On August 5, the NCAA voted to ban college ball teams from using American Indian mascots that they would decide are "hostile or abusive" images, which would include at least 18 universities. Florida State's Seminole and Illinois' Illini were among those definitely deemed offensive and in need of ethnic cleansing. Note that this ban theoretically specifically covers only postseason tournaments, as the NCAA unfortunately does not have authority yet to completely dictate the running of colleges across the nation.
Alas, they have now backed off of Florida State University and their Seminoles, on the grounds that two Seminole tribal groups have formally endorsed the mascot.
Giving in to these Seminole groups is wrong, because for one thing, we are all just alike. There are no characteristic behavioral differences between American Indians, Negroes, Asians or Caucasians based on nature or nurture. Men and women are just alike. Homosexuals and heterosexuals act exactly the same. Christians, Muslims, Jews and Buddhists think and act just the same. We are all individuals independently thinking exactly the same. If you can't grasp this truth, then you need some re-education.
Blogcritic Gypsyman has a thoughtful new essay supporting this ban, and supporting our manifest destiny of ending the use of Indian mascots.
I'm with Gypsyman- it's time to do away with this archetype of the noble Indian warrior. We in the United States have worked for centuries to turn the native Americans into gelded girlymen like this Sherman Alexie that he cites, or the rest of the way to being wholly dependent infants in their reservation play pens nursing bottles of the hooch.
Thus we should certainly ignore the illegitimate protests of such folks as the dreaded self-described Comanche "savage" Bad Eagle David Yeagley, who says "Mascots provide an opportunity to re-educate America, as well as Indians, on the virtues of being a man." Indeed, he takes his ingratitude further in denouncing the efforts of decent right-thinking progressives:
A mascot is a thing, not a real person. Therefore, the Indian is insulted by any image not expressing his full humanity.
Continued on the next page Page 1 — Page 2
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - RJ
Great post! :)
BTW, I'm part Irish, and those filthy, hate-filled bastards at Notre Dame better stop using vile stereotypes to marginalize me! :-/
2 - MCH
Why Bobby? Their nickname is the "FIGHTING Irish," not the "CHICKENHAWK Irish."
3 - Al Barger
Thanks, RJ.
MCH, "chickenhawk" is now on the BC banned list, being monitored by Shark. I'll turn him loose on ya. Think I won't?
4 - RogerMDillion
funny comment, MCH
5 - RJ
Yeah, MCH is hilarious, if you are the type who keeps laughing at the same joke over and over and over and over and over again...
6 - Al Barger
Good humor can certainly be hostile, but it still requires wit. Mere hatefulness does not constitute a joke, let alone a funny one. Try again, MCH.
7 - gypsyman
Al.
Disapointing. It seem I have been giving you more credit than I should have. I've liked your intellagent criticisms of my posts, and your teasing, in the past. Here though it borders on offensive.
You probablly don't care what this "pinko" has to say, so I won't bother except, that you can't call a public figure girlyman in print. That's insulting and derogatory. That should be gotten rid of before anyone sees it who cares.
Two I don't know many people from the U.S of native blood, save for one man. He was an Ogala, who moved here because he was tired of being called prarie nigger. Or drunk and on welfare.
Native people continue to honour "warriors" as part of their tradition, but I think in a way that would be unrecognised by most non natives.
At every Pow-Wow I've been too there is always a Vetran's Flag(Usually the M.I.A Flag)to honour those who fought in died in such battles as Wounded KneeCreek, World Wars 1+2, Korea, Vietnam, Wounded Knee occupation, The gulf, Oka, and the battle with booze and alcohol.
An elder I knew teachs that the sign of a real warrior is a person who thinks about caring for his family. That means instead of going out and slaving to make tons of money, or drinking in bars, or bashing in heads with a tomahawk they care for the hearts of their families instead. A warrior is a fighter for spirit not military prowness.
In the old days, i've been tole, war parties were only sent out on approval of the women's council. It sounds like the men were just getting in the way, and the woman would say, get out and come back when you've worked off some of that excess testosterone.
Of course the Iroquois had Lacross for that.
Ah well
hoping for better from you Al
8 - RogerMDillion
What a shock! The butt of the joke doesn't find it funny. And it's not just that he called you "chickenhawk", but the way it was inserted into the conversation.
"Good humor can certainly be hostile, but it still requires wit."
Please paste that on your monitor and read before beginning your next "satire".
9 - Dave Nalle
Gypsyman gives Anthony Grande a run for his money:
"i've been tole"
By declaring that in a previous life he was a highly collectible piece of painted pottery.
Dave
10 - Shark
Gypsy, lighten up. If this is slander, everything I write can be banned.
It's intended as Satire -- and probably rates about a 5 on Shark's Satire Effectiveness Scale [from 1 to 10] -- only because I'm not sure Al made his point too clearly.
("We are all just alike" is not a theme I would have pursued; there's a lot more humor/profound social comment available along other lines, but hey, to each his own...)
BEST PART: the quotes from [doh!] Bad Eagle -- who reminds me that a paleface should NEVER attempt to speak for an Indian -- and that there are many different 'opinions' among indians.
PS: Given a choice, Shark would prefer to play on a team "The Peyote Eaters"
11 - Shark
from "BLOGCRITICS LIST OF BANNED WORDS"
Hope that helps.
12 - Shark
Speaking of banned words, Big Al, if memory serves, I believe "gorrilla" and "breast" can't be used in the same sentence.
[heh]
13 - Matthew T. Sussman
Apparently "satire" in this case is "say the opposite of what you mean."
Even if I agree with the point of it, it's not clear to me so I'm gonna have to give this piece the big thumb down, which may be considered "hostile and abusive," but once the postseason rolls around I won't do it anymore.
14 - Eric Olsen
it's Opposite Day, just ask Squidward Tentacles
15 - Al Barger
Gypsyman, sorry you don't like my outlook here, but I meant it and it stands. And why can't I call a girlyman a girlyman? It's derogatory, but it's not gratuitous. If he doesn't want to be called a girlyman, then he shouldn't be whining like one.
"Gelded girlyman" was a reasonably mild term for what I took from this guy. He doesn't feel like a warrior, or even macho to be climbing the mountains and other rugged non-violent stuff, therefore it is illegitimate and any symbol of it should be abandoned.
Alexie appears to think that his alienation from the warrior spirit means that everyone should be expected to abandon it. That's certainly your point in quoting him. When his personal issues are offered as the basis of public policy, then HE has chosen to make them a public issue.
Hell no, I say. From the other side, I'm not that macho. I'm not out roping cows and branding steers, but I can take cowboys for symbolism and not be offended, and call for doing away with the symbolism.
I'm obviously not saying that just going on a testosterone binge and killing everything in site is what we're aiming for. It is certainly one of the top functions of womanhood to civilize men, and reign in their excesses. That's great.
Yes, taking care of the family is right at the top of the list of values. Fighting for your family may literally take the necessary form of going to war against bad white guys or Islamic jihadists who are trying to hurt you. Hopefully you'll be blessed to not be in that necessary position.
There seem to be a couple of basic competing images, archetypes you might say, or "stereotypes" if you want to try to delegitimize them. Choosing to find them "offensive" does not alter the realities, however.
A Native American can see and identify with the image of brave warrior ancestors willing and able to take on the world. That's a largely positive and proud image which you can take as inspiration as you try to achieve something.
Or instead, you can look at your heritage more as helpless victims, drunk on the reservation, dependent on the pity of good liberals. Which image is better, nobler and more likely to produce successful, happy people?
And what kind of compassion or true concern would cause people to want to squelch that warrior spirit?
Gypsyman, I do in fact care what you have to say, as evidenced by the fact that I wrote about it in the first place, and that I'm trying to answer your concerns here. By the way, I think I pretty clearly used "pinko" as a term of endearment. If I were actually upset with you, I wouldn't be speaking so flippantly.
The bottom line under all this is that although both are necessary as yin and yang, I value strength and achievement more than empathy and compassion. It's good that Mommy's there to nurse your wounded knee, but carrying on about it not only won't get you back up on that bike, but at some point actively makes you less likely to do so.
In short, you're not doing Native Americans any kind of favor by trying to ban the symbols of their glory. I have trouble understanding how anyone could NOT see that.
16 - Bob A. Booey
You're all such ignorant children.
That is all.
17 - MCH
Re #15;
It is interesting how some white men feel that it's their divine right to tell the red man what he should and shouldn't be offended by.
18 - Al Barger
Shark, I'll take your 5/10 satire rating as a pretty fair success. It's higher than I've seen you rate any other such thing at Blogcritics.
The "we are all just alike" thing may or may not be the most promising humor angle of this, but it is the part that is most personally annoying to me. Basically, anytime you grant any idea that there are significant cultural or behavioral differences between groups, then you invite being bludgeoned with the "bigotry" or "racism" clubs.
Certain types of left wingers are ready to lead a lynch mob against any recognition of group differences by anyone who disagrees. Even saying something unequivocally positive about an ethnic group is some evil insult that's just a step away from ethnic cleansing.
Of course this standard doesn't apply to compassionate liberals. They can bitch about evil religious folks, or turn on the sob sister stuff to explain how the pathologies of some or other group are the fault of rich white guys, or rural rednecks, or whoever is their designated goat.
19 - Matthew T. Sussman
This just in
The NCAA has ruled that comment No. 17, with its use of the phrase "red man," is considered hostile and abusive and is banned from postseason blogging.
You have until Feb. 1 to appeal this ruling.
20 - Al Barger
Off with his head, I say.
21 - El Bicho
"I believe "gorrilla" and "breast" can't be used in the same sentence."
Then I guess I can't write about the delicious sandwich I had today at Burger King Kong.
PS I believe "nest egg" has been banned.
22 - RogerMDillion
Are your comments meant to be satire I'll leave off the obvious foolishness of a whiteman telling Indians what they should and should not be offended by.
"A Native American can see and identify with the image of brave warrior ancestors willing and able to take on the world."
Yes, because we know many brave warriors danced after touchdowns were scored.
"a largely positive and proud image which you can take as inspiration as you try to achieve something."
What is there to be positive and proud about? All the warriors got their asses handed to them by the white man.
"In short, you're not doing Native Americans any kind of favor by trying to ban the symbols of their glory."
Please show me one Indian that thinks Chief Wahoo is a symbol of their glory?
If tribes have relationships with schools and they are fine with the mascot, that's fine by me, but if not, then I'll all for the removal of the ridiculous mascots, but do it or don't. This half-ass solution of having it only apply to the post season is ridiculous.
23 - Al Barger
I'm already bored with this nonsense about how I'm "the white man telling the Indian what to be offended by." What you mean is to hand some open veto power if anyone decides to be offended by anything, then it should be banned.
This is patent nonsense. I'll tell anybody up and down the block what I think they should or shouldn't be offended by, if I see truth. They may still choose to be offended by whatever they want- but if it's foolishness then I'm going to disregard.
Plus, of course there is the question of what most American Indians do or don't think. We can each find some who agree with us, as they are individuals capable of different ways of looking at it.
But of course I don't presume to speak for red folk any more than I presume to speak for white folk. I speak only for myself.
24 - Shark
Big Al: "...A Native American can see and identify with the image of brave warrior ancestors willing and able to take on the world."
Me see cartoon characters wearing silly costumes. What me missing, Large Albino Man?
Big Al: "Or ...you can look at your heritage more as helpless victims, drunk on the reservation, dependent on the pity of good liberals."
Me detect "excluded middle" aka "false dichotomy". Your tongue forked only in two ways, Translucent Visage?
Big Al: "...Which image is better, nobler and more likely to produce successful, happy people?"
Me think image ain't caca compared to education, decent jobs, and above minimum wampum.
What you say to that, Snow Face?
25 - RogerMDillion
That's only fair; we've been bored with your attemtpts at satire.