Radicalized mascot is not the way to honor but growing up this was a social accepted norm. Watch the Redskins and the Braves as a young child the thought never clicked that these terms and gestures are a negative way to “honor” a culture. These names are just another way that this society sweeps under the rug the way that early “Americans” treated the native of this land. The ones who were here first were either slaughter or died from disease that were brought over. Society has look down on slavery and tried to make it known throughout school that these awful things happened, but little is talked about the Native Americans. The only reason is that black man and women came into so power and influence so the society had to listen. Nobody talks about the “walk of tears” as much as they should because no one from that ethnicity has come to power.

Honestly, before this week’s topic in class about issues with team mascots and the use of racialized mascots, I really never thought of the problems that can be brought upon the Washington Redskins or the Cleveland Indians. These problems I am referring to is the fact that names of professional teams can and are very degrading to many people. Now, even thought I understand why some people feel it is degrading to their heritage or ethnicity to use the name for a professional sports team, I have to disagree and say that it is easy to defend why it is okay for teams to use these names for their sports team. My opinion on the matter is that it is just a name to represent a sports team. That is all. The teams do not name themselves with some of these racial and ethnic names to throw it in the faces of the people who these affect. I would think that it would be an honor for a professional sports team to be named after my ethnicity or race.
The readings this week were very interesting. Between the reading on the University of Ole Miss and their troubles with their wildly popular mascot Colonel Rebel and then to the Sports Illustrated piece on the Indian Wars and the issues with some of the names of mascots and teams. Both showed the ongoing issues that certain people with certain ethnic and racial backgrounds have problems with names of some sport teams. Universities are the prime suspects for mascot and school name issues. Many of the University names that are represented to schools have had many problems with groups of ethnicities and races who do not like the notion that their name represents a Universities name. This problem has existed for a while now. Also, many gestures and symbols made by fans of teams have caused problems to many who feel it is a detriment to their society and an insult to them. The Florida State Tomahawk Chop or the Atlanta Braves chants do probably have some kind of insult to the respective societies. But, you can not put a law to stop this. When college kids at FSU do the famous Seminole Chop, they are doing it as a symbol to the football team, not the Seminole group form where it originated.
My whole issue again is that people do not see a sport teams name that is having racial and ethnic issues with the people in that way. Redskin fans are just Redskin football fans and Cleveland Indians fans are fans of Indian Baseball, and in both cases neither team name affects the people of the race or ethnic names and symbols of people. “Many Americans, particularly those interested in sports, can identify Osceola as the FSU mascot, but far fewer know of the historic figure” (King pp.4). Just like I said before, people should not feel that a sport team is offending their heritage, but rather honored for a team using its name or symbols. Sport is huge and growing every year so why not have your ethnicity or race honored and representing a school, or team.


Andrew Schwartz

Racialized mascots have always been apart of American sports and it is purely wrong and should be upsetting to the average American. The prevailing thought we believe about our society is that we are now color blind, and we must be, we can’t even see the blatant racism right in our nation’s capital. The Washington Redskins may be the one of the worst perpetrators of this despicable branding, but at least their Native American looks somber. The Cleveland Indian’s logo uses a caricature of a Native American with a huge smile. Native Americans were driven off every land they tried to settle on when the European settlers came to North America. The only reason we still have teams using logos such as these and team names is because the Native American community is completely and utterly oppressed

Racialized mascots have been a major social issue for a while now. In my opinion i think that any sports team name that has ties to a racially insensitive or culturally insensitive concept should be forced to change their name. First lets look at the Washington Redskins. The name Redskin is a racial slur for Native Americans. The Native American culture has been screwed by our society since the colonial days. We have forced them off of their land and killed many of them. Their societies are now crime and drug filled and it is because of what we have done to them in the past. Allowing a football team to continue to use this insensitive name just adds to the long list of harrassment that our society has placed on Native Americans. Next lets look at the Old Miss Rebels. The name Rebels and Old Miss refer to a time in our Nations past filled with racism and slavery. This is a time that we should be ashamed of and not celebrating. This was a very negative time in our nations past and since then times have changed. Since the creation of this school schools have been integrated, we have become an exogamous society, and we have had the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement was a major change in how our society was from then on going to run. All races were given equal rights and laws were changed to ensure that these rights would be provided to everyone. Now you have to ask yourself, if our societies norms and laws have changed to ban racism, shouldn't a school name that refers to a ime of slavery and racism be forced to change. Times have changed and so do team names. I understand that these teams have been around for a long time and that everyone has an excuse about how their team doesn't promote racism. Im sorry though they are wrong, your team is racist and so are you for promoting and celebrating a racially insensitive term.

I have to disagree with what tiger14frank said. I believe that there is nothign wrong with having these team names. They have been around for years and we have all grown accustom to them. when you think of the Red Skins you dont think of Native Americans you think of the worst football team in the MD/DC area that sucks at football.

The fact that mascots have ever been based off of different cultures is a given statement of disrespect to me. I do not see the honor in making a culture a representative of your team, especially when the culture is misrepresented out of ignorance. I can understand why the students of this generation do not see an issue with using Indians as mascots because America has taught them through history that it was acceptable to misrepresent an entire nationality. As a nation we market these images through song, dance, and false drum beatings that we have all bought into and become so accustomed to that we turn a blind eye to what actually lies beneath the surface. America is very good at acting like racism and oppression of cultures does not exist. A few quick examples of why this Indian mascot issue does not weight heavy on the minds of those that created and participate in it: the only mascot that has been chosen by its own native people is the Fighting Irish. The Notre Dame students voted on this mascot, it was not simply given to them. No Indians were called by the Redskins or the Seminoles to get approval to choose a mascot to represent a group of people that they were not a part of. They were just claimed. I doubt any black students voted for Colonel Reb at Ole Miss. I personally view Ole Miss as out of touch and blatantly ignorant to the emotions of the athletes that this mascot represents, especially since the majority of their athletes are African American. I generally feel that white Americans are always removed from feelings of separation and disregard because they have never been on the receiving end of disrespectful and juvenile hatred. They are the untouched race and they act accordingly. Its no wonder there is an air of white privilege around. They either never have to defend themselves, or there is a group of power that will make sure their race is not misrepresented. To hell with the rest of us. Race is just something we have to get over, a thing of the past. Where does it end?

Taking this class has made me really think a lot about the world we leave in today. It has changed my entire outlook on a lot of different issues concerning our society. For a very long time I never viewed mascots as anything more then the faces of a team. A goofy character or animal to run around a game to entertain, and encourage an audience was the only way I really looked at things. None the less, being viewed as a negative, at least not until taking this class it has changed my whole look on everything. I agree whole heartedly with Mr. White after taking time out to really think about what was taking place. I now view naming a team after someone’s ethnicity as being extremely discriminatory and disrespectful to someone’s heritage. Plenty of other blogs that I have reviewed stated they felt as though nothing was wrong with racialized mascots, but why? Is it because since you are not offended, its makes no difference to you. Race and culture are very sensitive subject matters on any level and believe they should not be taken lightly. For instance, like University of Mississippi their mascot “Colonel Reb.” The school mascot is a white-bearded old man wearing a wide-brimmed hat and leaning on a cane. He is a spitting imagine of nothing less than the very caricature of an old, white plantation owner. If that isn’t disrespectful and inconsiderate to the African Americans students that attend that school I don’t know what is. I believe because their aren’t people taking a stand for what they believe and know is blatant disrespect, racialized mascots will continue. Teams like the Washington Redskin,(who I already dislike, GO COWBOYS!!!)will continue to use the figure of a Native American as the face of their horrible team.


Kadie Bangura

I agree with Bryan in the sense that if the names aren't offensive to individuals then they should be allowed to continue with those mascots. However I also feel like if your going to outlaw a certain type of mascot then you should up hold the rule for everyone and not just some teams.

Before reading the article and the class slides I can honestly say that I had no real opinion on the matter of mascots representing a particular race or ethnicity. It was a non- issue for me mostly because I didn’t really think anyone really cared that much about mascots and because my race was not being represented by these mascots. However after reading the articles I can say that this is now a major issue to be looked at within the sporting nation. I strongly feel that it is unfair to represent an ethnicity through a mascot that defines many of the negative aspects of that ethnicity. I feel like the media played a huge role in making believe that this was a non-issue. The Entire article by King basically explains how Sports Illustrated created an article based off of polls that were not created through polling standards. If the media is portraying the idea of using the Indian mascots as an idea that even the Native Americans do not care about, then why should the rest of the general population care. The idea of using the mascots to represent ethnicity especially occurs within the Native American race. Native Americans in this day in age are generally a peaceful race. However they are stereotyped through mascots as being vicious and rowdy killers, with no sense of civility. Like King’s article stated, “Native American mascots emerged from these stereotypes and these mascots continue to reinforce these stereotypes”(Of Polls and Racial Prejudice, 14). While mascots will always represent some sort of stereotypes towards something, I believe that as long as someone doesn’t take offense to the stereotype then it should be ok.

Michael Cole

One of the rising issues in both college and professional sports is the use of racialized sporting symbols used as names, nicknames, and/or mascots. Names that carry a negative condensation have been used in modern sports since their creation however only in recent years have people begun to question names of sport franchises that are involved in everyday life. The most prominent issue with racialized symbolism in sports is its attack on the Native American community. All together there are eighteen Colleges and Universities that have names, nicknames, or mascots that are said to be offensive to the Native American Society as well as several professional organizations.
The Native American community is not the only group of people who are affected by the use of racialized symbolism. The African American community, all be it a much smaller representation then Native Americans, are still being attacked by schools and universities who carry a racially motivated mascot or traditions. One example of this is Mississippi University, also called Ole Miss, where students still wave the Confederate States of America Battle flag before home games. Along with this, the University also participates in other traditions for sporting event that were formed before and during segregation and by modern standards are considered to be openly racist.
It is hard to take a side on the debate of racialized symbolism in sports. Morally I know that it is wrong to use a derogatory name as a representation of a team. I have seen from the Video, “In Whose Honor,” the affect such names can have on the people who are being misrepresented and still it is unclear to me which side of the fence to be on.
The Washington Redskins, one of the top abusers of racially charged names and mascots, have been my football team forever. As a child I always knew that Redskins was a term for Native Americans however it never was explained to me as being a derogatory term. Since being a child, the Redskins have become one of my top five passions in life and are not going anywhere anytime soon. A few years back there was some talk that the Redskins owner, Daniel Snyder, was under some pressure to change the name of his team. At no time in my life have I been happier to hear he was sticking with the Redskins. This is my dilemma.
Although I do not agree with the use of Colo. Red at Mississippi or many of their other traditions it is hard to take a stance against the use of Native Americans names, nicknames, and mascots for the reason that I bleed burgundy and gold for the Washington Redskins. To say that schools should have to change their names or professional organizations change their mascots is not something that I can back for if I did it would be quite hypocritical.
strickman

There are so many strong points made in Professor King-White’s lecture on Racialized Sporting Symbolism that support many valid angles to argue this issue. “Why are some stereotypes and caricatures inappropriate and other stereotypes stick?” I can easily say, just like our generation has with corporate insertions into sport venues, that we have simply grown accustomed to seeing these people as just another mascot representing schools. However, it is so obvious that this is racist. I am absolutely against this. I find myself pretty sensitive to particular racism issues, and I understand how anyone represented incorrectly would be against this. Stereotypes, especially associated with racism, are all about the semiotics of the mascot. Schools may claim that they do not mean to convey their mascot in a racial matter (their denotation), however, the reality is that many people will interpret it differently in their own way (their connotation). I think the unfair point to make here is, “why do we accept ‘redface’ and not ‘blackface’?" Somehow it is an already known fact that using an African American as a mascot, and to relate it to this specific topic we will say an African American portrayed as a slave, is completely offensive. How is it then, that these American Indians portrayed as an aggressive, red-fleshed race, used as mascots are not clearly offensive as well? It does not matter what race you are, minorities are minorities and one should not be held on a pedestal over another. If you are not racist then you should rid of it entirely, not just for particular races. Using people of rank like “knights,” soldiers,” or “captains” as mascots is one thing, but using people based on their race as mascots and using them in an exaggerated, inaccurate portrayal is definitely a whole other issue. -Gincel

Native Americans have taken the brunt of racial slurs and mockery in recreational, high school, collegiate, and even professional sports. This topic has been controversial for many years, and remains an issue to this day. I do not agree that Native Americans or any specific reference to individual tribes or cultures should be chosen as a mascot, logo, or name for any team no matter what. Individuals who create this or even support teams with these names are upholding a degree of racism, disrespect, and ignorance. I believe that by allowing the use of such names is only perpetuating the stereotype of the Native American people as bloodthirsty savages.
I can understand why people would think it is okay to display another human race as a mascot, holding the belief that they are honoring Native Americans’ nobility and strength to defend their land and their lives. According to King et al, “Native American mascots are rooted in the bloodthirsty savage stereotype… that is linked to desirable athletic qualities such as having a fighting spirit and being aggressive, brave, stoic, proud, and persevering” (King). At first glance this would only make sense. However, many people do not realize that by taking non-typical trait of a few Native Americans who only displayed such traits in defense of their lives and applying that to a Little League baseball team defending their home turf is completely out of context and inappropriate. Not only that, but the extreme that many fans and supporters of teams adopt many rituals that they do not see as hostile and consequential for Native American people. Ellen Staurowsky from Ithaca College says,
“For more than a century, U.S. colleges and universities have participated in laying siege to American Indian culture. Through a mass process of misappropriations in the form of American Indian mascots, fight songs, and other forms of imagery, legions of students, graduates, sports fans, and citizens have been encouraged to enact their own version of the [Indian impersonation], selectively becoming American Indian imposters themselves and accepting American Indian impersonation as a normative an expected part of school and team identity.”(Staurowsky)
I think that people, especially those of majority races, tend to overlook the harm and pain that derogatory slurs and rude imitations can have on people of the targeted race. I think that it is unfortunate we live in such an ignorant society.

in response to alauenstein, i agree, i never realized how much of our youth was intertwined with racial slurs and stereotypes.

This is probably the hardest blog I have had to write considering I can not actually put my feet in the Native American’s or any minorities shoes for that matter. I am a white, Italian American boy in the United States of America, my kind is not a dying breed so to speak. So for me I haven’t been faced with offensive material to my culture. The closest thing I have ever faced that can compare to anything remotely offensive is watching Eddie Murphy’s live stand up Raw. When he made fun of Italian Americans, using crude and offensive language, all while holding his crotch. I found this to be the funniest part of the entire skit so I am not one to be upset easily. I think sometimes people over react. But after taking a closer look at some of the college and professional sports team’s names and mascots, I can see how some things are offensive. Ole Miss is the college that just jumps out the page at me. Everything about the school screams pro slavery. The school waves a Confederate Battle Flag which was remade popular by the Ku Klux Klan back in the 30’s for anti-black movement. Their mascot has been given the nickname “General Nat” which is in reference to a Confederate general who is actually the founder of the KKK, coincidence I don’t know. This is one of the schools that need to change but not all sports teams names are bad. Look at the Atlanta Braves their name is in reference to Native Americans. And there is nothing offensive what so ever in my eyes about calling your team the braves, if anything its more of a compliment than a put down. I think each case should be looked at separately and if decided by the law as offensive then I needs to be changed. Having said that I think people to stop being so sensitive and realize its just a game and a name, and get over it there are bigger issues out in the world that need to be dealt with.

As many of the class has stated, racializing mascots cannot be right. It demoralizes the Native American heritage. For someone to only pick out one of the many races in this country and say it is alright to make a comic face of him/her and have them do a dance around a game and call it authentic is wrong. The racism fight must expand to all races, not just a few.

Growing up i sat Indian style, ran Indian runs, rooted for the cowboys and against the Redskins. It never occurred to me that these things could be insulting. I actually remember thinking it was stupid when i heard they changed the name of sitting Indian style to cross legged or pretzel style. People get used to these terms and do not realize their true meaning. Just like we learned earlier this semester there are things that people think are completely normal but are really learned. After listening to the lecture about ole miss I totally disagree with racially sensitive mascots. I do not think they should get rid of all the mascots that represent people just the ones that are derogatory like the redskins. If mascot like the fighting Irish or Trojans are forced to change names i think that is a little ridiculous because who is that insulting? People do not want their Mascot to change because they are so used to it but if they stepped foot in a Native Americans shoes for one day they would understand. When things do not affect you, you are definitely more likely to look past it.

The video from the blog is very interesting. I do not have any clue what the Native Americans are feeling when seeing the mascots being paraded around cities and games. I completely agree with what they are saying in that we are characterizing their people in comics, phony costumes, and non-authentic dances and rituals. The lady from the video commented on how colleges and universities would claim they are celebrating the religious ceremonies of the Indian tribes. She also then made a very good point in asking why these universities were connecting themselves in any particular religious practice because it is known that it is looked down upon for a university to claim a religion for the entire population of the school. The white population of America would not know what it would be like to live as a minority in a different country and have the label of “white” or “Caucasian.” I particularly liked the section of the movie where they showed different mascots of other races or religions. Could you imagine if there was a team called the New York Jews, or the Baltimore Negros? The country would erupt in outrage and the country would listen. The Jewish and African American population has grown significantly, but I do not understand why people would listen to them, and not someone who lived here long before anyone else. It is clear that I side with the Native Americans in those perspectives, but at the same time as I do not understand what they are going through, one of our countries most popular sayings is “majority rules.”

I think that the idea of changing mascots because they represent ethnicities wrongly, has to be the dumbest, stupidest idea I have ever heard of. I mean that’s like making all teams with animal mascots change theirs because they don’t truly represent the animals that they name their teams after. Does that make a lot of sense? NO of course not that would just be dumb, right? I think that it’s a sensitive topic because we allow people to be sensitive about it. I mean I understand why people don’t like names like the Redskins, but I don’t understand why they get mad about the names like the warriors or savages. I mean personally I don’t understand what the big deal is. I am Irish but I am not trying to sue Notre Dame because they misrepresent Irish people as always wanting to fight. I would get laughed at if I ever tried to do that. Or went after the Boston Celtics because of my heritage, and again that’s a joke.
I also believe that it’s dumb to go after the University of Mississippi. Do they have a racial mascot? No it is supposed to be a colonel from the Civil War. I mean as said in the Journal of Sport & Social Issues “spectators are immersed in a universe of Old South symbols” during football games, but come on as long as they are not doing anything to harm anyone I don’t see what is wrong with it. Overall I think people who worry about this thing need to find something else to criticize because I really doubt anything will come out of it.

I disagree with tigerfrank14 and think he is an idiot. I dont think he would be upset if the redskins of washington became the Washington Whites or if it were the Cleveland Caucasians. I can see the white race being embarrassed but not upset. I feel that the other races would be more so upset by this than us

For as long as I have watched football I have rooted for the burgundy and gold, yes I am a Washington Redskins fan. So in a way this blog is right up my alley and you would expect me to defend my 'skins to the death. To be quite honest though I am fairly neutral in regards to this topic. I was raised by two avid Redskins followers and have always been under the impression that the Redskins represented something good, great, Awesome. Not that it was derogatory to ALL Native Americans. When I go out in my Redskins pants, rocking a Santana Moss jersey and get into my "Redskinsed out" car I don’t believe what I am doing is a bad thing. I see it as supporting my team not degrading another person’s ethnicity. Although when I step out of my own little world and look at it through their (the Native Americans) eyes I can see where one would have a problem with this. It may be different if I were actually in their shoes but I personally would not have a problem with the Redskins name if I were a native American but it’s understandable how they could have resentment towards this. All in all I must agree with Dr. King-White, in that Native American mascots like that of the Indians, William and Mary Tribe and the Washington Redskins do more harm than good. Although I don’t see the Redskins or any of the other Native American related teams changing their names in the near future, mainly because of where the Native Americans fall in the ranks of our society today. I could see Ole Miss and its Colonel Rebel undergoing a change in the near future. When we dealt with the Native Americans as the whites explored America we simply stated Manifest Destiny and it was our right to their land. Yes this was something huge and if it were happening today there would millions of people protesting such actions. Although the sad fact is that it happened so long ago, and no free white, black and any race besides Native American is ever heard complaining about it. To us it’s as if it never happened since we don’t see or hear from it any more. That could be because the Native Americans never recovered from us taking over, as we see no Native Americans in Authority positions in the world today. On the other hand racism and the civil war seem like it happened just yesterday. Especially with our next President being black, White vs. Black politics and racism are still, sadly, at the forefront of this society. Blacks unlike Native Americans have rebounded from slavery and are making their voice heard. So I would not be surprised if enough African American supporters got behind a rally to end the happenings at Ole Miss. Especially when you look at all the things at Ole Miss that connect it to racism. Take this quote for example, "Over time, the Colonel came to be known by other names, including “JohnnyReb” and “General Nat”—with the latter a reference to General Nathaniel BedfordForrest, Confederate war hero and founder of the Ku Klux Klan."(Newman 2007, p 323) When looking at this you can see how politically incorrect Ole Miss University is and why I believe one day their ways will have to be changed. When the petition for changing its name comes around and the names of the Redskins and Indians, I won’t hesitate to sign.

I don’t think that there is anything wrong with mascots that represent Native Americans. Teams like the Washington Red Skins, Cleveland Indians and Florida State Seminoles aren’t hurting anyone. I really don’t see how these names are that offensive to Native Americans. The Seminole tribe in Florida actually love that the school is called the Seminoles. At Florida State football games they have a pre game tradition. Chief Osceola runs down the field riding a horse named Renegade and stabs a flaming spear into the center of the field to begin every home game. The clothes and rigging that both chief Osceola and Renegade wear was designed and approved by the Seminole tribe of Florida. FSU has also adapted many traditions from the Seminole tribe, like the war chant which is the first thing you are taught when you get to orientation. When talking about symbols/mascots being derogatory, any symbol could be misused and thought of as offensive. You never hear of anyone complaining about the Pittsburg Steelers name or new mascot. Pittsburg is known for its steel mills, and there new mascot is a big guy holding a steel beam. To me that can be just as offensive as any of the other teams with Native American names. I just don’t see why these names are that big of a deal. They have been around for years and years and we have grown accustom to them. They are not meant to disgrace any one race. Now people are just trying to change things. They have been this way for a long time, I say just leave it alone.

When I was watching the video about the native american woman, i have to admit that the only thing that was going through my head was that if she dosn't like the way her people were being represented than ignore. The best thing to do is not to support that type of behavior. I think that by going out and protesting, she was putting herself out there for a verbal bashing by the fans. Perhaps a better way to fight the power sturcture is to write letters to the clubs, start petitions, appeal to local and state governments. The thing that really bothered me about her was that she was so concerned with her children and the way they would be effected by the mascots, yet the video depicts her going out to many games and protesting and speaking out. I think that for the children, understanding that the mascots are not real representations of people needs to be talked through and come to terms with. Im sure she spoke with her children about the matter but it didnt seem to me that she put much emphasis on her children when trying to fix the problem.
That being said, i think the mascots that expose such feelings of disrespect and blatant racism should be taken out of sport. We have learned all semester that sport and society play off of each other. Whether people want to believe it or not is irrelevant, it is whats happening. The type of ideas that come out of the institutions with these kind of mascots are harmful to the people inside and outside the institution and only hiders us as a nation to free ourselves from these horrible traditions and move on to a better time.

-amg

Before taking this class it was never brought to my attention the racism within sporting teams names. Of course I knew there was teams that had Native American mascots but I never looked at them as being racist in nature. However, do i now think that all these teams should change their mascot? The answer is no, this mascots have been around for multiple generations and have made an identity for themselves all of which would be ruined with a name change. Now, should Florida State and other universities coming riding in on horseback throwing a sphere into the ground as if they are barbaric and somewhat uncivil? Again the answer is no. I see nothing wrong with having a mascot that is in the form of some Native American past-time, however if you do choose to have one of these it is important to treat it with respect and portray them as normal civil human beings. Me being a die hard Washington Redskins fan since the day I was born, I would be truly disappointed if they chose or were forced to change their mascot. I have experienced the good, the bad, and the ugly with MY Washington Redskins, it would be ashame to not be able to pass these joys onto my children and so forth. Yes, i know people are going to say changing the mascot doesn't change the memories or tradition, but i disagree. Also I don't think that the Redskins are disrespecting any Native Americans, most people simply called them the skins most of the time, not to mention that people, other than the Chief, are dressing up acting like fools. The people who do dress up are the old timers that miss the days of the hogs, when we actually had an offensive line.
If the redskins were to change their mascot and name not only would it start a new road for the team, it would also erase all the memories that us die hards have had in the past.

I agree with bruzicka about the naming of teams. Yes back when a lot of these schools were given these Indian names it wasn't looked at as a bad thing. But now its 2008 and I'd like to think that we've turned a new leaf. No longer is this country a place full of biggets. We have to look at how far we've come and not lose our gains

I think that as much as I enjoy watching and partaking in the Tomahawk Chop when watching Florida State University sporting event the actual act is extremely disrespectful to the actual American Indians. Since I was young I’d visit my family in Florida and I would get shirts from local teams. One of the teams was Florida State so I having the gear I would watch the football games. I have to admit that I loved the beginning of every game when Chief Osceola came out on his horse Renegade and threw the flaming spear into the ground. I use to even think that the Seminole tribe was accepting to this tradition. Over time I’ve realized that the spectacle put on by the Florida State fans and supporters makes a mockery of the actual Seminole tribe. I don’t think there was ever a time during a battle that the chief of the tribe went to the middle of the battle ground and spiked a flaming spear. Like the American Indian mentioned in the video the idea of an Indian drum beat was something I never realized. I’ve grown up thinking that the images of the Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, Washington Redskins, Florida State Seminoles, and Chicago Blackhawks were what real Native Americans were like.

I agree with tiger that the mascots take away from the pride of these cultures. Thats why i think kids need to become more educated about american history in elementry school rather then lied to about some friendly harvest and making hand shaped turkeys. If Indians arent seen as a "cartoon, non-existant, tall tale" then maybe society will be able to shape itself to having a sensetivity and respect toward the culture instead of a misinterpretating it.

This class definetly brought to my attention the racism in the names and logos of some sports teams. Should we change the names of teams like the Redskins and Ole Miss, and the logo's of the Blackhawks and Clevland Indians? I dont think so. All we can do is recognize it and refrain from naming a another franchise inappropriately. It is strange to me that names related to religion and violence were changed very quicky, but racist names still exist. For example, the Baltimore/Washington Bullets became the Wizards and The Tampa Bay Devil Rays became the Rays. People thought Bullets promoted violence and gun use and that the Devil in Rays (even though its an actual animal) had some sort of satanic symbolism, i guess. But at least in Washington D.C, the Capitol of our country, we keep the racist term "Redskin" attached to our NFL team. That makes complete sense. The same district that hosts our government, has a racist named football team. Some of the tribes try and fight to have team names changed, but i do not think that the Redskins will be one of them. There is to much team history under that name. As long as the team doent relocate, i cant see it changing its name.If it ever does relocate,which i highly doubt, then i suppose the franchise would most definetly rid the racist name. On the topic of racist logos, i can see but dont agree with the percieved racistness. For instance, the Clevland Indians. What did you expect the mascot to look like, if it was a realistic looking Indian with a head dress and all, it still would be percived as somewhat racist. I remember growing up watching cartoons like Loony Tunes and Peter Pan with cartoon stereotyped Indians. Also, Cowboys and Indians was a concept of battle that was ingrained in almost every youths head. I think this desensitizes us at a young age to the racist correlation it may have. Thats why, we as a country, may not see the racist naming and logoing of teams as a big threat to society. We even have a holiday "Thanksgiving" that almost has Pilgrams and Indians seen in the same sense as like a Santa Clause or Easter Bunny. Obviously no Indian was sharing turkey with some pilgram in late November; the pilgrams were rapeing and killing the Indians and saying thanks for giving us your land. This history is rarely or never taught in elementry or middle school. But as we discussed in class, the Nebraska "N-words" wouldn't fly. As a youth you are taught about racism and the civil rights movement and you recognize the racist language differently as opposed to Native American racist language. Nickalodeon and Disney didnt make cartoons that were any bit racist towards African Americans, but movies like Pocohontis decensitized us to Indians and indian culture. Most people in America probably think Indians dont even exist anymore. I feel that these team names that are targeting the Native Americans should be looked into being changed, but at the same time it is society's fault that the names got there in the first place. Society needs to be taught about Native American history before they can become sensitive to the racistness of the discriminating names. Without this being known as gerneral common knowledge, how do we expect people to be proactive on stopping the racism.

I do agree that it is disrespectful against certain ethnicities when their name is used as mascots for teams. However, I do not think all teams with native american names are disrespectful and racists. Yes, Ole Miss, Redskins, Blackhawks and Indians are all names that are racists toward the native american culture. I just do not understand why they were allowed to become team names when they all did. I am a Redskins fan, but i have never thought of it this way until I took this class, so obviously it does not seem like the Redskins frachise is trying to be racist. My disagreement is why every native american team name is racist and disrespectful in some people's eyes. For instance, the Seminoles, Chiefs, and Braves do not seem to be so bad but some people want to say so because it still refers to the native american culture. In this world, there is nothing that everyone is going to agree on for different religious and ethnic backgrounds. I do not think every team needs to be changed but maybe a few do. I definitely feel like the way Ole Miss displays and waves the confederate flag at home games and the Ole Miss name needs to be changed based off of its history. The names that aren't racist should not be a problem, especially since we have the Patriots, Yankees, Nationals all as team names that are about other people that aren't disrespectful.

I agree with kyle the most. Just as he said, there are things in our lives that would offend us such as religion or politics and teams are named after them. Is that fair for Native Americans? It's not, it is disrespectful. It does not matter if something is meant to represent something different it matters what different interpretations of it are. If there is a way that alot of people can and do intrepret a mascot, so if it is borderline ok, then it should not be used. Why can't schools just stick to animals there are plenty to use.

I went to an private all girl high school. Currently, our mascot is the magic. It used to be the "Sharp Shooters" until we had to change it because our main rivals were the Indians. I think that it was a good idea to change the mascot because it is politically incorrect and also just plain rude. It is 2008, we have plenty of options to name teams and can refrain from using sterotypes that may offend some people. I feel that there are so many negative consqequences or images that can be perceived from having a particular mascot that it would be better to avoid any chance of hurting someone or disrespecting someones history and heritage. In Newmans's "Army of Whiteness" it says, "..the problem ith the mascot becomes conveniently simplified to the negative consequences for those in power rather than any reflexive consderation of the oppressive nature of the sign" (325). They also say that it "positions whiteness as the norm" (316) which I feel is true. I agree that it takes away an aspect of the culture and could hinder their pride, especially in the case of the Native Americans. I think it is espeically offensive that Native Americans are the only society members who have teams named after them. There are not teams named on slanderous words for African Americans, Asians, or even Whites. There are not teams based on different political parties representing a football team. There are not names slandering the religion of certain groups of society. Overall I agree with you and think that it is wrong and that we should have more respect for these unique cultures instead of making a mockery out of them.

I agree with Yankee1127 when he says that what the Colonel Rebel means to Ole Miss is different than what the rest of the world thinks of it. This is not good because it allows us to use sport as a way to immortalize some horrible events that have happened in the past. It totally ignores slavery and the troubles that African Americans when through.

After watching the video and reading the required readings I have to agree with you that radicalized mascots are wrong and degrading. These mascots take away from the pride these cultures have and almost make it into a cartoon. It takes away from all the years of suffering and hardship some of these races had and makes them into almost a joke. A defense that some of these teams have is that they are not trying to degrade these people but rather immortalize them by having them represent their teams. If this is true then why are Native Americans mainly the only race that is represented in team mascots? If we really feel that it is alright to have radicalized mascots then every race should be allowed to have a mascot. I am pretty sure that it would seem a little offensive if the Washington Redskins changed their name to the Washington Whites or if the Cleveland Indians became the Cleveland Caucasians. A lot of times these names do not seem offensive because we grow accustomed to them when we grow up with them. In the case of Ole Miss there are even many rituals that fans perform during the game that degrades the African American race. In the Newman article “Army of Whiteness” on page 6 it says, “On football Saturdays, the central campus space is transformed into a veritable modern day Civil War encampment, as tens of thousands of Ole Miss fans congregate amidst a sea of Confederate flags.” These fans that are coming to the games are ignoring what all those flags and colors stand for and are using it to root on their team. I believe that this is wrong because it takes away from the real issue. Frank Olszewski

i think it is wrong and i agree, schools should not have mascots that are offensive to native americans because it is a sterotype that is a mockery of a people. in the case of the university of Illinois, i don't think they were honoring the native americans at all as it was presented as being repeatedly in the film. it some university had a team called the speedy coons i would be offended. for me the name coon was used as a racial slur against african americans. so with teams such as the redskins, warriors, cheifs, indians, it ( even though they names may seem positive) mocks and belittles the american indian culture.

in response to mmmjay11 i don't think anyone else should have to attend another school because they feel threated or offended, if what they believe in is right they should protest and peacefully call for a change. if eeryone just walked away from situations that were wrong there never would have been desegregation, women wouldn't have the right to vote, etc.

If a mascot is being used to represent another person’s ethnicity on purpose, or to solely offend someone’s cultural background, than yes, it is morally wrong. However, there are so many colleges and universities in the United States that support athletics teams who have mascots, it would be hard to please everyone and make sure no one is offended. It is hard to believe that any university would choose a mascot such as “Colonel Reb” or the “Fighting Sioux” to offend or misrepresent a certain ethnic/cultural background. According to Dr. Newman’s article Army of Whiteness? it states toward the beginning that “The mascot as a caricatured symbol of sporting identities…(316). It would be surprising if every student who went to a school such as the University of Mississippi that they think about how morally wrong and offensive singing “Hotty Toddy” or “Dixie” at football games can be toward African Americans. If this were the case, no one sing the songs because the entire football team is composed of mostly African Americans. It is in the spirit of the sport that the students sing the songs and look upon mascots like Colonel Reb. If African Americans or any other ethnic background has a problem with a school’s mascot, then the only solution is to choose a different school to attend.

I agree with bill reem when he says that the term 'redskins' is a racial slur against American Indians. Also, I too think that teams and schools should follow what Florida State has done with how they use their mascot. By getting permission from a tribe, they are not hurting anyone with the portrayal of an Indian Mascot.
erin ragan

When I was in high school, our mascot was a sea hawk. The majority of mascots for schools and sports teams are animals. There is, however, the occasional team or school who use an Indian as their mascot. The Washington Redskins, the Cleveland Indians, the Illinois Fighting Illini, Newberry College Indians, and North Dakota Fighting Sioux all have an Indian as their mascot. Bradley University, called the Bradley Braves, used to have an Indian Mascot but with all the controversy over it they are now without a mascot and looking for a new one. I think that racialized mascots should not be allowed and that all of the teams with an Indian as their mascot should have to change it. Teams that use mascots that are not animals like the Dallas Cowboys, Sacramento Kings, New England Patriots, New York Giants, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers do not portray racialized sporting symbolism in their mascots. By using an Indian as a mascot most people don’t see how it could be controversial because they don’t realize that it isn’t just a symbol, being American Indian is an ethnicity, a religion, and a culture. It is a way of living for many people who do not appreciate their culture being mocked and mimicked. Why do teams use an Indian as a mascot but not an African American or a Hispanic mascot, or a Catholic or Jewish mascot? How would people react if a team was called the South Carolina Black Sambos or the Pennsylvania Priests? It should not be any different for Indian mascots. It is offensive to have mascots that portray ethnicities or religions. The US commission on Civil rights, 2001, “recommended that all non-Native American schools drop their Native American Mascots or nicknames” because these mascots are “false portrayals that encourage biases and prejudices that have a negative effect on contemporary Indian people.” Later, the NCAA rulings of 2005 said that no school would be forced to alter its mascot, logo, or nickname. I do understand how the teams who have had their mascot for a while would not want to change it because they are so well known for it, like the Washington redskins who are nationally known. Having a racialized mascot as a symbol is not as offensive as mimicking a culture. The Illinois fighting Illini have an Indian mascot that comes out and dances around at time outs and half times. By doing this, they are mocking the culture of American Indians because they are mimicking them.
erin Ragan

I agree 100% with Kasi. If we are concerned as a society about falsely and offensively representing ethnicities with mascots, we need to enforce it. Smaller ethnicities like the Native Americans are ignored when they speak out against being represented by mascots offensively; its time we ACTUALLY stop the embarrassments.

As we discussed in class, I agree that it is wrong to represent ethnicities with the use of a mascot. Mascots like the ones for the Washington Redskins, and Cleveland Indians represent Native Americans of all types from all areas in ways that they feel are very offensive. However, the difference between knowing that it is wrong to represent ethnicities with the usage of mascots and actually enforcing laws that regulate this are two different things. Unfortunately, it seems that only a general uprising from an ethnicity has the power to provoke removal or a change of offensive mascots. The other problem that goes along with this lack of enforcement is acceptance. We all know that these mascots are offensive to others but we have just written them off as something that is generally accepted and 'ok' in sports. The perfect example of this, as we discussed in class, is Ole Miss University. Colonel Rebel is the mascot for Ole Miss and undeniably represents a plantation owner of the old south in the Civil War era. Blatantly representing racial resentment and carrying around symbols of racial offensivess is portrayed when Newman says, "The reemergence and revivification of the Rebel flag at Ole Miss sporting events contributed to more than one bond between Ole Miss and Confederate past, and the fact that it was an election year even further cemented the relationship between symbol and ideology" (Newman, 2007, p. 7). To the student body and faculty of Ole Miss, Colonel Rebel is just their mascot and represents nothing more than just that, a mascot. However, to the rest of the world and moreoever the African American population, Colonel Rebel is needless to say a bit more offensive.

I agree that the display of mascot that represents racialized stereotypes is morally wrong and sporting franchises should come to an agreement with these teams that display these mascots so they could change their name. Even many people say that it is harmless for these mascots to be displayed, with the die hard fans of these sports the racialized stereotype is being played at throughout the entire game. For example, Newman says "Indeed, sport is central among these cultural technologies of separation and alienation. While attending an Ole Miss sporting event, and particularly a contest involving the university's championship intercollegiate football team, spectators are immersed in a univeristy of the Old South symbols and signifying acts" (Newman 2007). This means that even though the University of Mississippi is an intergrated school in the South the University becomes a "civil war encampment" during these sporting events (Newman 2007). This blatantly display why these racialized, stereotypical mascots are morally wrong. Turning the University back into the civil war encampment would cause any other student from a different university to feel uncomfortable, but in the University of Mississippi this is of the norm which is also morally wrong. Such teams as the Redskins are socially insensitive to the fit that the term 'redskins' is equivalent to the 'n-word'. If anything this would cause any of the sporting teams that do display this socially insensitive mascot to change. But of course the sporting franchise wants to make profit and they feel as if changing the name would cause them to lose money. In actuality, this will help them make money because of the die hard fans that will go out and buy everything with the name change on it. You would never the Towson N'word or the Towson Chinks so why would should have any team with the term redskins when it is considered a racial slur to the Native American community. This is also display the lack of respect for the Native American community since their voice is hardly heard and then when they are heard they are ignored.

Kierra Palmer

I agree that using mascots representing racialized stereotypes is wrong and should be changed. Native Americans are not mascots, there people and deserve to be treated with the same dignity as anyone else. The term “redskin” is a racial slur against Native Americans and yet it continues to be the name of a major NFL franchise. We would never see like Kyle 6082 said the “Ragin’ Rabbi’s”. It seems like being decent and politically correct doesn’t apply to words used for Native Americans. There are in some instances where the use of a Native American name and mascot are ok. For example, the Florida State mascot is the Seminole and to use that name they went to the Seminole tribe in Florida and made sure that using the name and mascot was ok. Also in return for using the name, the university pays the tribe small royalties. I believe that all other universities and sports teams should follow what Florida State has done. If they want to continue to use these Native American names and mascots, they need to have the permission of the Tribe or Native American’s they are representing. They should also be willing to pay if necessary. I think asking permission and paying royalties is a decent comprise, but ultimately the best case scenario and what should be done is eliminate the use of the names completely.

Bill Reem

I have to agree with the professor’s take on the mascot issue; it is not ok to represent another person’s ethnicity by using a mascot. I am Jewish and even though I don’t consider myself an active or participating Jew I would find it offensive if a University showcased a Rabbi as its mascot. It would infuriate and disgust me to see a University exploit my religious and spiritual faith in to something they call “inspirational, reverent, and moving.” I could somewhat understand the pro-Illiniwek movement if Chief Illiniwek was himself a Native American performing traditional dances but the current Chief clearly has no Native American heritage and performs a basic gymnastic routine. A mascot name like the “Ragin Rabbi’s” albeit clever and unique would not sit well with the Jewish community as a whole. If people actually put themselves in other people’s shoes then they might realize the harm that they are inflicting on the innocent. The idea of using ethnicity for forming a mascot reminds me of blackfaces in minstrel shows during the 1800’s. Have we really gone backwards in terms of discriminating, that we are promoting demeaning acts of the past? Newman (2007) states that dual processes of a collective conscious and commodity racism “enacts an antihumane polity and ideology that to this day maps privilege and works to oppress the marginalized peoples of the region (p.316). No institution should be able to capitalize or neoliberalize on someone’s religion or ethnicity because it is immoral and unethical.

To comment on what 9 Tremblay Rd. said how can you call using ethnically motivated mascots, "inspirational, reverent, and moving" when people are killing themselves over the issue? It seems that the Illini fans who are pro Chief Illiniwek are just ignorant and naive.

I agree with when you say that is inappropriate to use mascots that represent somebody else’s ethnicity. It is wrong and it can make them feel small and useless. Like it is said in the video, the chief that was used for the University of Illinois was very controversial. One, the dance was not authentic. At first, the university said that it was, but then when people started finding out that it was not, they had to change it. Using a dance that misrepresents the symbol you are using can be very disrespectful. Another issue that people had was that the suit that the mascot was wearing was of the Sioux tribe. Not the tribe that the fighting Illini were supposed to be representing. How can they say that they are honoring somebody or something and not fully understand all the facts? Another thing that it mentioned in the video was that if people made posters about the fighting Caucasians, or fighting Jews, or fighting blacks, people would react a lot more differently and hopefully understand where the American Indians were coming from. If the University decided to just use the chief as a symbol of the university, then maybe people wouldn’t react the way that they did. But the moment that they started using mascots, songs, and dances, then it starts to insult the culture. One interesting fact that I got from the video was that one in five American Indian youth, have attempted suicide because of low self worth and low self esteem which can be attributed to the mascots used in sporting events for entertainment.
Scott Rappaport.

At my high school our mascot was the warrior. During my time in high school there was a huge argument over whether or not the name of our mascot should be changed or just have a new one entirely due to the fact that many people within the county found it very offensive and racist. Personally at the time I didn't see what the huge deal was about our mascot. I thought that it was very stupid people fighting over this matter. Now that I stand back and look at it though I think that many mascots are racialized and its not alright. I agree with jgreen that when he says "if we are going to outlaw discrimination, we need to follow through on it..." I feel that sports have a huge pardon in many areas as we have already discussed in this class. Many things are overlooked and just played off when it is involved with a sporting team. Ive been on the fence about this subject for a while now ever since high school with our mascot. I see both sides of the story now and believe that yes it is very wrong and yes that we need to be politically correct and follow through with outlawing discrimination; however, at the same time i think to myself that everyone is never going to be politically correct and that everyone is always going to discriminate something or someone somehow. Honestly, this is a never ending battle that each generation is going to fight. We can keep trying to make things right for those certain individuals that find wrong in things, but we will never be able to satisfy everyone.

Kasi Harris

I agree with you. Like we have said in class, would it be alright to create a team called the Nebraska (n-word)? I dont think it would be ok to do that, and I dont see how that doesnt correlate to teams like the Redskins and Ole Miss. I understand that there may not be a big voice against native american issues like this but that doesnt make it OK. Nor does it make it OK for Ole Miss to waive the flags they use during games. I think if we are going to outlaw discrimination, we need to follow through on it and not just follow the law according to who is going to respond to us doing wrong and who isnt. Its just wrong