You're correct SCF, the athletics department really doesn't have much tradition to be proud of. I think it is more of an excuse because people around here are afraid of change. There isn't much tradition at all. Too bad you have never been to Jonesboro because you would definitely see what I mean when I say they are afraid of change. They don't want to make the county wet (able to sell/serve alcohol), they don't want the mascot changed, they don't want p*rnography sold anywhere except designated areas (poor sections of town), they don't want the town to grow any larger, etc. I mean I could go on and on about the stuff they want to remain the same. It's ridiculous sometimes.
Ugh. Not even close. Here's one article... And another... Smokey, how is it that you could even consider as valid the idea that the government is the sole arbiter of your identity, your culture, your history?
http://www.factmonster.com/spot/aihmterms.html http://www.aimovement.org/ There is a section here about sports mascots: http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/index.html
That's outrageous. They should come up with their own name. Just because a whitey mistakened the natives for us doesn't mean they can steal the word Indian. They are Native Americans. Or if you perfer, American Natives.
I understand that but there are still some that do not. Just like there are some who would rather be called African-American than black.
Sorry to take so long to respond. Sometimes they want me to do work around here. It's not because you say you're Native American, necessarily. It's just that there are people who have some Native American blood but are not official who sit on both sides of the argument. You can't dismiss the opinions of one side without dismissing the opinions of the other side. You seem to dismiss one and not the other. You can dismiss both sides and leave it at government-recognized-Native-Americans' (or some other legitimating criterion) opinions are the only one that matters. That'd be logical, but I don't like that argument because there are people who consider themselves to be Native American who are not a member of a recognized tribe. I don't think it is legitimate to categorize the ethnic identity of someone by what the government says or by some requirement you yourself sets -- like speaking the language, or socializing with other people who identify with the same tribe. So, as a listener to this argument, I would be offended by and dismiss any attempt to parse the population to say this person is Native American and that person is not. Ethnic identity is a self-selection, imo. I'm not sure if I clarified anything or I just said everything twice.
If the Fighting Irish and the Celtics are okay, I don't see what would be wrong with Indians, Braves, etc.
I don't know that the concern is as much about the names as it is the mascots and stereotypes that are brought out in connection with them.
i think the mascot and stereotypes of the Fighting Irish would have been offensive in generations past. but not today. the celtics? not at all offensive. quite the opposite.
Cute, but please don't try to make the argument you're thinking about making. The American experience and the English experience are too different.
Certainly - and I think if the Irish were still facing a lot of struggles here in the US, that would be a concern for ND as well. Using various Indian tribes and having the caricature mascots is no different than having a team called the Houston Mexicans and bringing out all sorts of latino stereotypes in the mascot and traditions. No one would stand for it. But since its always been this way and the Native Americans don't have nearly the political clout, it's more of a challenge to get rid of already existing things like this.
