Podcast Recording:
Transcription:
Kyle: Hello and welcome to our “Yo, is this racist” podcast where we discuss a controversial issue affecting sports teams over the past few years that gained new life after the BLM movement of 2020. I’m Kyle Moncol joined today by my classmates.
Bryden: Hello, I’m Bryden Penhorwood, and I’m looking forward to diving into today’s relevant issue regarding Native Americans rights and misrepresentation.
Claire: Hi, I’m Claire Robson and I’m excited to break down some misconceptions and discuss the harmful implications around this problem.
Kyle: Great to have you guys, today we’re discussing the controversial issue of whether or not some sports team’s names and mascots are racist. We will discuss some of the most notable cases, including our very own Cleveland Indians, the Cleveland Indians and countless other teams have been in hot water lately. As their team names and mascots have been ridiculed as being racist toward Native Americans. Can you guys shed some light on what’s going on.
Claire: Yeah… so… as most of us know sports are a major part of American lifestyle and culture. For more or less of the past 50 years controversy beyond just the game itself has and continues to take place. One of the most appealing aspects of sports is the persona a given team may possess. Being students at Ohio State, we can see how intertwined and almost protective we are over our beloved Brutus the Buckeye. While a buckeye hopefully isn’t as harmful or offensive to social and cultural groups across the nation and globally, the same cannot be said for other major league teams and even some high schools, specifically the use of stereotypical logos and names like Indians, Chiefs, Redskins and Savages have caught the public eye surrounding the message it sends to both Native Americans and non-natives, and how the cultural group is perceived.
Kyle: That’s a great point Claire, I’d like to add that Native Americans have been depicted as animalistic and savage like you said within athletics, many teams are named after a Native American influence including our very own Cleveland Indians, the Washington Redskins and the Atlanta Braves. These teams operate in leagues being pitted against others donning names such as the Bengals, Tigers and Broncos. The naming theme of these teams depicts animals or generalized peoples denoting violence, such as the Buccaneers and warriors. Native Americans feel they are being stereotyped by a representation of their past during a time of conflict, their tribes are being compared to animals, set to battle within the realm of sports.
Likewise, logo and mascot depictions of Native Americans routinely depict redskin characterizations of Chiefs wearing feathers and or holding weapons. The depiction of Native Americans enforces a primitive violent stereotype and further propagates, the single story that Native Americans are violent indigenous peoples. A perception that continues to shackle them to this day, despite being citizens just like everyone else. Native Americans seek to abolish the use of their namesake in sports as dehumanizing stereotypical and offensive. Some of these teams have been named after the Native American influence for over 100 years, over the course of that time Native Americans have fought to have names and mascots changed since as early as the 1960s, by the National Congress of Indians the NCAI, but to no avail until recently. The issue has been taken to court a number of times, in 2017 the Supreme Court dictated the team’s name cannot be banned on the grounds that is offensive.
The government has been aware of the issue for decades, yet nothing has been done until now, as citizens begin to rally behind the cause in the wake of the racial Renaissance following the BLM movement. Native Americans have suffered at the hands of the US government in many ways over the years, and this issue further enhances the history of injustice against an indigenous populace that was stripped of lands, culture and dignity. These names and images further propagate dehumanizing stereotypes and inhibit Native Americans from achieving full assimilation in society today. Could this be result of an ingrained systemic injustice? What do you think Bryden?
Bryden: Yeah, good points Kyle, and I think at this point we’re seeing a good example of the subaltern. Subaltern being… is when a group of people are of a minority to the point where their voice is almost shut out and become almost powerless. So, we see this in the Native American people, as they’re trying to fight for themselves but at this point their numbers are so few that they’re just almost ignored. So, as you mentioned, they’ve been working to change some of these issues but for many decades, little progress has been made.
Claire: Yeah, and along with the whole power dynamic thing we can apply the master slave dialect by Hegel as well… kind of discusses the consciousness and self-consciousness and the idea of desiring recognition. They said as humans… or as humans we desire to be seen as a person, and even so intensely that we suffer, or surrender our autonomy to gain this recognition. By doing this, we one metaphorically become a slave, and the other becomes the master that was overpowering us. In the case of Native American traditions and customs and sports branding we can see how this power dynamic, especially when we consider the violent history of European colonization. This enslaved the native groups to concur with the guise and behavior that are depicted to be encapsulated in these mascots. This in turn removes the free will to present themselves in their own image or likeness and we know Native Americans are not a singular homogenous group of people, but there its rather countless groups of people that are diverse and rich and culture. But with sports mascots we do limit that.
Kyle: I think that you guys both make great points. I think we can see there’s a history of systemic injustice against the Native Americans dating back to the birth of the US and further exemplified by these questionable team names and mascots. They do seem to have been subject to a subaltern like treatment as Bryden said, and it’s only until recently that others have taken note of their cause that they’re being given proper recognition. How do you think these team names and mascots affect Native Americans today?
Bryden: As most Native Americans are intermingled in today’s society. I think that they’re trying to raise awareness and bring respect to their history, as they should have, for example, many prefer to be called Native Americans rather than Indians. I think that term Indians can sometimes be somewhat derogatory, especially as you see like as Cleveland Indians is labeled across their jersey so they can’t even get away from it, they’re being called it, they’re seeing it on the sports jerseys, so I think maybe a mislabeling is what you could you could call it and that’s where a lot of people take offense to it. So, do you have any thoughts on that Claire?
Claire: Yeah, no, that’s a really good point and when I was researching the topic and reading articles about it. A native activist quoted, you know, Native American self-esteem has fallen so low that they don’t even know when they’re being insulted and I think it’s really important for us to keep in mind, you know, the historical and current relationship between non-Native Americans and Native Americans, The usage of native mascots extends further than that of just major league sports but in education as well. You know when we subject these images to Native Americans at such a young and impressionable age, it can cause negative feelings of themselves and their communities. According to a Freiburg study, if these mascots don’t accurately represent what their customs really are, they can associate themselves with these characteristics that are ultimately irrelevant. And there, you know, identity and the construction of that and limit the potential of who they really are in self-discovery.
Kyle: Well put Claire, we can see this issue has pervaded for over a century and is injured the reputation and perception of Native Americans for that entire time, Native Americans continued to be perceived as a violent and primitive and remained the only race depicted by sports teams. They suffer from a nationally endorsed campaign of “othering” that continues to dehumanize and alienate them. But some disagree, remarking that the names are an honor and Native Americans should be proud to have sports franchises named after them. What do you guys think of this logic, should the names to be changed, or shouldn’t they?
Bryden: Yeah, I mean from the research I’ve done it sometimes you get mixed reviews, many Native Americans feel that they’re being mistreated, and are upset about the lack of effort taking place to make a change. On the other hand, you know, we look at columns like the Plain Dealer, wrote about the Cleveland Indians and how they got started. And it really roots back to Louis Sockalexis, who was the first Native American baseball player, professional baseball player. Who played for the Cleveland spiders at the time later on changed their name to the Cleveland Indians. But you can see that some of this name change could have been to honor him and him being first Native American to play professionally so there’s kind of a point of where it sounds like their honoring him, but in my opinion, I think it’s misrepresented if they did it in a more respectful manner then it could be a really good stuff and honoring the history that’s been made, but like we talked about just the terminology they used can sometimes be degrading. What do you think Claire?
Claire: Uh, yeah, no I definitely agree, I personally don’t think there’s, you know, a reason not to change them like studies and surveying show the disconnect and opinions between non-natives and natives living on reservations. Those who do live on reservations and are naturally more connected to their culture predominantly view sports branding as offensive. Whereas those who do have weaker ties tend not to view them as offensive, if the ties are, you know, weaker then there shouldn’t be a reason to be upset if the name were to be changed. So, yeah.
Kyle: Yeah, I’d like to add Maria Givens Tahoma Peak Solutions, a National Advocacy group, notes that when at a conference in Washington DC a lobbyist remarked “It should be seen as an honor” telling her about her what she should, how should feel in regards to this issue in reference to sports teams donning Native American names and mascots. Though this lobbyist’s sentiment is shared among many, there’s nothing honorable about being made into a characterization such as Chief Wahoo. The depiction of the Chief Wahoo, as a characterized beat red-skinned, stereotypical Native American with feather in cap, does in fact seem incredibly derogatory and potentially racist, not to mention the racial slur that formally embodied the name of the Washington football team. It’s quite clear these are both insensitive and potentially racist constructs born of a historical depiction of Native Americans as beasts and savages versus human beings and citizens of the US. I think we all agree changing the names, is for the best. But even if the names should be changed, should they be changed because they’re racist or because they’re just insensitive. What do you think Bryden?
Bryden: Yeah, I mean I think it’s not necessarily a racial issue, although it can evolve into that, for sure. But slider names like Cleveland Indians might be just more injustice and more of an insensitive topic, doesn’t mean we don’t need to change the names I think it’s a good step in the right direction to honoring them in the right way. But at the same time, it’s not necessarily degrading them specifically. So, it could be up to opinion. What do you think Claire?
Claire: Yeah, no, I definitely agree with that. I don’t think the two are necessarily you know mutually exclusive, they can be the other like Bryden said they can come in waves, but I do think it’s only right to make sure all of the people living in our country feel comfortable. By doing this we can improve the well-being and belonging any given group may have to the country and society as a whole. Whether or not we determine the name as insensitive or racist we should prioritize, how the name, makes the groups feel and the message it sends.
Kyle: Well put… change … as we’ve noticed change has arrived in sports as a number of teams, including the Cleveland Indians and Washington Redskins have begun changing their names, mascots and logos. The Indians halted the appearance of Chief Wahoo on their jerseys starting in 2019 and will be known as the Cleveland Guardians in 2022. The Redskins alike began to change their name in 2020 and abolished the use of their Native-American logo as well. What do you guys think has racism been solved in sports? Or is there more work to be done?
Bryden: I think we all agree that this is a much larger issue and there’s still work to be done something we all can work together towards and put our heads together to figure out a solution.
Claire: Yeah, I think, thing that could definitely help with that is just going directly to the Native Americans and ask how we can correct the harm that we caused. We can only do so much by assuming what they may want or going by what we think is best. There are countless ways in which we can ensure their ancestors are honored and we can ask ourselves if using culture, their culture and American sports is truly vital to the success in nature of the sports institution.
Kyle: I agree it’s a good start but there’s a long road ahead in order to clear the sports industry of all derogatory imagery and sentiment. Thank you guys for purporting great conversations, thank you for listening to our “Is This Racist” podcast and we hope you enjoyed the conversation!