Indian... Politically Incorrect?

[Sargent_Peach]

So I'm currently enrolled at Arkansas State University. We are the ASU Indians, but we are in the process of changing our name because "Indian" is politically incorrect. Personally, I feel that you would only choose a mascot that you think would positively reflect your school. You wouldn't purposely choose a mascot that you didn't like. If the school is not degrading the mascot, then why do we have to change it?

Is it that offensive? What do you think?

Lets take the Kansas City Chiefs as another example. They are positively representing their name as the "Chiefs." Is that wrong?

 

[Me14k]

Its not that the title is incorrect, it is that groups in indian avocacy find many team mascots in which indians to be offensive.

My sister goes to UoIllinois, 'the illini'. For the past 70 years, they had someone come out in an indian chief outfit at halftime and dance. It is awsome, youtube it. Anyways,there would always be people protesting against the dance, one man whom i remember greatly was a man who held a sign in which read 'Cowering Caucasians'. Is this how we portray the indian mascots to be? pathetic? Are we making fun of them? Personally, I dont think so.

Here goes my crazy conservatism:

Indians attacked the colonies before we attacked them, look up king philips war. For everyone who claims white folk stole indian land, that is false, we stole enemy land.

 

[AltF4]

We conquered them fair and square. Or... well... more like our smallpox conquered them, but whatever.

But seriously, it's just hypersensitivity. That type of person will always be protesting against SOMETHING. Take it as a sign that everything is going pretty well right now, because that was the best they could complain about.

PS: My high school's mascot was "The Matadors". My Mexican friend told me a couple of days ago that matador means murderer. That's hilarious.

 

[Mediocre]

Here goes my crazy conservatism:

Indians attacked the colonies before we attacked them, look up king philips war. For everyone who claims white folk stole indian land, that is false, we stole enemy land.

That might be a reasonable position if the Indians were one entity. However, they weren't. They were distinct and disparate tribes, and while some of those tribes may have "attacked the colonies before we attacked them", many did not.

For you to lump all Indians together grossly misrepresents the actual situation.

 

[Xsyven]

Yeaaah, I think it's kind of wrong to name a school after a certian race. It's like saying there's a Computer Tech college somewhere out there as the 'Asians'. The only reason colleges name their mascot after Indians is because they're "savage and ruthless". At least, in some cases.

University of Utah's mascot is a Ute-- a native Utah tribe. Though the college probably named themsleves after them as a tribute, I wouldn't consider it very flattering.

 

[snex]

is anybody else tired of having white people try to tell us what non-white people find offensive? cant the non-white people speak for themselves?

ever notice how nobody cares when nintendo makes stereotypical italian greaseballs its mascots? you know why? because italians dont give a crap! we think its hilarious. i have to assume, being closely related to non-white humans, that they have also evolved a sense of humor.

 

[Xsyven]

Snex, there have been tons of cases where Native Americans have complained about sport teams and mascots being named "Indians."

 

[The Mad Hatter]

I personally don't find anything wrong with it. I think as long as you keep it tasteful (don't name your school "The Drunken Indian") and actually have a connection to Indian heritage, its fine.

BUT, seeing as how we will never truly conquer the race issue while things like this are happening, I say change the name and just forget about it.

 

[KevinM]

is anybody else tired of having white people try to tell us what non-white people find offensive? cant the non-white people speak for themselves?

ever notice how nobody cares when nintendo makes stereotypical italian greaseballs its mascots? you know why? because italians dont give a crap! we think its hilarious. i have to assume, being closely related to non-white humans, that they have also evolved a sense of humor.

Thats an incredible stupid generalization, you pretty much just said in one line that. White people can't take jokes because they are to sensitive EL OH EL. Stop with your sweeping generalizations before we make a mascot out of you hah.

 

[DoH]

Here goes my crazy conservatism:

Indians attacked the colonies before we attacked them, look up king philips war. For everyone who claims white folk stole indian land, that is false, we stole enemy land.

EDIT: 300th post

Ummmm...

King Phillip's War was in 1675-76

Plymouth was established in 1620...there'd been over 50 years of colonialism before the Natives struck back, to them they're just reclaiming their own territory and white people are the imperialist enemies.

 

[AltF4]

Now, now. Let's not bicker and argue about who killed who. Lol.

 

[KevinM]

DoH i hadn't even noticed that post by Me14 but good answer. Indeed before King Phillips war, which for the Indians was a war of reclamation, the colonialists had already taken Native American land and colonized it.

 

[Falco&Victory]

Groups of native americans are fighting to get be called indians again, because that's what they were called for 400 years.

And how is politically incorrect in the first place? Is US history politically incorrect?

 

[Me14k]

You know Native Americans were given the name 'indians' by Columbus who thought he was in india. (He was trying to find a westward route to india for the spice trade)

 

[Falco&Victory]

I know how they got their names, most people do. But the fact is that is the name they were given in English. Seeing as it is our culture, not being allowed to call them Indians would be wrong. They may not be Indian per se, but they ARE indians.

In fact if calling them indians is politically incorrect so is calling them native americans, since they are native asians =p
or native canadians =p

 

[Mediocre]

In fact if calling them indians is politically incorrect so is calling them native americans, since they are native asians =p
or native canadians =p

See that? All those countries on that map are part of America. Not to mention all the countries in South America.

So, yeah, "Native Canadians" are Native Americans.


As for the Asian thing, that's just ridiculous. By that standard, we're all Africans. Sure, they came to America from somewhere else, but they've been living in America long enough that it's meaningless to call them Asian.

 

[Evil Eye]

I thought Greenland was part of Europe...


Anyway, the term Indian isn't politically incorrect so much as logically incorrect. Everybody knows Columbus was looking for India when he found North America, and that's how the name was put forth. Which is why people from India are referred to as "East Indians".

"Native" is a correct term, since they were here waaaaaaaay before any of us. However, of late, it's started to have a derogatory social stimga attached to it -- at least up here in Canada. "Aboriginal" is a common and inoffensive umbrella term, as is "First Nations".

I have no idea why the word "Indian" is still used to describe Aboriginals. I wouldn't doubt that it's largely thanks to the commonly known "cowboys and indians" scenario, popularized by the western genre and ingrained into the social consciousness some sixty years ago. This is certainly why the word is used for sports teams -- just take a look at logo for the Chicago Indians. Stereotype City.

 

[snex]

i think you mean the chicago blackhawks... and how is it a stereotype? that was in fact a traditional indian head-dress.

it seems you people will take any representation of human beings as different (which they ARE) and label it a "stereotype." why dont you take it as celebrating native culture instead?

 

[Evil Eye]

Whoops, Cleveland Indians.

I'm not at all sensitive to faux racism, especially not in that "the new Resident Evil proves that George Bush hates black people" kind of way. But I mean, honestly, that's as bad a caricature as the whole "shoop da woop" thing as a representation of blacks.

 

[snex]

how come nobody complains about these?

 

[The Mad Hatter]

There are some that white people could get offended by. Are we all slave owners from the south?

People just need to relax.

 

[Falco&Victory]

Thank you Mad Hatter

Things like this become a problem because people decide to make them a problem. I know Indians, guess what they call themselves? 5 guesses
no guesses actually, they call themselves Indians

 

[Evil Eye]

Yeah, except the way things are seen on a global level, there's no such thing as racism against whites. That's my answer to all three of you.

That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with the term, I'm just saying I understand why they might.

 

[Indigo4]

Ugh, politically correctness rears it's ugly head again. 9_9

Look, people anymore are so uber-sensitive. You aren't actually insulting the Indians by having them as a mascot. People have Spartans, Trojans, and other such backgrounds of people as mascots because they are fighters! I mean, you are calling them strong, so it's a compliment if anything.

And as for "Native Americans", that term is garbage. I was born in America, so aren't I a Native Amercian? Same goes for other PC terms as well. Say for example you have an Asian background, but were born in America. Does that make you an Asian American? No. You are an America. Same goes for African Americans, Mexican Americans, and any other type. Why is it necessary to complicate the simple? If you have White Skin, you're White! If you have Black Skin, You're Black! But why not take it a step further, and just look beyond all that! There is only one race anyway: The Human Race. So by saying that you cannot call someone this because it's not PC is segregation, only in a different form. It's the same crap from all these years ago, just on a different end of the spectrum. We're all people, we're all equal. PC wants that to change, but disguises itself under the guise of equality. Bull.

It's 2007, and almost 2008 people. I would've thought that after all these years of being on planet Earth humans could've overcome such ignorance.

Excellent Post, Sargent Peach. Sorry, I went off on a tyraid. -_-

 

[Falco&Victory]

lol, super good post

people seem to worry more about other people's feelings towards something above their own now-a-days, without caring to look into the other person's perspective. Go on google and look up the indians trying to get their name changed from native-americans to indians, they take pride in the name.

 

[Indigo4]

It's good to hear! They've been called that for the longest time, so why would they want to change that? What if Whites had to be called "Caucasian Americans" all the time? I prefer just being called white! Heck, I've been called cracker, whitey, honkey, etc, by people of my race, and outside of it as well. Do I care? Psh. I just laugh. America needs to really lighten up!

 

[adumbrodeus]

On the main topic, the term Indian, well the reason it's such a major issue isn't really because it's insulting, or it shouldn't be. The reason is because it butchers the term, turning it imprecise.

Look at the term Indian, it denotes residents of India, are they? No, so what using the term does is essentially equate two near perfectly unrelated groups. Thus, the contributes to the continuing trend of imprecision in language.

People may call it bucking political correctness, but let's call it what it is, "making English even more hazy".



So please people, use it in connection with real Indians, we shouldn't just create random labels for people that are completely unrelated to who they are and perpetuate them, especially if the label is already used for an fits another group.

Ugh, politically correctness rears it's ugly head again. 9_9

Look, people anymore are so uber-sensitive. You aren't actually insulting the Indians by having them as a mascot. People have Spartans, Trojans, and other such backgrounds of people as mascots because they are fighters! I mean, you are calling them strong, so it's a compliment if anything.

Generally that works because we don't have real Spartans or Trojans left to compare them to, hence no way to tell what is stereotype and what isn't.

I don't know, things like Red Skin, and such.

Here we have the actual people and we're ignoring who they really are.

And as for "Native Americans", that term is garbage. I was born in America, so aren't I a Native Amercian? Same goes for other PC terms as well. Say for example you have an Asian background, but were born in America. Does that make you an Asian American? No. You are an America. Same goes for African Americans, Mexican Americans, and any other type. Why is it necessary to complicate the simple? If you have White Skin, you're White! If you have Black Skin, You're Black! But why not take it a step further, and just look beyond all that! There is only one race anyway: The Human Race. So by saying that you cannot call someone this because it's not PC is segregation, only in a different form. It's the same crap from all these years ago, just on a different end of the spectrum. We're all people, we're all equal. PC wants that to change, but disguises itself under the guise of equality. Bull.

The whole idea behind those terms (besides the derogatory ones) are cultural ones, the first displaying a person's ethnic background and the second displaying one's country, one's home. As such it's a way to remember one's history and one's family history without leaving one's home from the equation.

It works for America, we are a multicultural nation, made from immigrants, created of a tapestry of various cultural traditions. Because of this, pride in one's ethnic history is not mutually exclusive with pride in one's home country.

Such terms denote that we are American, but that we are more then simply American.

It's 2007, and almost 2008 people. I would've thought that after all these years of being on planet Earth humans could've overcome such ignorance.

Forgetting who we are is not overcoming ignorance.

 

[runningbrave]

i am lakota sioux. my grandpa spent the early years of his life on the pine ridge res. he calls himself indian. he calls me indian. indian, native american, american indian: i have heard all of these from other indians first hand. from an indians point of view all of these are correct. it just depends on where and what tribe they come from. basically having the 'indian' mascot isn't politically incorrect.

in my opinion, indians that take offense to the mascots are just hungry for attention. how cool is it to have a mascot after your ethnic background. it's an honor.

 

[Falco&Victory]

do indians have a team called the 'Sioux(it's pronounced 'sue', right?) White Crackahs?' I'd be down for that

of course, from the other side of things what if you were raised by people who believed the term was incorrect? With our government turning to lead towards such liberalism it's SO easy to have a great, albeit unwanted impact on our culture.

 

[Crimson King]

Am I the only one that finds "Indian" a much more beautiful word than "Native America"?

Because really, by now, most here are Native Americans. Sure there are other Indians, but I like the word...

 

[adumbrodeus]

i am lakota sioux. my grandpa spent the early years of his life on the pine ridge res. he calls himself indian. he calls me indian. indian, native american, american indian: i have heard all of these from other indians first hand. from an indians point of view all of these are correct. it just depends on where and what tribe they come from. basically having the 'indian' mascot isn't politically incorrect.

But from a linguistic prospective, the problem isn't that you're insulted by the term, the problem is that the term doesn't belong to you. The term belongs to a completely unrelated group of individuals who live in a totally different country. The problem is that usage of the term adds to it's vagueness and contributes towards furthering the imprecision of a language already beset by many terms that mean a hundred different things depending on who you ask.

I applaud any effort to remove definitions that cannot be identified individually simply by context, and move said definitions into their own term.

Am I the only one that finds "Indian" a much more beautiful word than "Native America"?

Because really, by now, most here are Native Americans. Sure there are other Indians, but I like the word...

But at least the term doesn't refer to a Country in Eastern Asia instead of their actual ethnicity or the place where they live, doesn't that trump beauty?

Beauty is after all, in the eye of the beholder, and plenty of people would think that "Native American" would sound better when asked.

But that's not really the point is it? The term is simply bad linguistics, and all this political incorrectness b.s. is achieving is making it unacceptable for people to make language more imprecise. George Orwell would be proud.

 

[Indigo4]

Adumbrodeus, my point was not for people to forget the heritage that flows through their blood. I myself have Indian heritage, and a lot of it. And I could understand the term American Indian, because it is a little ambiguous when compared to Indians from India. But again, Native American doesn't make sense, and that's why I dislike the term. Would you ever call an ******/Inuit a "Native Canadian?" Not to mention, a lot of Indians resent the way they were treated in the past. Why would they want to align themselves with the whites, when if they call themselves Indians, it sets them apart. That IS their living heritage.

And Indian is not my only background. German, French, and Welsh make up a large part of my background as well, and while I am proud of my heritage, I don't call myself an American with one of those backgrounds attached. I am an American, plain and simple. If I was born in one of those countries, and I came here, then I WOULD be an American, with such a background attached. But I'm not.

But going beyond the whole Indian thing, PC is just ridiculous. One of my all time favorite PC terms is "Sanitation Engineer", which is meant to replace "Garbage Man." See how PC complicates things for no good reason? As long as you are not insulting someone, why change the names? As for coherance of language, how much sense does that make, especially for those who are not native english speakers?

My point: PC complicates everything. Don't use derogatory terms, but use simple ones. ;/ Crimson King was right when he said Indian is a beautiful word. It's a unique and special word, and taking it away from the Indians is the same as taking their land in a sense. It's not our place to define them.

 

[Ophelius]

Alright, I'm a Santa Fe India, and we're in the same pickle. Indian isn't derogatory, so why do they take offence to it? Because they like giving us a hard time. Nuff said.