Was anyone offended by the University of Illinois Mascot?

Question

I think they just buckled to political pressure by a few Indians.

Answer 1

I think anytime theres political lobby, votes to garner, and money to gain ...from inequality or racism...you'll have people trying to point fingers and place blame.

Take a look at the Tom Joyner Morning Show...he spends HOURS of air time trying to "unearth" hidden racism...when he doesn't even get that his show is racist...
and whats the hallmark...how do we know???
Put a white person in the chair making the same comments.

I have Native American family members: their favorite pro teams aren't from their home states...
their favorite pro teams are identified by Native Americanisms...
Darvel in Texas loves the Redskins, Bobby in California loves the Chiefs. And everyone loves it when someone beats the Cowboys.

No I wasn't offended by the mascot...I was offended that someone took advantage of laws designed to preserve and protect and maintain equality...levied a complaint...and action was taken.

I'm offended that we hyphenate cultural affiliation and are protected by that. If you're Italian-American and proud...this is great...and if you were invited to return to Italy...would you go??
I know I would.
How many Iranian-Americans or Palestinian-Americans would return to their homeland???

Lets keep the racial pressure where it belongs...it belongs on unifying and equalizing americans...
not on creating divides to garner votes and money.

And keep politics out of sports

Answer 2

The Stanford Indian was raised on the reservation he was Native to the core. He was well aware of his image and the feeling that his presence gave to the student body and alumni as well as America. It was another time to be classified as a time in history when Indian country did not have the right to stand up and say collectively would society stop with the many mascot’s that were degrading. I know that is hard for society in general to understand. There are some mascots that are a proud symbol that is respected but where do you stop and where do draw the line with an issue that demeans a race of people. I think that the mascot thing started as an Indians, in your face, as if mascots were a sign of the continuing dominance. Although the Stanford Indian was a striking image as many other mascots portrayed many gone to the wayside images were symbols that the general public accepted as what Indian Country was all about, a joke without saying. In Indian Country the phrase red skin is very degrading for in this countries history is the fact that Native American’s were hunted and killed and then a piece of scalp that was considered red was cut from the murdered Indigenous persons scalp and then the scalp was taken to the local legal system and the killer received one dollar or five acres of land. Now tell me that Native people are wrong with the direction in America of stop with this mascot policy that has been the general rule of thumb far to long. It is right to talk and agree on an issue that is a two edged sword for some mascots are a symbol of reverence as other continue to be degrading. Another words the mascot should not disappear for ever more.

Answer 3

I don't know if anyone remembers this but a semi-pro softball team manned by Native American were called the Fighting Whites. I don't remember anyone really being that offended by it. Illinois only got rid of the Chief becuase NCAA wouldn't allow them to host any tournements there.

Lets not forget that Illinois, Chicago, Algonquin, Peoria, Des Moines, Mississippi, and a ton of other Illinois cities, and landmarks are from Native American culture. So are we to get rid of all them too.
Also:
The Braves, Indians, Redskins, Blackhawks, Reds, Seminoles, Warriors, and about a dozen other professional and college teams have to change their mascots and names.

Answer 4

ok, here is my two cents on this one. first off, i am caucasian, so i don't really know what it would be like to have a school mascot named after my race or ethnicity, but i would be damn proud if some team was called "the schroeders", thats my last name, so i guess i don't really understand what all of the fuss is about. teams don't pick mascots that they wouldn't be proud of, you don't see any teams called "the nazis" or "the pol pots", it just doesn't make sense that a group of people who say they are so proud of who they are would be offended when a team, pro or college or even highschool, would want to attach a feeling of pride to a certain nationality or group of people. pretty soon peta will be demanding that the cardinals or the orioles change their name because it is degrading to animals. maybe i just don't get it.

Answer 5

It personally didn't bother me a bit. But I can understand Illinois giving in; they were under pressure from the NCAA.

Answer 6

I wasnt but then again I'm not indian. You don't see Irish people complaining about Notre Dame's mascot.

Ryan you really shouldnt compare a race of people to Birds.

Answer 7

it shouldn't matter if anyone is offended. isn't it enough that white men stole their land and slaughtered their people. why can't we do things just because it is right. the idea that it pays tribute to native americans is a crock. why then dont we have schools with mascots like the crackers, the jews, or the negroes.

Answer 8

No but it's not my choice. Hell, it shouldn't even be the NCAA's choice. It should only be the choice of that particular Native American tribe.

Answer 9

I don't think many people were. The NCAA, however, craves power and they wanted to exercise it over UI.

Answer 10

i'm offended by all exploitation of Native Americans for the purpose of sports.
It would be wrong to do it to African Americans or Asian Americans, but for some reason, people think its fine to exploite Native Americans.
The usage of these terms, symbols is often in humorous and degrading manners.
The usage of them should discontinue.