Teacher Feature...
What’s Wrong With Using Indians for Mascots Anyway?
by Christine Rose
All across the country, schools are wrestling with the issue of whether or
not to keep their Indian mascots. Some of these schools have had these
mascots in place for half a century or more. It seems odd that after all of
these years, people are sitting up and taking notice. Why is it that now,
suddenly, these mascots are a problem? Is it just a matter of political
correctness or is there something else at stake?
The elimination of school mascots began late in the 1970’s and is now
gathering steam. Over 500 Native American organizations have announced their
support for the removal of the mascots. As of now, over 1200 hundred schools
across the United States have changed the names of their sports teams and
some schools have even refused to play schools that maintain an Indian mascot.
However, many schools are reluctant to part with the image they say has not
only represented their school but pays homage to the Native people as well.
They suppose that perhaps it’s just another group claiming to be offended at
the political incorrectness of the whole thing. It is hard for many of them
to understand how a proud portrait of an Indian, wearing perhaps a feather or
two or even a headdress could possibly be offensive or racist. In their
eyes, the portrayal is not meant to offend so what’s the big deal?
But when one doesn’t know the facts of Native history or understand the
Native culture, it is hard to understand why using Indians or tribal names as
mascots is perceived as racist. However, if Native people say they are
offended and schools want to keep the mascot are we not bound to at least
investigate the issue?
To begin with, it is important to view our history from Native eyes. This is
not something we have ever done in our country. But in order to understand
the problems with the mascot it is important that we step away from what we
perceive to be unimportant and have a look through new eyes, eyes that see
the history of this country from an entirely different perspective. We need
to develop a sensitivity to their culture, which is a culture we have never
bothered to learn to understand, yet one which has impacted us greatly. This
alone will constitute a step forward.
Our schools have only taught from the perspective of the victors of hundreds
of years of war against Native people. Although this war and overt genocide
appear to be over, any Native person or anyone involved with Native issues
will tell you that war is far from over.
As educated Native Americans begin to take their places in society where they
can effect change, the war silently rages on. From the current removal and
relocation of thousands of Navahos from their homeland, to the desolation and
despair of the many Indian reservations out west, to the lack of health care
for Native people who’s health issues differ from any other non-native group,
to the perpetuation of the mascot, we as a nation continue to be unaware of
the problems Native people face. While the mascot mocks the problems of the
present it also serves to keep the Native people oppressed by a stereotypical
image of the past. If we continue to see them as only mythical people long
gone we can easily ignore the problems of the present. But, it is
important to understand the history of how our country has dealt with the
Native people in order for us to fully understand the mascot issue.
For over a hundred years we have been programmed to believe that this is our
country, fair and square, and we have the rights to all that it includes.
There was a war with the Indians and we won. Some people believe that this
war began in 1637, in Mystic, Ct. A secure fort of Pequot Indians that had
been involved in trade with the Massachusetts Bay Company was burned to the
ground killing approximately 700 men, women and children as they slept.
About 200 Pequots were able to escape and several of them arrived in the town
of Fairfield, Connecticut. They hid in a swamp for several months but were
hunted down and the men were killed when they refused to come out. (On the
site of this swamp now stands the Pequot Liquor Store, and the Pequot Motor
Inn. This is extremely common and there are stories such as this throughout
our country.) Across the country, from the 1700s to the beginning of the
1900s, bounties were placed on the heads of Indians and they were hunted,
warriors and the peaceful alike, women and children not excluded. By 1900,
over one million dollars had been paid for Indian scalps.
Can stories such as these possibly be related to the mascot issue? Well, our
culture has a macabre way of memorializing those we have hunted. We hang
the moose head on the wall, we place a liquor store on the graves of the
murdered and we come up with our idea of an amusing fictional character based
on those that were eliminated and we use it as a mascot. We want to feel in
some way that we are honoring them, because it is after all a way of
remembering. But in fact, we are creating trophies. This is mine, I have
killed it, therefore I now own it. But you can not claim a person as you
might a beast that you have hunted.
In the past, Native people had no need of prisons. Instead, one of the most
severe punishments that could be inflicted on a tribal member was to pretend
they weren’t there. They were told to leave the tribe, they were banished
from their society. Ironically, they are now living with their ultimate
punishment. Because Native people were so persecuted many of them now keep
the culture very close to themselves, rarely sharing much of it with
outsiders. Because of this we don’t see them. We choose to assume they have
either assimilated and are now just like us or they are all dead and
forgotten, only living in our minds in the way we choose to remember them.
They have become the invisible race. This has been due partly to the way
our society wanted it but it has also been a way that Native People protected
themselves. The less we saw them the less they had to lose. We may have
known they were there, but they kept to themselves. Now finally, after all
of these years, they are speaking out. But because we like our life the way
it is we don’t want to hear them. We like our cowboy and Indian games, we
like our legends of the old west. To give up the mascot is almost the
feeling of having our very culture taken from us. But this is exactly the
point. This is what we have been doing to them for so long. The early
settlers took the land from the Indians, we took their culture and their
religion from them and then we attempted to redefine them according to our
own ideas of entertainment.
Charles Yow, Cherokee, and attorney for Massachusetts AIM (American Indian
Movement) has worked with almost 50 schools in resolving their mascot
issues. He writes about the origins of the wild west myths that for many of
us have come to symbolize the whole of Native American culture, "The start
of Western mythology and the fascination with Western Indians is attributed
to early Western novel authors and traveling shows. The greatest of these
shows was Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show which included noted Indians such as
Sitting Bull. The novels and traveling Wild West Show had a considerable
impact promoting what has become the "fierce Indian" mythology. With the
heyday of both radio and TV came the greatest increase in interest in western
mythology.
With the advent of organized team sports came the desire to adopt mascots to
promote a team’s athletic prowess. In instances where Native American based
mascots were chosen, the choice was made from lists that often included
various Indian descriptive and slang terms as well as "vicious" animals from
American, and often Western American folklore including wolves, lions,
eagles, hawks and other similarly situated creatures. The largest group of
mascot models are based on Plains Indians such as Sioux, Cheyenne and Arapaho
(frequently portrayed in TV programs and popular Western mythology with eagle
feather war bonnets). Almost all of the mascots are modeled after examples
of Plains Indian regalia in locations outside the aboriginal areas of Plains
Indians. Second to the Plains Indians are tribes from the Southwest such as
the Apache, and Navajo. Southwest Indians are most often seen with colorful
blankets, one or two feathers tucked in the wearer’s hair in a manner that
does not extend above the profile of the wearer’s head.
The use of geographically incorrect depictions of Native People is common.
Once it is determined the depiction of the mascot is geographically incorrect
the "heart felt desire to honor Native Americans" argument becomes
meaningless. If the original intent was to honor Native Americans the
depiction would more than likely have been accurate."
We have shrouded their people, their history, and their culture with the
history we want to see. In the stereotypical portrayal of Native People,
the Wild West image that mascots perpetuate continues to distort the reality
of our history. Stereotypes, such as Little Black Sambo, have become
unacceptable with groups from every race, religion, or sex. Why is it still
acceptable to stereotype Native people? Could we name a team the New York
Jews or the New Jersey Italians? Of course not! But for some reason our
culture continues to hold tightly to an image of Native people that we have
actually created and is not based on any understanding or respect for the
truth. When a school allows a mascot based on a group of people to continue
to exist that school is promoting racism. Because schools in their depiction
of Indians as mascots draw on the most obvious elements of their culture,
those elements have become our sole image of the Native person. We do not
picture them in suits or in nice homes with the kids playing in the backyard.
It is imperative that the mascot be eliminated so that a new image of the
Native person can emerge.
It is also important to begin to investigate the cultural symbolism
associated with the objects used in depicting mascots. Inevitably, these
items are displayed without any relevance to their true meanings. Therefore,
they are represented without respect, without understanding their cultural
significance and especially their sacredness. It is time for us to broaden
our views and see our history from the other side of the coin. There are two
sides to every story and so far only one side has been told. While many
schools are now attempting to do this, it is imperative that teachers also
begin to study the culture in order to accurately portray that other side.
It can be extremely difficult for students to make the leap into trying to
understand another culture. It is hard for anyone to truly accept, on a
profound level, that for other people, there are other ways, and that those
ways are not only valid but just as good and perhaps, for them, even better
than our ways. When we view another culture through our own eyes and
experiences only, misunderstandings inevitably arise. It is important to
realize that a feather in their hair is much more than just a feather in
their hair. And in a successful multicultural experience, children will
learn to accept the differences rather than point their fingers and say, "You
are different and therefore I am better." This happens to Native people
across the country far more than with any other group of people as will be
seen later. For now, let us try to understand where the misunderstandings
stem from.
Our acceptance of the abuse of Native people can be traced as far back as
the Puritans. Because of their different belief system, different social
mores and different approach to life in general, Native people were perceived
as inferior. The Puritans, in their absolute certainty of the righteousness
of their religion allowed themselves to view the Native people as primitive
savages, almost on a par with wild animals. There are writings that state
that if they considered the Native people human, the treatment of them would
have been inhumane. Native people were dehumanized and reduced to a sub-human
level on a par with animals.
Native Americans were able to make their way through this world with only
what nature had provided them. This was not possible for our European
ancestors. They were much more dependent on what they had developed and were
already far removed from a life that lived in harmony with nature. Five
hundred years ago, almost all Native people could easily sustain themselves
on the nuts, acorns, berries, plants and herbs that grew wild. Their
medicine people were well acquainted with the healing properties of all of
these plants. The apothecaries of the settlers were equally at ease with the
different herbs, but it was their specialty. The average person was not able
to survive on what they found in the woods. Yet, for some reason, the
Native’s ability to live a life harmoniously with nature was regarded by the
Puritans as primitive. But from the Native point of view, the ability to
survive with only what nature had provided was much more civilized than the
way of life of the Puritans, who feared nature and sought control over the
uncontrollable.
The first British, French and Dutch settlers and traders had lived peaceably
enough with the Indians with some degree of respect for their ability to live
so well within their surroundings. But the Puritans could not contain their
distaste for the lifestyle of the Native people, their nakedness without
shame, their communion with nature and with spirits, all of this was not only
strange to the Puritans, but very frightening. They were the people that
instigated the Pequot massacre and although they recognized the horror of
what they had done, it didn’t stop them from hunting the few that had escaped
and eliminating them as well.
As time passed more and more settlers arrived, the hunger for land became
insatiable and the Indians turned from the peaceful Natives that the original
settlers had found and began to defend themselves and their land. But as
history shows, the new American citizens saw the land as theirs and for every
attack by the Indians, a much more massive attack was launched upon them by
the settlers.
The settlers justified their reactions by declaring the Native people
uncivilized savage heathens. At the time there was no recognition of the
many benefits they had reaped as a result of being taught how to live
comfortably in this country by the Native people. In their eyes, the Native
people were seen as little better than the animals. They demonstrated their
lack of respect for them as people by the revolting but prevalent use of
Native skin as leather. In the early 1800’s, after raids on Indian
settlements, the skin was removed from the back and the legs and treated as
leather to be used as boots, purses, reins and belts. Their bones were used
as buttons. If our society was able to produce goods from the hides of
humans without guilt, it is clear to see that they were also easily able to
eliminate entire tribes without guilt.
Although much less horrifying, our acceptance of mascots continues this
tradition of seeing Native people as unworthy of the same rights accorded
every other group of people in our country. And with the underlying attitude
that they were inferior beings that have long since disappeared, it becomes
easy to see how we rationalize the serious crimes that continue to be
committed
|