Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Criticisms of utilitarianism ethics
Virtue ethics vs utilitarianism
Criticisms of utilitarianism ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Criticisms of utilitarianism ethics
Teams in every sport, at every level of competition, have a mascot. It is the mascot that represents the competitive spirit and team identity, motivating players and fans alike. Does the symbol chosen have any impact on whether a team wins or loses? Unlikely. But the choice of a Native American mascot continues to ignite debate and controversy among athletes, fans and alumni, as well as those people who might otherwise be disinterested in sports. Utilizing an Indian mascot is nothing more than a veiled attempt at hate speech. The dispute over whether Native American mascots should be used as a team symbol dates back to the 1970’s (Price 2). People differ on the basic issue, but there is a more important underlying principle. It is called freedom. Determining whether or not someone is harmed by a practice can reveal whether that practice can or should be morally justified. Wherein lies the truth about exercising the use of American Indian mascots? The reality is that they cannot be morally justified. The certainty is not ascertainable by way of any comparison to other similar phenomena. No such comparison can be made as none exits. Then, are not the only relevant voices those of the Indians themselves? If so, the truth regarding this imagery can only be discovered by conferring with the groups that are depicted. Only those portrayed should have a voice. Or at the very least, be heard louder and more clearly than those who are not mirrored in the representations. Viewing this issue from a Utilitarian perspective, one reasons the justification that Native Americans convey to support the claim that Indian mascots pose harm need not themselves be obliged by those of alternative ethnicities. What Native Americans say about Ind... ... middle of paper ... ...ce. Wausau East Library, Wausau, WI. 16 Nov. 2008. . Morrison, Rich. “Special Interview: Rich Morrison Speaks Out in Favor of Native American Sports Mascots.” Issues and Controversies on File. 29 Mar. 2002. Issues and Controversies. Facts on File. Wausau East Library. Wausau, WI. 10 Nov. 2008. . “Native American Sports Mascots.” Issues and Controversies On File. 12 April. 2002. Issues and Controversies. Facts On File. Wausau East Library. Wausau, WI. 10 Nov. 2008. . Price, S.L. “The Indian Wars.” Sports Illustrated 4 Mar. 2002: 1-5. SI.com. 16 Nov. 2008. . Wieberg, Steve. “NCAA Ponders Future of Indian Nicknames.” USA Today 15 May. 2005. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Wausau East Library, Wausau, WI. 16 Nov. 2008.< http://www.sirs.com>.
Wooster R. (1998). The Military and United States Indian policy 1865-1903 (pp. 43, 47). West
Modern day Native American are widely known as stewards of the environment who fight for conservation and environmental issues. The position of the many Native American as environmentalists and conservationists is justified based on the perception that before European colonists arrived in the Americas, Native Americans had little to no effect on their environment as they lived in harmony with nature. This idea is challenged by Shepard Krech III in his work, The Ecological Indian. In The Ecological Indian, Krech argues that this image of the noble savage was an invented tradition that began in the early 1970’s, and that attempts to humanize Native Americans by attempting to portray them as they really were. Krech’s arguments are criticized by Darren J Ranco who in his response, claims that Krech fails to analyze the current state of Native American affairs, falls into the ‘trap’ of invented tradition, and accuses Krech of diminishing the power and influence of Native Americans in politics. This essay examines both arguments, but ultimately finds Krech to be more convincing as Krech’s
The article “Indian Mascots-You’re Out” by Jack Shakley, was published in the Los Angeles Times in August 2011. The author argues the issues of sport teams having Native American names. The author wrote the article due to more and more Native Americans protesting at stadiums. This article can be divided into five sections. In the introduction, the author opens the article by giving us history on how he first encountered this topic in the early 1950s. He tells the readers, that his father gave him money to buy a baseball cap, but was also conflicted. He originally wanted a Yankees hat because of a fellow Oklahoma Mickey, Mantle came up as being touted as the rookie of the year. Since he is mixed with Muscogee/Creek, he felt misplaced to the
For example, The Dartmouth Big Green were once called the Indians; Oklahoma removed Little Red; Marquette Warriors changed to the Golden Eagles; even the prestigious school of Stanford was once called the Indians. However, most schools or sports teams have accommodated by not removing or not showing their mascots, but for these teams to remove the names is taking away the history of the team, and in some ways probably bring positive spotlight to the Native American culture. These teams do not want to choose a name or mascot that a lot of people do not like or look down upon. They choose names that have a rich history, and they can carry on the tradition. This is why some sports teams have no problems with keeping their sports names without any
Cultural stereotypes have always existed and while they may have been acceptable to society in the past, that does not compel us to accept them in today’s society. One such stereotype which is used is that of Native American names and imagery for sports teams and in particular The Washington Redskins of the National Football league. While for many people, this is an argument that has just recently arisen, in actuality, the debate over the use of native names and images has been an ongoing issue for over 50 years. The subject of the Washington Redskins name has been debated across politics, media, academia, religious backgrounds and in the public square for many years.
...ers' evolution from mother and student into a leading voice against the merchandising of Native American sacred symbols -- and shows the lengths to which fans will go to preserve their mascots." In keeping all the Native American Mascots in schools, colleges, and professional sports teams we are showing a lack of respect. The Native Americans have voiced the lack of honor these names are bringing to them. "The fact that history has ignored the incredible pain we have inflicted on Native Americans does not now give us the right to ignore their largely muted call." Americans need to take a step back think about how they would feel if there ritual and or sacred tradition was misused. "We feel that we are being put in a position of sacrificing our dignity and pride and will never be treated as equals in white society as long as the use of Indian symbols continues."
Logos in professional sports like the Cleveland Indians with the added features to the logo has caused a lot of conflict in the past and today. Most schools or franchises that have Native American mascots have tribal people who will stand up for the name and say that you can have them as long as they are not doing anything that people would find offensive to the culture of the Native Americans. A college in Mt. Pleasant, Michigan, Central Michigan University, has a native tribe name for their mascot, the Chippewas. However, the school does not have an offensive logo, doesn’t have anyone dressed up at sporting events, or for activities around campus.
The author Justin Angle says how in a study the mascots and names were shown to people unfamiliar with Native American culture and the sport teams, in the end of the study most of the participants viewed Native American’s as “war like”, which can carry negative consequences in the real world affecting the views of some future employers, creating a view that though Native American’s can be seen as strong and bold they can also have been perceived as violent and irrational. The uses of Redskins also create the belief that it is culturally appropriate for the constant use of Native American culture this has led to thousands of schools and sports teams to have questionable mascots and names. Such as the Savages from Salmon High school and the baseball team the “Indians” whose mascot was a hooked nose red skinned Indian with bucked teeth. Comparing this to the now frowned upon depiction of African American as black red lipped stereotyped popular in the 1920s advertisements does it not show similarities in a cultures becoming a caricature. While one is view as racist the other is view and honorable due to it representing one of the greatest passtimes in America,
Teams use Native American mascots in all sports, to represent their team’s pride, strength, and will to win. The role the mascot plays is an intimidation factor, as well as something to motivate the team. Mascots rarely fall under scrutiny, except for the mascots that represent Native American tribes, people or cultures. Many schools and teams use some sort of Native American reference as a mascot. Examples of Native American mascot range from names like the Indians, Chiefs, and Braves, which are some of the more generic ones, to Seminoles, Fighting Illini, and Chippewas to name some of the tribal based names.
the author tries to convince his audience that the use of Indian names and mascots is wrong. He argues that most of the problems that come with the usage of Indian names are that the team name has been around for so long that it loses its meaning. Shakely also states that the use of Indian or Native American names in sports should be done away with just like all of the other ethnic names in sports that have been thrown out. On the other hand, in the article “What’s in a (Team) Name” written by John J. Miller (2001), the author talks about why using Indian names gives great significance to the meaning. The author makes the point that a team doesn’t name itself after a particular Indian tribe to dishonor them. In fact, he says they do it
Many of the most controversial mascots in history have been caricatures of indigenous peoples. One of the most famous is “the Chicago Redskins,” with a picture of a Native American on its flag. There has been an on-going campaign to change the name by fans of the NFL, which have been dismissed by the owner, Dan Snyder, and the NFL alike. Despite the mascot being portrayed in a positive light, it is still representing a stereotype and encouraging racism. Chicago sports teams seem to admire the fighting spirit of the Native Americans, hockey fans cheer on “the Chicago Blackhawks.” Again the mascot is an Indian, fully dressed with feathers and face paint. While many people are offended by the use of a particular race of people being used as a mascot, The Executive Vice President of the Blackhawks tribe doesn’t seem to mind, calling the team’s logo “respectful and proud.” The Florida State University “Seminoles” managed to escape a name change due to outrage over a new rule by the NCAA, banning the use of American Indians as mascots. The Florida Seminole Tribe endor...
Lets go back in time to cheer a sports teams with crazy Indian chants, even if its totally unnecessary. After all, with ridiculous and offensive cartoon logos like Cleveland's “Chief Wahoo” how could we not. American have and still use team names that highlight ethnicity. Richard Estrada, in 1995, wrote a syndicated column for the Dallas Morning News titled “Sticks and Stones and Sports Team Names”, in it he argues that using names like the Redskins is wrong. I agree with Estrada, Using an ethnic group to represent a sports team is wrong.
European colonists offered compensation for the scalps of Native American men, women, and children: “50 pounds for adult male scalps; 25 for adult female scalps; and 20 for scalps of boys and girls under age 12” (Holmes, par.3). The “redskins” mascot glorifies this horrific time period in Native American history. Philip Martin states “[p]aying money for scalps of women and even children reflected the true intent of the campaign-to reduce native populations to extinction…so the native could not oppose European seizure of Indian lands” (par. 7). Hereafter, the genocide of Native American people is the direct result of the colonist operation of buying “redskins.” Therefore the name “redskin” is a constant reminder of the scalping of Native American ancestors. Fortunately Native American people survived the genocide but the societal approval of this mascot negatively acknowledges the historical trauma Native American people deal with
The next reason we’ll be looking at are the stereotypical images commonly seen in literature and mascots. Mainstream media such as “Dances with Wolves”, “The Lone Ranger”, and “The Last of The Mohicans” and mascots in professional sports teams like Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Chicago Blackhawks all include representations of Native Americans that for some, are offensive. With this in mind, ...
“It is a way of using another culture in a way that delights our imagination, while stripping that group of their identity.” This is how Author Lenore Keeshig-Tobias defines appropriation. Stripping the Native community of their identity is exactly what the use of these mascots is doing. The use of Native American mascots is racist, dehumanizing, degrading, and people “supporting” their teams has made it become dangerous for Native people.