why are they trying to ban these school mascots all of a sudden now i know for a fact that FSU has permission from the Seminoles to use that name in fact they send there own warrior to the home games. but I'm not sure about Illinois fighting Illini but even if they don't there is nothing degrading about calling these schools doing this in fact honor the tribes
2007-02-21 14:29:06 · 5 answers · asked by ryan s 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Other - Cultures & Groups
but this is the first time that the NCAA has put sanctions on schools unless they stop using them
2007-02-21 14:34:46 · update #1
This isn't new or all of a sudden. The attack on established mascots has been on and off for 20 years depending on the PC mood of the protesters.
2007-02-21 14:32:39 · answer #1 · answered by iraq51 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This isn't something new. There has been a crusade in the Native American world to abolish Native related mascots for over 15 years that I am aware of. I'm sure it was going on longer than that.
Personally, I don't take offense at Native themed sports mascots. I have never seen the U of I Chief dancing and I could really care less.
Just because I don't care doesn't mean I think it honors Native tribes (I never gave the idea much thought personally). Perhaps the intent of the school was to honor the tribes (which I think was the case at U of I) or maybe it was just thought to be a cool mascot. Either way, what matters is how people perceive the mascot, not what the intent is.
For example, a person can argue that slavery of the Blacks is an honor as this meant people thought people of African descent were hard workers and they were much sought after. A Black slave probably wouldn't think this way.
That is an extreme example, but intent isn't important...how something is perceived by the people if affects is what is key.
Like I said, I could care less. I got better things to do than worry about a school mascot.
2007-02-21 22:33:29 · answer #2 · answered by Slider728 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's nothing 'sudden' about it. These issues surface repeatedly every so many years; maybe it's the first time YOU'VE noticed it, but even professional teams like the Washington Redskins have faced criticism from native groups over the use of certain terms.
In my opinion, the names should be dropped if the group in question isn't getting any benefit and they don't want their reputation insulted. People can be offended whether you "intend" any offense or not.
"A group of Native Americans, intent on eliminating what they say is a racial slur from the Washington sports scene, yesterday urged a federal agency to cancel the trademark protection of the Redskins.
"Redskins is the absolute, unquestionably worst term," Raymond D. Apodaca, a former governor of a Texas tribe, said after a hearing. "There is no context in which the term Redskins is not offensive. There is no context in which it is not insulting, pejorative or racist."
But an attorney for Pro-Football Inc., which owns the Washington Redskins, said the term "redskins" is not a slur and compared it to the use of the word "colored" in the name of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. "\
2007-02-21 22:38:15 · answer #3 · answered by nora22000 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It seems ridiculous. Its an honor to be a mascot, I dont know why some people are making such a big deal over it. Its not something new, Illinois has had that mascot since about 1926. Apparently some people just get bored and need to sue someone, thats the USA today-neighbor suing neighbor.
2007-02-21 22:42:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have a school name and i do not like it. my name @ school is wiffany or fanny or tiffos or loser or that girl so your is not bad.
mine is bad or just do some thing cool and you can have a cool name. god luck
2007-02-21 22:40:48 · answer #5 · answered by tiffany.kenney 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋