At 02:34 PM 7/26/96 -0400, J. Michael Jackson wrote:
 
>I'm not entirely familiar with the situation at Miami.  The fact that they
>got approval from the tribe is certainly a mitigating factor.  I would say
>that it brings up more subtle points on whether and how tribes can change
>their minds on withdrawing support and the effects this should have.  I would
>be undecided on this issue if the specific nickname in question wasn't so
>offensive.
 
Someone spoke earlier about the recent change in Miami Indian tribal
politics which resulted in the withdrawal of their endorsement of of the
Redskins mascot.  I agree with Mike Machnik on this point.  No means no at
any point in the discussion.  Just because the tribe said yes before (even
if at the time they meant yes forever) doesn't mean it's okay for the school
to continue using the mascot indefinitely.  Even if the current tribal
leadership were to change its position and support the Redskins, the issue
will no doubt arise again in the future.  The school should deal with it now
and get on with the business of educating students.
 
As for athletics images in general, it's unfortunate that ferocity and
barbarism are often sought-after qualities in the mascot selection process
(with the possible exception of the Banana Slugs).  But that's the way it
is.  Someone is always going to take exception with affiliating an
institution of higher learning with devestation and mayhem, even in a
sporting context.  Maybe the best way not to offend is not to have mascots,
or sports for that matter.  I don't recall off the top off my head what the
mascots for Oxford or the Sorbonne are but I don't think those schools
suffer much without them...
 
Then again, a college hockey discussion list wouldn't have much to discuss
without college hockey.  As Ms. Litella would've said, "oh...never mind..."
 
Mark Sonnier
Anchorage, AK
 
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey;  send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.