The California Racial Mascots Act

Should the Washington Redskins change their team name due to controversy with Native Americans? That has been the questions since the 1980s. There are many different views on the issue. Some people believe the name should stay, some insist it should be changed, and others are ultimately indifferent. In the end, changing the name is the definite right choice, the Washington Redskins name is offensive to the Native American people and therefore it must go. The name is not only offensive to the Native American people, but people outside of Native American 's find issue with it, and it also promotes ethnic stereotyping.

Proponents believe tribal symbols display honor and respect towards the Native American people. They cheer that the inclusion of this iconography in the athletic arena serves to pay admiration and ongoing tribute to the identity of the Native American culture. They believe that rather than extinguishing Native American mascots as a symbolic reference for schools and sports teams, the choice to sensitively use such imagery should be without sanction.

Sometime in your life, you have most likely attended a school that had some sort of mascot. These mascots, often animals, are carefully selected to represent not only the school’s competitive teams, but also the whole student body. Mascots are also used to represent professional sports teams. However, the use of Native Americans, an entire race of millions of people, as mascots is extremely insulting and should be banned.

Snyder and others strongly believe it’s sacred and deserves to stay with history behind it. The tradition started from tribes and chiefs back in the settlement time. Everything now is respect for the tribes in our nation. The biggest point that the United States wants to get across to the public is pride. In today 's society there is a blind love for the teams and mascots we have today. The hidden picture is seeing that the sports side of our world has the biggest appreciation for Native Americans. Harjo says, “it’s not about choosing sides, it’s about doing the right thing” (Wulf).

There has been many controversy with teams using Native American name for mascots and has become a major issue in today’s society. Many have viewed the Washington Redskins as honor for Native Americans, others see it racist, insensitive, and demeaning. Woods (2016) claims that “the complaint is that the use of stereotypical team names, mascots, and logos perpetuates an ideology that dehumanizes and demeans the cultures of Native Americans” (p. 298). Since the issue arise, many scholars, journalists and leaders have joined the battle to ensure that each team will eliminate the nicknames since it is considered abusive or hostile. It may take time but the trend is growing. More than 1,400 professional, collegiate,

Teams that have the name like Redskins, Indians, and Red Raiders are racist terms used as mascots. Interchange the name with the Negroes, the Jews or the Asians and that sounds even worse but, it all means the same thing. They are all racist terms that no one should use to represent something like a team name. According to racismagainstindians.org, Native Americans were banned from practicing their own religion and would be often thrown in jail if they were caught all the way up to 1978. But when nonnative people at sporting events would dance and sing their songs it would be completely okay. This makes no sense,

He insists that the Redskin mascot is a form of resilience. He declared, “It is a symbol of everything we stand for: strength, courage, pride, and respect - the same values we know guide Native Americans and which are embedded throughout their rich history as the original Americans”(Snyder, 249). This shows how he does not believe the Redskin mascot is supposed to be negative, but to be uplifting to both Native Americans and everyone that comes into contact with the mascot. This is important because it demonstrates that people have different perspectives on what the mascot could mean. Dan Snyder also grew up with a strong relationship with the Washington Redskins. He revealed, “That tradition - the song, the cheer - it mattered so much to me as a child, and I know it matters to every other Redskins fan in the D.C. area and across the nation”(Snyder, 249). This illustrates what the Redskins meant to him when he was a child. This is also important because everyone is going to have a different relationship with the mascots, but if any of them are negative then there should be a

Although Native Americans have told ESPN and the owner of the team that they disliked the term redskin and that they are not comfortable being a mascot or subject to slurs, the name is unsuccessful to do so. Many natives are seen protesting on the street showing people that they want a name change and to raise awareness of

The year is 1991.  The Atlanta Braves had just completed their first trip to the Fall Classic in four decades, and the Washington Redskins were undefeated, well on their way to their third Super Bowl title.  All across the eastern seaboard, sports fans were tasting success - while American Indians were in an uproar.  This year witnessed the peak of the protests over the use of mascots with American Indian themes.  With two of the major professional sports teams in question making front-page news across the country, many of us heard American Indians' complaints for the first time.  Suddenly, thanks to the cries of thousands of demonstrators, the names of many Americans' favorite teams had become synonymous with "nigger."

The debate about whether or not the Washington Redskins should change their name has been a topic for a long time. Some Native Americans have often considered the name a racial slur and think that the league should get rid of the name as it doesn’t represent Native Americans in the best way possible. In 1937 the Redskins moved to Washington and decided to retain the name even though it had faced backlash then. Since then the team has over time shown more caution on using slogans that may disrespect Native Americans. Some slogans they did use include “On the Warpath, with a cartoon drawing of an angry Indian, and another called “Teepee Talk, featuring a clip-art Indian sticking his head out of a tepee” (Shapira, 2016, Para.5). There will always be a debate if the team should get rid of its name but for right now Washington’s football teams name is the Redskins.

Thus, it seems odd to suggest that naming a team after an Indian tribe is a calculated insult. A team or school embraces a mascot that represents the favorable traits and characteristics of its members. Such is the case with the Florida State Seminoles, who are named after a tribe with its origin in that southern state. The Seminole tribe optimistically favored the use of the Indian mascot and even facilitated the design of authentic dress that is proudly worn at sporting and community events. Similar to the Seminoles, the University of Illinois preserved their mascot, Chief Illiniwek, for almost 80 years. Named after the indigenous Illiniwek tribe, the Chief was a customary sideline figure at football and basketball games until 2007 when the NCAA forced the University of Illinois to remove this historic mascot. Unfortunately, the collegiate governing body failed to realize what this symbol meant to the collegiate Illinois community. Illini students were polled regarding the action and a majority disapproved of the decision. Sixty-nine percent of the students voted to keep Chief Illiniwek as their mascot. (Haugh). These students believed that removing Chief Illiniwek as the University of Illinois’ mascot would diminish the passion associated with their university. After the forceful removal of the Native American mascot by the NCAA, the students felt

     Many people do not consider themselves supporting Native American mascots that depict them in a bad manner. But when people walk around with a Atlanta Braves shirt on with a Indian with a tomahawk in his hand, it is degrading to the Indians. It is stereotyping them. School mascots and Sports team’s mascots are named after groups of people for no reason known. Notre Dame was founded by Irish Catholics, but their sports team was named the Fighting Irish. The name Fighting Irish has nothing to do with the Irish Catholics, it depicts them in a wrong way.(Price, 3). Team names can be changed to similar names that do not depict certain groups of people. Like the Redskins can be called the Red Hawks or the

To start the article, Shakley tells the audience a story about the time he came home with a Cleveland Indians hat with the famous Chief Wahoo logo (The Cleveland Indians mascot is Chief Wahoo and is one of the most controversial mascots in American sports). This hat was later thrown in the trash by his mother (that had been fighting against Native American stereotypes her whole life), who Shakley describes as having “the look of betrayal”. Shakley uses strong words to describe his negative opinion on Native American mascots by stating that the North Dakota Fighting Sioux provoked a feeling in him that was embarrassed and angry. Shakley described it as “It was an irritant, like a long forgotten piece of shrapnel working its way to

The American Psychological Association had found that using representation of the mascots “undermines the educational experiences of members of all communities- especially those who have had little or no contact with Indigenous peoples” (APA). When people view a culture being paraded as a mascot, it can become their singular view and knowledge on the ethnic group. There is nothing to stop the formulation of what students know about Native Americans when there are few natives around. With the allowance of mascots to represent Native American in a way as they do now, wearing headdresses or war paint and using “peace pipes” has become a trend and something “cool” to do. Headdresses are traditionally a part of the Plains tribes and are considered sacred. Only revered warriors or significant people could wear war bonnets or headdresses. Feathers, especially eagle feathers, are very sacred to Native Americans. These appropriations continue to be a negative and demeaning aspect of using Native Americans as

Schaefer (2012) states, “discrimination is the denial of opportunities and equal rights to individuals and groups because of prejudice or other arbitrary reasons” (Schaefer, 2012). Courtland Milloy inquires about discrimination in the article Do the Redskins Need a New Name? by P. J. Orvetti (2011) when he states, “Why is it okay to use “redskins” but not, say “blackskins” or “whiteskins” (Orvetti, 2011)? When I mentioned Milloy’s statement to a peer, she seemed somewhat surprised, because it never occurred to her that “redskins” was an offensive term, she claimed that she only knew this term from its relation to the football team. Although using altered images of Native American may seem relatively harmless, they cause long term effects on a race because people begin to see the race as more of a joke than an actual group of people who have emotions and are worthy of the same rights and respect as any other race. When I was younger, every picture or video I saw of a Native American depicted people adorned in the same feather covered outfit, speaking the same clichéd dialects, and making “howling” or “whooping” noises. For instance, in Walt Disney’s