Column: Native American mascots not fair representations

By ChaToyya Sewell

Published Jan. 29, 2010

Correction appended

Native American mascots — they are in almost every field and level from preschool soccer to high school athletics to the MLB.

Next week our campus will welcome Cornel Pewewardy, Charlene Teters and Native American activists when they give a lecture on the problems associated with Native American mascots.

It isn't merely the representations of a people that raise many hackles but also the flattening of dynamic cultures filled with 3-D people to a series of misrepresentations that is problematic.

Emblematic of this issue is former University of Illinois mascot, Chief Illiniwek. In its 1990 defense of the mascot, the board of trustees argued the chief served as a historical reminder of a "great Native American tribe alive for thousands of Illinoisans who otherwise would know little or nothing of them." Barring that I doubt beer-soaked college football games constitute a viable teaching moment, just how historical was this reminder? Not very. The celebrated tribal dance and costumes were both Lakota traditions.

Telling, it begs the question: Is the defense of the mascots as "teaching" tools valuable? Honest? Fair? According to the American Indian Cultural Support Organization, as of 2006, at least 2,498 K-12 schools use some form of Native American mascot. It is a widespread problem. I am unsure of the history of the Fighting Irish or Flying Dutch, but neither is prevalent to such a degree.

As always, there are exceptions to these rules, and maybe schools can learn from the example of the Florida State Seminoles how to work with the community they're representing to reach accord. Since 1972, after retiring its far more problematic image of Chief Fullabull, Florida State has worked with leadership from the Seminole Nation of Florida to properly represent its Chief Osceola and Renegade. The school refuses to call the chief mascot as well, with the negative connotations it brings, and prefers symbol or character to refer to its historical origins. In my opinion, this solution is not perfect — are they ever? The fiscal compensation seems to be quite low, but it is a step up from the culture-jacking occurring in other places.

Unlike other schools, Florida State seems to treat the Seminole Nation of Florida with a spirit of respect. Others seem to treat those objecting to their mascot as merely background noise to their plans with others' culture. Arguments that place the fiscal impact on the team above those people who are offended exemplify this sentiment. These are real human beings whose opinions, to me, are more important than whether the Braves have to take a loss while Clevelanders familiarize themselves with a new mascot.

And as individual people, there are a variety of opinions. Some Native Americans take no issue with the use of tribal mascots.

In 2002 Sports Illustrated published an article claiming there was a near total disconnect between the Native American leadership who opposed the mascots and other Native Americans. Aside from the fact that there are always issues with statistical data and bias, and Sports Illustrated has a symbiotic relationship with many of the teams referenced in the article, maybe it is completely true. This does not negate the issue that some hold with the mascots, and it is those needs I feel take primacy. There is that saying "comfort the disturbed, disturb the comfortable."

And it is difficult. I'm from Kansas City and have had a long, torrid, tragic and doomed relationship with the Chiefs. It still doesn't make it OK. For more information, I urge you to attend the presentations given on Feb. 2 and Feb. 4.