Teams in every sport, at every level of competition, have a mascot. It is the mascot that represents the competitive spirit and team identity, motivating players and fans alike. Does the symbol chosen as a mascot have any impact on whether a team wins or loses? Unlikely. But the choice of a Native American mascot continues to ignite debate and controversy among athletes, fans and alumni, as well as those people who might otherwise be disinterested in sports. Why all the controversy?
The dispute over whether Native American mascots should be used as a team symbol dates back to the 1970’s (Price 2). There are those who are passionately against Native American mascots. These advocators insist that Native American mascots are degrading to the native population and the mascots do not represent the true identity of Native Americans. What they fail to realize is that this argument focuses entirely on the perception and predetermined judgment that any Native American mascot is discriminatory and dehumanizing. This is simply not the case.
The proponents of Native American mascot use believe tribal mascots display honor and respect towards the Native American people. They cheer that the inclusion of Native American iconography in the athletic arena serves to pay admiration and ongoing tribute to the identity of the Native American culture. In a majority of cases, this view is even sanctioned by the tribes themselves (Morrison). Rather than extinguish Native American mascots as a symbolic reference for schools and sports teams, the choice to sensitively use such imagery should be without sanction.
Doesn’t the restriction and ultimate elimination of the Native American mascot also abolish the nation’s historic view of Native American’s as characters of strength, determination, boldness, resourcefulness and courage? These same positive attributes are not only required by athletes, but are an actual expectation of the sporting community. Thus, it seems odd to suggest that naming a team after an Indian tribe is a calculated insult. A team or school embraces a mascot that represents the favorable traits and characteristics of its members. Such is the case with the Florida State Seminoles, who are named after a tribe with its origin in that southern state. The Seminole tribe optimistically favored the use of the Indian mascot and even facilitated the design of authentic dress that is proudly worn at sporting and community events. Similar to the Seminoles, the University of Illinois preserved their mascot, Chief Illiniwek, for almost 80 years. Named after the indigenous Illiniwek tribe, the Chief was a customary sideline figure at football and basketball games until 2007 when the NCAA forced the University of Illinois to remove this historic mascot. Unfortunately, the collegiate governing body failed to realize what this symbol meant to the collegiate Illinois community. Illini students were polled regarding the action and a majority disapproved of the decision. Sixty-nine percent of the students voted to keep Chief Illiniwek as their mascot. (Haugh). These students believed that removing Chief Illiniwek as the University of Illinois’ mascot would diminish the passion associated with their university. After the forceful removal of the Native American mascot by the NCAA, the students felt voiceless and absent in the decision-making. (Haugh).
It is of interest that the NCAA, who regarding the ban of Chief Illiniwek made a presumptive assumption without adequate student polling or input, have not addressed the use of other ethnic classes as mascots. The Notre Dame Fighting Irish display a petite man dressed in Irish attire. San Diego State University uses an Aztec as their team representative. No one has voiced concern about these cultural groups, or others being portrayed negatively (“Native American…”5). Native American mascots are the only distinctive culture being targeted. The passionate arguments of those who oppose the use of Indian mascots could also be made against these ethnic mascots. The fact that no one scrutinizes the use of these other symbols highlights the arbitrary standard that exists against the use of Native American mascots.
Do those who support the universal removal of Indian mascots believe that by doing so racism will be eliminated? It is absurd to assume such an idea. Banning Indian mascots not only does not extinguish discrimination, it fosters additional societal separation. One needs to question the underlying motive of this debate. Of all the cultures in a blended society, why is it that the Native American culture is singled out and prohibited from continuing their historical relevance and ancestral traditions in this way? The motives are questionable. The NCAA’s reasons for their actions are also questionable. Irony exists in that this collegiate governing body professes its primary purpose in ending the use of all Native American mascots is to eliminate prejudice, but in fact, its own evaluation process is based on a biased and prejudicial notion that any reference to Native American culture is discriminating. The NCAA’s notion of implied stereotypes and then the imposing agenda of removing these stereotypes is a way of exercising unwarranted power and control. This contrived manipulation and restraint is emphatically unnecessary.
Could underhandedly shifting wealth somehow be an underlying issue in all of this? Possibly. In addition to the emotional cost, the financial burden required to change a team or school’s mascot would be detrimental, especially to smaller schools. Affected institutions would need to purchase new uniforms, equipment and athletic merchandise. Native American symbols located on school property would need to be removed and replaced with a new logo. An estimation of the cost to change a school’s mascot would be approximately $100,000 per school (“Native American…” 7). Schools have limited budgets in any economy and are even more strained today. Education budgets allocate defined funds to both athletic and academic departments. At a time when schools are drastically cutting programs and scrutinizing finances it is unlikely that a school’s budget includes ample, if any, money for mascot changes. In addition, stadiums, arenas, coliseums and corresponding facilities would require costly renovations to remove Native American mascot symbols. Alternative apparel would have to be manufactured and newly marketed (Badger). Previously purchased merchandise would no longer be allowed at games, likely negatively affecting ticket sales and impacting over-all revenue. (“Native American…” 4).
If involvement and ultimate sanctioning regarding this issue is inevitable, teams and their associated educational institutions should be individually reviewed, rather than universally forced to change their Native American mascots. Simply because a school or team has a specific mascot does not imply that the school’s intention is offensive or discriminatory. Individualized review would provide a more accurate evaluation by taking into account the school’s history, as well as the opinions of local residents, alumni, current students, associated tribal members and those who will ultimately be affected by the decision.
Despite individualization in the evaluation process, it is probable that the controversy and sensitive debate over the use of Native American mascots will continue. Does the choice of a mascot have any impact on whether a team wins or loses? Unlikely. Does a Native American mascot provide motivation, promote admiration, preserve history, advance acceptance of difference and support education regardless of wins or loses? Absolutely.
Works Cited
Badger, Emily. “NCAA Puts Limited Ban on American Indian Team Names, Mascots.” The Orlando Sentinel 5 Aug. 2005. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Wausau East Library, Wausau, WI. 16 Nov. 2014. .
Haugh, David. “NCAA Fever Rising, but Mascot Still a Contentious Issue.” Chicago Tribune 22 Mar. 2005. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Wausau East Library, Wausau, WI. 16 Nov. 2014. .
Morrison, Rich. “Special Interview: Rich Morrison Speaks Out in Favor of Native American Sports Mascots.” Issues and Controversies on File. 29 Mar. 2002.
Issues and Controversies. Facts on File. Wausau East Library. Wausau, WI. 10 Nov. 2014.
.
“Native American Sports Mascots.” Issues and Controversies On File. 12 April. 2002. Issues and Controversies. Facts On File. Wausau East Library. Wausau, WI. 10 Nov. 2014.
.
Price, S.L. “The Indian Wars.” Sports Illustrated 4 Mar. 2002: 1-5. SI.com. 16 Nov. 2014.
.
Wieberg, Steve. “NCAA Ponders Future of Indian Nicknames.” USA Today 15 May. 2005. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Wausau East Library, Wausau, WI. 16 Nov. 2014.
< http://www.sirs.com>.