I am so, so glad to see that Lebanon's racist mascot is finally becoming an issue. I've been waiting at least five years for this to happen.
For why I am of this opinion, see this PDF file from the American Psychological Association:
“The use of American Indian mascots as symbols in school and university athletic programs in particularly troubling,” says APA President, Ronald F. Levant, EdD. “Schools and universities are places of learning. These mascots are teaching stereotypical, misleading and, too often, insulting images of American Indians. And these negative lessons are not just affecting American Indian students; they are sending the wrong message to all students.”
h/t Stoller.
7 comments:
Racist is a bit much don't you think. I don't think having the mascot was meant to be racist. Yes it needs to be changed but, I don't think the lebanon mascot was intended to be racist. That is a harsh word and reflects a lot of people.
I used the word on purpose. Given the context - that the mascot and name first showed up in the late 1910s or early 1920s - I believe its conception came from a racist framework - especially considering there's not been any kind of acknowledgment of where the mascot came from or why it was used, etc.
Further, as the APA link notes, the use of Native American mascots teaches mistaken stereotypes and beliefs and does so in a way that has been racialized and assigns values to all members of a group based on a perceived (but not real) group identity. That's practically the definition of racism.
In fact, claiming that warriors are "honorable" and "brave" is part and parcel of that process - just because the stereotypes and mistaken beliefs are positive doesn't make them OK.
One more thing: At the very least, I would think it's common sense to acquiesce to a request to not use mascots from different ethnic groups if said groups request that you don't. Even if you don't think racism is an issue, in our society, it can be considered an issue of control over one's image as a group, which is certainly a common practice.
Heh. A certain dark-haired Express writer posted those links on her myspace blog, and I HAD to spend an hour writing a dissenting response. I'll copy it in below, thought none of it will be new to you, or any other readers, surely.
I'm going to be the dissenting voice here. I have a feeling I'm going to be long-winded.
The idea of "warrior" is not as obviously offensive as some of the more outstanding mascot titles (obviously "redskins" is in this category). Many people will (and have) argued that it should be looked at as a compliment - how could it possibly be offensive? But you know what? We (non-Native Americans) don't get to decide what is offensive and what isn't. The only people who can say what offends them is THEM.
Say a man walks up beside a woman on the sidewalk and says "Your ass looks great in those jeans." or "Nice tits." Surely, the man means this as a compliment, right? I don't know many (emotionally stable) women who would see comments like that as a compliment. Most would be offended, right? And quite possibly uncomfortable and frightened.
Another part of this argument is usually a question about WHAT is offensive about "warrior" or "redskin" or "braves." Or the excuse that Northern Europeans don't get all up in arms about mascots like the "vikings." I'm neither a Native American OR a Northern European, so I can't answer that question for them. But my history classes have given me some clues.
To suggest that Native Americans and Northern Europeans should have the same opinion on this subject seems ridiculous. Do they share a similar background? Do the two groups share a common perspective?
I don't recall Northern Europeans being forcefully removed from their own land. I don't recall a Scandinavian genocide where millions were slaughtered by an opposing national army.
Northern Europeans have not faced the tribulations of overwhelming displacement, racism, alcoholism, and poverty. I teach at a drug and alcohol treatment center for women. Though Native Americans represent less than 1% of the population, 12% of our program's population identify themselves as Native American. This is no anomaly.
Native Americans and Northern Europeans do not share a common past, so why should they share a common perspective of the present world?
Perhaps the most disturbing argument I've heard is that what happened happened - it's over, it's ancient history, get over it. The battle at Wounded Knee was fought only 110 years ago. Re-education boarding schools thrived less than 80 years ago. Native American civil rights battles were fought during my lifetime. I have grandparents and great-grandparents who were alive for all of this.
So how could the warrior be seen as offensive? Maybe the mascot reminds tribal Americans of the bloody defeats suffered at the hands and guns of white soldiers. Maybe the use of Native American symbol in a predominantly white school system symbolizes the lack of control they have over their own cultural identity. We (non-Natives) are defining who they are for them in our popular culture.
But wait! Not every Native American thinks that the mascot is offensive! That is absolutely correct. Just like how not all Chicanos /African Americans/women/Filipinos/homosexuals agree with one another on every single issue that affects their cultural community. The bottom line is that some Native Americans are offended by it. It's not just one person complaining, it is a significant part of the community. The number has been put at anywhere between 9% and 90%, depending on which survey you're looking at. Whether it's one out of ten or 9 out of ten, it seems common courtesy to change the mascot. Don't we owe them that much?
On the issue of the artwork. Is it not the responsibility of whomever commissioned that piece of art to take the fall if it does have to be removed? This certainly isn't a new issue. If they didn't see it coming, then "too bad, so sad" to them. Sell the thing for scrap and commission a group of high school students to paint a mural that builds community instead of fragmenting it.
I don't know, I think there's got to be some common ground here to which everyone can agree on. If the mascot needs to be changed and a group of people representing Native Americans are behind that change, then so be it, it needs to be changed. But I think the name should remain, that's part of compromise. A warrior doesn't have to be an Indian. To me, it seems as though there is middle ground here if the 18 students in our district are offended by it's use. Although it pains me to say it, but if there isn't a middle ground, so be it. I guess Lebanon will have to be the... Bears or something... I suppose PETA may be upset at the use of "agressive animals" or something and it would have to be changed in a year or two anyway. :\
That's my two cents.
And I don't think it's racist either. But hey, as Jen pointed out, I'm not Indian and the only one who can determine that are those who are. That I wholeheartedly agree with.
Certainly, there are far worse instances of "racist" mascots. The "Crook County Cowboys" for example when the county is named after General Crook who chased Indians out of the area into Warm Springs and masacred them. Or even the "South Albany Rebels" which apparently have a Confederate soldier as their mascot?? Is that true?? I saw it on a posting on the DH story.
Roxy - I think you're right that middle ground could be reached by keeping the name warriors (I still don't like it, but whatevs, this isn't all about me, now is it?) and just having the mascot be some goofy guy dressed up in a crazy wig and giant shoes decked out in the school colors. To be honest, I don't really "get" this whole mascot thing anyway. You're probably rolling your eyes right this minute, thinking "obviously" - admit it! :)
And I've got to say it: just because it's not the worst doesn't mean it isn't wrong.
I don't get, on personal/emotional level, the whole mascot thing either. I get it as a sociologist, but I'm not sure that helps.
Obviously you both don't get it :) For some reason I do. How's this? I don't get that I get the mascot thing, but I do and for some reason that damn name (I'll regress it to name from mascot, leaving room for compromise).
*shrugs*
I guess we'll just see what happens.
Post a Comment