It's not at all. Not sure why you're yelling at me for it. I didn't start the protest.
- weirdoh
Comment is free
Cif America
Why the 'Fighting Sioux' mascot is not acceptable
Apologists for the University of North Dakota say we should be 'honoured' by caricatures of us as warlike savages. You think?
Dana Lone Hill
Dana Lone Hill
guardian.co.uk, Friday 23 March 2012 15.57 GMT
Article history
'Fighting Sioux' mascot
The University of North Dakota's 'Fighting Sioux' mascot
I used to wear a Cleveland Indians jersey with pride. Not because I am a Cleveland Indians fan, because I have been a Yankees fan since I was five years old, but because I am an Indian. I used to think, "What's the big deal? Can't I be a sports fan and an Indian?"
The sports mascots issue never bothered me that much – there were so many other, more pressing problems facing Indian country, I thought. Why waste people's time and energy on fighting about college sports team emblems? I even used to say of the University of North Dakota's "Fighting Sioux" that I was somewhat proud of the name – and glad it wasn't the "Flower-picking Sioux".
But over the years, my opinion has evolved. Besides hearing my sons' thoughts on the subject, I also have met people along the way who had differing views. But it wasn't only listening to others; it was also the fact that when I have to explain repeatedly who we are, and how we exist in today's world, it made me realize that most of the world sees us as objects, not as human beings. We don't all have tomahawks; we don't all live in tipis; we don't all have the same rituals, customs, and beliefs. We comprise 500 nationshere in America. We are not all from the same cookie-cutter that was used to make the Indian in The Pilgrim and Indian cookies on Thanksgiving.
The University of North Dakota has been trying to keep the Fighting Sioux nickname – even though the NCAA in 2005 described the continuing use by 18 schools of Native American mascots as "hostile and abusive". The NCAA informed the schools that in order to use these nicknames, they had to get special permission from the tribes their sports teams were named after.
The University of North Dakota has been fighting via lawsuits and legislative action to keep its nickname even though only one of the two Sioux tribes in North Dakota have granted approval, and there are nine other Sioux governments throughout North and South Dakota. University officials have complained of how other schools from the Big Ten won't play them, or how they are banned from wearing the logo at game time, or how they are no longer able to host lucrative NCAA championships. Well, sorry, but one Sioux tribe does not have the right to speak for the whole of us.
One tribal member who has been fighting this issue for some time is Chase Iron Eyes, from the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in North Dakota. Chase is an attorney, writer, and founder of
www.lastrealindians.com, a website that "highlights indigenous artists, writers, musicians, designers, speakers, community organizers, movers, shakers, leaders, success stories, struggles, and current events as viewed through the lens of indigenous perspective". Chase is not only himself an alumnus of the University of North Dakota, but has been a long-time advocate for the movement to end the practice of using Native Americans as mascots.
Iron Eyes has said that he never considered the mascot issue until his sophomore year, in 1997, when he was asked his view about it in class. Even though, at the time, he answered that he was indifferent about it, after that moment he started going to meetings and reading up on the implicit hostility of using Native Americans as mascots. That started his commitment to educate others on the issue. Chase actually went so far as to hold a one-man protest during the 1999 Homecoming, arguing that the use of Indians as mascots is demeaning and damaging to Native Americans' self-esteem. According to Iron Eyes, what changed his conviction was an analysis from the American Psychological Association:
"The use of American Indian mascots as symbols in schools and university athletic programs is particularly troubling because schools are places of learning. These mascots are teaching stereotypical, misleading and, too often, insulting images of American Indians. These negative lessons are not just affecting American Indian students; they are sending the wrong message to all students."
I can see that if you are taught from a young age that it is OK to stereotype certain people, why would you ever think it is wrong? That started me thinking about the students on the reservations who go to schools with names like Chieftains, Warriors, Braves, Indians etc. I asked Chase if he felt it was different for schools on the reservations, where the student population was predominantly American Indian. He responded:
"I do feel that at base, when we use ourselves as mascots, 90% of the time we are doing it because we may not have other ways of feeling good about ourselves. Nobody cares about Indians as mascots until you're placed in a predominantly non-Indian setting and the context changes, but I think that at the most basic level, using ourselves as mascots is still objectification; it's just that we can get away with it because we are the living subjects of the practice. I think it's wrong. Am I going to tell a bunch of Indians that? Yes. Will it do any good? Probably not."
Chase has hope: he believes the use of Indians as mascots will go the way of segregation, someday. But it will be a fight to show people that we are not objects; we are progressive human beings – not the savages that fans and cheerleaders pretend to be when they paint their faces, war whoop, and do their tomahawk chops. In Chase's words, he thinks tat in the context of "our history as indigenous peoples meeting this tidal wave of institutions, the academic, media, legal, education, religious":
"This Indians as mascots practice is a continuation of the attempted wiping out of the indigenous people. Western society was and continues to be misinformed about the human dignity of indigenous peoples."
That fact of misinformation makes sense to me when I see a Fighting Sioux fan painted up, wearing feathers and acting like a fool, yet supposedly representing the people I come from. It makes me cringe at the stupidity of it. Despite some people thinking they are "honoring" us, we do feel the disrespect of this negative stereotyping, that is a dishonor to our real heritage and values. If the situation were reversed and, as a people, we made fun of other cultures' ancestors while claiming we were "honoring" them with such crass caricatures, then people would know how it felt.
"Of course, I think it's racist," my son said to me. "As Lakota people, when we are given a name, it is a ceremony. It's a huge honoring.
"Whoever honored them and said they could use the whole Sioux tribes' name?" That hit home.
This debate continues, from the capitol in North Dakota where the lawmakers keep changing their mind, to the wealthy alumni who put up $100m for a new hockey arena only if they get to keep the Fighting Sioux name, to the North Dakota supreme court. While the debate goes on, the athletes stuck in the middle are not allowed to wear the name or logo during game time, under NCAA sanctions. The University of North Dakota athletics program now claims that it is being discriminated against by the NCAA for using the name "Fighting Sioux". Ironic or what?
