Current Debates
Are Indian Sports Team Mascots Offensive?
OVERVIEW
Like other colonized minority groups of color, American Indians face many challenges. Some of their issues, however, are more symbolic and perceptual and reflect their long history of marginalization. How are American Indians seen by the larger society? What stereotypes linger in American popular culture? How might these stereotypes affect the ability of American Indians to argue their cause?
The controversies over using Indian mascots for athletic teams illustrate these symbolic battles. Is there any real harm in using team names such as “Indians,” “Seminoles,” or “Braves”? Are people who object to these names carrying political correctness and sensitivity too far? Or, does this practice reflect the way Indians are seen in the larger society? If they are seen primarily as exaggerated, stereotypical caricatures, can they expect to generate much interest, support, or sympathy in the larger society? Given the small size of the group, such support is crucial for efforts to deal with the issues of jobs and education, health care and discrimination.
Some universities and colleges, including Stanford and St. Johns, have dropped their “Indian” sports mascots in recent years (Stanford from “Indians” to “Cardinal” and St. John’s from “Redmen” to “Red Tide”) and others have secured permission to use an Indian name (for example, Florida State University has an agreement with the Seminole tribe to use the tribal name). In other cases, especially for professional teams, the use of what some consider offensive names and mascots continue.
Nowhere, of course, is this controversy more intense than in our nation’s capital. The Washington Redskins are one of the most beloved sports franchises in the nation and their roots go deep in the local community. The team argues that “Redskin” is a symbol of honor, bravery, and fortitude and the majority of fans seem to agree. Others point out that “redskin” is a racial slur, equivalent to “nigger,” “spic,” “chink,” and “honky,” completely inappropriate in everyday conversation, let alone as the nickname for such a highly visible sports franchise.
A variety of readings are presented for this debate. We begin with an article that provides some background and perspective on the issues. Next, we consider a letter written by Dan Snyder, the owner of the Washington NFL franchise, defending the name and a rebuttal from Sally Jenkins, a Washington Post sports columnist. The final selections are a Sports Illustrated magazine article that argues that Indian-themed mascots are not offensive and a rebuttal article written by a group of academics and Indian activists.
POINTS OF VIEW
History and Perspectives
To access the article, written by reporter Lakshmi Gandhi of National Public Radio, go to
Owner Dan Snyder’s letter explaining his commitment to the team nickname.
To access the letter, go to
A Column Sally Jenkins, a Sports Writer for the Washington Post, Responding to Snyder’s Letter.
To access the column, go to
DEBATE QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER
- Several articles point to surveys that show that most people (even Native Americans) do not object to the use of Indian team mascots. How relevant is this point to the debate? Should questions such as these be decided by “popular vote,” or are there deeper principles? If so, what are those principles, and how should they be applied?
- The management of the Washington football team argues that the team uses “redskin” to honor American Indians for their courage and dignity. Should “intent” matter in deciding whether a term is insulting or offensive? Who should settle questions like these? The team? The tribes? Someone else?
- What arguments are made regarding the harm done by using Indian team mascots? Are these arguments convincing? Why or why not? What are “positive stereotypes,” and how do they differ (if at all) from negative stereotypes? Are positive stereotypes less harmful than negative stereotypes?
- What is the gender dimension to these arguments? Are team names sexist? What is the nickname of the sports teams on your campus? Are the women’s teams distinguished by adding the modifier “Lady” or “Women”? What issues arise from this pattern? Do these issues matter? How?
- Ultimately, is anything important really at stake here? Isn’t it all just a matter of exaggerated political correctness? Why does it matter (if it does)?rse discrimination”?