quote:We can "argue back and forth about it," but there wouldn't be much point. They endorsed the team name. It's intellectually honest to admit when points have been indisputably established. Why not do it?
Isn't your statement a bad rhetorical technique? Any time a point is inconvenient, we can simply say, "Well, we can argue back and forth about whether your indisputable proved point is correct, but let's ignore it instead." I don't think that's the best idea.
The bold portion is calling me intellectually dishonest. The italicized portion is such a ridiculous strawman that it's barely worth mention.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you roll in the mud, blaming someone else for the puddle won't make you any less muddy. Even if you're right.
Posts: 1877 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
A book I recommend for people interested in this issue is The Heart Of A Chief by Joseph Bruchac. It IS a kid's novel, but covers the issue nicely and in a heartfelt way. It brings it out of an intellectual discussion and I think portrays the emotions from a Native boy's point of view. I also just think it is a really nice coming of age... or at least starting to come of age story.
Back to Dagonee. This discussion has inspired me to start reading the book to my son! I like many of you ideas. I think an interesting proposition would be in a school that DOES have a mascot in question, and has a population of students that the mascot "represents" (i.e. from the specific tribe, or just Native American) that would be an easy population to poll or ask, and adjust accordingly.
I have heard of some schools with a high Native population which support their Native themed mascot. I think that's pretty alright. But I have to say I think that when the Native students in the school are calling for a change, then clearly the matter should certainly be SERIOUSLY studied to ascertain the real opinion and feelings, then probably acted on. And I agree with you that it is the Natives' opinions that matter most.
I will now share 2 of my favorite bits from the book:
"...A Penacook man drives into a gas station. The gas station attendant comes out and sees that the man is an Indian. " 'Shall I fill it up, Chief?' the gas station attendant says. " 'No,' the Penacook man says, "just give me ten dollars worth, Mr. President.' " ... "The point is, ... that every Indian man is not a shief, the same as every non-Indian man is not the president of the United States. Whe you call someone by a name they haven't earned, it just becomes a joke."
and
It has been said that giving a sports team name is meant to honor Indians. But if real Indians don't feel honored by that name, what really is the honorable thing to do?"
-The Heart of a Chief by Joseph Bruchac
EDIT for grammar
Posts: 772 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Will, I'm not sure if you're intentionally mistaking their point or not, but I'm going to restate something it looks like you missed.
There is a big difference between the Seminole tribe and the specific governing body that saw fit to write that resolution.
The support was not the "tribe's decision" - just as the US military's invasion of Iraq was not the people's decision, nor were any of the acts of terrorism a Muslim decision.
Do all Seminoles *in Florida* support that resolution? Likely not - things are rarely unanimous. All we can be sure of is that the ruling body produced a resolution. Congress passess resolutions all the time, and I doubt you agree with all of them - just as it's impossible that each resolution has unanimous support of the people.
That's important.
Second, and also very important, is that the Seminole tribe is not centered exclusively in Florida. There are many Seminoles that are not in Florida, a large group of which resides in Oklahoma.
*That* group's ruling body is looking to pass a resolution counter to the first. Does this mean all Seminoles in this body are against the team name? Not at all.
But surely you can accept that there are Seminoles who do not like their name being used for a sports team.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:"...A Penacook man drives into a gas station. The gas station attendant comes out and sees that the man is an Indian. " 'Shall I fill it up, Chief?' the gas station attendant says. " 'No,' the Penacook man says, "just give me ten dollars worth, Mr. President.' "
See, this would never occur to me, although I don't think I'd go calling people "Chief," either. But it's blindingly obvious once pointed out.
A lot of this is simply the difficulty in seeing the world from another's perspective.
I'm going to add this book to my reading list.
quote:Do all Seminoles *in Florida* support that resolution? Likely not - things are rarely unanimous. All we can be sure of is that the ruling body produced a resolution. Congress passess resolutions all the time, and I doubt you agree with all of them - just as it's impossible that each resolution has unanimous support of the people.
If the government is elected, I'd be willing to accept a majority decision on this. But, see below for a huge caveat.
quote:Second, and also very important, is that the Seminole tribe is not centered exclusively in Florida. There are many Seminoles that are not in Florida, a large group of which resides in Oklahoma.
This, however, is what makes it impossible to rely on one vote. If more than one elected council can speak for a tribe with an interest in the name, then unanimity across the councils is needed (that is, each council has to approve use, not each council has to be unanimous). If I understand the history right, the Chief who FSU's mascot was named after led the Seminoles against Jackson. The Florida tribe is descended from about 200 who escaped to the Everglades after he was killed and his head taken for a trophy; the Oklahoma tribe is descended from those who did not escape and were forcibly marched to Oklahoma.
How does Florida tribe have a better claim to the name than Oklahoma name?
To further complicate matters, some in the Oklahoma tribe don't seem to mind, but their not minding is couched in terms of having more important things to worry about, not approving of the mascot.
My main concern is that I don't want people thinking this is easy for a college president to figure out. It's not. It's easy to be insensitive. It's easy to be patronizing. And I don't envy those who have inherited this dilemna.
However, I don't think we should underestimate the impact money has on this. Sports teams are brands, even college teams, and the brands are worth a lot of money.
All this makes me almost despair of figuring out what the right thing to do is.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
