The prompt for this assignment was to answer the question, ¨Is the use of Native American mascots a source of pride and honor for Native Americans, or is it racist and detrimental to Native American culture?¨ with a five-paragraph essay including a works cited page.

Daniel Gorel

Mrs. Muñoz-Matheny

English 9, Period 4

4 November 2019

The Negative Applications of Native American Stereotypes in Sport Paraphernalia

Native American mascots are used quite commonly for sports teams. A few that come to mind include the Redskins, the Braves, the Warriors and the Chiefs. The use of these names has sparked a major controversy in recent years though. Many people — some of whom aren’t even Native American — say that these mascots are offensive, while others say that they are a tribute to Native American culture. Native American mascots have been used for many years. Yet they are only now beginning to be abolished. But, still, changing the name and mascot of a well-known sports team is a much bigger issue than changing the attributes of a school sports team. The use of Native American mascots is racist and detrimental to Native American culture because team names are often slurs or offensive stereotypes, teams with Native American names don’t really take the opinions of actual Native Americans too seriously — unless they support the use, and it treats Native American culture like a joke and makes their history seem like a farce.

Sports team names relating to Native American culture are almost always — if not always — slurs or offensive stereotypes. This is true because Native Americans don’t like being described as vicious warriors or red-skinned chiefs. The Washington Redskins, for example, have a team name that is, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, a dated and offensive term for “a North American Indian.” Therefore, it is a slur that demeans Native Americans. Similarly, Kim DeOcampo, the executive director of Sacred Sites Protection and Rights of Indigenous Tribes — or SSPRIT, opposes team names denoting Native Americans. “‘There is no honor in being stereotyped,’ said Kim DeOcampo. ‘If you want to honor us, honor our treaties’ and ‘protect our sacred places’” (Brinkerhoff). It is logical to assume that, since Native Americans, such as Kim DeOcampo, openly oppose the name of the Napa High Indians, some people find the use of a team name referring to Native Americans to not be a tribute to Native Americans. To summarize, sports team names relating to Native American culture are often slurs or offensive stereotypes because, for example, the term Redskin is defined as offensive by the Oxford English Dictionary, and Native Americans, such as Kim DeOcampo, speak out against team names denoting Native Americans because they do not see them as tributes to Native American culture.

Sports teams with names relating to Native Americans don’t listen to actual Native Americans too seriously. This is true because, despite the complaints of disgruntled fans, these offensive names are still being used today. For example, on ‘The Daily Show’ hosted by Jon Stewart, a group of biological Native Americans and a group of Washington Redskins fans were given an opportunity to share their thoughts on the team’s use of Native American paraphernalia. According to a statistic found by a recent survey, nine out of ten people don’t find the name of the team offensive, however that survey was not necessarily taken by just Native Americans. Another example would be a quote from Daniel Snyder in USA Today. “‘We will never change the name of the team,’ Snyder told USA TODAY Sports this week. ‘As a lifelong Redskins fan, and I think that the Redskins fans understand the great tradition and what it's all about and what it means, so we feel pretty fortunate to be just working on next season… We'll never change the name,’ he said. ‘It's that simple. NEVER — you can use caps’” (Brady). This suggests that, even though Snyder claims to listen to the opinions of Native Americans — in relation to the Washington Redskins’ name controversy, he does not plan on actually doing anything about it. To sum things up, sports teams with names denoting Native Americans don’t really listen to the opinions of Native Americans because, for example, on ‘The Daily Show’ hosted by Jon Stewart, Native Americans and Washington Redskins fans shared their thoughts on an unfair survey supposedly representing Native Americans, and majority owner of the team, Daniel Snyder, refuses to change the name of the team despite complaints from Native Americans.

The use of Native American figures as mascots makes a travesty of Native American history and culture. This is true because it makes Native American leaders seem like buffoons, making their culture appear to be cretinous. For instance, Philip Yenyo, a Native American civil rights activist, said in an article about the Cleveland Indians by the Associated Press, "If they don't get rid of the name, then you're still going to have fans going down there wearing headdresses and painted in redface” (“Newsela”). It is logical to assume that Native American civil rights activists would not necessarily protest the use of Native American paraphernalia unless they found it offensive and/or harmful to their culture. Some might say that the use of Native American figures as sports mascots pays tribute to them, however they are wrong because mascots are not meant to honor anyone, they are simply charms believed to bring luck, or, at least, to make a team stand out and raise morale. For example, in the same article, it says “Chief Wahoo is a big smiling, red-faced cartoon of a Native American chief. Some people believe the mascot is racist because it makes fun of Native Americans” (“Newsela”). Therefore, a collection of stereotypes supposed to represent a Native American leader is considered offensive. To summarize, the use of Native American figures as mascots makes a travesty of Native American history and culture because it seemingly justifies racism and reinforces negative stereotypes.

The use of Native American mascots is harmful to Native American culture because it seemingly justifies racism and reinforces negative stereotypes, also making the opinions of actual Native Americans appear insignificant. To help end the use of Native American paraphernalia in sports, avoid supporting the use of offensive imagery. This can be done by simply not purchasing merchandise with insensitive logos and/or names. Another way to boycott teams is to speak out. Writing letters is a way to personally, yet, also, indirectly articulate opinions. Meeting with an activist would be a good way to learn additional ways to protest teams. For more information, reading articles — such as the ones in the works cited page — may help. In conclusion, the use of Native American mascots is racist and detrimental to Native American culture because team names are often slurs or offensive stereotypes, teams with Native American names don’t really take the opinions of actual Native Americans too seriously — unless they support the use, and it treats Native American culture like a joke and makes their history seem like a farce.

Works Cited Page

Brady, Erik. “How Long Is ‘NEVER’? NFL Team Owner Dan Snyder at Five Years and Counting.” USA TODAY, USA TODAY, 9 May 2018, www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/erik-brady/2018/05/09/dan-snyder-redskins-mascot-never-five-years-later/596491002/. Accessed 4 Nov. 2019.

‌Brinkerhoff, Noel. “School Board Votes to Abolish Logos for Napa High Indians and Redwood Warriors.” Napa Valley Register, 23 Mar. 2018, napavalleyregister.com/news/local/school-board-votes-to-abolish-logos-for-napa-high-indians/article_7e2afb42-1736-50a4-b0e5-b98d0f853ec8.html. Accessed 27 Oct. 2019.

“Newsela.” Newsela.Com, 2019, newsela.com/.

“Oxford English Dictionary | Redskin Historian.” Redskinshistorian.Com, 2013, www.redskinshistorian.com/other-blog-key- words/oxford-english-dictionary. Accessed 8 Nov. 2019.

‌“The Daily Show - The Redskins’ Name - Catching Racism.” YouTube, 26 Sept. 2014, www.youtube.com/watch?v=loK2DRBnk24. Accessed 13 Oct. 2019.

During this project, two things I did well were critical-thinking and learning conscientiously; I did these by improving my essay based on Ms. Muñoz´s suggestions and by carefully choosing reliable sources to read and quote. For this assignment, my work ethic was based on my desire to submit the best essay I could write, which I feel I did, demonstrating my ability to create a proper argument. As for time management, I completed more of the essay than necessary for the first submission so I could receive more feedback from Ms. Muñoz, allowing me to improve my work. I also reviewed several sources to get a better understanding of the significance of the issue, as well as to find relevant quotes to support my claim. In all, it is my opinion that I spent most of my time pretty well, however I am sure that, in the future, I can spend my time better and maybe even do a better job at focusing on the big picture. I feel that I planned pretty well, creating a good outline and getting feedback to make revisions to my essay before the final draft was due. I did an adequate job organizing my time and dividing sources and evidence into categories based on my sub-headings for my body paragraphs. In the future, I can communicate better and be more creative in my writing. I feel like I could have done a better job asking clarifying questions — to make my essay fit the criteria as best as possible, and I think that I got a bit repetitive in my essay, which I believe Ms. Muñoz noticed as well, and I know that I can do a better job of keeping the reader engaged.

Image Source:

https://redskinswire.usatoday.com/2020/01/06/ryan-vermillion-announced-in-washington/‌