The Tomahawk Chop

I don't get it. I mean, ok, I sort of get it, but not really. All the hubbub over the use of Native American references in sports mascots. I am not conjuring up ugly stereotypes of Indians when I see the Atlanta Braves on TV nor am I snickering at Indians when I see Chief Wahoo of the Cleveland franchise.

Yet, the PC NCAA is blackmailing colleges into changing their history and legacy and ultimately their mascots if they want to continue competing in sports. I find THAT offensive.

Some chief of the Cherokee nation was on WBAP this morning and likened his take of the mascot for the Washington Redskins as being comparable to a black person being called a nigger. He was genuinely sincere. Now, I hate the N word and won't use it. I won't tolerate for it to be used around me or my family, either. Not that I really hear anyone even saying it anymore, thankfully. And, we would never tolerate a team like the Detroit Niggers in a sports team. It just wouldn't happen and no one - regardless of color - would think it was appropriate. So, it is making me question my own feelings about the Indian mascots.

Are they REALLY that offensive to Native Americans? I mean, it isn't like we're promoting some stereotype by calling them the Drunken Indians or the Lazy Indians. NO, they're called Braves, they're called Seminoles ... names that I think command respect and strength. I, personally, see nothing disrespectful in the names. Ok, the team that has the mascot of the Savages, I could see THAT being offensive. But, now, what if there was a new franchise called the Cincinnati Crackers. Would that bother me? The mascot is some uptight white dude in a suit. Or maybe the Kennedale Rednecks and the mascot is some dude with a beer belly wearing a wife-beater. Ok, yeah, I can see those being a little offensive to me as a white person.

But, there is also the Rebels. I'm from the South and we are proud of our heritage and ashamed of the slavery aspects, but simply because a team is named the Rebs, it doesn't mean they promote slavery or bigotry. It is just a historic symbol of our history. I don't relate any other meanings with it. So, playing devil's advocate, what if someone wanted to be the New Braunfels Nazis. Yikes, that is REALLY bad and would be hateful to the Jews.

So, who is right and who is wrong? I don't know. I think there are points to be made on both sides. It is easy for me to say that Native Americans are making too big of a stink about the issue and agencies like the NCAA is being too PC. But, that is easy for me to say. I'm not a part of that minority group and have no idea who it feels to be characterized like that.

I don't see the offense in keeping the Native American references. My immediate feeling is that the tribes can take those mascots and create the spin they'd like the public to have about them. Use it to your advantage. Take this controversy and create a positive public image about your heritage and use it as a springboard to publicize the plight of the tribes. Don't take it and whine or it is going to backfire on you.

*putting my soapbox away and preparing for the barrage of comments from both sides*