Comments

1. hadji wrote:

   The whole mascot issue is pretty sad. It’s about cultural arrogance, pure and simple. Historically Black Colleges and Universities couldn’t name their sports teams names that offend Jews, Irish, Germans and then claim, “We’re doing it to honor ‘you people’ so get over it.” But mainstream, white sports franchises and colleges do this out of arrogance because they think they’re doing “these people” a favor by “acknowledging their existence” somehow.

   But naming rights and mascots don’t crack the “top 10″ of offenses perpetrated against native americans any more than the advent of the n-word does against blacks, hence the lack of priority in dealing with these issues.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 2:03 pm ¶

2. Rob Schmidt wrote:

   Note: This isn’t the most critical question in America, obviously. But it’s representative of a whole range of multicultural issues facing our country. It’s a worthwhile question because it encourages politicians to take a position on a longstanding cultural controversy. Will they stand up for an America that’s culturally diverse and sensitive to the needs of its minorities?

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 2:29 pm ¶

3. Rob Schmidt wrote:

   To address your point about the top 10 offenses against Native Americans, Hadji:

   I think the mascot issue is inseparable from the general issue of racism and prejudice against Natives. And I’d say that is a top 10 offense.

   We could ask politicians what they intend to do about poverty on reservations. They’d answer with sound bites about their economic programs. Or we could ask them about something particular to Indians–for instance, how Indian children were shipped to boarding schools. If the politicians even understood the issue, they’d again respond with sound bites. Something about how we must never repeat the tragedies of the past, undoubtedly.

   That’s why the mascot issue is a good proxy for other Native and multicultural issues. It’s simple, clear, and compelling. Since most people still think mascots are benign, I believe, the question forces candidates to take a stand on a less-than-popular issue.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 2:41 pm ¶

4. Rob Schmidt wrote:

   Some video ideas for followers of Racialicious:

   What I think makes a good video is this: 1) something broad and general enough that most people will have an opinion, 2) something that will challenge the candidates to answer clearly, and 3) something that will separate the candidates into distinct camps. With that in mind, I offer these suggestions:

   Video narrative #1: “Rap music often promotes sex and violence and denigrates women and homosexuals. Is this kind of music bad for our country, and what should we do about it?”

   Video narrative #2: “Don Imus called black women ‘nappy-headed hos,’ and Michael Richard used the n-word against blacks in his audience. Are these people racists? What should we do about them, if anything?”

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 2:45 pm ¶

5. Cara wrote:

   I like this question because it’d be interesting to see if any candidate would be willing to give the short and correct answer of “yes.” I’d expect most to try to talk their way around the question by talking about “different points of view,” so anyone would say “yes, they are offensive, they need to go” would win automatically win some respect.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 4:09 pm ¶

6. Free wrote:

   Here’s a link to a timely article about the Cleveland Indians mascot, The Curse of Chief Wahoo: Enabling Racist Imagery.

   http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=131639

   The American Money Machine keeps the racial ball rolling.

   Rob: Thanks for the advice.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 5:01 pm ¶

7. *M* wrote:

   You have to look at it on a case by case bases. The Redskins is clearly a racial slur. But the Florida State Seminoles (there is a picture of Chef Osceola in the clip) is used with the greatest respect. and honors the unconquered people.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 5:08 pm ¶

8. Rob Schmidt wrote:

   Right, Cara. Anyone who gives a straight answer to this (or any video) should get points for honesty.

   Besides, “respecting different points of view” isn’t exactly enlightened in this context. We’re talking about giving equal respect to the views of racists and non-racists. That may play well with conservatives, but it won’t play well with liberals.

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 5:17 pm ¶

9. NoName wrote:

   In general, yes, they should be banned. But *M* is correct about the FSU mascot; the Florida Seminole people do support it, and for that reason, the NCAA exempted it from its mascot banning policy. So that one, I support as well. The mascot, not the team. My part of Florida is Gator Country. ; )

   Posted 22 Oct 2007 at 10:48 pm ¶

10. Jonas Cord wrote:

    I like this question because it’d be interesting to see if any candidate would be willing to give the short and correct answer of “yes.”

    Whether thet answer is right or wrong is beside the point - any President who said they would do it would be lying, because it’s unconstitutional and impossible.

    Come on, guys.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 12:36 am ¶

11. Lyonside wrote:

    *M*: I don’t know anything about Florida State, so I’ll take your word that the campus attitudes towards the team, the name, and the people are positive.

    But if anyone thinks it’s cool to do a hatchet chop during a game, I’ll take that back in a heartbeat.

    In the case of the Seminole, maybe an alternative would be that if the group named can come to consensus as to whether to allow the use of the name or not…. then it’s OK to name a sports team. That would prevent ethnic slurs (Redskins) or generic names (Indians) from being used, at the very least.

    But the overall issue is the same, regardless of whether every single fan understands/respects the people for which a team is named: It smacks of paternalism and objectification to label a SPORTS TEAM after real people, especially those with a bloody history of violence, racism, segregation, and oppression. In the US we name our sports teams, from pee-wee to the pros, after 1) mythical figures (dragons, knights, wizards, devils, angels, titans, giants), 2) constructed names that reference the home town (Sixers, Lakers, 49ers), 3) natural phenomenon ( hurricanes, storms), and 4) conquered/socially invisible indigenous people.

    Yes, occasionally we get historical elements - senators, gladiators, Celt(ics), kings, vikings- and those elements are overwhelmingly those that are revered as part of the foundation (real or mythic) of the European/Anglo-Saxon core culture. In other words, names that belong to “us” and that the core culture respects….

    I don’t think enough people would be able to put “Seminole” in that last category.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 3:06 am ¶

12. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    I looked at mascots on a case-by-case basis when I made the video. FSU may respect its Seminole mascot, but I don’t. As I wrote in “Why FSU’s Seminoles Aren’t Okay” (http://www.bluecorncomics.com/seminole.htm):

    Florida State “honors” the Seminoles with a scowling, warpainted Indian on horseback who throws a flaming spear at midfield. In other words, a spearchucker. If a half-naked Zulu warrior ran onto the field and chucked a spear, would that strike you as wrong? How exactly is the Seminole case different?

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 5:35 am ¶

13. LM wrote:

    @Jonas Cord: If you’re going to be dismissive, you might as well be head-on about it. The question has nothing to do with constitutionality as it doesn’t ask, “Would you advocate a law…”

    As to “impossible” — perhaps you’re basing this on constitutionality, which is addressed above. If not, what do you mean by that?

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 7:53 am ¶

14. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    There’s no unanimity of opinion on the mascot issue. You can find lots of Indians who support any team name or mascot, including the patently vulgar “Redskins.”

    I explained why this is in “Team Names and Mascots” (http://www.bluecorncomics.com/mascots.htm). The short answer is that non-Indians don’t have a monopoly on ignorance or apathy.

    As I said, I considered the Seminole case before including the image. Last year I posted a long writeup of “Why FSU’s Seminoles Aren’t Okay” even if many people think they are. Read it and learn about all the arguments that I’ve addressed and you probably haven’t.

    Here’s a quote on why the Seminole mascot is objectively wrong (i.e., stereotypical) even if the Seminole Tribe approves of it:

    “It is shameful that the mighty Osceola is portrayed as a mascot. He is represented with fakey ‘war paint,’ which he never wore; on an Appaloosa horse, which he never rode; with a Plains Indian war lance, which he never used; acting the fool, which he never was; and performing for non-Indians–which he never, ever did.”

    In short…no, *M* is not correct. The Seminole mascot is a false and scurrilous representation of American Indians.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 2:02 pm ¶

15. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    Eliminating mascots is “unconstitutional and impossible”? That’s funny considering mascot foes have successfully eliminated about 2/3 of them in the last few decades. I wonder how they managed this “impossible” task.

    Chief Illiniwek of the University of Illinois is the latest and biggest mascot to go. Mascot foes eliminated him through a perfectly legal campaign of education and advocacy. No laws infringing on the university’s free speech were necessary.

    Perhaps you thought the word “eliminate” in my video meant “ban via legislation.” If so, you read something into the text that isn’t there. We can eliminate mascots through many approaches–e.g., gradually, voluntarily, consensually.

    Any candidate is free to take this moderate position. Or to advocate a law banning mascots, if he or she wants to go to that extreme. In either case, we’d learn something about how the candidate would handle racially charged issues. That would be valuable information for a would-be voter.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 2:22 pm ¶

16. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    I support the Seminole Tribe’s right to support FSU’s Seminole mascot. And I support my right to tell the tribe it’s made a bad decision. That is, my right to continue advocating for the removal of this foolish stereotype.

    To reiterate, the Seminole mascot portrays a phony warrior, not a real Seminole. No amount of “approval” can change that fact.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 2:30 pm ¶

17. donna darko wrote:

    YES.

    The Seminole tribe was paid off by the FSU for a million dollars.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 6:56 pm ¶

18. donna darko wrote:

    FSU is a huge football school and would lose alumni support without the Seminole mascot.

    Posted 23 Oct 2007 at 7:00 pm ¶

19. Colin wrote:

    The Seminole mascot is not just some playful mascot, it is a brand, and FSU will pay a lot of money for rights to what is now THEIR brand. To me, that’s the worst part — the co-opting of an entire people for the sake of a profitable brand. It’s incredibly dehumanizing for the sake of green.

    That said, any candidate willing to condemn or even speak in negative terms about these mascots, while they probably won’t make the MSM, will show a touch more integrity than I’ve seen so far.

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 8:46 am ¶

20. Lyonside wrote:

    Regarding how mascots would be removed: through education, outright protest, and a change in attitude.

    It’s the reason many negative black images have either disappeared or been revamped/retooled (a la’ “Uncle Ben” and “Aunt Jemima”). It’s the reason “Darkie” is no longer in the toothpaste aisle, and why

    My own high school finally got rid of our “chiefs” mascot, right after I graduated, and took up “magics” instead. It was the mid-90s, when the “hatchet chop” at sporting events was getting bad press. A group of us already refused to do any of the sterotypical crap they tried to get us to do at prep rallies, and the nuns who remembered that their order was about social justice finally overruled the traditionalists.

    Did my high school lose anything? Nope - because we were an academic-focused schoolo and our sports teams were still competitive.

    Any alumni who really would abandon a school over a mascot don’t give a crap about the school in the first place.

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 11:01 am ¶

21. Lyonside wrote:

    My second paragraph went wonky: it should read: “, and why “sambos” and “pickaninnies” are rightfully absent from the landscape. It’s not perfect, which is why people still protest stereotypes in ads and such.

    And really, all a mascot is is a form of advertising and branding. Slate ran a good sideshow a while back: http://www.slate.com/id/2164062/slideshow/2164626/fs/0//entry/2164627/

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 11:13 am ¶

22. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    Good points on the Seminole Tribe’s support of the FSU mascot. There’s no outright proof, but a lot of suspicion that the tribe is under pressure. “You support our mascot or we’ll make trouble for your casinos.”

    A few tribes do support their college namesakes without apparent arm-twisting. For example, the Chippewas in Michigan and the Utes in Utah. But the schools are using the names only, not some caricatured mascots. I’m not sure an example exists of a tribe approving a mascot without a suspect motive.

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 12:12 pm ¶

23. Rob Schmidt wrote:

    Other points to consider in the Seminole case:

    1) The Seminoles’ position amounts to “We appreciate the honor,” not “The mascot is historically accurate.”

    2) There are other Seminole tribes in Florida and Oklahoma who may not appreciate the “honor” of being caricatured.

    3) The warlike imagery stereotypes all Indians, not just the Seminoles. So the opinions of other Indians are relevant to the matter.

    4) National organizations such as the National Congress of American Indians have denounced all mascots, including “Chief Osceola.”

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 12:22 pm ¶

24. JustEnjoyHim/Judy wrote:

    I live in NE Ohio where Chief Wahoo is, for some reason, revered as the Cleveland Indians mascot. I think having Wahoo as the mascot is embarrassing and a disgrace.

    There are many people who honestly don’t understand why Wahoo is racist. I try to point out that Wahoo is the Native equivalent to the African American caricatures of bygone days.

    Yes, I wish the mascots would be banned. Better yet, I wish people could see how racist they are and agree to changing the mascots — but I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 2:24 pm ¶

25. donna darko wrote:

    Yeah it’s 100% bullshit. I have a friend who was the main opponent of FSU on this issue. From his tone on the mascot issue, it’s 100% bullshit.

    Posted 24 Oct 2007 at 2:35 pm ¶

26. Bianca Reagan wrote:

    The mascots offend to me. They should be embarrassing to all Americans.

    Posted 25 Oct 2007 at 4:34 pm ¶

27. Vic wrote:

    Also from what I’ve read it seems that a majority of the Seminoles were not represented by the one nation in Florida, as the majority of Seminoles live in Oklahoma on the reservation where they were put (doesn’t sound very “unconquered” to me”). And it also seems that the real Cheif Osceola was imprisoned as he fought against U.S. encroachment and was captured. his personal property was taken from him, his family deported, people took his pictures and examined him. After his death locks of his hair were taken, a deathmask made, and his gravemarker often had chunks of it taken off by tourists. If anything having Cheif Osceola as a mascot at any University serving the purposes of American popular culture is adding insult to unjury.

    Posted 02 Jan 2008 at 9:07 am ¶

28. donna darko wrote:

    The whole mascot issue adds insult to injury.

    Posted 02 Jan 2008 at 7:42 pm ¶

29. ronald wrote:

    i am 100%for whatever the american indian decides ,if you want my opion i think the mascot issue is prejudice in the highest form.

    Posted 24 Mar 2008 at 7:25 pm ¶

30. Jonathan Yellowbear wrote:

    Yes, to the banning of “indian” mascots!

    Posted 11 May 2008 at 5:53 pm ¶

31. Jonathan Yellowbear wrote:

    I used to live in Iowa, and I saw first hand what the people who “Played indian Mascot” were doing. They would dance around (if you could call it dancing) whooping and halloring doing there little chants and making a mockery of ower sacred traditions and chants. I say the sooner the better. You don’t see any other race being slammed with a mascot do you. Like for instance the whitefield cacasions, the southland negros, ect. So why should we have to put up with this racism against our Native Race?

    Posted 11 May 2008 at 6:02 pm ¶

32. Jane Erbe wrote:

    wow.this is a touchy subjuct.. no people should be made fun of no matter what tribe, culture, race, color, or educational background. and speaking of education, well here lies your problems. untill everyone is educated as equals then this country will remain the same. its no diffrent then hollywood doing the old “hi how are you” song.. ( my native brothers and sisters know what this means..) its no diffrent than the joke of a high school my kids go to. its named after a native woodland woman and has a plains war chief as a logo. hello?? education is key here. is it wrong to name the school after hononagha? no. is it wrong to paint murals all over the school depicting her as a plains woman living in a tipi? hell yes it is. this is in a school. a school that is in a town with a lot of rich native heiratage. and yet the school porttrays this woman as a “indian princess” ha. and also incorrectly portrays her people, and does not even educate the kids on the tribes that were in this area. so tell me how is that honoring the people? i agree with all in favor of removing all racial logos and or mascots from all sports teams. and fyi it isnt just natives.. hell look at notre dames “the fighting irish” what the hell there are no irish players? and it portrays the irish as fighters and brawlers ! go figure that out.. but this is my point. no racial logos or mascots of any kind should be alowed. education is key. and i mean that all people should be educated the same, not by the money you make or the clothes you wear to school, or the kids you hang with. when i was in school i remember being taught only what the government wanted us to learn.. i say we start demanding that they teach our kids the truth and not how to use a calclulator to do the math. bullshit. i say we all should know the real truths and educate educate educate. and if you can go talk to the elders.. they know more and have forgot more then we will ever know. if we only rely on our current school systems we can count on stupid people voting for stupid people to make more stupid laws and to keep racial ignorance in place and thats that. freedom of the mind people.. thats what it will take to change this country.. whos gonna stand with me?

    Posted 12 Aug 2008 at 6:40 pm ¶

Post a Comment