such as ............. Black Hawks...........Cleveland Indians..........Chiefs
President O 's recent thing about name change made me wonder
Its not a cut and dried issue. Many of the team names are not the problem...like Chiefs, Braves, Indians...its the imagery that accompanies them, and the way the fans act at games. Have you seen the picture of the man holding up a speared Indian head at the Washington vs. Philadelphia game? It was a VERY realistic looking prop. How is that considered acceptable? Or seen the Braves fans do the tomahawk chop? Or seen a white guy dress up in a ridiculous halloweenesque Native costume and parade around the arena?
Honestly, I've never met a Native who found the Blackhawks logo offensive. I am sure there are some out there, but its really the lowest on the rung of offensive, because the logo isn't a ridiculous caricature, like the Cleveland Indians one. Beet-red skin, goofy grin, huge nose. Wouldn't fly were it a black man with an afro, exaggerated lips and a bale of cotton. Or a Jew with a huge nose grasping a handful of bills.
Redskins....a term that has been used only in the derogatory for hundreds of years now. Sure, it may have started out as something beneign, much like N*gro, but that isn't what it represents anymore. Redskins was a term used by the US when it was actively paying settlers for each Redskin they turned in. Redskin being the scalp of any Native man, woman or child. The skins of Natives were even tanned and sold for 'fun'. Redskin to us, is NO different than calling a black person N*gger. Yet non-Natives insist we should feel honored and that they don't find it offensive, so it must not be.
The Seminole team is a bit different....they have a sanction from the actual Seminole. The Seminole helped them to portray Indians more accurately, and that is fine, because it is the Seminole being represented.
People also like to point out that if Native mascots are offensive, then ones like the Vikings, or Cowboys, or Fighting Irish must be too. Cowboys is a proffession...not a culture or social race group of people. Vikings...well, if Nordic people think its offensive, then I support them on that. I've actually talked to REAL Irish people about Notre Dame. Real Irish, as in from Ireland...not the Irish descendants who've never been there whose only connection to Ireland is a last name.....and some have expressed that they think its offensive because it portrays them as drunks who look like leprechauns who are always fighting. And I support them on that. I can't claim that those logos aren't offensive, because it is NOT me being portrayed.
We've been lobbying for name changes on a couple select teams for decades now. Decades. Yet people are acting like its a new thing. Or that we've suddenly decided to be offended. WE've always been disgusted by it......only now people are starting to listen.
Making us into mascots was an attempt at putting the final nail in the genocide coffin. If they could make us into caricatures, cartoons and logos, then we really would be just a figment of the past and no one would see our current struggles. And it worked.
The Redskins, University of Illinois' Chief Illiniwek (that's a prime example), Florida State Seminoles, the (now retired) Stanford Indian.
I'm sure there's more...I try not to pay attention to much. They're stereotypical, racist carictaures and they really do hurt.
Braves yes. Also...
Washington REDSKINS
Florida SEMINOLES
I guess the Atlanta Braves would be another.
