Are indian mascots racist
Are Native American Mascots Racist Symbols
Many Sports teams today have mascots and team names that are offensive to Native Americans. Teams such as the Kansas City Chiefs, Atlanta Braves, Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks, and the North Dakota Fighting Sioux just to name a few.
A controversy has existed for decades about sports mascots with Native American images and names. Some argue that the images and names projected by Indian mascots demean the traditions of their people, and improperly represent history.
Those who support Indian sports mascots argue that these mascots honor Native American traditions, culture, and history. Mascot names such as “Indians”, “Chiefs”, “Savages”, and “Red Men” are chosen to represent aspects of courage and pride. This coincides with why teams would consider these choices as mascots.
Supporters of the ban say that even if the schools that use them harbor no ill intent, the images themselves are stereotypes. Opponents of the ban suggest that these names celebrate, rather than shine a negative light on the Native American culture. What about other sports nicknames that make reference to a particular group of people, such as the Minnesota Vikings or the Fighting Irish? How about religion? For example the Quakers, Anaheim Angles, or the New Orleans Saints for instance. We could argue that occupation should also be a legitimate reason to band mascots such as the Seattle Mariners, Pittsburg Steelers, Boilermakers and Engineers.
One could argue that if we were to be 100% politically correct that we would have to band almost all mascots, as we would be offending all of the groups mentioned above. In today’s society, it seems anything can be considered offensive to someone or some group. Everything has to be politically correct or people get upset. Sports teams are meant to bring enjoyment to people’s lives. The team mascot is supposed to represent team unity and get fans fired up to
Many Sports teams today have mascots and team names that are offensive to Native Americans. Teams such as the Kansas City Chiefs, Atlanta Braves, Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians, Chicago Blackhawks, and the North Dakota Fighting Sioux just to name a few.
A controversy has existed for decades about sports mascots with Native American images and names. Some argue that the images and names projected by Indian mascots demean the traditions of their people, and improperly represent history.
Those who support Indian sports mascots argue that these mascots honor Native American traditions, culture, and history. Mascot names such as “Indians”, “Chiefs”, “Savages”, and “Red Men” are chosen to represent aspects of courage and pride. This coincides with why teams would consider these choices as mascots.
Supporters of the ban say that even if the schools that use them harbor no ill intent, the images themselves are stereotypes. Opponents of the ban suggest that these names celebrate, rather than shine a negative light on the Native American culture. What about other sports nicknames that make reference to a particular group of people, such as the Minnesota Vikings or the Fighting Irish? How about religion? For example the Quakers, Anaheim Angles, or the New Orleans Saints for instance. We could argue that occupation should also be a legitimate reason to band mascots such as the Seattle Mariners, Pittsburg Steelers, Boilermakers and Engineers.
One could argue that if we were to be 100% politically correct that we would have to band almost all mascots, as we would be offending all of the groups mentioned above. In today’s society, it seems anything can be considered offensive to someone or some group. Everything has to be politically correct or people get upset. Sports teams are meant to bring enjoyment to people’s lives. The team mascot is supposed to represent team unity and get fans fired up to