Is It Offencive For Sports Teams To Use Native American Names And Mascots?

The Pittsburgh steelers has a lot of history behind it, from the uniforms logo and even the name.The Steelers are owned by a man by the name of Art Rooney who bought the franchise in 1933 for 2 thousand 500 dollors. Since they were found in 1933 they are the 5th oldest franchise in the NFL.

As you can see this team and people related to this team went to hell and back cause they had a minority of white boys. They had to have courage from the very first game to the national championship game. From their own home games to the most hostile games in the deep south. They need all the courage they could muster, so that why you can see that was the best theme for this

Is using Native Americans as mascots for sports teams offensive? It does not matter if it is a high school or a college, sometimes even the NFL. Examples of sports teams that use Native Americans images are Washington Redskins, Florida State Seminoles, and a high school Cherokee Braves. It is not offending and there should not be any problem because it is not making fun of anybody. Using Native American images and names in professional, collegiate, and high schools sport teams does not reinforce and perpetuate stereotypes because it symbolizes their culture, shows that they are ready to play, and appreciates their coexistence.

Finally, there is a lot of racism towards the Indigenous Peoples tribes. First, the Ute article states that, “It is a complete lack of appreciation for cultural diversity.” This is saying that nobody appreciates that there are other cultures or ethnic groups within our society. Second, it is one thing to respect the tribe 's tradition, but to cover a white guys face with paint and ride an Appaloosa to the middle of the field is another. This is showing that at sports games, people try to replicate the tradition of the tribe, but they do not perform it with

From Eleazar Wheelock in 1769 to Philip J. Hanlon in 2018, Dartmouth administrators have always been under fire from the student body. Whether it was the quality of food back in the days of Dartmouth’s early founding, women demanding equal rights and fair treatment on campus in the 1980’s, or recent student protests dealing with the demise of old traditions, Dartmouth’s legacy has gone through a great deal to land where it is today. Among these “obstacles”, one of the most prominent, and problematic, was rooted in the school’s mascot. From 1860 to 1970, Dartmouth’s use of a cartoon “Indian” went on with little to no public aggravation or protest. However, in the 1970’s and 1980’s, people began to realize the mascot was inhuman, as it depicted

The subject matter of the film “Reel Injun” was an especially intriguing and surprising concept to me. The idea that an entire race of people could be so severely underrepresented in popular media is terrifying, and goes to show just how easy it is to cast an imprecise portrait of an unknown culture. What really fascinated me was the segment on Iron Eyes Cody. How could one of the most popular depictions of a Native American actually be a second generation Sicilian immigrant? What other lies have I been told about these people? Is this sort of inaccurate depiction still happening today with other cultures?

Mascots and team names are stereotypical or offensive. These are all teams that have stereotypes. If a team name, mascot, or insignia is offensive, then just change it; it is just a sports team. Even if a team changes it, it is not like every jock, or sports fan is not going to know theyour new name, mascot, or insignia. Using Native American images and names in professional, collegiate, and high school sports teams do reinforce and perpetuate stereotypes because the mascots and team names give stereotypical features.

We can 't forget our founders. As Lydia Huntley Sigourney sites in one of her poems "Indian Names", "how can the red men be forgotten, while so many of our states and territories, bays, lakes, and rivers, are indelibly stamped by names of their giving?” That is a perfect example of how not only sports teams use representable names of such but also our land and different dominions are named after Native Americans. Nudging out sports teams in such way isn 't fair when it 's being used for other entities, and pulls out the irony from

Native American themed mascots such as Braves and Warriors should not be used due to the misrepresentation they give of Indians. There are many sports teams and schools that use Native American themed mascots. The use of these Native American mascots have created a lot of controversy among people. One side of the argument centers around the idea that Native American mascots are misrepresented and stereotypical. The other side talks about how Native American themed mascots are used to honor Native Americans. Native American mascots though are a misrepresentation of the Native American people. As stated in the article “Native American-Themed Sports Mascots are Racist and Reinforce Negative Stereotypes” former APA President Ronald F. Levant states that “These mascots are teaching stereotypical, misleading, and too often, insulting images of American Indians.” Teams such as the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, and different schools across are depicting the

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. Also, if any professional sport teams were forced to change their names, it would have a huge negative impact on commercial products. Lingebach addresses in his article how “in another sign of support, the majority of Washington, DC fans would not purchase new team merchandise if the Redskins changed their name” (qtd. in Lingebach 2). If Native Americans and most of the National Football League fans infer that the name is not derogatory, the Redskins should not have to change their name. The Kansas City Chiefs have been lucky enough not to face the same issues as the Washington

Proud To Be (Mascots),” produced by the National Congress of American Indians, convinces the audience of the importance and necessity of changing the mascot of the Washington Redskins to something not offensive or racist towards Native Americans or any other group. Throughout the video, rhetoric provides levels of techniques in language and imagery in order to persuade the audience. The intended audience, mainstream American football fans, and their relationship with the speaker establish what group of people the ad needs to convince for the mascot to change. The video’s use of ethos, pathos, and logos through one word descriptions and images serve as the most effective visual rhetoric to the argument. Music, diction, imagery, suspense, and

The United States of America is a land of freedom, a land of equality, and opportunity. We value independence and should look to exercise this in every form, as a nation. We must stay united and show respect to one another. This means we should not disregard ones ' ethnicity and culture, and use names in which are offensive towards their culture, in order to promote any sort of activity. This is aimed mainly at sports teams that carry racially inappropriate names. 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

The Washington D.C football team has started a controversy with many people that are from the American Indian background. The “indian” sports mascot, logos, or symbols show an image of the Native American people that is not true.

Ellie Reynolds advances a rhetorically effective argument on why government should not have regulatory control over offensive Native American mascots in schools across the country. She believes this control is more of a detriment to society than a service. Her article published on the DenverPost.com, “Native Americans Have Become a Political Pawn,” offers a compelling point of view on this controversial issue because Reynolds is a member of the Oglala Sioux tribe herself (Reynolds 659). Along with her strong view against government involvement on this issue, which she considers censorship by political correctness, Reynolds uses her personal experience, historical context, and the negative effects of political correctness to convey her effective

Have you ever been offended by a name that someone has called you? More likely than not, the answer to this question is yes. This is the stand that some Indian tribes and the government are taking on the use of Indian names and mascots in sports. This controversial topic has been discussed and argued over for at least the last decade, if not longer. People are starting to wonder if using these kinds of names are appropriate or offensive to the tribe the team is named after. The debate raises this question: should Indian names and mascots be allowed in sports?