The other day on the news, there was a story about the University of Illinois (my alma mater) appealing an NCAA ruling about Chief Illiniwek, the school's "mascot". Apparently because the NCAA feels that the Chief is "hostile" and "abusive", they banned the school from hosting postseason competition.
This blog isn't going to be about the NCAA ruling itself, but it got me thinking about the Chief debates that I always heard about while I was at school.
During my 4 years at U of I, I remember the Chief being a frequently discussed issue, but never cared to get involved on either side. I basically just deleted the emails I got from the Pro-Chief or Anti-Chief groups, walked by the rallies those groups held on the Quad, and neither cheered nor booed the Chief when I went to basketball or football games.
So let me preface all that I'm about to write by saying I fully admit that I'm not the most well informed individual on the subject of the Chief. I don't know all the history and the facts, so just take what I'm writing for what it's worth.
I guess I never really understood what all the uproar was all about. Like I said, I don't really have a strong opinion one way or another, but I think if I were to lean one way, it would be Pro-Chief. I like the fact that our school's name has some unique tie to the state's history, and I think it would be a shame if it ended up being changed to something generic like an animal or color for no good reason.
Of course, that all depends on what constitutes "good reason".
As a Chinese person, one way I have looked at the situation is this - what if the university wanted to change its mascot to the Illinois Fighting Bruce Lees? I don't think I would have a problem with it, because let's face it, Bruce Lee rocks your socks and everyone knows it. After all, he was Chuck Norris's master, and look at how awesome Chuck Norris has become (see Chuck Norris Facts, warning: some profanity).
On the other hand, if they wanted to change the mascot to one of those chinky-eyed guys in straw hats that you see on Abercrombie & Fitch T-Shirts, that would be a different story. I don't think I was as outraged as some other Asians about those shirts, but still, I don't think "Two Wongs Can Make It White" would be a very acceptable motto for a university.
The point is, I don't think that a school using Native American imagery for its mascots or logos is necessarily offensive or racist in itself. It all depends on how it's done. I mean, a good number of states, cities, rivers, buildings, parks, and even cars are named after Native American tribes or words. Is that offensive?
Or, look at some of the other team names out there that involve different groups of people. Fighting Irish, Trojans, Yankees, Patriots. I don't see anyone complaining up a storm that we are stereotyping Irish people as being combative, or trivializing the bravery of our nation's founding fathers by putting them on a football helmet.
In general, I think people like to name their team after something associated with strength, bravery, or just coolness in general. Such as Trojans, Spartans, Angels, Tigers, Lions, Bears, Eagles, etc. You don't see anyone calling themselves the "Surrendering French" or "Dodo Birds", do you?
Before I ever heard of the protests about Chief Illiniwek, I never even thought twice about the Chief being racist or disrespectful. That's not to say that it's definitely not, I'm just saying that it doesn't strike me as being that way. And leads me to think that maybe it's only an issue because some people were bored and decided to make a fuss about something.
When I look at the various Native American team names/mascots out there, some definitely stand out as being racist while others not so much. The Cleveland Indians' Chief Wahoo logo, for example, seems pretty blatantly disrespectful. And I don't see how an NFL team can continue to call itself the Redskins, if that is a racist slur. On the other hand, I always thought the Florida State Seminoles logo looked pretty cool, and that the Chicago Blackhawks logo was done in a reverent manner.
But you know what? My opinion doesn't really matter. Because I'm not Native American, and I don't know jack about the culture or what it's like to be a Native American in this country. I don't know if the Seminole logo is historically inaccurate, or if a white guy doing Chief Illiniwek's dance is considered sacriligious to a given tribe (if anyone out there knows more feel free to enlighten me).
Anyways I think that's what always bugged me about these Pro-Chief/Anti-Chief groups and their public debates. At the risk of generalizing, on the one side you have the Pro-Chief folk, a predominantly older, conservative, Caucasian group. Then you have the Anti-Chief people, who are usually younger, and include Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanic, and Asians.
But where are the Native Americans in this debate? Each side will occasionally quote an individual Native American who is either offended or not offended by the Chief, to support their own argument. The problem is, I have heard quotes supporting both sides. For an issue that is supposedly as critical to our society's well being as some of these people make it, can't someone find out once and for all, what Native American people as a whole think about the Chief?
Bottom line is, just like nobody should care whether I think Chief Illiniwek is racist or not, nobody should care about what the Pro-Chief or Anti-Chief groups have to say, because they don't speak for Native Americans. Everyone is so busy arguing up a storm, taking up a cause and getting so passionate about it, when only one thing matters - what the Native Americans themselves think about the Chief.
It's kind of like Carlos Mencia's story about the Taco Bell dog ("Yo quiero Taco Bell"). White people randomly came up to him and apologized to him for the dog being racist against Latinos, because they heard some people thought it was offensive. But he himself never saw it as being racist at all. Actually thought the commercials were funny, and even pointed out that unlike "your bitch" Lassie, the Taco Bell chihuahua could talk.
If it sounds like I am being Pro-Chief, that's really not my point of writing all this. If a credible and comprehensive poll of Native Americans comes out and definitively says, "Chief Illiniwek is offensive", then it doesn't matter how much tradition and support is behind the Chief, or how much it will suck to change the names and logos, it has to go. But it would be just as horrible to make all these changes, just because some non-Native American college kids who are just looking for any cause to fight for say it's offensive.
