[oman]

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.

[oman]

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.