Goodbye To Racial Mascots Research Paper

It can also be said that the discourse of honor resulted in misunderstood or misidentified Native Americans speaking out on behalf of the mascots. Many of those who spoke out in favor of the mascots were found to be “self-proclaimed” Native Americans. These people were maybe one-sixteenth Native American or confusedly said to be related to a Native American chief or princess. The article by Pauline Strong supports this idea stating “given this pattern of socialization, many non-Indians come to feel deeply invested in Indian mascots... Such an emotional investment is a form of White privilege akin to that analyzed more generally by George Lipsitz (1998).

Are team mascots using stereotypes? What about the team names? And their logos? Mascots and team names are stereotypical or offensive.

Racism and inequality negatively affects our games because it takes the fun out of the games. Ideally games are meant to be entertainment and recreation for all people to enjoy. But once complex social issues are added into the mix, it removes the enjoyment of the game. The game itself does not induce racism. The people that participate in the playing, organization, and implementation of sports bring racism into sports.

a. What happened? Sarah Adams-Cornell and Jacqueline Holder, Chair Person of Parental Invovolment of Oklahoma City Schools, addressed McLoud to change their mascot name due to the negative effect it might have on their Native American Students. Mcloud acknowledged the issue and after seeing support from the local community and a local native american tribe, it was decided that would keep the name the Redskins. b. What was the ruling/decesion?

History of the term “Majors” and the Mascot The sideline mascot was created by the Spirit Committee of the SBA in the spring of 1985 when they began requesting mascot uniform designs. It first appeared on the field in the fall of 1985. There are two articles in the Purple and White documenting this. See Mar. 26, 1985, page 6 Here and Sept. 10, 1985 page 1 and 5. Prior to this time, the only visual representation of the athletic teams for Millsaps were the words “Majors,” which first appeared in the early 1900’s, the military “leaf,” which is the insignia for a major in the military, was used on jerseys and helmets, and the graphic seal of the college with the encircled line drawing of the college founder Major Millsaps’ head and shoulders.

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

The author talks about how Indian mascots and logos perpetuate racism in schools. This relates to the Big Picture Question as those Indian logos and mascots put a stereotype on the people that go to that school. They may be called names that are specifically called to natives only. This all would go towards racism being implemented towards those kids and them being treated as different. I would answer the question the same way that the author did.

The author Tex G. Hall is explaining Native American team sports mascots are racist. He is testifying for many other people as well. He makes a very sensible are you and uses the motion and great facts facts. The way his argument is structured is very engaging. He first off thanks many people for bringing this controversy to everyone 's attention.

In 1947 the Cleveland Indians introduced the Chief Wahoo logo for their uniforms. In the beginning of the logos days, it was seen as very offensive due to its yellow face and large nose. Many Native Americans were upset with the baseball teams decision to create such a disrespectful logo to represent the Cleveland Indians. Eventually the organization realized its fault and recreated the Chief Wahoo logo. They made the nose smaller and revealed the red faced caricature we have today.

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.

Teams at any level of competition, in every sport, have a mascot. The mascot is essentially what represents the competitive spirt and identifies the team, motivating both fans, coaches, and players. Although, the symbol chosen as a mascot does not have an impact on number of wins nor loses. The choice of a Native American mascot continues to initiate debate and controversy among fans, alumni, and athletes today. More specifically, the debate over the controversy surround the Washington Redskin football team.

Is it offencive for sport teams to use Native American names and mascots? Is it really that bad to have a Native American name for a sports teams? Do you think that it is racist? Having a team with a Native American name is not a bad thing. If you have a teams named after specific Nationality group, like the Indians, then that would be splendid because the Indians were feared people, it’s an honor for the Indians, and it would help the Americans remember the Native Americans.