Why is this still acceptable?
Why is this still considered to be okay?
Chicago Blackhawks – professional hockey team:
Cleveland Indians – professional baseball team:
Wapello Indians and Arrows – Iowa High School – Men’s teams = Indians, Women’s teams = Arrows:
Washington Redskins – professional football team:
Related posts:
Perhaps the question should be, why does it matter? If an individual only has a sense of worth based on whether or not their ethnic background is being used as a mascot then they have much bigger issues to deal with.
Mr. Viddy
22 Jan 06 at 5:40 pm
I think Eric’s question is more valid. After centuries of invasion of the land that originally belonged to the American Indians, the institutional form of stereotyping and propaganda continues in various forms – Despite the acknowledgement that America is a “civilized” country that honors diversity.
Just today, Mormon missionaries knocked on my door and politely but firmy asked if they could talk about their religion to me and my family members. My sense of worth is not based on what I am told, but I will be appalled and enraged if someone stereotypes my traditions and culture.
t
Padma
Padma
22 Jan 06 at 7:35 pm
Mr. Viddy,
“Perhaps the question should be, why does it matter? If an individual only has a sense of worth based on whether or not their ethnic background is being used as a mascot then they have much bigger issues to deal with.”
I think the issue is this: What happens to the dominant group’s view of the oppressed group, in this case – Native Americans?
It would seem that it creates a dominant culture that thinks that it is okay to institutionally oppress Native Americans.
Eric Dwight
22 Jan 06 at 7:45 pm
You know, I’m always the first to make sure nobody is offended, that my friends and family and co-workers don’t say disparaging things about classes of people, etc. My college thesis was even about ideology that led to the oppression and subjugation of Native Americans. Even so, I have *never* understood the outcry against using Indians, or Native Americans, as mascots. It’s not a derogatory thing.
Teams take pride in their names, and their names are generally based on some sort of regional history. Having and Indian as a mascot is not a bad thing. Should we also prevent Boston from having the Celtics as a nickname? Minnesota from having the Vikings? Pittsburgh from having the Steelers? Green Bay from having the Packers? These are *all* names based on groups of people. There are *dozens* of others in professional sports and even more in amateur athletics: Mariners, Pioneers, Kings, Royals, etc.
This is a total non-issue. Making it an issue detracts from the real injustices present in our society.
J.D.
22 Jan 06 at 9:02 pm
Hi J.D.
I think you hit the nail on the head: “…using Indians, or Native Americans, as mascots.”
Native Americans are being used against their wishes by sports teams (professional and college) that make millions of dollars off of the sale of caricatures of native people. For example, the Cleveland Indians logo depicts Native Americans as people with big teeth, large noses, and wearing a feather. Oh, and the mascot is in all red.
“Teams take pride in their names…” – Exactly, teams a.k.a institutions of power use Native terms, customs, and symbols for profit. How many Native Americans are on professional or college sports teams?
I believe this is indeed an issue because it dehumanizes Native Americans and contributes to the maintenance of stereotypical and oppressive imagery within the United States.
Eric Dwight
23 Jan 06 at 11:47 am
Mr Viddy and J.D.,
This article illustrates why the use of Native Americans as sports team mascots is racist and oppressive.
Eric Dwight
23 Jan 06 at 11:51 am
I’m always the first to make sure nobody is offended, that my friends and family and co-workers don’t say disparaging things about classes of people, etc. My college thesis was even about ideology that led to the oppression and subjugation of Native Americans. Even so, I have *never* understood the outcry against using Indians, or Native Americans, as mascots. It’s not a derogatory thing.
But you see, there is a big difference between “offending” somebody in a polite discussion, and a power structure furthering oppresive and racist representations of a group that it is activelly striking out against.. A singular person talking to another person and using the N word is a form of “offending”. Using the power of a structural institution (as baseball, football, hockey etc ARE, because the structure of capitalism supports and encourages their growth), to define a group extends well beyond “offending” some individual–when you’re talking about a group of people that is currently engaged in an active battle to keep their land/tribes safe from the same imperialistic and colonialistic power structure that is defining who they are to the rest of the world, I’d say you have some really big problems.
brownfemipower
26 Jan 06 at 4:22 pm
Here’s a great site for Native American information.
Eric Dwight
29 Jan 06 at 1:21 pm
Just color the faces in those whacky symbols white. I figure then everyone understands that the images are whiteman made and present as symbols solely in the white mind. I think most people might know that anyhow. Makes one a bit embarrassed at times to be white.
JH
31 Jan 06 at 12:26 am
[...] The use of Native American imagery/symbols is unacceptable. Appeals court sides with Chief Illiniwek [...]
Chief Illiniwek needs to stop dancing » Eric Stoller’s Blog
16 Sep 09 at 10:06 pm