Over 80 high schools in the United States once used or currently use the Redskin mascot. 56 currently use the mascot for their schools in California and four high schools bears the Redskin name. Students, alumni, community members and staff all carry the Redskin name with honor and dignity there's no “misappropriation” of the mascot, from small communities to large districts. Even though some Native Americans find the Redskin name offensive, schools should keep the Redskin mascot because the students, staff, and community members take pride in their mascot and removing it with AB 30, violates First Amendment rights and does nothing to prove the lives of Native Americans. Regardless, a mascot is any person, animal, or object thought to bring …show more content…
luck, or anything used to represent a group with a common public identity, such as a school, professional sports team, society, military unit, or brand name. Many argue that they constitute offensive exploitations of an oppressed culture. In Nikki Ewald’s perspective, a Native American should not be used as a mascot. The mascot reminds those Native Americans of their bloody and brutal past. The basis of Ewald’s argument is that Native American culture is affected by the fans who ridicule it and that people should be educated on what a “Redskin” really means (Ewald). According to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary, “redskin” is defined a contemptuous term used to refer to a North American Indian and labeled “usually offensive.” In the article written by Ewald, she explains how the fans of the teams and schools that use the “derogatory” mascot, support negative stereotypes without even knowing it. The Native Americans have struggled and been discriminated against for centuries since the colonization of America. For that reason, Native Americans, or any people for that matter should not be mocked or paraded around for others amusement. If the name offends at least one individual, it should be removed because the name is found to be offensive. In contrast, even though some Native Americans find the Redskin name offensive, schools should keep the Redskin mascot because students, staff, and community members take pride in their mascot. Not all Native Americans find the mascot offending. Several Native American tribes have actually come out in support of keeping the names. The Redskin mascot is a symbol of honor and removing it violates First Amendment rights and does nothing to improve the lives of Native Americans. James Seyler, 46, from Wellpinit high school’s class of 1986, works for the tribe’s historic-preservation program in his hometown of Wellpinit,Washington. He remembers his basketball days. When playing at other schools, Wellpinit players were called derogatory names. However, Seyler wants to keep the mascot name. “We shouldn’t change it because everybody in politics wants us to change the name,” he said. “We’ve been here for thousands for years. It’s people who weren’t raised here who are bothered by it (Lactis).” Surely, the Redskin name is found to be offensive, but mostly by individuals who are not a part of the Native American community. Recently, Assemblyman Alejo, District 30, proposed a bill that would abolish the use of the Redskin moniker from schools in California by January 1, 2017. These schools are: Gustine High School, Calaveras High School, Tulare Union High School and Chowchilla Union High School. None of these schools fall under District lines represented by Assemblyman Alejo. In the Merced Sun Star, Mr. Ron Seals, Chowchilla Union High School District Superintendent feels that a decision like that should be made at the local level. He said school officials won’t have any discussions about a possible new nickname if and when a law is passed. “I’m not traveling to Watsonville and calling the legislator a Redskin,” Seals said. “I’m not sitting in my district and telling him what he should do. So for him to sit in his district and tell me what to do in mine doesn’t sit well with me (Jansen).” Assemblyman Alejo is not Native American, and the majority of people who find the Redskin moniker offensive are predominately Caucasian. Yet nonetheless, pride, honor and respect are just a few words explained by Linell Hoffmann in her “Valley Voices” article.
In her article, Hoffman explained how there was never a time that her and her community thought of their “Reddy Redskin” and a derogatory slur. In Hoffmann’s community, Chowchilla, the town derived from the tribe of the Chaushila Yokut Indian tribe, meaning bravery. She owes a large part of who she is to her heritage of being a Chowchilla Redskin. Local school district Superintendent explains “We don’t call those offended by the term Redskins, Redskins. We call ourselves Redskins. We use the term as a sense of pride, respect and honor. We don’t use it in a derogatory way (Hoffmann).” In small communities, like Chowchilla, with generations of Redskin alumni, the Redskin name change is widely opposed and makes it an even more sentimental topic. The pride these High Schools have for their Redskin mascot isn’t “Warpaint and racial slurs” it’s pride and honor for the Native American tribes that once walked and ruled the …show more content…
lands. More importantly, Eben Novy-Williams states that there is “roughly 2,000 schools that have logos or mascots [that pertain to the Native American culture and] to tribal communities.” In her article, Novy-Williams predicts that the cost of changing the mascot for schools could cost at least $30,000 (Novy-Williams). Shawn Jansen informs the public in a Merced Sun Star article that estimated costs for schools in California are roughly anywhere from $55,000 to $110,000 to make a complete transition from the Redskin mascot to something that doesn’t stir up such a debate (Jansen). The NFL Redskin team’s transition would cost millions and millions of dollars. The financial cost of the Redskin name change would be extremely high and smaller schools and school districts could not pay for these extreme changes. Gustine Unified Superintendent Bill Morones says that will be costly. During Monday night's study session on the bill, the district's counsel in Gustine said it's not clear how much money will be reimbursed by the state. That was an unsettling prospect for most in the room. State governments that opt to pay for the change are funding these schools in order to make a complete transition, money that could be spent elsewhere, like new textbooks in the classrooms or even to better learning strategies in the school classroom. That is $30,000 to $110,000 that could easily be utilized in classroom settings, to benefit low income families, beautifying the town or even state problems like the drought, as stated by Linell Hoffman. But, let's get something clear, only some of the money that would be used to transition from the Redskin mascot is paid from the state government (Johnson). Meaning that most schools would need to raise money themselves to pay for this extremely expensive change to the school’s heritage. That is so much money that these schools need in order to spend on a change of their mascot, the same schools where a majority of the school’s population is a part of the Free and Reduced Lunch Program. The costly measure may be a little more costly than the state government knows. Particularly, Chowchilla Union High School District Superintendent, Mr. Ron Seals has made it very clear that the decision to change the Redskins mascot, should be a local one. Making a blanket decision across the state of California to abolish the Redskin moniker in High Schools does violate First Amendment rights. In both Chowchilla, California and Wellpinit, Washington, local Native Americans have come out to support the High Schools’ Redskin mascot because they honor the ancestors of the Native Americans. The school board and community should have the say whether they believe they should change the mascot, not state governments. After the name is changed, then what? The Native American’s live don’t change, they continue on while the high school's dish out thousands and thousands of dollars to change the name. The name change divides generations of alums. Not only will the school have to transition to the school’s identity being rearranged, but so will the communities that have barred these Redskins mascots for almost 100 years and even over 100 years for some (Jansen). In fact, ABC30 news in Fresno, California puts the Redskin debate on the front burner.
“Nobody came to our town, asked us if anyone was being offended or upset by this," said the mother and Gustine alumni Sherri Marsigli. Marsigli calls AB 30 ambiguous and flawed and believes it will affect more schools in the future. She also thinks it will negatively impact current Gustine students. "Warriors, Braves, Chiefs, they're going to go after everybody and it's absolutely ludicrous," Marsigli said. "I don't want to lose our mascot, it's a part of me," said Gustine cheerleader Nicole Cunha. "We're going to be graduating as Redskins, and after this, there's no more if we lose it. It's not going to be the same." They say the name represents pride, not racism. "We always say redskin pride, together we come together as one tribe," said Gustine student Sebastian Figueroa (Johnson). Students, staff and community members exemplify unity and respect the moniker that is found offensive. There wasn't a time where Governor Jerry Brown or Assemblyman Luis Alejo, or any government official for that matter, ever came to visit any of these schools and asked students, employees, and community members about how the name is represented in these towns
(Johnson). Lastly, Redskin pride is real and present in these students, no state government could ever rip that away from students. The pride, respect and honor that these entire communities have are valuable The Redskin name is found to be offensive, but mostly by individuals who are not a part of the Native American community. The Redskins moniker being ripped away from schools rips the identity of thousands. The financial costs could be very expensive and that money could be spent on other problem areas either within the school, or even problems within the state. Only some Native Americans find the Redskin name offensive. The Native Americans that reside in the area where the Redskin moniker used, supports the students and school Redskin Pride. Schools should keep the Redskin mascot because the students, staff, and community members take pride in their mascot and removing it with AB 30, violates First Amendment rights and does nothing to prove the lives of Native Americans or other individuals who find the name offensive.
In a generation focused on social justice and the elimination of prejudice from our society, there is still a use of offensive language and terminology in the area of professional sports. In “The Indian Wars” by S. L. Price, Price attempts to make the reader aware of sports teams that use derogatory terms as their team name and their mascot. He does this by highlighting football, and trying to determine whether Native-Americans are offended by team names in sports, or more specifically, the Redskins. Price’s essay is ineffective because although he raises good points, he doesn’t help the reader to form an opinion by adding historical context to the derogatory names used. He also uses inaccurate poll results to make assumptions about the feelings
In the past few years, the controversy over Native American and other racial sport names or mascots have become an uproar. The main sport teams that are being targeted due to controversial mascots are programs having names dealing with Native Americans. Many teams are well known programs such as the Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, and the Washington Redskins. The Redskins are receiving the most heat from racial groups. According to Erik Brady of USA Today “The volatility surrounding such names has amped up in the year since Daniel Snyder, owner of Washington's NFL club, told USA TODAY Sports that he'd never change his team's name: ‘NEVER — you can use caps.’” (3). However, professional teams are not the only teams receiving negative remarks,
The name redskin is an offensive term used to refer to Native Americans, and it comes from native people being killed with their scalps cut off. These notions offend people in many different ways depending on how you see it. However, the Redskins are not named after the offensive term that many think. The Redskins before they were called the Redskins were the Boston Braves. They then changed their name to the Redskins to honor their coach William “Lone Star” Dietz who was a Sioux Indian and other Native Americans that were on the team. They also wanted to avoid conflict with having the same name as the baseball team. Also, a survey of over 500 Native Americans from the Annenberg Public Policy Center said that 9 out of 10 Native Americans would not be offended if a non Native American team called themselves the Redskins and a surprising 8 out of 10 would not mind if they were called a Redskin. Also, even Mark Rypien said the Redskins name shouldn’t change by stating, “I can see the viewpoints of both sides … it takes away the history of the team.” Mark Rypien is a former Redskins quarterback who is a descendant from Native Americans. These are the type of people they need to start asking because they would have the most knowledge if the team name is disgracing their ancestors and obviously it is
The debate is divided into two sides. Those opposed to the use of Redskins and all Native American names in sports, and perceive the use of such terms and imagery as racist and derogatory towards Native Americans and those for keeping the name who cite the history of the team, its links to Native American players and coaches who were part of the team when it was create...
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.
...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."
Issue of whether to keep Mascots in schools or not, started in late 1970’s and from then this debate is going on. Most of the schools have Indian Mascots in place for half a century and suddenly it become problem to use Indian Mascots. Over 500 Native American organizations also announced their support for the removal of those mascots and over 1200 schools across the United States have changed the name of their sports teams and some school refused to play with those schools using Indian mascots. But some school still think that using mascots are just paying homage to the Native peoples and it’s just another group claiming to be offended. Sports teams used those mascots to promote their team’s athletic powers, like wolf, lion and eagle etc. How portrait of an Indain wearing hat with feather or headdress can be offensive or racist? One thing which never be done up to now that is to view our history from Native eyes. First of all, learn about their culture and their living style from their new perspective not the one which is given in our history books. From last hundred years we taught our generations that this is our country and we had a very long war with Indians which won. We also tell different kind of stories like burning of Fort Pequot Indians because they had trade relationship with British company. Can stories like this possibly be related to mascot issue? Using mascots are really a problem or just a political incorrectness.
Fighting the use of the word ‘redskins’” by Brian Cladoosby says how “[s]tudies show the use of American Indian-based names, mascots and logos in sports has a negative psychological effect on Native peoples” Cladoosby places a link to Dr. Michael A. Friedman research report which backs his case. In his study Dr. Friedman, a clinical psychologist says how Redskins is “uniquely destructive” because it “perpetuates the stereotypical and outdated caricature” and “promotes and justifies the use of a dictionary-defined racial slur, thus increasing risk for discriminatory”. With the rate of Native American suicide one of the highest in the nation the addition of their culture and history being stereotyped young Natives are facing discrimination and then being told that it’s okay because it’s for a sport. Cladoosby adds how that it creates a challenge to Natives who want to “maintain a foundation in their culture and language” meaning that ignoring a name that was once used when hunting their ancestors means that they are ignoring their culture. The name is not just racist and derogatory but promotes the an old-fashioned and stereotypical view of Native
Recently, the use of controversial words has become a heavily debated topic, as seemingly truthful statements to some, cause insult to others. The Times article "Why 'Redskins' Is a Bad Word", by acclaimed linguist and professor John McWhorter, was published in 2015, around when the use of the word "Redskins" was being debated in Californian public schools through Bill AB-30 (2015). In the article, McWhorter aims to clarify the condemnation of the word "Redskins" (McWhorter,2015, para. 1), by suggesting the offence does not stem from the literal definition of such words, but instead the negative and often derogatory connotations the words have. McWhorter begins by introducing the recent discussions surrounding the use of the word "Redskins" (McWhorter,2015, para. 1). He informs readers of the emotions attached to controversial words in the examples and describes how words continue to evolve as time goes on. Alongside his reputation as a credible person, a quote from a distinguished professor, and anecdotal story, McWhorter provokes an emotional connection with the readers
Putting Indians on a helmet shows how America “owns” them. “Not only do Indians have to deal with the fallout of being ‘conquered’ people...the shame of being men who descended from those unable to protect our women...the shame of being women who descended from those raped and tortured…” but they also have to deal with being reminded of the events that happened in the past. Constantly being reminded of these events is disrespectful and torture. In the past, the Indians were helpless against the pilgrims and were unable to do anything to protect their people. Since the name of the mascot is broadcasted visually, Redskins just reminds them that they were owned and still remain to be. Just like corporate America copyrighting their inventions, in Dan Snyder’s position in his letter to the Washington Redskins fans, he continues to want to “own” the name Redskins. Snyder’s action of keeping the team name shows his power of “sustain[ing] long term success if this franchise.” American Indians are being disrespected in this manner by being seen as a franchise instead of a group of people. Especially since such a big issue like this is just for a sports game, it is demeaning for American Indian’s
Aside from professional sports teams having offensive names, high school and college teams also have offensive names. In Greenly, Colorado at the University of Northern Colorado, their mascot is the Fightin’ Reds. Of course, this name sounds very racists, depicting Native Americans in a very harsh manner. Students on the basketball team renamed their team, The Fightin’ Whites. They were trying to depict the 1950’s style of the average American male. Their slogan for their team is “Every thang’s going to be all white.” By making this new mascot and new slogan, the basketball team was trying to get their city council to talk about the insensitive team mascots that their school, along with thousands of other schools have. In Eaton, Colorado the people who live there are amazed by all the madness that is going on about the school’s mascot. They are perfectly happy with the mascot, and to them it seems like it would be breaking tradition if someone were to change their mascot. Even though there are many people who hate the school’s mascot and vote for it to be changed, there are also some people who love it and do not want to be changed. Some people think it is a honor for a school’s mascot to be named after their culture. But the number of people for the mascots do not even compare to the number of people opposed to the mascots. (Cart, A12)
Sports organizations that have ethnic team names and mascots have been a controversial hot topic for decades. Professional sports franchises like the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Washington Redskins have maintained significant presence and fan base in their respective leagues, but disputes over the perceived racial offensiveness of their names has surrounded them. Some Native American activist groups and political figures think ethnic team names and mascots are disrespectful to their culture and defame the historical legacy of their ancestors. They view the name “Redskins” as a racial slur, and the cartoonish-looking Chief Wahoo mascot for the Cleveland Indians as mockery rather than flattery. Despite the fact that sports franchises know their brand is offending ethnic groups, they have refused to change their team names. Native Americans have experienced psychological distress, lower self-esteem, and a lower sense of achievement because of the offensive and stereotypical names/logos of these teams ("Washington Redskins: Do Offensive Team Names Endanger Public Health?"). This begs the question, should sports teams with potentially offensive names and mascots be required to change their identities in order to be more racially sensitive and politically correct?
Many races are unjustly victimized, but Native American cultures are more misunderstood and degraded than any other race. College and high school mascots sometimes depict images of Native Americans and have names loosely based on Native American descent, but these are often not based on actual Native American history, so instead of honoring Native Americans, they are being ridiculed. According to the article Warriors Survive Attack, by Cathy Murillo (2009) some “members of the Carpentaria community defended Native American mascot icons as honoring Chumash tradition and the spirit of American Indian Warriors in U.S. history and others claimed that the images were racist stereotypes” (Murillo, 2009). If people do not attempt to understand and respect Native American culture, then Native American stereotypes will become irreparable, discrimination will remain unresolved, and ethnocentrism will not be reprimanded.
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, ...
A uniform is a standard set of clothes that is worn by a group of people. These people may be members of an organization or a group of people having the same ideas. There are thousands of kinds of uniforms in the world worn by people, such as police officers, firefighters, doctors, lawyers, security guards, and even fast-food restaurant workers. School uniforms are a controversial issue in schools today. Many schools have already adopted a policy mandating school uniforms, while many more are still considering the change. School uniforms create an atmosphere of equality in which the students are able to achieve to their best, while attaining the most out of their education. School uniforms should be mandatory to unite the school community as one, to instil discipline among the student body, and to eliminate distractions that will help students focus more, which in turn will help our society.