http://www.webmediainc.com/54157PT/PeshtigoTimes.taf?function=detail&Layout1_uid2=13367By what sort of twisted logic has an expression of admiration been transformed to discrimination??
All sorts of sports teams - high school, college and professional - have traditionally adopted mascots - names and symbols representing admirable attributes the teams admire and would like to claim as their own. Generally those mascots are wildlife, Indian tribes, or other heroic characters or peoples from history or mythology. Note that no teams chose to be known as the "Timid Bunnies" or "Flying Geese" "Laughing Hyenas." No. The names are chosen to indicate bravery, courage, sagacity. All things we - and they - would like to be known for.
So why is the president of the Great Lakes Inter-Tribal Council (of American Indians) asking Wisconsin lawmakers to prohibit schools from using American Indian logos and nicknames? Says those "discriminatory images" of Indians need to be eliminated.
We keep hearing how Native American cultures want to preserve, protect and venerate the old ways. And rightly so. They have a proud heritage and an invaluable history.
It's a bit of a mystery why they - or anyone else - would feel degraded, rather than flattered, to have their heritage so admired that people name schools and teams for them. They're in good company. Consider the "Vikings," "Fighting Irish," "Catholic Central Cavaliers"? Fierce? Yes. Brave? Yes? Since when is that bad?
The name "Warrior" with a depiction of an Indian headdress does indeed carry a connotation of a warrior society. And so they were, unless the history we learned in school was entirely false. In light of Sitting Bull, Little Big Horn, Custer, the French and Indian Wars, and a whole lot more, inclination is to believe the Cowboy and Indian tales we grew up on were mostly based on fact.
Most of us also know the other side of the story, and we're quite a bit ashamed of it. We know the white man did indeed take the Indian lands, not because the Native Americans were weak fighters, but because they were badly outnumbered and not equipped with modern weapons. But they put up a valiant fight, and when they did offer friendly assistance to the white invaders they often were rewarded with treachery. But that's the way the world has been throughout history. In Europe it was the Greeks and Trojans and Vandals and Goths and Franks and Celts and Scots. Some prevailed. Others did not. But history has always held in veneration those who fought valiantly, regardless if they won or lost.
So why would some Native American leaders object to having their forefathers honored by naming teams and schools for them? Unless of course it's the quality of some of those teams that they're objecting to. That we can understand!
Incidentally, since a bit of Indian blood most likely flows in these French-Canadian veins, I feel a personal need to speak on this issue without accusation of prejudice.
Oy vey. Only home for one day, and the nutters are already pissing me off.
I miss Stevens Point already.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
