from Amazon
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Offender v Offendee
When I look at something, I always ask:
In this day-and-age, if we had an expansion team in some sport, would we call them The Indians? Maybe. Probably in Canada. While Canada is not beyond reproach, they probably have more respect for Native Americans than the U.S. does. I don’t think Nunavut could happen in America. (Please, no need to detail the atrocities by either side here. I’m not looking to see which country is the worst. I do encourage that you post anything positive that is done, by any government.)If this were brand-new, would I still do it this way?
Anyway, if you call a team The Indians, it’s up to the offendees to determine if they are in fact offended. If the name is given because of respect, and Native Americans give their blessing, then we don’t have an issue. My guess is that the name Indians would be good to go. But the Indians logo? Would that logo ever have possibly been conceived, if this was an expansion team? Would anything like this possibly have been created for the first time today?
It’s very simple. The oppressors never think of the oppressees. The offenders don’t think of the offendees. It up to the “ees” to decide if the “ers” are being respectful or not. They make the call. And, my guess is that if the Cleveland Indians give up their logo for something new, they can spin this as a huge positive for recognizing how completely ridiculous they have been, and a marketing blitz for a snazzy new logo.
Why in the world carry on a tradition that you would not in your wildest dream have dared to start in the first place?
That the mascot is called Chief Wahoo says all that needs to be said. That this persists really is ridiculous and speaks volumes of our historical disregard for the American Indians and an inability to (re)consider history with a fairer eye.