It is my personal opinion that it is appropriate for teams to continue to use the original name of their mascot even if it appropriates another culture. Snyder emphasizes the fact that people take the mascot beyond its means and blow it out of proportion. Snyder himself writes, “…understand that it means...honor, it means respect, it means pride. And it’s that simple” (Wulf). The essence of Snyder’s argument is that many people are offended by the names of mascots yet they fail to understand the meaning of that mascot. I agree with Snyder’s argument, a point that needs emphasizing since so many people believe that mascots were created to be offensive. In a different source, Broecker questions why Native Americans don’t look up to the names …show more content…
After all, many believe that “It confuses my race with a brand name” (Anderson). Anderson’s matter is important because it proves that with any positive connotation, there comes a negative. He acknowledges that mascots were created as racial stereotypes. Anderson himself writes, “Instead of Snyder suggesting the “Indians” have bigger problems than the name of his team, I challenge him to focus on winning, not just football games but also an opportunity for me to simply sit with my grandchildren to watch my former team without having to cut through racial stereotypes” (Anderson). Anderson contradicts himself here because he can’t have it both ways. On one hand, he argues that mascots were created as stereotypes. But on the other hand, he argues that it interferes with the game. Although stereotypes may seem trivial, it is in fact crucial in today’s concern over naming mascots and racial profiling. Broecker concludes that, “Society is fraught with division. There are more important issues for us to tackle” (Broecker). Ultimately what is at stake here is that in this case indeed it is racial profiling, I still maintain that it is blown out of proportion because mascots are supposed to be an entertainment and asset to the team, not portrayed as a negative racial
In the article Hispanic Team Changes Small Town Attitudes, by William L. Holmes, many things stood out to me. First of all, I think the race of the players can matter, especially in this era we’re in. Some races, such as Hispanics, tend to have a bad reputation, in the article it referred to the people in the stands calling them stupid, and mocking Spanish accents, just because they were Hispanic. I think the race can matter a lot, especially if you live in an area, that’s predominately another race. This can cause many problems in a community, if not addressed right away.
The Fighting Sioux Name Change The University of North Dakota, found themselves in a battle against the Standing Rock and Spirit Tribes a few years back. The Standing Rock and Spirit Tribes found the term “Fighting Sioux” and the Indian head logo disrespectful and, in fact; racist toward their heritage. After Brittany Bergstrom, the author of The Fighting Sioux: The End of a Legacy? spoke with some of the students from University of North Dakota she starts to notice that changing the name is just as offensive to them as the name itself is to the Standing Rock and Spirit Tribes. “When the ‘Fighting Sioux’ lawsuit came about, I had really never thought one way or the other about the name… I became very defensive over the name.
The author uses a personal anecdote to begin his argument: he “bought the Cleveland cap with the famous Chief Wahoo Logo on it” (520), which betrayed his Creek mother’s faith; as a result, his mother jerked the cap off his head and “threw it in the trash” (520), which left an indelible impression on him. Shakely’s personal experience is efficient to draw a vivid picture about “Indian Mascot” abuse for audiences. Based on his experience, he believes that possessing dignity and respect is the right to everybody, and it doesn’t apply to majority rules. Therefore, Shakely claims that college and professional teams should abandon Native American names and mascots because it is racial
What’s that sound? It’s the sound of the crowd chanting, Hold your horses, the elephants are coming! In the beautiful town of Chicago, Illinois there is a brand new mascot hall of fame. This place inducts the best mascots from all sports that had a major impact in their sport, community, a memorable or groundbreaking performance, and a fun and unique costume. Even though some argue that Big Al the Elephant isn’t the best mascot and isn’t worthy of the hall of fame, we think that he has hit every category to be inducted because he is designed by Disney.
These mascots are disrespectful to the natives and pressure people to create stereotypes for the cultures. However, people think that the mascots are a way to honor the indigenous people and other cultures. We shouldn’t use mascots to honor the different cultures instead we should honor them in a way that’s not mocking them. Works Cited Ipatenco, Sara. “Pros and Cons of Indian Mascots.”
Not only is what they 're doing offensive it’s also disrespecting to the history of Native Americans. They have been suppressed for years and now with the Washington Football team name it causes the Native American people to be upset EVIDENCE: Racism and racial discrimination are attitudes and behavior that are learned and threaten human development. Which means that people should be taking proactive steps to prevent intolerant or racist acts. Indian mascots, symbols, images, and personalities establish an unwelcome hostile learning environment for American Indian Students.
“Schools use these as ways to honor them for being brave and to look at them as a leader,” (“Native American mascot controversy”). This is a good idea, but students don’t think any students think this is the reason for the name. If the school really had this idea in mind they would do more to dignify it. But from what I’ve experienced it is that schools don’t really honor other teams' mascots. They have posters and chants going against the opponents mascot in a disrespectful way.
Recently, the use of controversial words has become a heavily debated topic and has gained international attention 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 McWhortor, was published around the time the use of the word Redskin was being debated. In the article, McWhortor aims to clarify the condemnation of the word Redskin, by suggesting that 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, especially the actions taken by Californian schools
This article was posted by Fred Brown and he argues about if calling Washington’s National Football League team is problematic. Nonetheless, the poll results show that it is not. He also discusses that although the Native Americans are not insulated, other people should endorse this controversy. As it was stated on this article, the Washington Post last week published the outcome of a survey of 504 Native Americans ( also called American Indians ) in regards to what is their reaction about the name of Washington’s National Football League team, the Redskins. Furthermore, Brown had written a column in 2005 and 2013 arguing that the team should consider changing their name, he also talked about the history of of the name, the redskins were
On September 26th 2014, Derek Jeter took his final swing at the most prestigious Yankees Stadium in front of thousands and millions of baseball fans and ended up winning his final home game. The crowd went ballistic over the RBI and chanted “Derek Jeter” while raising signs that read “Salute to the Captain”. At that very moment, people viewed Derek Jeter not for what race he fell under or for what kind of person he was or for the ladies he slept with, but the athlete who electrified the diamond every time he stepped on it. Roberta Newman wrote an article on (Branding Derek Jeter, Redefining Race) companies such as Movado and Avon on how they showcase Derek Jeter “as neither black nor white and so can relate to everyone” (Newman) as a turning
The Indian mascot was originally designed to render tribute to Native Americans, not as a racial symbol. In the past forty years, changing the name backfired, and citizens began taking offense to the name because they felt like the name represented the color of Native American’s skin. Nevertheless, many fans, including Native Americans, do not consider the name or the mascot to be degrading or racial. Fans of the Washington Redskins participated in a poll that reveals, “77 percent reject changing the name” while in another poll “71 percent of NFL fans did not find the Redskins name offensive” (Lingebach 2). Clearly, from the results of the two polls, many fans would be unhappy if the Redskins’ name were to be changed.
However, the underlying truth is that teams with names like these are meant to honor and represent the pride and strength these tribes have had throughout their history. "We Seminoles embrace the mascot... they honor us", says James Billie, the tribes chairman. When he claims this statement, he is referring to their mascots having more than the appearance of calling out a specific race but to recognize the ones who deserve the merit (source C). People who find this so offensive don 't realize that in reality we are all hypocritical.
The mascot of the Cleveland baseball team is a smiling Indian caricature. We see this Indian smiling,but in reality the are fighting for their homes. In Chicago there has been many shootings,gang violence,police cruelty and many lives lost to lack of
“Redskin” is an extremely derogatory term used to describe the reputed color of a Native American 's skin tone. Along with the simply disrespectful terminology, the phrase has a history of being used alongside bounty for the scalping of Native Americans, so it is without a doubt offensive to many people. Washington 's choice to continue using the word as a name for their popular sports team has been the cause of much controversy. Despite the pleas of millions of people, advocacy groups and even government officials to change the name, the sports team remains unchanged. Even the United States Patent and Trademark Office has refused the renewal of their name, logo and likeness, citing the combination as “disparaging to Native Americans" National public opinion polls have found that 60 to 83 percent of the general public supports the teams ' decision to continue using the name, yet only a small majority of fans think the term is offensive to Native
Couple teams that carry names that are very offensive to the natives are the Atlanta Braves, Chicago Blackhawks, Cleveland Indians, Kansas City Chiefs, and arguably the most popular of them all, the Washington Redskins. These teams carrying such names bring offense to all the native