By John Two-Hawks
1. Animals 2. Objects 3. 'Professions'
Eagles, Bears, Falcons, Lions, Tigers, Ravens, Bulls, Wolverines, Cardinals, Dolphins, Ducks, Jaguars etc.
Pistons, Bullets, Rockets, Suns, Jets, Red Sox, White Sox, Stars, Rockies etc.
Packers, Kings, Steelers, Spartans, Buccaneers, Vikings, 49ers, Cowboys, Rangers, Lakers etc.
Obviously there are exceptions.
The answer of course, is simple, none of the above! These names/mascots fall into the category: RACIAL.
The main point with these groups is that they're predominantly gone, and thus not around to be offended. As for the Fighting Irish, I addressed that case in Fighting Sioux vs. Fighting Irish.
One could argue that most people classify Indians with animals, not professions. People think they're fierce and predatory like animals. They wear skins and feathers like animals. They make sounds (chants) and movements (dances) like animals.
Being Indian isn't a profession, obviously. If people thought it was, every Indian mascot wouldn't have a display of plumage like an exotic bird's. They could represent an Indian with an abstract logo like that of the Steelers or Saints.
Fact is that people choose Indian mascots precisely so they can display a wild
More thoughts on mascots
Why is the fact that Indians are a racial category a problem?
Indian children cannot possibly look at a stadium full of thousands of people mocking their ethnicity and making fun of their traditions and feel good about being Indian. This is what 'Indian mascots' do. They glorify all the stupid old stereotypes and steal the pride our children could have in the beauty of their race. They insult the entire Indian race.
Insulting an entire race...the very real definition of racism....
This is a word that has been used to denigrate Indian men. It dehumanizes the Indian male and equates him to something less than human. The terms 'buck' and 'doe' were also used by early european immigrants as a way to patronize Indian men and women. As you can see, they also infer that the Indian person is in some way inhuman. We are men, NOT 'braves'....
This is a word that is commonly given as a nickname which insults Indian men. The cultural equivelant would be to nickname all white men 'Prez' or 'King'. The term 'chief' itself is incorrect. Our leaders were never 'chiefs', but headmen, or clan mothers, and so on. Not 'chiefs'. Our leaders were highly disrespected by the USA. So calling someone 'Chief', is just a way to continue that disrespect....