Part 1
Unfortunately, he missed a third option: to insincerely honor Indians. That is, to "honor" them with no mockery and apparent sincerity according to the white man's standard, which many Indians don't accept. In other words, to "honor" them in a phony way that isn't honorable at all.
This is what happens at many schools. They "honor" Indians by placing them in the distant past. By fictionalizing and fantasizing about their traditional beliefs and practices. By portraying them as one-dimensional warriors who lack culture, religion, or other markers of civilization.
What schools don't do is honor living, breathing Indians. They don't study their histories or cultures in depth. They don't meet with Indians and learn what they think. They don't act to ensure that federal and state governments uphold Indian rights.
I explained all this in Smashing People: The "Honor" of Being an Athlete. The notion that a mascot is a worthy honor is the most worthless claim in the book. But if you think you can spin this old argument in a new way, let's hear it, Kenn.
Yeah, tell us how you know better than all the Indians who don't feel honored by being some sport team's pet poodle. You're "pro-Indian," but when Indians disagree with you, you tell them they're wrong. Once again, the Great White Father knows best.
Way to show how much you support Indians, buddy. What are you going to do next...slap their faces? Break their treaties? Terminate their tribes? I'm sure you can explain how these acts are in their best interests, too.
Part 2
Again...I am generally pro-Indian but when it comes to this idea of your taking the use of Indian-oriented logos/mascots away, I and many like me will fight you to till the last man's down. You are WRONG on this.
Kenn
Chief Wahoo isn't smiling pleasantly, bright boy. He's leering evilly like a skulking savage about to bushwhack someone. His devilish eyes and skin color confirm it.
FYI, Indians don't have bulbous noses or flame-broiled skin. Chief Wahoo is similar to other racist images--for instance, the hook-nosed, greedy Jew. It's a stupid, offensive caricature of an entire race.
Are you seriously arguing that this racist image is okay because it's smiling? I don't see any other racist images gracing America's sports logos. Not only is this red-skinned devil racist, but so is your support of it.
Which of these mascots do you find acceptable, Kenn? Tell us which ones so we can tell which ethnic groups you're prejudiced against. All of them, perhaps?
Your knowledge of Indians is pitiful. The Penobscot Indians live in Maine and the Shoshone Indians in Idaho and the surrounding states. Neither group resides within 700 miles of Cleveland.
How nice of you to prove our point. You "honor" Indians by being completely ignorant of them. You whoop and holler about a fictitious chief while knowing and caring nothing about real Indians.
In what way are you pro-Indian, Kenn? What have you done except "honor" Indians by stereotyping them as killers and marauders? If you've lifted one finger to help an actual Indian, I'll be surprised.
If mascots disappeared
No one's talking about removing anything except offensive sports team names, logos, and mascots. Your claim that activists intend to attack place names, statues, and so forth is false and scurrilous. It's like saying that if Congress bans nuclear bombs first, it'll ban pea-shooters next. It simply doesn't follow logically.
Let's stick to the actual topic, not your ridiculous straw-man argument. If America removes all its Indian mascots...it'll still have millions of places named after Indians. Millions of products named after or featuring the likenesses of Indians. Indians in textbooks...on statues...in movies and TV shows. Not to mention the millions of actual Indians whom you know nothing about.
There isn't the slightest chance in hell that Americans could eradicate the Indian presence from the land. It would require an alien spaceship with a couple of magical death rays: one to vaporize every building, monument, and ruin and one to erase every product label, book, and movie with an Indian connection. Needless to say, that isn't going to happen.
Here's a news flash, Kenn: Activists are removing mascots at a steady rate. There have been no anti-Indian riots or massacres as a result. People who have nothing to live for but their mascots may be upset, but they inevitably get over it. That's what you should do too: get over your love of racist kitsch.
But if you insist, keep fighting your losing battle. Keep stamping your feet while Chief Illiniwek, the Natick Redmen, the Fighting Sioux, and others disappear from the landscape. While you're at it, maybe your bitching and moaning will stop the tides from rolling in.
If that doesn't work, you can always film a commercial of yourself as the crying white guy once the last mascot is gone. You'll be a martyr to your cause: the white privilege that lets you stereotype minorities with impunity.
P.S. I suggest you watch the Daily Show's report on mascots. I trust you'll find it a comfort to see your beliefs and values upheld.
Below: Another white guy cries over the vanishing Indian mascot.
13 comments:
Writerfella here --
The reply to the anti-mascot column IS wrong in its assumptions, but it is RIGHT when it says that "people...will hate the Indian." The University of Oklahoma past 1970, when OU divested itself of the Native 'Little Red' office, cannot be dismissed as a major case in point. The arguments that most other schools' Native mascots resulted from "They have respect for those Indians..." and "They cared for them so much...they wanted to name the team for them..." are spurious, at best. But the argument that the loss of "Indian-oriented mascots" will win "the battle and lose the war" all is true. And the mascot decriers go away happy, while Native students have to remain there in the midst of the aftermath...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
This whole mentality is just like Iraq and Imperialism in general. Dropping bombs and screaming "we're freeing you, dammit!" or using Native mascots and screaming "we're honoring you, dammit." It's like if my neighbor started hitting me on the head with a hammer and began shouting "Stop moving, I'm helping you...I'm helping you, dammit!" And then if I resist my neighbor would say "what's wrong, you don't want my help?" ...and then proceeds to hit me harder.
On a side note: there is a baseball team in Germany named the Erfurt Latinos. But, all the players are actually "Latino." I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that the player themselves chose team name.
(even though the word "Latino" is as whitewashed as anything else)
Writerfella here --
Interesting the parallels between Republican conduct of the Viet Nam war and Gulf War II: "hearts and minds" still is the catchphrase, and "Vietnamization" finds its equal in what for all intents and purposes is "Iraquization." John McCain as president will add a third front: Iran. The universal conscription draft will see a revival, and the world oil price will hit $200+ a barrel...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Indians are destroying themselves. A logo or mascot is one thing, disenrollment is another.
The Pechanga Tribe in California has eliminated 25% of their tribe, Picayune almost 50%.
Pechanga has destroyed more Indians than the white man did the previous 100 years.
Indians WILL go away if that keeps happening, as will sovereignty
Writerfella here --
Unlike the Founding Father of this blog, writerfella does not subscribe to the standpoint that legal words make anyone Native who is not Native otherwise. Just being a member of a tribe or being awarded status as a tribe is not enough. One must be Native by blood and genetics AND history to be Native, not merely by law. In other words, EuroMan and his law do not have the right to say who is Native and who is not, but so some have allowed by philosophical surrender. Else, Rob Schmidt tomorrow can declare that he stood downwind of Pechangas and has spent enough time in the Morongo Casino for him to claim by petition to Congress to be Sycamore and start his own tribe, a la the Pequots. And writerfella sincerely doubts that Pechangas have destroyed more Indians than has the white man's Tuberculosis in the past 100 years, or than will DRTB (Drug-Resistant) in the next 100 years...
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
Ho-hum. I knew you'd trot out your tired Little Red story again, Russ. It was as predictable as the sunrise.
Since you haven't provided a shred of evidence for your claims, I've dismissed them before and I'll dismiss them again. They're anecdotal at best and fabricated at worst.
Let us know when you have any documentation to back up your storytelling. Until then, there's no evidence whatsoever that any Native has suffered from a mascot's removal.
Needless to say, you're ignorant of the situations at Stanford, Dartmouth, Marquette, Syracuse, and every other school that's eliminated its Indian mascot. FYI, nothing happened to Natives at these schools. Yet you keep telling us your possibly-false story as if one case trumps many.
Here's a news flash, chum: It doesn't. Until you can prove that eliminating mascots has hurt Natives in general, quit wasting our time with your one paltry anecdote. It could hardly be less relevant to the overall history of successful mascot purges.
As for who's an Indian, your statement is laughable considering that federal recognition requires both genetic and historical ties. Unfortunately, you've demonstrated your profound ignorance of the law many times before.
Tribes such as the Chickasaw and Kickapoo have documented histories going back hundreds of years, but you dismiss them because they don't fit your stereotypical notion of who's an Indian. You've also told us the Cherokee, Choctaw, and other "civilized tribes" are dishonorable people who embarked on the Trail of Tears willingly. And you've told us the Pueblo people aren't descended from the Anasazi and Mel Gibson's Apocalyto is historically accurate. In short, your grasp of Native history and ancestry is weak at best.
As for the disenrollment issue, it's tough to know what you think about that. I'd say your "position" is cowering under your bed, too afraid to speak up, take a stand, and possibly look foolish.
We do know where you stand on the related issue of terminated tribes. You've said or implied that every tribe seeking recognition is phony. You've shown no awareness of the fact that the federal and state governments terminated legitimate tribes in the past.
So keep up the good work, Russ. You love your stereotypical mascot and you hate the tribes trying to reestablish themselves. You should bill America's anti-Indian zealots for your services because you've done such a good job shilling for them.
P.S. Apparently you don't dislike McCain enough to vote against him. He must be another white man you want to smooch.
Writerfella here --
It is tired for you because it is true and cannot be refuted or disproven by your rhetoric. The perfect response from a jail-house lawyer: attack the evidence! Look over here at my hand-shadow puppets, not at the truth!
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
What evidence?! You haven't provided any evidence worth mentioning about the Little Red mascot.
If you're talking about your OU anecdote, you're well-known for exaggerating or lying about the facts. Without corroborating evidence, your testimony is worthless.
Repeat: Until you can prove that eliminating mascots has hurt Natives in general, quit wasting our time with your one paltry anecdote. It could hardly be less relevant to the overall history of successful mascot purges.
It seems you're too addled to even understand the concept of evidence. That must be why you rarely if ever give any when asked to do so. All you care about is hearing yourself talk, not about ascertaining the truth.
While you continue (not) to offer "evidence," I imagine you'll keep shilling for mascot lovers. Your support of Little Red is the equivalent of giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Thanks for nothing, apple.
Writerfella here --
Ah, yes, writerfella did leave out a few things: Rob Schmidt also is well-versed in glittering generalities, repetitive propagandae, obfuscatory syllogisms, and the coward's refuge of all former debaters, reductio ad absurdum. The 1970 'Little Red' debacle and years of aftermath for Native students are well-documented in the archives of THE DAILY OKLAHOMAN and the OU student newspaper, THE OKLAHOMA DAILY, for whom writerfella was a columnist from 1970 - 1974. Yet, Rob both has the temerity and audacity accusingly to ask writerfella, "Don't you ever look anything up?"
All Best
Russ Bates
'writerfella'
The controversy is well-documented in articles? Then go ahead and cite and quote these articles. You made the Little Red claim; now you back it up with documentation. Not worthless references to documentation...actual documentation.
I've looked up Little Red on the Internet repeatedly, which is more than you've done for any issue we've ever debated. There's little or no information about it. Since almost every controversial issue gets plenty of play, that suggests you're making it up. You fantasized (i.e., lied) that gaming tribes pay me, so maybe you fantasized about this too.
Prove me wrong if you can, mouth. Stop hiding behind your inventive claims and show us the evidence. For once in your life, put up or shut up.
P.S. There's no such word as "propagandae," doofus. Before you throw around big words you barely understand, perhaps you should learn to spell them.
Alas, Russ, your comments on the 2008 presidential election proved to be incredibly ignorant. For more on the subject, see Stupidest Indian Prediction Ever.
I have a young son who is, as the saying goes "all boy". So I dread the day he decides he likes the Washington football team (we live in DC), because I'll be damned if any of that racist trash comes into my house! Hopefully, he will still be as sweet & sensitive as he is now, so I'll be able to show him what's wrong with their logo without it becoming a huge feud...
Post a Comment