The CardBoard
Using people groups as mascots - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Using people groups as mascots (/thread-4488.html)

Pages: 1 2

Using people groups as mascots - oman - 12-07-2012

I think some real or manufactured Stanford Indian controversy would bring more attention to the brand. 

[Image: bcd75ba1f3bff3f7ae9c3fbc171f9ab003d44ae2...f766506b2b]

(I kind of dug those feathers on the pom pom girls in the other thread.)

Re: Using people groups as mascots - dabigv13 - 12-07-2012

I realize that the fictional Indian, as a former mascot, has some significant meaning to a portion of the people on this board, but I know too many real, actual Stanford alums who are hurt by the stereotypical betrayal to not cringe whenever I see it depicted.

The fact that it seems to be making a comeback in some ironic/hipster fashion amongst current students and young alums is unfortunate.

Anyway, I'm fairly sure that the Stanford Indian has very little to do with the AD revenue of Stanford in 2012, so if people want to discuss the Indian, let's do it in another thread.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - terry - 12-07-2012

The clownish caricature of the Indian posted in this thread is the sort of thing that led Stanford to drop the Indian nickname and mascot.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - OutsiderFan - 12-07-2012

[Image: images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJYNse3vcIJmPvXWxslpi...YrwbawStXg]

So are you saying that if Stanford went to a Indian mascot like this, there would be no offense?

Re: Using people groups as mascots - washingtonismoney - 12-07-2012

I don't have as much of a problem with Seminoles nickname because it's my understanding that the Seminoles themselves are fine with it. And if the people allegedly being insulted are not, in fact, insulted I don't see why I should be vicariously insulted.

I'm not a big fan of Indians, though. I'm still holding out for Robber Barons.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - oman - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 12:47 PM)dabigv link Wrote:I realize that the fictional Indian, as a former mascot, has some significant meaning to a portion of the people on this board, but I know too many real, actual Stanford alums who are hurt by the stereotypical betrayal to not cringe whenever I see it depicted.
...
Anyway, I'm fairly sure that the Stanford Indian has very little to do with the AD revenue of Stanford in 2012, so if people want to discuss the Indian, let's do it in another thread.

There is certainly a link between AD revenue and marketing, so to me the subject is relevant.  Given that many of the high schoolers I talk to would go to Oregon solely for the football uniforms, I would think that for some reason if Stanford gear took off it would have at least some effect on AD revenue. 

As outsider implies, I'm not sure the clownish caricature or the "waiver" granted by the Seminoles is really the point.

Would Stanford ever officially bring back the Indian?  No.  But I saw enough of the t-shirts at the Fiesta Bowl to think that some kind of underground sales could occur.



Re: Using people groups as mascots - dabigv13 - 12-07-2012

Again, I think we should move this to a different thread if we're going to have a discussion about it, but you're incorrect garvin. If you polled Stanford alumni Native-Americans, I think the results would be substantially different. Certainly the Native-American alums I know all do not like the portrayal. One of them linked this blogpost on facebook a little while back:

http://nativeappropriations.blogspot.com/2012/10/when-offensive-indian-mascots-hit-too.html#more

Re: Using people groups as mascots - terry - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 02:20 PM)garvin link Wrote:Cardinal is firmly established as the nickname for Stanford teams, and I see no need to refight that battle. But this idea that the name is or was objectionable to a substantial number of Indians is pure myth.

Garvin --

In 1972, 55 of Stanford's Native American students and staff signed a petition in which they denounced the use of the Indian nickname and mascot and called for it to be dropped. The petition referred to the "demeaning, insulting ways in which this symbol distorts the image of the Native American and prostitutes the religious aspects of all tribes in general."

Here's a copy of the petition -- http://lib.stanford.edu/files/8655_mascot_petition.pdf

I don't think it's fair to say it is "pure myth" that the Indian was objectionable to a substantial number of Native Americans. Obviously, it was objectionable to the members of the Stanford community who signed the petition.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - oman - 12-07-2012

I think all Garvin is saying is that it might be myth to equate 55 people to a "substantial number of Native Americans".

To me, the linked blog has one salient and important fact.  The writer finds the mascot objectionable.  If Stanford decided that any number of persons find such a mascot or image objectionable, that is good enough.

The actual arguments made in the link to me were somewhat weak because they made some pretty incredible assumptions about those who might not find the mascot objectionable. 

We all have our own prejudices.  To me, the term "Ole Miss" is very objectionable, but obviously in a way completely unrelated to an obvious caricature.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - terry - 12-07-2012

The 55 people who signed the petition in 1972 undoubtedly made up a "substantial" portion of Stanford's Native American community. As of 1968, there were only 4 Native American students at Stanford. Native American enrollment increased in the early 1970s, but I'll bet the number of Native American students still was significantly under 100 in 1972. Today, Stanford's Native American undergraduate enrollment is 63. In that context, the 55 people who signed the petition seem like a substantial number. I don't think it's right to say it's "pure myth" that substantial numbers of Native Americans objected to the Indian.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - oman - 12-07-2012

The following is not linked for the credibility of the source.  Just to show that this issue isn't necessarily dead, nor was opinion uniform at the time.

http://stanfordreview.org/old_archives/Archive/Volume_XXXVI/Issue_4/Features/features2.shtml


I'm not sure Garvin is doing anything other than saying that we don't have the data to show that a majority of Native Americans have objections to Native American "mascots".

Re: Using people groups as mascots - Embo - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 02:53 PM)oman link Wrote:We all have our own prejudices.  To me, the term "Ole Miss" is very objectionable, but obviously in a way completely unrelated to an obvious caricature.


I remember reading a long time ago (the early 90's) a  feature story in Sports Illustrated about Jackie Sherrill, a coach who sometimes drew the attention of NCAA investigators, when he went to Starkville to coach Mississippi State,  The article described the hatred between Mississippi and MSU.  It also mentioned something that I never forgot - the origins of "Ole Miss".  The article explained that term came from the days of slavery - the slaves would call the daughter of the plantation owner "Young Miss" whereas the wife of the master would be called "Ole Miss".  Hence, this nickname for the school is an unpleasant reference for those with knowledge of history.

oman, is there more to the story, or do I have it right?

Re: Using people groups as mascots - oman - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 03:25 PM)Embo link Wrote:I remember reading a long time ago (the early 90's) a  feature story in Sports Illustrated about Jackie Sherrill, a coach who sometimes drew the attention of NCAA investigators, when he went to Starkville to coach Mississippi State,  The article described the hatred between Mississippi and MSU.  It also mentioned something that I never forgot - the origins of "Ole Miss".  The article explained that term came from the days of slavery - the slaves would call the daughter of the plantation owner "Young Miss" whereas the wife of the master would be called "Ole Miss".  Hence, this nickname for the school is an unpleasant reference for those with knowledge of history.

oman, is there more to the story, or do I have it right?

I think you are correct, although I originally misunderstood it to mean the top ranking female slave in the household.

My personal reasons to find it objectionable are that it is such a direct link to that particular past.  Whereas I see the caricatures, those to me exist in their own cartoon world.  I think someone above used the word "stereotypical betrayal" which describes the confusing nature of mascots infused with so much historical confusion and prejudice.

Whereas Ole miss?  No caricature needed.

Not saying one is worse than the other.  Just that we each have our own buttons. 

Re: Using people groups as mascots - washingtonismoney - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 02:20 PM)garvin link Wrote:In 2002, in conjunction with a long piece on the subject, Sports Illustrated polled Indians on their feelings about the use of Indian-related mascots. 83 percent said that professional teams teams should NOT stop using Indian nicknames, mascots or symbols. I see no reason to suppose the results would have been different if college nicknames or mascots had been included.

Of course, it's different to ask about all mascots and a certain portion of the category. I think there's a difference between Seminoles on one hand and Chief Wahoo and Redskins on the other. If you don't think there's a diffrence, when's the last time you greeted a Native American with, "Hail, Redskin!"?

Re: Using people groups as mascots - jayasena - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 03:39 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Of course, it's different to ask about all mascots and a certain portion of the category. I think there's a difference between Seminoles on one hand and Chief Wahoo and Redskins on the other. If you don't think there's a diffrence, when's the last time you greeted a Native American with, "Hail, Redskin!"?

To quote Chris Rock: "Washington Redskins, that's not nice! That's a racial slur! That's kind of like having the New York Nig**rs"

Re: Using people groups as mascots - CrazedZooChimp - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 02:32 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Again, I think we should move this to a different thread if we're going to have a discussion about it, but you're incorrect garvin. If you polled Stanford alumni Native-Americans, I think the results would be substantially different. Certainly the Native-American alums I know all do not like the portrayal. One of them linked this blogpost on facebook a little while back:

http://nativeappropriations.blogspot.com/2012/10/when-offensive-indian-mascots-hit-too.html#more

My interpretation of that paragraph is that the author didn't understand that the Wildcat was the mascot of Arizona...

Re: Using people groups as mascots - yvonne - 12-07-2012

(12-07-2012, 03:25 PM)Embo link Wrote:[quote author=oman link=topic=7128.msg54805#msg54805 date=1354917181]
We all have our own prejudices.  To me, the term "Ole Miss" is very objectionable, but obviously in a way completely unrelated to an obvious caricature.


I remember reading a long time ago (the early 90's) a  feature story in Sports Illustrated about Jackie Sherrill, a coach who sometimes drew the attention of NCAA investigators, when he went to Starkville to coach Mississippi State,  The article described the hatred between Mississippi and MSU.  It also mentioned something that I never forgot - the origins of "Ole Miss".  The article explained that term came from the days of slavery - the slaves would call the daughter of the plantation owner "Young Miss" whereas the wife of the master would be called "Ole Miss".  Hence, this nickname for the school is an unpleasant reference for those with knowledge of history.

oman, is there more to the story, or do I have it right?
[/quote]

That was how I first learned the origins of the name, as well. Calling a university Ole Miss is like calling one Massa.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - pefloresjr - 12-08-2012

(12-07-2012, 02:32 PM)dabigv link Wrote:Again, I think we should move this to a different thread if we're going to have a discussion about it, but you're incorrect garvin. If you polled Stanford alumni Native-Americans, I think the results would be substantially different. Certainly the Native-American alums I know all do not like the portrayal. One of them linked this blogpost on facebook a little while back:

http://nativeappropriations.blogspot.com/2012/10/when-offensive-indian-mascots-hit-too.html#more

I spend time at a shared Latino/Native American tailgate party every year along with other events and my experience is the same as dabigvi's.  My opinion is that ethinicities or races should not be used as mascots because it usually ends up being disrespectful.  However, if the domers stick to their stereotype, I reserve the right to make fun of any other aspects of that stereotype to them or anyone who likes them. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - fullmetal - 12-08-2012

I'm friends with a few Stanford native alumni, and they're upset about the resurgence of the Indian mascot with the younger fans.  I sympathize greatly and cannot support the Indian mascot.

Re: Using people groups as mascots - doubledub - 12-08-2012

Here is what SI said about the use of the Indian as a mascot (which I find completely offensive, in the same way that Chris Rock describes).  I find it sad and sickening that the school does nothing to discourage people from wearing such shirts.  They will spend more time to make sure you park in the right place on game day...

Quote:"Indeed, a recent SI poll suggests that although Native American activists are virtually united in opposition to the use of Indian nicknames and mascots, the Native American population sees the issue far differently.
...

"I take the middle ground," says Leigh J. Kuwanwisiwma, 51, director of the Hopi Cultural Preservation Office in Kykotsmovi, Ariz., and an avid devotee of the Atlanta Braves. "I don't see anything wrong with Indian nicknames as long as they're not meant to be derogatory. Some tribal schools on Arizona reservations use Indians as a nickname themselves. The Phoenix Indian High School's newspaper is The Redskin. I don't mind the tomahawk chop. It's all in good fun. This is sports, after all. In my living room, I'll be watching a Braves game and occasionally do the chop."

Native American activists dismiss such opinion as misguided ("There are happy campers on every plantation," says Suzan Harjo, president of the Morning Star Institute, an Indian-rights organization based in Washington, D.C.) or as evidence that Native Americans' self-esteem has fallen so low that they don't even know when they're being insulted. American Indians -- unlike, say, the Irish Catholics who founded Notre Dame and named its teams the Fighting Irish -- had no hand in creating most of the teams that use their names; their identities were plucked from them wholesale and used for frivolous purposes, like firing up fans at ball games.

...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/magazine/08/17/indian.wars030402/index.html