Honest question: my High School mascot was the “Warriors”, generic enough sounding, but always represented on uniforms by a Native American-- acceptable or not?
I never thought about it until now. We never did any kind of war-whoop chants, nobody dressed up as the mascot (that I ever witnessed or heard of), it was just a name. At the time if asked I probably would’ve thought it was cool mascot, if only because the image they used was a Mohawk, complete with “punk rock” haircut.
I think the state of Michigan pushed schools to avoid Native American mascots, but didn’t go as far as banning them. A few schools kept tribe names or generic names that might have been based on Native Americans but not unique to them, like Warriors. Central Michigan U compromised by keeping the tribal name Chippewas, but with no mascot character or Native American logo. They use a block letter C with motion lines as their logo instead of the previous spear logo. There’s a small town with Grass Lake Warriors as their team name. I don’t think they use a costumed mascot or images of Native Americans, but their logo is a flint-knapped stone spear head with a feather hanging off.
Seems like the local Native American students would be the ones to ask about whether it’s a problem for them or not, on a case-by-case basis.
Central entered into an agreement with the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe. The tribe officially approved Central’s use and aided the University in getting off the NCAA censure list. But I’ve seen complaints from members of the tribe and members of other tribes who live in the area that they didn’t have an adequate say in the matter.
The problem with Native American sports imagery is that it’s all about “Indians” in the past, as white people remember them. That freezes conceptions of them IN the past, overriding perception of, let alone understanding of, the realities of their lives today. Imagine teams named after black people, with images of them running around half naked with spears and so on. Obviously offensive, right? But somehow, similar primitive images of Native Americans are considered okay, even “honorable.”
We had the same kerfuffle at Eastern Michigan University, with some of the same arguments and justifications. They changed the team name from the Hurons to the Eagles when I was attending. The alumni group and students who campaigned to retain the old mascot “Hurons” had the chief of some related tribe flown to the school to express his approval. I’m not sure if it was his personal expression or if he was carrying the consensus of the tribe, but it doesn’t mean much if Hurons living in South Dakota approve of their tribe’s name as mascot while Native American students on campus are the ones getting mistreated because of the logo or team name, whether or not they’re from that same tribe. To me, it seems like the affected students are the people who matter, and in the case at EMU, the complaint was brought up by the Native American Student Organization.
Allow me to vent for a short time:
Sorry for that rant. I seriously dislike good points being made in a bad way. That said, I agree with the important point of the article:
If a significant number of people even consider the possibility that the etymology of “redskin” has to do with the skins of Indians being used as proof for a kill during the genocide, then that is enough reason to avoid using the word. Even if it’s not true. Also, if a word is perceived as a slur by the group in question for any other reason, maybe because it has been used as such for a century or two. No need to bend reality to prove that the word was bad all along.
Indeed. Allow me to add an example. The word “Jew” is not a racist slur, even though the Nazis used it as such. And then imagine a German sports team called “The Jews”. Or maybe, “The Nuremberg Jews”. Not a good idea.
Hmmm… would it be appropriate to use “the Samurai” as a mascot? The Japanese, too, have some incredibly cool warriors in their stereotyped past. Or how about “Knights”? (“Crusaders” is out, because that’s another historic crime). Or how about the Musketeers? (Well, there were only three and a half cool ones…).
How is it that Japanese, Europeans, and many other peoples get to celebrate their Glorious Past and have other cultures celebrate it (with many flat stereotypes), while minorities in the USA suffer from the same act? I mean, I don’t think various western Ninja movies are perceived as offensive in Japan (although the Japanese may laugh at them), and when Hayao Miyazaki uses stereotypes about Europe’s past as the setting for some of his movies, I feel my culture is being flattered. If it works out differently for Native Americans, is there a name for that phenomenon?
All four schools are in Central California; three in the deep Central Valley. Growing up next door to Tulare, I’m most disappointed with Tulare Union (home of Bob Mathias, the first back-to-back Olympic gold medal decathlete). Neighboring Visalia used to be a sundown town for African Americans and Tulare was where African Americans could call home, and the majority of African American students attended (maybe still attend?) Tulare Union HS. They should know better.
Edit to add that Tulare the entire town, not specific groups of people, should know better.
There was an entire pretty cool legion of them, but they were wiped out by the Church.
Well, “pretty cool”… I’m not sure that counts. Other countries had “pretty cool” armies, too, but those three and a half particular fictional musketeers were in a different league of cool.
But now that you mention it, the church has some pretty cool fictional bad guys. Hardly any cool good guys, though. Wonder why that is.
…band name? (i’m a bad person)
best i can say is Punching Up vs. Punching Down. My ancestors already took everything that was theirs then killed them. I don’t think asking to not appropriate their heritage is asking too much.
Cool is in the eye of the beholder. None of them are Steve McQueen, and well hell we know he had his massive issues.
I don’t think that’s it; at least it’s not enough to explain the phenomenon. First, “up” can’t go both ways between Europe and Japan, or between different European nations. So it would be “Punching on a level playing field” vs. “Punching down”.
But, among those “privileged” nations, it’s not even a punch. It’s not something bad that the Europeans do to the Japanese and the Japanese do to the Europeans, but that each nation can tolerate because they are proud and independent nations that are not being oppressed by anyone. Rather, it’s a compliment. It’s a nice thing that nations do to each other, not a “punch”.
The idea that “appropriating somebody’s heritage” is a bad thing seems to be a specifically American idea; at least I am not aware of “appropriating heritage” being among the things that minorities in Austria object to.
Of course, if that’s the general American idea, it becomes true for America by virtue of people believing it, so I don’t propose disregarding Native American people’s wishes on this matter.
I not really arguing, but keep my (many if not most) direct lineage massacred 99.99% of the Indigenous people here. It really isn’t comparable to anything I can think of in Europe except the holocaust, and even that pales in comparison.
Also keep in mind property has been returned in other genocides at a pretty good clip. That isn’t the case for our indigenous people.
Because the noble savage caricature isn’t in any sense celebrating Native American history (Seattle’s Indigenous Peoples day is an example of how to do it right, or at least Less Wrong) it’s making a disrespectful and garish buffoonery.
Yes, romanticization or romanticizing are commonly used. And, as @Mausium said, caricature. Sports names and mascots by the dominant culture are also called appropriation (and sometimes, simply theft).
There’s a big power differential that you’re overlooking here between the US and Native American nations that doesn’t exist between your supposedly parallel examples. Is it really so hard to see?
Spanidau ballet?
Spandau …
No, I’m not overlooking the power differential. No, it’s not hard to see.
I see how a power differential can turn something harmless into something bad. It’s hard to see how a power differential alone will necessarily turn something positive into something bad. Also, I am not aware of any minority group in Austria objecting to “appropriation”. Therefore, I concluded there might be an additional mechanism in play, and I am asking if it has a name.
(Note that right now I am not talking about using a racial slur or the name of a people, race or tribe as a mascot. I’m referring to the “Warriors” and “Braves” example. Romanticization and caricature of an element of the history of a people, not using a slur or turning a whole people into mascots. Exactly the same thing that a “Samurai” sports team would do, plus a power differential.)
The term ‘noble savage’ was coined to denote a state of human goodness free from the corruption of civilization. Still, it creates a non-equal other, so it is at best obsolete.
Come now, do you really believe that ideal isn’t also about racial supremacy?
Do you have a large group of native peoples who were rounded up off their land and into reservations?
You’re trying to create an analogy that doesn’t fit.
