There are many sports mascots today that are being accused of being offensive. Smithville is a school that is being questioned as being offensive. Smithville schools have had the mascot of a warrior for about half a century. However, now people are thinking that the use of a warrior as a school mascot is offensive to Native Americans.This is a recent problem that is just now being discussed. This wasn’t a problem when we came up with the name, so why is it a problem now? The Smithville Warriors should not have to change their name. Smithville is positive with using a warrior as their mascot. The quote “It’s a great day to be a warrior,” is said often throughout the school and is used as an encouragement for the students. The school is positive with the name, saying warriors are strong and brave and that everyone should want to be a warrior. The name is never used in a negative way. The problem that Smithville Warriors is offensive …show more content…
The school would have to repaint a lot of the school because of the warrior logos everywhere. The school has also spent a lot of money on products with the Smithville Warriors logo on it. That would all have to be thrown away and would have to all be purchased again with the new logo. The school would be forced to spend thousands of dollars on those things instead of new tools for the classrooms and new computers. The effects of changing the mascot of the Smithville Warriors are all things that would negatively affect the school and everyone involved with the school. It would affect students in school and ones who have graduated on losing the name they have always been. The school would also be forced to spend thousands of dollars on printing new logos. The school doesn’t and never has used the name in a negative way. The Smithville Warriors use their name in a positive way and should not have to change it. a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
We show pride in our sports team, right? We all love going to the Friday night games and cheering with the school mascot. Is using Indian mascots truly inappropriate or is it just showing honor? Using Native American images and names in professional, collegiate and high school sports team does not reinforce and perpetuate stereotypes because it is not harming them; these teams is merely showing gratification for their cultures.
The Washington Redskins should change their name because the name is coming down to the kids in school, the dictionary defines “Redskins” as offensive, and their name offends many Native Americans. Children in their adolescent ages are being affected, especially the children in the Modoc tribe. Adolescents that can comprehend what is going on are making fun of the children that they know in the Modoc tribe. In “The Huffington Post”, an online
Why does the opposition believe these mascots are offensive? Critics believe they show disrespect, and those people see the truly honorable names as racist or offensive to the Native American culture. Many who view names like “Redskins” as offensive also find these names, “inappropriate,” (Lewis and Tripathi). By saying this, Native Americans are trying to emphasize the point that they do not want their culture and race being viewed as just a mascot. Natives want to do bigger and better things with the honoring of their culture, and all people who believe the names are offensive, just simply want names removed.
And especially to be named after a fictitious suck-up white boy. “If you notice, I’m black. My whole family is black. So why would we want to be like a candy-coated *white* family? Why not some cool black family?
Sports team’s mascots have been known to have the most stereotypical features. These mascots are offensive towards Native Americans, because mascots have feathers, headdresses, and even braids and mohawks. Mascots in the past have made it look as if them and their teams have no respect or common decency for Native Americans. Some of the most offensive features of these mascots are the mascots having weird, and misshapened faces. For example the mascot for the Cleveland indians.
Reynolds constructs an interesting correlation of government intervention regarding culture in this matter to the same government intervention that Native Americans had to deal with for much of their history in the United States (659). In this particular portion of her article, she makes the argument that this is the exact same issue that Native Americans have fought against for so long, the government’s right to act and regulate issues of culture (659). Reynolds states, “More government is not the answer to a community concern” (659). Her argument clarifies that this a local issue and thus should be decided locally and not handled by the federal or state governments (659). She is worried that a negative message may be sent to students if schools do change their mascots.
The time is now. The roaring crowd settled, the stadium lights shined above us, the field was set. It was time to show the audience how much dedication, sweat, and tears were put in the show right before the eyes. The masterpiece, I like to call it. The hardest part however, is making it seem so effortlessly.
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
Well, a Native American tribes chairman named James Billie said, “We seminoles embrace the mascot, They honor us”(“Insult”). This means that this Indian group likes the mascot. Also, having a team named after Native Americans is supposed to be a positive thing, and it should also be a privilege. Why I say that is because not everyone can have a team named after them. They should be happy that they have a well know, or pro sports team name after them.
Over the past few years, the controversy over sports names or mascots has increasingly become an uproar. The main sports teams being targeted due to controversial mascots are programs having names that deal with Native Americans. Well known programs, such as, the Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, and the Washington Redskins are just a few of the many teams being targeted due to controversial team names and/or mascots. Currently, the Redskins are receiving the most heat from racial groups. However, professional sport teams are not the only teams receiving negative remarks; there are well known colleges that are also receiving huge blows for racial symbols.
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.
In our first year as a new team, we will have two mascots, King Clark and Queen Shea. In our first four years as an organization, we will release a new mascot every year. This will hopefully create excitement amongst the fans, to see who the new mascot will
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 reason think that we shouldn't wear uniforms is because KIDS DO NOT LIKE UNIFORMS. In this paragraph you will see why I think that schools should not have uniforms. And the reasons we shouldn't have them. Uniforms are distractive in many ways such as , uncomfortability and annoyance. Many kids and parents think that we should have uniforms but they don't help anything just there looks.
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