Sports and Society 19 November 2015
Download 20.43 Kb.
|
| Brian Wulf
Dr. Marx
Sports and Society 19 November 2015 Native American Mascots: Respect or Ridicule? As avid sports fans, we take pride in our teams, our mascots, and our players. But to what degree? Some fans are extreme in their admiration for a team or its name. However, these fans and fans all over the United States don’t take a second to really think about what they are rooting for. There are arguments on both sides on whether or not Native American teams are respecting or ridiculing the Native American people. There is a Native American team or mascot in almost every major sport in the United States. In the NHL there is the Chicago Blackhawks, in the NFL there is the Washington Redskins, and the MLB has the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves, the NBA has the Golden State Warriors, the list goes on and on. Native American teams and mascots have been institutionalized throughout the United States. Throughout this paper I will be addressing both sides of the issue in both professional sports and Division I college sports. This topic first interested me when I was a junior in high school. My class was required to write a research paper on any controversial topic we wanted, as long as we took a side. Throughout that paper I chose to defend and justify the use of Native American names and mascots in professional sports and division I college athletics. Growing up I have always been a huge Chicago Blackhawks fan, and I just can’t imagine the team if it didn’t have the sacred Indian head on the front of their sweaters. So I dug a little bit deeper. According to the history Wulf 2
page on the official Chicago Blackhawks website, the Chicago Blackhawks weren’t actually named after the Blackhawk tribe. In reality, the first owner of the Chicago Blackhawks, Frederic McLaughlin was a commander with the 333rd Machine Gun Battalion of the 86th Infantry Division during World War I. The division was nicked “The Black Hawk Division”. So after McLaughlin became the original owner of one of the original six NHL teams, he named his team after the men that had served under him in World War I. Not many people in America would dare fight against a team named to honor veterans of the United States Army. However, the controversy has grown immensely. The Chicago Blackhawks try to do everything they possibly can to keep good nature between the Native American people and the National Hockey League. The Blackhawk tribe is now paid a great deal of money by the hockey team so they can continue to use their name. Not only is the team compensated for their name, but they also always have a member of the tribe present and honored during the national anthem before every game. Additionally, the Chicago Blackhawks also consistently donate a great deal of money to the American Indian Center of Chicago. The 1960’s was a time of civil rights for not only African Americans, but also for Native Americans. The issue of offensive names first arose in the 1960’s. Specifically in 1968 a man named Vernon Bellecourt founded the American Indian Movement (AIM) with his brother. The goal of AIM was to ensure civil rights to Native Americans and to educate Native Americans on their culture and spiritual heritage. Bellecourt protested outside sports arenas and in some cases was arrested for doing so. This issue has never been put to rest. Great strides have been taken to end the use of offensive names and such, but no matter where you look whether in professional sports, college sports, high school sports, or even middle school sports the names Wulf 3 exist. In a recent survey conducted by Sport Illustrated in 2002, the question “Does the use of Native American team names and mascots contribute to discrimination against Native Americans” (Price 4) was asked. The results were shocking 75% of Native Americans living on reservations believed it did NOT contribute, and 81% of Native Americans living off reservations believed it did NOT contribute as well. So of over half of all Native Americans believe that it doesn’t contribute to discrimination then why should names be changed? That is the million dollar question, the question that has been trying to be answered since 1960. On the other side of the spectrum the Native Americans that believe it does contribute believe it is a human rights issue. Generally speaking in sports, there are two opinions that matter, the fans and the owner’s. Although the fans and the owners opinions matter regarding the issue are important, they are not as important as the people their teams are representing. The team names are racist and derogatory. It is a human rights issue. In an uneducated America, people might give in to stereotypical terms that the mascots are representing. If those who fall into those stereotypes, it might jeopardize the future of a Native American. How do you expect to go far in life if your own boss thinks that you won’t be able to succeed just because of your race and what is associated with it. “Native American logos and nicknames create, support, and maintain stereotypes of a race of people. When such cultural abuse is supported by one or many of society’s institutions, it constitutes institutional racism. The logos, along with other societal abuses and stereotypes separate, marginalize, confuse, intimidate, and harm Native American children. They create barriers to their learning throughout their school experience. Additionally, the logos teach non-Native American children that it is all right to participate in culturally Wulf 4
abusive behavior. Children spend a great deal of their time in school, and schools have a significant impact on their emotional, spiritual, physical and intellectual development. As long as such logos remain, both Native American and non-Native American children are learning to tolerate racism in our school” (Ewald 1). It is a human right issue some believe that no person is a mascot, they are simply human beings. Personally I would hate to be represented incorrectly. But the underlying issue of the mascot is when people say they “honor” them they often show signs of “owning” Native American names and traditions. The fans dictate what certain traditions are, not the actual people being perceived. The Washington Redskins are a prime example about how this is a human rights issue. This name is not only offensive to Native Americans but it is also an insult to Americans. Redskin is an extremely derogatory term, with the equivalency to “the N-Word.” Not only is the name the issue, but that team represents our nation’s capital. Are you kidding me? It is almost comical how insulting that team name is. First there is an extremely derogatory name, as the team’s name, and then we choose to have that team represent our nation. People try to use the argument that the goal of these Native American team names and mascots are used to honor the Native Americans, however, redskin is a term that you can’t get away with using that argument. The term redskin is derived from an original bounty put out on Native Americans. Its origin is from when people actually scalped the Native American Indians. Yeah and that is the term we use to “honor” Native Americans. In a recent study conducted by Shea Hart, she had asked people about this offensive name, and also created a different names to represent other ethnicities. Her results specifically about the Washington Redskins was that 54% of the people Wulf 5 she surveyed believed that it was racist. I see this as an issue. It is a shame to see this racism engrained in today’s society. This issue is everywhere we look, in almost every major sport. One sport that I will be looking more into is Major League Baseball. The first issue was with the Atlanta Braves. The Braves organization has dramatically changed their logo since the beginning of their baseball team in Boston. However, for a long period of time their logo was a screaming Native American head. That was present until 1990 when they completely took away the screaming head and just had “Atlanta” with a tomahawk. I applaud the Atlanta Braves organization for making some effort to avoid the issue. The other organization that has made the issue arise is the Cleveland Indians. Personally, I don’t understand why this organization doesn’t cause as much issue as the Washington Redskins do. Indians are another derogatory term for Native American, and to add insult to injury, have you seen the logo? It is a bright red Native American with, frankly, an obnoxious smile on its face. The Cleveland Indians organization has tried to sweep this issue under the rug by creating an alternate logo on the hats in replacement of the Native American. The logo is a simple red “C” to represent Cleveland. This would be a good step, if they actually completely took the step. They only use this alternate logo for some games but, not all games. Some games, they prefer to use the smiling Native American on their hats. However, there are some arguments that support the use of the Cleveland Indians logo. Chief Wahoo as degrading as he may be, was actually put into place by the Cleveland Indians franchise to honor the first Native American player, Louis Sockalexis. Louis Sockalexis was a Wulf 6
member of the Cleveland Spiders and broke the color barrier fifty years before Jackie Robinson did. When Cleveland got a baseball club once again, they decided to revive the name to honor Louis Sockalexis in being the first to actually break the color barrier. What I have covered today, is frankly just the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more controversy within colleges, high schools, and shockingly middle schools (but that is a whole different research paper). Right now I will be focusing on Division I Colleges. In 2005 the NCAA had distributed a “self-evaluation” to 31 different schools asking them to think about their names, what they represent, and make sure to maintain an "atmosphere of respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person." These different schools had “self-evaluated” and returned to the NCAA, their findings. Fourteen of the 31 schools had either removed all affiliations with Native Americans from their collegiate athletics or were deemed not associated with Native Americans. However, nineteen different colleges were cited as having offensive, hostile, and overall inappropriate names that misrepresented and held a lack of sensitivity. The 19 schools with that citation were held accountable by the NCAA. The NCAA had decided that the schools with these offensive names and such would be ineligible to participate in any playoffs, and the schools were also not allowed to host any sort of NCAA tournament. Once of the centerpieces of this controversy was in fact the Florida State Seminoles. It could be argued that this name is offensive, and does not promote a respectful atmosphere. However, there was a way that Florida State evaded any repercussions the NCAA was willing to throw their way. Florida State had approached the Seminole tribe and asked for their support. In July of 2005, the Seminole Nation General Council, which is the legislative body for the Seminole tribe, had voted on the issue and whether Florida State could keep the name voted on Wulf 7
by their students in the 1940’s, along with their mascot “Chief Osceola.” At an astounding vote of 18-2, it was clear that the University had its support from the Seminole Tribe. Because of this waiver, it allows Florida State to participate in athletic playoffs, as well as host NCAA tournaments at their established university. It is a matter of morals. The use of these terms have become so prone to today’s society that, we often overlook the names and what they really mean. Sometimes we don’t understand that though the name may seem harmless, it may cause great pain and support racism to children. Although a team goal is to maintain respect and honor towards Native Americans, they often fall short through offensive team names, mascots, and logos. Works Cited Ewald, Nikki. "The Native American Mascot: Tribute or Disrespect?"Minnesota Daily. Minnesota Daily, 28 Mar. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2015. Hart, Shae. "Native American Mascots: A Quantitative and Qualitative Study of Students’ Acceptability Perceptions of Native Mascots Versus Theoretical Use of Other Ethnic Groups’ Iconology by Sports Teams."Boise State Scholarly Works. Boise State, 2011. Web. 25 Nov. 2015. http://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1090&context=mcnair_journal Proxmire, Douglas C. Coaching Diversity: The Rooney Rule, Its Application and Ideas for Expansion (n.d.): n.pag.Https://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Proxmire_Issue_Brief.pdf. American Constitution Society, Dec. 2008. Web. 20 Nov. 2015. Fleitz, David. "SABR." Louis Sockalexis. SABR, n.d. Web. 25 Nov. 2015. Download 20.43 Kb. Share with your friends:
|