Clay Satow wrote:

> I’m of two minds on this issue.


Clay, I think you raise excellent points. I don't know whether you read
the NYT piece that talked about Florida State's reaction and also
mentioned that the NCAA had passed on criticizing a school that used
"Braves" as its mascot because the enrollment had traditionally been
about 20% American Indian. I think that makes sense. I also don't know
whether "Seminole" or "Sioux" should be off limits because I don't know
who speaks for all the Seminoles or all the Sioux with one voice to tell
us whether they are offended or pleased. Is there still a native Illini
("Illinus"?) anywhere in the country? According to my local paper, the
Florida Seminole tribe gave Florida State approval and Seminole tribes
elsewhere objected. Perhaps they could just have an Indian war to settle
their differences, but I think the general rule for an academic
institution, which should be setting the educational example, should be
to voluntarily refrain from using terms which stand a good chance of
being genuinely offensive to a significant segment of any group for
ethnic reasons. The weight of consideration for my enjoyment of my
favorite school mascot name shouldn't be in the same ballpark with the
weight of consideration for what can be genuinely offensive to another.

I don't know whether the NCAA has handled it the "best" possible way,
but I think they've handled it reasonably. They suggested that schools
take the lead and left it to them for a couple years to take the step.
Now they're saying some schools' failures reflect unfavorably on the
whole academic world and college sports and the NCAA is stepping up to
apply pressure. I think the best outcome would be if that forces a
process in which Seminoles and Sioux supporters are allowed to present
their case to the NCAA, argue for why their use is a bona fide
exception, and have the NCAA give valid credit if that's due. I'm
disappointed to read that FSU's initial action will be to head to the
courts. They could save that as a later resort.

Frankly, my peave is with the use of discriminatory mascot names that
mock professions merely because they add nothing especially useful to
society, and after they do away with "Engineers" I think they should go
after schools that exploit naked, non-fur-covered animals.

Bob Griebel



Clay Satow wrote:

>I’m of two minds on this issue.  First, I think that the NCAA’s statement is disingenuous.   They
>use the term “hostile and abusive racial/ethnic/national origin mascots” but to me, it’s fairly
>clear from the follow-up statements that “hostile or abusive” is meaningless.  The list that’s
>published with the announcements includes “Savages” and “Redmen,” a couple of nicknames that I
>personally object to (though I don’t think “hostile or abusive” are the right words to describe
>them).  But the list also includes “Choctaws” and “Seminoles,” names that are not inherently
>hostile or abusive.  Apparently, the NCAA is taking the position that any reference to Native
>Americans as a mascot is inherently hostile or abusive.   If that’s what they meant, why don’t
>they say it?
>
>Also, they don’t specify “racial/ethnic/national origin” but it’s apparent that the only
>racial/ethnic/national origin they care about is Native American.  If that’s the case, why not say
>so?  I can see no difference between “Fighting Irish” and “Fighting Sioux.”
>
>On the other hand, I think that there is a germ of legitimacy to the NCAA’s position.  I’m very
>surprised that there is still a nickname like “Savages” that has historically been used as a
>highly derisive term, and “Redmen” that has a clear racial connotation.  And, while I realize that
>they aren’t NCAA issues, I’m bothered that there is a football team in the Nation’s Capital called
>the “Redskins” and that Major League Baseball has a team that uses a caricature of a Native
>American as its logo.
>
>My personal view is that nicknames that are on their face neutral are OK, but pejorative or
>mocking nicknames or logos aren’t.  So I would strongly disagree with the NCAA on “Chocktaws” and
>“Seminoles.”  I think “Indians” and terms that add “Fighting” are at least discussable, but I’d
>also disagree with the NCAA’s position.  I think that “Savages” and “Redmen,” the “Redskins” of
>the NFL and the Cleveland Major League Baseball team’s Chief Wahoo caricature have no place in
>modern American society.
>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>