Redskins: Proof Positive That Words Do Hurt.

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 20^th century to approximately 1/6^th 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.