The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision to
strip the Washington Redskins, a National Football League (NFL) team, of their
registrations has created an atmosphere ripe for debate. While the ruling has sparked conversations on
the issue of racial slurs, the reactions of many white male Americans is
concerning. The recent controversy
surrounding the revocation of the Washington Redskins’ trademark is a symptom
of a much larger issue. The plight of
Native Americans continues to be largely overlooked and misunderstood by the
majority of Americans. In order to
promote harmony and understanding between cultures, professional and college
athletic teams should consider changing racially charged names.
Despite claims that the current lawsuit and ruling
are nothing more than political pandering, history indicates otherwise. According to The Christian Science Monitor:
But for nearly forty years, Native
American organizations have been working to end the use of Indian names and
symbols as sports mascots in the US – at high schools, colleges, and among
professional teams. They have had
significant success at the college and high school levels, persuading officials
that Indian names and mascots for sports teams are derogatory and demeaning to
Native Americans. For example, between
1991 and 2008, eleven high schools and two colleges discontinued the use of
“Redskins” as their team name. They include Miami University in Ohio and
Southern Nazarene University in Oklahoma (Richey) .
In
fact, efforts to change the Washington Redskins name can be traced back to the
early 1970’s. At that time the National
Congress of American Indians met with the team owner and urged him to change
the name. He declined. It was not until 1992 that an actual lawsuit
was filed against the team by longtime advocate for Native American rights,
Suzan Shown Harjo, who is herself a Cheyenne (Mears) . That suit was ultimately overturned in 2003
by a federal appeals court. The court
decided that the suit was filed too late after the team registered the
trademark. The current suit, filed by Navajo
Amanda Blackhorse, argued that the term “Redskin” is offensive based on the common
meaning and usage of the term when it was adopted. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision
is based on cultural sensitivity, not political pandering.
Some argue that changing the name of the Washington
Redskins is a slippery slope of political correctness. They point an imaginary line that must be
drawn between common sense and complete chaos.
They argue that names such as Braves, Chiefs, Indians, and even Redskins
actually honor and pay homage to Native Americans. The name Redskin has been in place since
1933. Its current usage is said to honor
William Henry "Lone Star" Dietz, who claimed Native ancestry. He is said to have coached the Washington
State University to victory at the Rose Bowl wearing full Indian garb (Richey) .
 |
| William Henry "Lone Star" Dietz |
Supporters point to a small group of
indigenous people named Beothuk. The Beothuk
would paint their clothing and bodies with red ocher for religious reasons, as
well as for natural insect repellent.
Some other tribes referred to the Beothuk as red people (Waldman) . Practices such as these only support the
origin of the word, not its current meaning.
Ironically, the 1972 meeting between the National Congress of American
Indians and then team owner, Edward Bennett Williams, spawned an olive branch
of sorts. Blackfoot Indian Walter
Wetzel, president of the National Congress of American Indians, urged Williams
to use an image of an Indian in full headdress as the Redskins’ logo. Within a few weeks a new logo was chosen
based on Wetzel’s recommendation (Vargas) . While these are valid arguments for retaining
the name Redskins as a point of pride, they do not take into account the
negative impact the word has had through history.
To that end, the case for changing the name of the
Redskins carries more weight than the case to keep it. Over the last 150-200 years, the term redskin
has taken a dramatic turn from a word which once honored Native Americans. A National Public Radio (NPR) blog by Lakshmi
Gandhi, details the evolution of the term from self-identity into a racially
stereotypical slur. One of the most
surprising quotes comes from the beloved author of The Wizard of Oz, L. Frank Baum.
In referencing the massacre at Wounded Knee he wrote, “With his fall the
nobility of the Redskin is extinguished, and what few are left are a pack of
whining curs who lick the hand that smites them” (Gandhi) . Lakshmi Gandhi continues to detail this
change in attitude by citing additional works by authors such as poet Earl
Emmons. Emmons’ book, entitled Redskin Rimes, is credited with fueling
racial hatred towards Indians in the early twentieth century. Lakshmi Gandhi states that Redskin Rimes was “a book so offensive I
had to double-check to make sure it wasn't a parody of the racism of that era” (Gandhi) . Some Native Americans find the word redskin just
as offensive as African Americans view the “N-word”. There also exists the argument that some
Native Americans have and do refer to themselves as redskins. Again, just as in the N-word, the internal
usage of racial slurs within a group is acceptable, while outside the group it
is offensive. Most importantly, the
disengagement of most Native Americans from the debate actually supports the
change of the name.
 |
| Cover of Redskin Rimes by Earl H. Emmons |
Furthermore, this detachment is an indication of the
much larger issue faced by Native Americans. The lack of understanding and indifference on
the part of white America is the real issue.
As Nobel Prize recipient Elie Wiesel so profoundly put it, “The opposite
of love is not hate, it’s indifference….Indifference, to me, is the epitome of
evil” (qtd. in Sanoff 68). Blackfoot Indian blogger, Gyasi Ross, explains,
“The topic has been championed by a very small group of Natives who do not have
to worry about the lower tiers in Maslow's hierarchy. Many of us, even those who agree with that
stance, are simply too busy keeping the lights on to worry too much about
mascots” (Ross) . While that may present itself as apathy, the
plain truth is the plight of Native Americans on the reservation has been
largely ignored by white America. The
plague of poverty, drug abuse, alcoholism, and lack of quality education serve
to reinforce this alienation.
The estrangement of Native Americans not only from
their lands, but from their culture, began over three-hundred years ago. In a paper on education among Native
Americans, Sherman Bold Warrior asserts that estimates place the native
population at approximately three million people at time of the first
settlements by Europeans. Since that
number was greatly diminished by the 20th century to approximately 1/6th
of that number, it is a fair assessment to term the action genocide. Bold Warrior further asserts that while
physical genocide had ended by the turn of the century, cultural genocide
continued for decades (Warrior) . Despite the belief that Native Americans have
prospered due to reservation casinos and other gaming, they remain among the
poorest culture in our nation. It is
disgraceful that the majority of Americans continue to believe that the “noble
savage” is content with life on the reservation. A very sobering article entitled “Running in
Place in Indian Country” shatters this misconception. The article details life on the reservation,
“On the 2.8 million-acre Pine Ridge Indian Reservation--home to nearly 40,000
members of the Oglala Lakota Sioux nation--alcoholism and suicide, especially
among young people, occur at alarmingly high rates. Families that have been
poor since the U.S. government forced tribes onto reservations more than 120
years ago see few prospects for breaking out of seven or eight generations of
profound poverty” (Maxwell) . Most of the residents of the Pine Ridge
reservation, upwards of 80% according to tribal government, are
unemployed. The average yearly salary is
far below the poverty level at $8,000 per year.
Additionally, four of five of the poorest counties in American are
within reservation lands (Maxwell) . The attempted assimilation of Native
Americans via cultural genocide, coupled with removal from their lands, has
only served to alienate them from the rest of society. The continued use of racially charged names
reinforces the intolerance of Native American culture and perpetuates
indifference.
 |
| Photo: Redskin name protest/ AP |
Racially charged words, such as redskin, have been scientifically
proven via psychological study to subconsciously trigger negative feelings towards
Native Americans. One such study
conducted by the Centers for American Indian and Alaska Native Health also
substantiates the fact it creates a subconscious bias among non-natives. The study is disturbingly titled Do American Indian Mascots = American Indian
People? It focuses on the hypothesis
that white Americans may not consciously feel bias towards Native Americans
based on sports mascots and names. The
article details widely accepted physiological tests and techniques that reliably
determine assumptions and judgments. The
technique, Implicit Associate Test, has been used to determine bias against
other minorities. The findings conclude
that despite the assertion by participants that mascots and team names do not
create bias, their subconscious believes otherwise. The article also points to a disturbing
finding that nonnative Americans may perceive the mascots as the same as the
actual race (John Chaney) .
In addition, another
study examines the link between the genocidal history of Native Americans and
its effect on their culture today. The
findings of this study are even more startling since its spotlight is on Native
Americans living in an urban environment.
The study presumed that these Native Americans would be more assimilated
into American culture; thus, they would be less affected by the trauma of
reservation life. A poor self-image is thought
to be the greatest contributing factor to poverty and addiction on the
reservation. However, life on the
reservation may provide a support system by way of culture and heritage not
found in urban America. Since it has
been 120 years since Natives were stripped of their land and heritage by
removal to reservations, it may be difficult to comprehend how trauma could
still be a factor in self-image and self-worth.
In the Journal of Loss and Trauma,
the fact is presented that low self-esteem among Native Americans, especially
in urban areas, may be rooted in the accumulation of a history filled with
heartache, anguish, hopelessness, and loss (Wiechel) .
Source:
Wiechelt, Shelly A., et al. "Historical Trauma Among Urban American
Indians: Impact On Substance Abuse And Family Cohesion." Journal Of Loss And Trauma 17.4 (2012):
319-336. ERIC. Web. 12 July 2014.
The results of this study show that
three of the five top historical loss scale items center on either respect or
self-respect (see table 1.). All of
these categories provide dramatic statistics regarding Native Americans’ sense
of self-worth. In either setting, the
continued use of racial stereotypes is a constant reminder to Native Americans
of the abuse and injustice perpetrated upon their race.
Perhaps, most disconcerting of all is the
indifference shown on the part of white Americans to the misery and suffering
of Native Americans. The misconception that
Native Americans’ lives are better than before Europeans arrived continues to
this day. This delusion is an indication
of the disconnect that still exists between white America and her Native
brothers and sisters. Almost as disturbing
is that the majority of debate over the Redskins’ name change has been among
white America. Possibly, most Americans
are taking their cue from people such as Daniel Synder, whose defiance only
adds to intolerance of other races. As
he vowed, “We'll never change the name, it's that simple. NEVER — you can use
caps” (Brady) . They may even be influenced by the beloved
coach of fifteen years, Joe Gibbs. Joe
Gibbs has been called many things in his long career; coach, owner, fan,
Christian, father, and husband. The one
thing he has never been called is a racist.
He is not. Most Americans are not
racists either, but ignorance and intolerance of other cultures is subtle from
of racism called bias. Gibbs’ remarks
regarding the Redskins’ name, mascot and fight song resound with the pride he
holds having been their coach for fifteen years. In a recent interview, Gibbs stated, “It was
always prideful. It was courage involved.
We have a song, 'Hail To The Redskins.' And so everything -- everything
-- about that name has been positive for me in my past” (Breech) . However, the fight song originally contained
references to scalping and broken English.
One of the lines that was since eliminated was, "Scalp 'em, swamp
'em — we will take 'em big score / Read 'em, weep 'em, touchdown! — we want
heap more!" (Gandhi) . Both Synder and Gibbs are too close to the
issue to clearly see how the term Redskin disparages and degrades another
culture.
Since the controversy surrounding the Washington
Redskins’ name is a symptom of a greater problem, additional action is required
to increase harmony and understanding. No
matter how subtle the form of racism, it must not be tolerated in America. To argue that only a few Navajos are offended
by the name redskins, is not accurate since the National Congress of American
Indians has urged the change in name since 1972. Even if it were factual, that would not be
reason to continue degrading another culture. The actions of the United States Patent Office
should be a catalyst for change. The
ruling may not force team owners to change names, but it should be a catalyst
for dialogue on the bigger issues facing our Native Americans. There are more appropriate ways to honor
Native Americans such as involvement in and establishment of foundations,
scholarships, volunteer opportunities, and charities. Personal interaction between cultures will facilitate peace, harmony and understanding which will lead to healing. The
ruling of Patent Office alone will not be enough to facilitate a change of
attitude towards Native Americans.
Works Cited
Brady,
Erik. "Daniel Snyder says Redskins will never change name." 10 May
2013. usatoday.com. Web. 17 July 2014.
Breech,
John. "Joe Gibbs: Redskins name is prideful, has always been positive for
me." 28 June 2014. cbssports.com. Web. 17 July 2014.
Bold
Warrior, Sherman. For The Administrator:
Realities for The Native American And Education. n.p.: 1992. ERIC. Web. 12 July 2014.
Chaney, John, Amanda Burke, and
Edward Burkley. "Do American Indian Mascots = American Indian People?
Examining Implicit Bias Towards American Indian People And American Indian
Mascots." American Indian And Alaska
Native Mental Health Research: The Journal Of The National Center 18.1
(2011): 42-62. ERIC. Web. 12 July
2014.
Gandhi,
Lakshmi. “Are You Ready For Some Controversy? The History of 'Redskin'." NPR: Code Switch. 9 September 2013: 38.
Web. 8 July 2014.
Mears,
Bill.
"http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/16/scotus.redskins/index.html."
n.d. cnn.com. Web. 15 July 2014.
Richey,
Warren. "http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2009/1116/p02s07-usju.html."
16 November 2009. The Christian Science Monitor. Web. 15 July 2014.
Maxwell, Lesli A. "Running
In Place In Indian Country." Education
Week 33.13 (2013): 1. MasterFILE
Premier. Web. 12 July 2014.
Ross,
Gyasi. “"Redskins": A Native's Guide To Debating An Inglorious Word.”
Deadspin. 16 October 2013. Web. 8
July 2014.
Sanoff, Alvin P. "One Must Not Forget." U.S.
News & World Report 27 October 1986: 68. Print.
Vargas, Theresa. "One Native American family with Redskins ties
disagrees on whether name is offensive." The Washington Post. 6 July 2014. Web. 13 July 2014.
Wiechelt,
Shelly A., et al. "Historical Trauma Among Urban American Indians: Impact
On Substance Abuse And Family Cohesion." Journal Of Loss And Trauma 17.4 (2012): 319-336. ERIC. Web. 12 July 2014.
