Introduction

Recently, the Minnesota, Washington, New York, Maryland and South Dakota State Boards of Education as well as the Commission on Civil Rights have spoken out against the Indian based mascots. They have added their statements to many more that have been issued in the last few years. Over 500 Native organizations, statements from hundreds of tribes, and petitions by activists groups with signatures in the tens of thousands, have made it abundantly clear that Native people find the mascots degrading.

Now, across America, schools and communities are contemplating or resisting the decision of whether or not to eliminate these mascots. While pockets of violence, oppression, threats and hate mail, and other activities that we have not seen the likes of since the 1960s civil rights movement occur in some areas with these mascots, in others people state that the mascot has always been a symbol of pride and honor. What makes these mascots such a volatile subject and why has this issue been largely ignored, not only by the national press and the general public, but also by the US Department of Education and the Justice department?

Most communities shrug their shoulders at what appears to be a unimportant decision to be settled within the community, they take a vote or a poll and decide that what is best for the majority is good enough for them. But what these communities must begin to understand is that the use of the mascot has far reaching effects and that this is in fact a national civil rights issue. Unfortunately, many schools, particularly the students and the alumni, attach great emotions to their right to keep these symbols. Stories abound of the honor they feel they have bestowed upon Native people by using them as mascots. In their defense, they say that they want to represent their schools with Indians because they were proud, fierce, or as was the case with a Holy Cross Catholic School in Kentucky, even because they were spiritual. Schools say these images have been around for years and have never hurt anyone before. The people who are holding tightly to these images saying that they are tired of being politically correct, that it all must stop somewhere. But why is it that we should stop at civil rights for Native people when the rights of all others must be respected?

This movement to drop the Native based mascot began in the 1970s by the National American Indian Congress. Coincidentally, it was also in the 1970s that Indians were granted permission to begin practicing their religion, which had been outlawed for almost a century. Feathers, which Native people had always considered sacred and had long been used in their ceremonies, were now being sported by caricatures of Indian people in a most unsacred way. In fact, the prominence of the use of Native mascots began in the 1930s and became most commonly chosen in the 1950s. The irony was that while Native people were by law not permitted the use of feathers, the freedom to dance, use their drums or even speak their language, schools were adopting their ceremonies for parody-like antics at sports events. Perhaps the NAIC, emboldened by the Freedom of Religion Act of 1978 and with hope and a renewed sense of determination, decided it was time to try to bring about some changes in the use of their sacred symbols. Since then, many schools have changed their names in recognition of the racism inherent in the confiscation of another people’s image and culture. Some schools and students now even refuse to play against teams with Indian based mascots and some newspapers refuse to report on the games played with schools that continue to use their Indian mascot.

Well before the Commission on Civil Right’s decision, many schools welcomed change but there are still more than 2000 schools that resist it, that fight tooth and nail to retain a symbol they feel belongs to them. Within some of these communities it is almost as if a silent war is raging.

In Massachusetts, a high school routinely sets fire to an Indian effigy the night before a game with the local team, The Indians. In Bemidji, Minn., at a pep rally at the Win-E-Mac High School, teachers dressed as stereotypical Indians while another teacher waved his guns at them and told them to get back to the reservation. After the rally, Native students were assaulted in the alley behind the gym.

In Little River, Kansas, an AIM (American Indian Movement) activist that was involved in trying to have the name Redskin removed from signs and schools in his community received criminal threats of physical harm and the rape of his wife. The local police department was resigned that they were incapable of solving the mystery of the origin of these emails and it was only when the FBI stepped in that the local police department took action. It was soon discovered that these extremely vile threats were coming from the high school computers and were in fact the products of two high school students. Some people may have thought that the felony charges these students faced were too harsh but when one considers the consequence of ignoring a violent streak in youngsters, we must only look at places like Columbine, Colorado and Santee, California to know that they must be taken seriously.

Only a few short weeks ago, the local Little River, KS paper, the Hutchinson News, ran a headline that stated, "Orioles Gun Down Indians." What does that say about violence to young people? Some may say, "Its just a team." But the problem many people fail to recognize is that it isn’t just a team. It’s a race of people. And in times when schools are experiencing violence at unprecedented rates, tolerance must become an integral part of a curriculum.

In towns where there is an individual or group that requests the mascot’s removal, there is frequently oppression with undercurrents of violence that permeates the community. In Tomales, a comfortable suburb in California, the president of the school board stood strong against a crowd of 300 people saying the mascot was wrong. In the very community where she had spent most of her life, attended the very high school in question, people turned on her, sent her hate mail, made late night hang up calls, and left aggressive messages on her answering machine. When a group of local Native people came in to speak at a town meeting to ask for the mascots removal, the same Native people that this school maintained it was honoring, the community behaved rudely and aggressively to them.

At the University of North Dakota, where there has been an intense battle over the name The Fighting Sioux, signs have been hung on the Native Studies Building stating, "Go Back To The Rez, Prairie Niggers." The students from the opposing team, yell, "Sioux suck" and wear tee-shirts showing an Indian performing oral sex on a buffalo.

In a school in Wisconsin and another in Michigan, the reaction to removing the mascots was so bad that some parents had to remove their children from the schools. Their children were threatened, called names like redboy and redskin, which reflected the schools mascot names.

In all of these cases, reports have been filled with The Department of Justice. However, at this time very little has been done to investigate or intervene in any these situations. (note: In Poolesville, MD, Richard Regan of the Indian Affairs Office came in to speak four times to different groups including the students, faculty, alumni and parents about the offensive nature of their school’s Indian mascot. He said that while the faculty and the students were fairly receptive, as is often the case, the community behaved with aggressive behavior and his words to me were, "If these people organized, they could have hurt me." In the end, the decision to keep the mascot in Poolesville was determined by a vote. It is unimaginable to wonder what might have happened if the majority vote had been allowed to rule in other civil rights issues, such as slavery.)

Denial of the problem in these communities is common. Most people in quiet suburban towns are perfectly happy with their schools and prefer to see threats such as these as isolated incidents. The mayor of Little River was actually heard to have said that the problem lay with the Native man that sought the name change, not with the students that perpetuated the threats.

What is it about the mascot names and images that many Native Americans find so degrading? Why do they risk threats to their lives and families as well as community rejection by continuing to fight to remove these symbols? To them this is more than just another politically correct situation.

Historically, the name Redskin was the term used for the scalps and the skin removed from the backs and legs of Indians to be used for belts, purses, and reins. Their bones were used for buttons. By 1900, at thirty five to fifty dollars per skin, over a million dollars in bounties were paid for dead Indians. This horrific use of Native people as products is a little known fact in the history of our country but in the 1500s and 1600s the Native people were not regarded as people but as savage sub-human beings of the wilds.

Mascot names like the Red Hordes, the Fighting Sioux, the Red Men, the Red Devils, and the Marauders reflect the opinions of the early settlers in this country and bear no likeness to the truth of who the Native people were or are today. These names perpetuate stereotypes that were intended to and still can strike terror in the hearts of children. Even the less offensive names such as the Indians, Warriors, the Braves, the Chiefs still bring forth images that originated in the imagination of the settlers that made their way west. Ask any child today to describe an Indian and you will surely hear the perfect description of the Native based mascot. The mascots keep these images in our minds and serves to hold back the image of Native people from progressing into the present the way that Little Black Sambo was an indelible image in our minds before it was vanquished to the dark recesses of our memories.

During war times, in order to generate loyalty and support, it is common to deride the opposing side. The condescending names for the Japanese, the Vietnamese, the Germans all come readily to mind when we think back to those wars. But when the wars are over, and the battles are relegated to the history books we usually forget those names and allow the people of those foreign places to move forward in our minds and we accord them respect as we do all others. But by using these mascot names, we keep this wartime condescension alive. Perhaps we do this because in some ways this war is not over.

Certainly there are aspects of this war that are still alive with controversy. Many tribes continue to strive for federal recognition which would entitle them to many benefits, there are lawsuits about treaty rights that have yet to be honored, and there is still antagonism between Native and non-native people in places across the country. In South Dakota, the civil rights commission determined that racial profiling, hate crimes, and discrimination have not changed in twenty years and in fact continues to be a serious problem there. Last year there were several murders of Indian people that went unsolved. At the University of North Dakota, the Indian students are undergoing enough antagonism to be requesting, with their names withheld, transfers to other colleges. The overall feeling of oppression, of wondering who was walking so closely behind them, of death threats to the students as well as the supportive faculty, the intimidation in class by professors that ask the Native students their opinions of the mascots when they are the sole representative of their race present, and the destruction of student projects and property is so oppressive that several tribes have encouraged Native students not to pursue an education there.
Certainly, the Native students that do attend this school can not easily or comfortably participate in the games or attend them with their children. This is in complete violation of the civil rights laws which state that students must be able to participate in all activities of their school. UND’s mascot has been under attack since the 1970s. It almost seemed that the school president, Charles Kupchella, was about to announce its retirement, but at the last minute, a contributor to the school, Ralph Engelstad, stated adamantly that if the name were dropped he would rescind his decision to spend 100 million dollars on a new hockey rink.

In 1977, a major flood caused severe destruction in the area of the university and the hockey rink has been seen as hope for the future, providing jobs and bringing tourism to the area. However, the man that is funding this cause has been found to collect nazi paraphernalia as well as to throw birthday parties in Adolph Hitler’s name. Other departments within the university have refused to accept his money. Upon receipt of his letter stating his decision to walk away from the project and view the 35 million dollars he had already spent as nothing more than a bad investment if the mascot name were changed, he single-handedly destroyed the hope of bringing peace and resolution to that school. Some have called it blackmail, others have said he is truly a man with vision. But when that vision threatens the education and the peaceful existence of the supporters of the mascot removal then thoughts of the segregation and oppression of the 1950s inevitably comes to mind.

Certainly this situation and many others across the country need to be dealt with by the Justice Department. And in fact, since it is clear that mascots can precipitate this kind of oppression as well as offend so many people it is shocking that so many are resisting removing them. This is due, in large part, to the lack of national media attention and to the lack of available education.

In almost all of the communities where Native people seek to remove the mascot, some form of tension and differing degrees of violence can occur. Hate mail is to be expected. Communities declare that the only problems are the people that are asking for the same rights that are taken for granted by all other people in this country. The religious significance of the regalia, feathers and drum that are frequently used in symbols and at games are dismissed as unimportant.
However, it is equally important to remove these mascots in places that are not experiencing racial tension or that do not have a large Native population. When the stereotypical image of a race of people is not only accepted, but actually promoted, that school is promoting racism. It is teaching students that mimicking another culture and that feeling superior to another culture by taking ownership of it and portraying the image of another race of people in any way that suits us, is acceptable. To continue to use these mascots despite the cries for recognition of the detriments to those people and their children, is unconscionable.

It is also important for schools to begin to understand the scope of the issue, that this is not just a small town issue but one that is being raised in almost every state in the country, that it is a movement not unlike the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s. We must begin to take this perspective in order to understand why it is important that even schools that are not experiencing severe racist events must remove the mascots. It is imperative that all schools take a strong stand against supporting the behavior that is going on in other parts of our country. Certainly, it would not have been okay for the north to retain images of Little Black Sambo because they did not have as difficult a time integrating their schools as did the south. The country must take a stand against all forms of racist behavior whether or not that behavior is happening within our own communities. We should all be offended by offensive actions, and we must stand to support those that are oppressed by offensive actions.

This image of the Native American that we perpetuate with the head- dressed Indian head mascot is in many cases the only image of Native people that is projected through the media. They have become almost invisible by the sheer decimation of their people with estimates ranging at around 100 million people killed from 1493 until the turn of the 20th century. Our country has never really been held accountable to that fact. Instead, we have reveled in the power of our Manifest Destiny. But to the Native people that period of time stood for much more than the excitement of western expansion. That period of time was when most of their ancestors were killed. There is not one Native American person in this country today that did not have ancestors that were eliminated at that time. This image of the Native based mascots becomes something so much more to them then. It becomes a symbol of genocide, a trophy, a souvenir of war. It can not and will not ever honor them regardless of the best of intentions. And those Native people that every group manages to find to support their retaining the mascots are themselves victims of another kind of racism, internalized racism. When people have lived with their own oppression for more than a hundred years, they actually become a party to it. "If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em."

Young children need to be accepted by their peers. When the only public image of their culture that a child is presented with is the image of the sports mascot, they can not identify with it. Native students that belong to STAR have told me that because their race, their culture, was so different from that of the other kids in their classes they frequently denied to their peers that they were Indian. They began to disassociate with their families and their cultures. Many refused to learn the language of their families resulting in their unwitting assimilation. As they grew older, they regretted their distance from their culture and many felt as if they had a foot in two worlds without any real grounding in one or the other. Suicide and alcoholism rates for Native adolescents are higher than any other children of any other race. In fact, in schools where it is assumed there aren’t any Native children, it may be because these children do not identify themselves as such.

In this collection of essays, studies, articles and various assorted writings by Native people, one begins to see how the lifestyles, the dissolution of culture, the low self esteem of Native children that is carried through into adulthood is directly associated with the Indian sports mascots.

After all of these years of America taking from the Native people, it is time to give something back. In order to honor Native people, we need to offer them recognition of another kind; recognition of their right to honor their customs and religion without the farcical jabs hurled at them by the cartoonish or stereotypical mascots, of their continued and welcome presence as our neighbors and friends, co- workers and even spouses. With the elimination of the Native based mascot, this recognition, this true honor, can finally begin to come to pass.

Christine Rose
Founder, STAR
Students and Teachers Advocating Respect
Editor, Understanding the Indian Mascot Issue