a fan attending a game be allowed to wear a shirt/jersey/whatever from a previous year or would they be forced to by all new logo clothing? If a school had to change because the previous logo was "offensive" than I would say fans could not wear any old logo clothing.
I think the generic terms such as indians and redskins are the worst and most offensive. they lump all native americans into one big group. I find it interesting that in our nations capital we allow the football team to be called the redskins. To me that is our country just flipping the bird to native americans and telling them they are a conquered people who has no say in how their heritage is viewed and depicted.
ReplyDeleteI am along the same lines as Kevin in the argument. If it offends a particular tribe then no one should be able to use the term redskin, sioux, or seminole. If its ok with a particular tribe (like it seems to be with Floriday State and the Seminole Tribe) than let them have their name and mascot. I have seen this process go both ways. I remember growing up always playing the Long Prairie Indians...now they are called the Thunder along with Grey Eagle. The native americans felt it was insulting to them so Long Prairie decided to change their name. In Mahnomen, I have a friend who is a teacher and coach up there, and the native americans love the fact the school is named after them so to this day they are still called the Mahnomen Indians. It really comes down to if the Native Americans are ok with it, keep the name, if they aren't, change it.
ReplyDeleteWhere I stand: if the school gets the ok from the group then they should be allowed to use the name and or logo. But if they are using it without permission and in a demeaning way, I think they should have to change the name.
ReplyDeleteWatching some of the pre-game and post-game rituals these schools put on, I can see how many of them would be deamed offensive. Especially if the student is of any other decent rather than Native Amercian.
Many of the schools changed their names or logos. But some kept the name and just changed the logo; warriors or braves. I don't see the harm in having names like those, I don't think they send a derogatory.
As for the Fighting Souix nickname, I'm tired of hearing about it. I went to college in Moorhead and that is all we seemed to ever hear about. I'm sick of people saying that if you change the name or the logo, tradition will be lost. Do you really think people are going to stop cheering for UND because they changed their name and logo? Not me. I believe the only reason this has become such a big deal at UND is because of their hockey arena, which is plastered with the Souix name and logo. And the man who donated the arena put a stipulation in his will that if the schools name or logo should ever change, then they couldn't use the arena any longer. And if you been there, the arena is state of the art. I can see where the school is coming from, but if you don't have permission, too bad.
If they have permission to use the name or logo, go for it. If not, change it.
Great responses to thus far. It is good to see the connection to your own experiences. To further expand this discussion, the former President of St. Cloud State University, Roy Saigo was heavily involved in the NCAA legislation regarding the use of Native American Mascots. Read the article(click link at the bottom) and continue the discussion already started. Consider the concept of how the use of Native American Mascots leads to racial stereotypes.
ReplyDeletehttp://socyberty.com/ethnicity/native-american-mascots-and-the-white-perspective/#5min
I have never really thought about the use of Indian names as mascots until now to be honest. I grew up in the state of Virginia and our mascot was a clipper (as in ship.. pretty pathetic i know), and there were no teams in our conference with Indian names. The big schools around were VA tech who are the hokies and UVA who are the cavaliers, so I guess I didn't grow up around to much of this.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing I can recall from growing up was my best friends family LOVED the Washington Redskins, and people in VA who didnt like the Redskins would say "booo you like the DEADskins!!" and now looking back on that, that is really wrong! and I completely agree with Doug that its ridiculous that our nation's capitol uses the Redskins for their football mascot. Its been interesting to read others posts and see the experiences with the UND Sioux.
I don't know enough information about FSU to put out a good opinion; however, if the tribe agreed that FSU could use the Seminole as a mascot of honor, then I don't see an issue with it. Thats all I can really say in regards to that topic at this moment.
This is an extremely hard topic to write about for me because of the little knowledge I have on the situation. I have read the chapter and the few articles in regards to the discrimination of American Indians. In the article Pete just posted, I agree that with the mascots we CAN be showing disgrace to one of our most scarred communities, and in many ways we have. However, if what FSU's president, TK Wetherall, states is true that Seminole Tribe of Florida is being honored through their mascot and that the Tribe agrees with this, then I don't see the harm in it. I feel completely teeter-tottered with this situation because of the strong cases from both sides. Another example is: The University of Illinois says that Chief Illinwek keeps the memory of the great native american tribe alive for thousands.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, these mascots can produce horrible stereotypes for American Indians and not only does it dishonor American Indians, but it puts them in a bad light toward non-american Indians. Dr. Richard Lapchick says "Could you imagine people mocking African Americans in black face at a game? Yet go to a game where there is a team with an Indian name and you will see fans with war paint on their faces.” This is such an unbelievable and convicting statement.
The ruling on this issue is unclear and it needs to be fixed. It should be ALL or NONE on the mascot ruling. FOr example, North Carolina-Pembroke uses the Braves as their mascot and is not affected by the ruling because a majority of their students are Native American. The NCAA cannot choose and pick sides. There should either be no Native American mascots, or their should be. I am really interested to read other peoples thoughts and feelings on this issue.
The uses of the Indian nickname could obviously go both ways: thus use of the name could be an honor and help support and allow people to gain knowledge about the tribes. Again, the use of the name could offend and demean the value of a tribes name.
ReplyDeleteThe NCAA is a large and honorable program that provides opportunities for thousands of student athletes and employees. They need to take a stand and choose a side in this matter, where can show their employees and student althetes respect and responsiblity for all parties.
I believe that there are many other names that can be used for teams, the use of Indian trie names have come an gone. It is now the time to move past this issue.
The article leads for a great discussion about the use of names and its relation to race in sports and its sterotypes. The use of mascots can lead to viscious conflicts and rivalries. I feel strongly that a new approach to team names and mascots is needed to clear this issue.
From my experiences I believe that mascots that are related to Native Americans should be banned from all sports organizations. It doesn't matter if it the organization is at the high school, college, or professional level. While playing basketball at SCSU, we played the UND Fighting Sioux at least twice a year. When talking to some of the players on their team, they would tell me stories about T-shirts that were made by rival NDSU that dipicted Native Americans doing outrageous things to NDSU's mascot the bison. There is no honor or tradition in ridiculing another human being. I'm sure that these types of degrading practices occur more than people think, even at schools that the tribes permission, such as FSU.
ReplyDeleteAnother problem that I have with schools that have Native American mascots that claim that they are honoring the tribes by performing some of their ritutals. The majority of the schools that I have seen (Illinois for example)have a white male dress up in a Chief's attire, with massive feathers coming out of it. The "Chief" performs a cerimonial dance before the sporting contests begin. Talk about a slap in the face; even if the person that dresses up as the Native American does research about these sacred rituals, there is no way that he knows that history and the cultural significance behind these practices.
The NCAA need to step up and take a stronger stand on Native American mascots in the college relm. Initially, they decided that all schools would need to change their mascot names. Then they said that they couldn't make them change, but if a school continuted to have a "demeaning" Native American mascot, they they would not qualify to host post season tournaments. Now, they are taking schools off the list if they threaten legal action against the NCAA. If the NCAA is committed to respecting cultural diversity, then they need to stand firm in order to make changes to schools that have Native American mascots.
After reading the article on mascots leading to reacial stereotypes one thought really came to mind. If a mascot was out there that offended the Afican-American race or White Race, do you think colleges and professional teams would be able to continue to use the mascot? I personally believe if there was a mascot that offended black people or white people it would be stopped in a few days. Many Native Americans have felt offended for a long time and yet there seems to be a loop hole for any university or professional team to do pretty much what they want. Why is that? Money? Tradition? People in power being stubborn and wanting their way? I mean come on, we are talking about a name and a mascot here. If the name or mascot offends a certain group of Native Americans it shouldn't be that hard to come up with a new name which offends no one. Wouldn't you think?
ReplyDeleteI posted earlier that I believed the affected tribes should make mascot use decisions. After reading the article and a couple of the other posts regarding the UND-NDSU rivalry, I think I need to modify my position. I still think the primary decision-makers should be the tribes, but in those cases where the use of a name or mascot is clearly offensive there needs to be broader intervention. That, of course, invites an argument regarding what is "clearly offensive," but I believe it's a line that needs to be defined and can't be crossed.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading most of the posts I am also in agreement with most of you that we should respect the tribes. The teams do not need a tribal name to be good. They can still be good, it would be a change that people hate to deal with. When I was younger and they changed some of the high school mascot names in MN, I did not quite understand why it was a big deal, but after understanding how offensive it was to some people in the tribes, then I do not see why we still have any names that are offensive. As far as the NCAA goes, they took the easy rode and tried to make too many people happy. If they would have stood their ground, then this would not be an issue anymore.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article "Native American Mascots and the White Perspective", I really believe that we need to change our mascot names. There is NO reason to have a mascot named after a tribe. It seems so obvious to me, but I understand the money it will cost to change it, however the pain that is had cost others is much more. I think that we may learn or look into a tribe if they use the name, but again the negatives out way the positives so for me it is a no brainer! The racial stereotypes that come out of using Native American mascots are so painful for those that cherish and understand the true meaning of their tribe.
ReplyDeleteHaving a racially based mascot for a school mascot is “culturally unacceptable”. I would take that a step farther and say it is ethically and morally unacceptable. I couldn’t imagine attending a school where they had an African American male on the gym floor holding a machete as if he was the “African Warrior”. All seems a bit over the top, but I couldn’t imagine being a Native American and having to see these institutions use their ethnicity as a Logo and or Mascot. The University of North Dakota “Fighting Sioux” was one of the few schools that had a Native American as a mascot. In 2005, I was attending the University of South Dakota a rivalry school where many students had bared no mercy to this mascot name, so bad that I won’t mention things I heard. I wouldn’t feel comfortable having an individual make fun of my race, nonetheless a whole institution.
ReplyDeleteLast addition from me for this topic. I spent three years at Ottawa University in Kansas working in Athletics. Our mascot was the Braves. Read an interesting article (http://www.oucampus.org/2.10450/ottawa-tribe-ou-have-long-history-1.1398135)about how the mascot is supported by the Ottawa Indian Tribes and the relationship that has been established.
ReplyDeleteThis sort of article is what me thinks that mascots can be in honor of a particular American Indian Tribe. The Ottawas respected the Meekers so much that they gave them 20,000 acres of land to fund a school and in turn descendents of Kansas Ottawa Indians are provided free undergraduate tuition. This is such a touchy subject, because lets just say the Ottawa Indians found out that the 'Braves' mascot was no longer allowed because of the NCAA, what if they were offended? instead of it being the opposite way around? Maybe there needs to be dress code limitations to games, but I think that is more work than the NCAA is willing to do.
ReplyDeleteDisrespecting any tribe is wrong and the NCAA needs to stop teeter-tottering this issue. Some tribes may feel extreme respect, like in the case of Ottawa University, but it seems in the majority that schools are showing great disrespect therefore it should be banned.
I attended a college in South Carolina called Newberry College and we were the Indians until 2006 when the NCAA stepped in and took our mascot. From 2006 until two weeks ago we were known as the block N's just like Nebraskas logo. For that four year span we were the only team in the NCAA with out a mascot. Not only did this bother us as a school but considering were donate money every year to various Indian funds to keep our nickname. We were just like Florida State buying out the local Seminole tribes. Only reason we didn't keep ours was because we were a school of about 800 students. I have mixed emotions on this topic, yeah it is wrong to single someone out but it is also wrong to take away a schools heritage,
ReplyDeleteKevin made a great point about the NCAA “half-way” position being “weak”. You cannot make it ok for one school to have a Native American as a mascot and tell others that they cant. It’s unfortunate that we as a society allow money to make decisions for us even when we know it wrong.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the purpose of having team names like the Redskins, Fighting Sioux, Indians, or Seminoles?
I believe that these tribes need to make it nationally known that it is ok for these sports teams to use them as a logo. Also, I think these teams should have to pay and recognize these tribes prior to every game or sporting event.
As long as the Ottawa tribe is okay with the use of the "Braves" name and mascot, I believe others should respect that decision, including the "Indian activists" mentioned in the article. There are all kinds of activists out there who happen to share my racial and ethnic background that I don't want representing my views in any way. As I've said before, leave the decision to those impacted by it and respect the decision they make.
ReplyDeleteI remember not having an opinion on the use of Native American names, logos and mascots prior to my first experience with Coakley. I also remember my opinion changing after I read about how Native Americans feel and are impacted by its use. Since first reading Coakley (over two years ago) I feel back into the “mainstream” way of thinking that it was acceptable to use Native American names, logos and mascots. I did not personally see anyone affected in a negative way by its use. However, having read Coakley again, I realize how demeaning the use can be. I think it is easy to forget about the impact it may have on others. I have always been a St. Cloud State Husky hockey fan and the Sioux were a big rival. However, I do not remember seeing the Sioux logo being treated in a derogatory manner. This is not to say it was not done though. Nevertheless, I do agree that if tribes are accepting of the use, schools should be allowed. There are many schools which use animals (as was pointed out with the Gophers and Badgers) and dead animals are thrown on the ice. While I’m sure it happens, I do not hear PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) protesting and condemning the NCAA for allowing schools to use animals as mascots. My feeling is once you start going down the slope of protecting one group, where does it stop? I do not feel it is right to protray a culture in a negative light, but we all know college students (and adults) will find a way to portray a mascot in a negative light.
ReplyDeleteI think that rita0901 brings up some great points from the articles. Why is it that we find it acceptable to portray Native Americans in such a way and not other cultures? Could you imagine if a predominately black school was “The Brits” (for example) and the mascot was a white dressed as George Washington? There would be tremendous upheaval (even if this were the case of another minority group). I also agree that the NCAA should adopt an all or none philosophy on this issue, however, the NCAA is such a corrupt organization that this will not happen. I also found it interesting that the NCAA is willing to ban the use of such logos, but is willing to continue to sell merchandise from that school as long as they can make money off it (see the second article for this blog http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/96420).
ReplyDeleteI agree with the posts related to the Ottawa University article. I believe if there is agreement with the tribes and the schools it should be accepted, regardless of the NCAA. I believe the NCAA is there to push their own agenda and does not take into consideration how this will affect others (i.e., they make millions off their student athletes, yet the athletes see nothing). I believe someone will be offended no matter what the logo of the school. How can you determine when “enough” people are offended to remove the logo from a school.
ReplyDeleteThe one thing that I find totally ridiculous is how schools and administrators try to justify their use of the Native American names, logos, and mascots. They say the use of the names, mascots, “dances” or “celebrations” are done with dignity and honor. Really? Who are you asking? From what I’ve read, most feel differently. How can you justify the use of these names, logos, mascots, and “celebrations” when most of the individuals who are doing them are white students. Who may have a blurred concept of American History. These individuals are not from Native American descent; they do not have the understanding of what truly happened, what the names mean, or who the men they are “portraying” really are. I see why people get so upset and why this is such a controversial topic.
ReplyDeleteI agree with most people who suggest if the tribe is fine with the school's mascot then the University may use it, however if a tribe feels discriminated against by the use of their tribe, then it should be removed in respect for the tribe. I had a similar experience in high school as we had to change our mascot picture we were the Raiders and had a similar picture with an Indian and a bow and arrow. We had to change our picture and now use roughly the same image the Oakland Raiders use.
ReplyDeleteThe Ottawa University article is pretty much along the same line of me and most of the bloggers on here. If the Ottawa tribe think the mascot and school are a good representaion of who they stand for as a tribe, than Ottawa University should be able to keep their Braves nickname no matter what the NCAA says. In this particular case, the only two sides who should have any say in this is the Ottawa tribe and Ottawa University. The rest of the activists should worry about other issues because obviously the Ottawa tribe doesn't think the Ottawa Braves are offensive.
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to respond to the part Pete made about Dr. Saigo. Dr. Saigo had very strong feelings about the subject. When I was first hired here three years ago and we were in the NCC and still playing UND. When UND left we were told we couldn't schedule them anymore because of the name. I found it interesting at the time that all the D2 sports were not going to be allowed to play them anymore but the hockey team would still be allowed to play them. If Dr. Saigo really wanted to make a statement about the name why not lead a boycott of playing them in hockey(higher level, more money involved) that really would send a message that St. Cloud was against using the Sioux nickname. As a matter of fact our new president has now agreed to let us play them. We have scheduled them in football for the fall of 2011. I am guessing with the tough economic times our policy changed because they will pay us a nice guarantee to come play them in a non-conference game. So it would appear even at St. Cloud State which has been a leader in the nickname issue, money wins out in the end.
ReplyDeleteOne last post on this topic, I think the whole arguement about the schools heritage is not a valid one. there are lots of ideologies and institutions over the years that have tried to use tradition as a reason to keep them. Just because something has been done for one way for a long period of time and means something to that group does not all of a sudden make it ok when it demeans a whole ethnic group of people. That is like saying because hazing has been a tradition at a school it is ok to continue doing it.
ReplyDeletePlaying basketball at SCSU allowed me to meet and talk with former President Roy Saigo and I am proud that he took a stong stand promoting the banning of Native American mascots in the NCAA. I am also proud that our huamn relations department has been at the forefront of making these issues known to the public. Having these mascots leads promots the stereotyping of Native American people. If you look at what the actual mascot logo looks like, it is a caricature dicpicting an "Indian" with an extremely large nose, stone cold face, with a couple feathers behind him. This makes people believe that all Native Americans look like that figurine and clumps them all into one mold. I also agree with a former student how stated that allowing Native American mascots, in a way, desensitizes them as people. The student revealed how at the hockey games, people throw dead badgers and gophers on the ice and how when UND played someone made the remark about throwing a dead Indian on the ice. And people that are associated with schools think that having the mascot is honoring the tribes?!? I am continually appalled by people's lack of moral intuition on this topic.
ReplyDeleteDoug has a good point. Since hockey is the most popular sport in Minnesota and at the UND why wouldn't they to make a statement by taking out the "Giant" first and then the rest. I just feel as if that would have been more of a statement rather than making the D2 sports not able to play UND.
ReplyDeleteThe genernal notion of using an indian tribe name does not help the public generate warm of thoughtful feelings towards the tribes themselves. It truly seems to have little positive outlooks. UND is just one example of a university with this problem. I read an article online that brought up how the Native Americans have been fighting against these schools. They cheered at a federal civil rights pannel, "the group said Indian names and mascots could be viewed as "disrespectful and offensive" to Indian groups and could create "a racially hostile educational environment" that may be intimidating to Indian students. I would imagine this would be very prominent problem at UND. The school needs to be responsible and educate their students, and should not use their influence to perpetuate misrepresentations of any culture or people. I agree with the above posts regarding this issue and belive that change is necessary.
ReplyDeleteA continued trend in many of the articles regard education or understanding of the history, especially the Indians history. If Universities and individuals in the public would reflect on the natives past and on how inappropriate some of our representations of their traditions are with face paint, tomahawks, drums, etc. I believe having a better understanding of their tradition and history would resolve some of the tension by seeing eye to eye on common ground.
ReplyDeleteThe article about the Ottawa University and Braves mascot was extremely fascinating to me. It was the first article that I have read regarding the Native American mascot issue where there actually seemed to be a positive connection between the tribe and the university. As opposed to some of the other univerisities that claim to be honoring the tribe, OU has documentation of the relationship with the tribe. The mere fact that the tribe gave the Meekers 20,000 acres of land to build the school showed the trust that the Native Americans had in the missionaries. It was also great to finally see a university giving back to the tribe by allowing any Ottawa tribe member the opportunity for tuition-free undergraduate schooling.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the Ottawa University article and reading what ohters have said, I believe that there needs to be some sort of documenation that we are asking the correct people if it is ok to use these mascots. I still feel as though we should not use them, but somehow there needs to be a vote among the tribe so that we can see how the tribe really feels. I know that in the beginning when the relationship between the Meekers and the Ottawa Tribe was good and he honored the tribe. However, things may have changed and the Ottawa tribe may feel differently now. I agree that it is good that the school was giving free tution to memeber of the Ottawa students attending.
ReplyDeleteThe video link for racial ideology was very upsetting and echoing what I discussed in my previous post about the importance of education in understanding another culture, how is it possible people today, especially in Europe, promote Nazism or their beliefs through the swastika. France was in the center numerous battles during World War II and much of their country was destroyed and terrified, yet they are still able to publicly display the swastika. That video was very frustrating in that regard, since they have no understanding of past events or choose not to learn from them.
ReplyDeleteI am going to make it known before I say this that I do not necessarily agree with what I am about to say but I would like to hear reaction to it if possible.
ReplyDeleteIf you are banning native american mascots/teams names are team names like the Vikings or Irish still acceptable? The teams did not get permission from the ancestors of the Vikings or from every Irish person in order to use the names.
I bring this up because it is a fine line to walk. Once you start regulating what teams can and can't be named, it is hard to stop.
As most have said, I believe that if there is an agreement with the school and the tribe then the mascot, logo, and names could be used. Sometimes I think the NCAA does overstep their boundries, as most things in America (i.e. Congress and baseball). If the tribe and the school have come to an understanding and both are fine with the decision, why should an outside source get involved? I don't like the voting aspect of whether or not to use Native American names and mascots, I believe it should be an all or nothing deal. Lets say that a tribe votes 5-4 in favor for. Is that really enough to justify the usage?
ReplyDeleteThere is a school in North Dakota called the Mighty Midets, the Dickenson Mighty Midgets. They even call their school store the Midget Market. Pretty absurd if you ask me. Just another controversial nickname in a long list?
I agree with Jeremy post about the video. How those people can believe that their taunting and other demonstrations serves a greater purpose I will never know. There is a right place and I right time to voice your concerns, but during a soccer match is not one of them. The video called for a hefty fine for the teams that allow this, I don't think that is entirely the answer. The teams need to kick those patrons out and or find some other way to contain it. If they still can't control the situation then you can start thinking about fines. I am by no means an expert on this and should not make too many claims with out knowing more information
ReplyDeleteGrant, in response to your post: I have heard of individuals who come from viking lineage or irish lineage. Some are fine with the names being used, others are irrate.
ReplyDeleteFor instance: Notre Dame claims "it keeps alive the memory of a long, uphill fight for recognition against a spirit that was not always generous, nor even fair-minded" (http://archives.nd.edu/carey/carey.htm). While I have heard many individuals from irish descent talk on numerous television shows and state that when they or others hear the term "fighting irish" they think of it as derogatory. That the term is a sterotype and all people think about when they hear it is "irish people drinking and fightin'."
Like Grant said, its a fine line to walk and where do you stop. When it comes down to it, it's hard to say what acceptable and what isn't.
Some names stand for what some people consider "American pride" like the fighting Irish. Many people support them, however this is not neccesarily the case for Native Americans. This controvery can be found all around us. Like mentioned before the "vikings" are not offensive because they were warriors that now represent our state. This selective pickings by society can not be pre-determined or destiny. It is simply a society norm.
ReplyDeleteThe images involved with these mascots we have discussed have always caught my eye. It's hard to believe that these things can be allowed; the obscene logo of the Cleveland Indians, and the borderline slur in the naming of the Washington Redskins have ALWAYS stuck out in my mind. Just as the point was made by others, this would never be accepted today if a team chose to, what I feel is to disrespect a culture by using generic names and sterotypical images to represent their team. And, as we have all seen, this only encourages not only false representation of a culture by a teams fans but highly disrespectful, inappropriate behavior defacing the culture (which was mentioned by Coach Thomas in his experiences with competing against UND). Regarless of an individual's intention with these actions, most are probably completely oblivious or just plain old don't care the negative impact they have on the respective culture because as a society, it is accepted. "We" wear in on shirts, hats, cheer for them, and boo at them. That alone can cause the hulimiation that it does. Aside from the obvious disrespect in the names and logos of these teams, "we" do not take them serious because they simply become exactly that; a logo and a name.
ReplyDelete