State of North Dakota will sue the NCAA over Indian mascot ban.

[JW]

Good. We have a small group of Native American activists and politically correct puritans at the NCAA driving the mascot ban, with polling data showing most real Native Americans -- as opposed to the Ward Churchill variety -- actually like Native American mascots and logos. Someone should challenge the NCAA.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060615/...N5bnN1YmNhdA--

WILLISTON, N.D. - State officials voted Thursday to sue the NCAA for penalizing the University of North Dakota over its "Fighting Sioux" nickname and Indian-head logo.

Following a meeting with state Attorney General Wayne Stenehjem, the North Dakota Board of Higher Education voted 8-0 to authorize the lawsuit, which would be handled by Stenehjem.

[clintl]

Do you have a source that documents polling data among Native Americans showing that most like the mascot names and logos? Because I have never seen data at all on this question. And the article clearly says that there's a split among the Sioux themselves within the state of North Dakota. I'm assuming this split is the reason the NCAA is sticking to its ruling.

[wade moore]

William and Mary has written a strong letter to the NCAA that includes similar language to this as far as "inconsistencies". They are considering sueing also, in particular is a point about the fact that our name is trademarked, and you are not allowed to trademark anything that is offensive.

Our legal experts letter - http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=5975

Our Presidents Cover Letter - http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=5972


William and Mary's Mascot is the Tribe. They have no problem with the name, but our "offensive" logo is a WM with two feathers coming out of it. Apparently the feathers are inexpensive.

William and Mary was founded in large part as an indian school. We have had much positive Indian involvement in our history and the local indian tribes have endorsed it.

So, we can't have our feathers but long live the tomahawk chop.

[illinifan999]

I'm still highly offended and disgusted that the Notre Dame Fighting Irish are allowed to use their nickname.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

I'm still highly offended and disgusted that the Notre Dame Fighting Irish are allowed to use their nickname.

Really?

[st.cronin]

I've said this before, but there is a high school here in Santa Fe owned and operated by a conglomerate of reservations, called Santa Fe Indian School. It's nickname is the Braves, and it's logo is similiar to North Dakota's.

[JW]

Originally Posted by clintl

Do you have a source that documents polling data among Native Americans showing that most like the mascot names and logos? Because I have never seen data at all on this question. And the article clearly says that there's a split among the Sioux themselves within the state of North Dakota. I'm assuming this split is the reason the NCAA is sticking to its ruling.

I hesitate to use National Review, since MrB would tell you it is all lies, but this is the first source I found when googling that has a good summary of the results of the Harris Poll sponsored by SI. Let me note that I have read elsewhere that some Native America activists have questioned the validity of the poll.

http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nr030802.shtml

The Peter Harris Research Group polled 352 Native Americans (217 living on reservations and 134 living off) and 743 sports fans; the results are published in SI's March 4 issue.

Here's the most important finding: "Asked if high school and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81 percent of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83 percent of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters, and symbols."

The poll also found that 75 percent of Native Americans don't think the use of these team names and mascots "contributes to discrimination." Opinion is divided about the tomahawk chop displayed at Atlanta Braves games: 48 percent "don't care" about it; 51 percent do care, but more than half of them "like it." The name "Redskins" isn't especially controversial either; 69 percent of Native Americans don't object to it. As a general rule, Indians on reservations were more sensitive about team names and mascots, but not to the point where a majority of them ever sided with the activists on these questions.

Sports Illustrated writer S. L. Price reaches the obvious conclusion: "Although Native American activists are virtually united in opposition to the use of Indian nicknames and mascots, the Native American population sees the issue far differently."

This is the only scientific poll I am aware of ever conducted on the subject.

Of note, my wife is a card-carrying 'bone fide' Cherokee Indian. All the newsletters and the such we get from the tribal leadership are very Indian-activist oriented. Based on that and some other reading, I believe that tribal leadership often speaks loudly on issues that most tribal members could care less about.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Really?

Probably not, but it's an inconsistency and it should also be dealt with.

The "it doesn't matter, most Irish people aren't offended" doesn't wash. It's an ethnic logo and it's stereotypical. All Irish people aren't all little people who walk around with their fists up.

Either treat everyone with consistency or stop policing mascots. Don't go in between.

I'd love to see what would have happened had the NCAA attempted to force ND to change their name and logo.

[illinifan999]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Really?

As someone with Irish descent, I find the little guy jumping up and down highly offensive.

[illinifan999]

dola

that and i hate notre dame

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Really?

I'm actually pretty sure he isn't, but isn't that name, and logo, certainly more offensive than some of these we're discussing?

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Probably not, but it's an inconsistency and it should also be dealt with.

The "it doesn't matter, most Irish people aren't offended" doesn't wash. It's an ethnic logo and it's stereotypical. All Irish people aren't all little people who walk around with their fists up.

Either treat everyone with consistency or stop policing mascots. Don't go in between.

I'd love to see what would have happened had the NCAA attempted to force ND to change their name and logo.

Well, it's even worse than that with their inconsistencies within native american mascots. As stated by both UND and W&M, the idea that the Seminoles (who happen to be a big $$ school for the NCAA) are ok and other schools like UND and W&M (who hmmm, make little to no money for the NCAA) are not is just silly...

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

dola

that and i hate notre dame

This, I understand.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

As someone with Irish descent, I find the little guy jumping up and down highly offensive.

Alrighty.

[Mustang]

Originally Posted by TroyF

All Irish people aren't all little people who walk around with their fists up.

How about the Fightin' Crowes?

[WSUCougar]

Are they going to sue them or Sioux them, or both?

[JW]

My local university, Louisiana-Monroe, was forced to give up its Indian mascot after deciding not to fight the issue. There was a search and vote for a replacement mascot. The winner was Warhawks. Several people said they voted for that choice because it was the most politically incorrect replacement among the choices. And Warhawks generated some publicity because a ULM professor and some other people squawked loudly about the possibility of a warlike, violent mascot and even held one of those campus forums on the issue, to no avail. In fact they probably hurt their own cause.
Warhawks, btw, does have a tenuous connection to Monroe and ULM, since the Flying Tigers of WWII fame use P40 Warhawks in China against the Japanese, and Gen. Claire Chennault, commander of the Flying Tigers, is from the area and once lived in Monroe. The idea is to use the hawk and also use the airplane in various logos. Additionally, many folks thought Warhawks sounded vaguely Indian. I wonder when the NCAA will ban warlike mascots?

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by JW

My local university, Louisiana-Monroe, was forced to give up its Indian mascot after deciding not to fight the issue. There was a search and vote for a replacement mascot. The winner was Warhawks. Several people said they voted for that choice because it was the most politically incorrect replacement among the choices. And Warhawks generated some publicity because a ULM professor and some other people squawked loudly about the possibility of a warlike, violent mascot and even held one of those campus forums on the issue, to no avail. In fact they probably hurt their own cause.
Warhawks, btw, does have a tenuous connection to Monroe and ULM, since the Flying Tigers of WWII fame use P40 Warhawks in China against the Japanese, and Gen. Claire Chennault, commander of the Flying Tigers, is from the area and once lived in Monroe. The idea is to use the hawk and also use the airplane in various logos. Additionally, many folks thought Warhawks sounded vaguely Indian. I wonder when the NCAA will ban warlike mascots?

That's pretty cool.

UTC changed theirs under pressure. Now they have a totally meaningless, artificial mascot name. It's stupid.

[SnDvls]

Pretty soon all the "evil" mascots will be banned too if the NCAA has their way.

good bye Blue Devils...hello Blue Elves
so long Sun Devils...hello Solar Winds
adios Demon Decons...

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by JW

My local university, Louisiana-Monroe, was forced to give up its Indian mascot after deciding not to fight the issue. There was a search and vote for a replacement mascot. The winner was Warhawks. Several people said they voted for that choice because it was the most politically incorrect replacement among the choices. And Warhawks generated some publicity because a ULM professor and some other people squawked loudly about the possibility of a warlike, violent mascot and even held one of those campus forums on the issue, to no avail. In fact they probably hurt their own cause.
Warhawks, btw, does have a tenuous connection to Monroe and ULM, since the Flying Tigers of WWII fame use P40 Warhawks in China against the Japanese, and Gen. Claire Chennault, commander of the Flying Tigers, is from the area and once lived in Monroe. The idea is to use the hawk and also use the airplane in various logos. Additionally, many folks thought Warhawks sounded vaguely Indian. I wonder when the NCAA will ban warlike mascots?

Warhawks is a pretty cool name. I like it. I have a hard time seeing it as a "politically incorrect" name. I also don't see any connection between that name and Native Americans.

Not sure what the old nickname was, but I have a hard time believing it was any cooler than Warhawks. Perhaps it was all for the best.

I think this whole mascot thing is retarded. There are far more important and real, pressing issues facing Native Americans than this. It really does nobody any favors.

[JW]

A discussion of the evil fighting Irish stereotype:

http://www.authorsontheweb.com/featu...h/irish-q4.asp

Malachy McCourt: At times I find myself bristling at some of the blatant taunts at the Irish but then I realize my own life at times has been the ultimate stereotypical example of the wild drinking, fighting, singing Mick or Paddy. So I need not be so thin-skinned when teased.

So if the NCAA standard on offensive mascots is that some people must be offended by the mascot, then I submit that some people are offended by the stereotypical image of a fighting Irishman.

As an aside, I think the Indian tribal leadership missed a golden opportunity here. I've suggested this before. Rather than seeking to ban such mascots, Indian activists could have pressured universities through the NCAA for a cut of the sales of logo/mascot items and worked to modify mascots in ways more acceptable to the activists. But the activists are too busy trying to build more casinos to think objectively on the matter. They just saw a chance, with the help of the NCAA, to get a 'win.' They should have hired Jesse Jackson. He knows how to go for the money.

[Warhammer]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

I'm still highly offended and disgusted that the Notre Dame Fighting Irish are allowed to use their nickname.

Preach it, since I am 1/8th Irish, I am outraged that I am portrayed as a drunken sot who fights a lot. Damn, I try to stay drunk 1/4th of the time!

[Abe Sargent]

EMU changed their mascot name from Hurons to Eagles. Feh.


-Anxiety

[JW]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

Warhawks is a pretty cool name. I like it. I have a hard time seeing it as a "politically incorrect" name. I also don't see any connection between that name and Native Americans.

Not sure what the old nickname was, but I have a hard time believing it was any cooler than Warhawks. Perhaps it was all for the best.

I think this whole mascot thing is retarded. There are far more important and real, pressing issues facing Native Americans than this. It really does nobody any favors.

The old mascot was Indians, chosen when the university was founded, and the official depiction was of a Ouachita Indian, a tribe that no longer exists but was kept alive in memory at ULM, until now.

As for your last point, issues like these bring attention to Indian activists. That is their major purpose.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by JW

The old mascot was Indians, chosen when the university was founded, and the official depiction was of a Ouachita Indian, a tribe that no longer exists but was kept alive in memory at ULM, until now.

As for your last point, issues like these bring attention to Indian activists. That is their major purpose.

But not in a good way. Like I said, there are far more important and real, pressing issues facing Native Americans than this. This kind of nonsense only be-littles these issues and ends up hurting "Indian activists'" causes. Not all attention is good attention.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by JW

The old mascot was Indians, chosen when the university was founded, and the official depiction was of a Ouachita Indian, a tribe that no longer exists but was kept alive in memory at ULM, until now.

As for your last point, issues like these bring attention to Indian activists. That is their major purpose.

Warhakws > Indians.

[Honolulu_Blue]

Originally Posted by JW

The old mascot was Indians, chosen when the university was founded, and the official depiction was of a Ouachita Indian, a tribe that no longer exists but was kept alive in memory at ULM, until now.

[ChiMatt]

No one is forcing them to be a part of the NCAA. If they dont like the rules why don't they just leave the organization?

[JW]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

But not in a good way. Like I said, there are far more important and real, pressing issues facing Native Americans than this. This kind of nonsense only be-littles these issues and ends up hurting "Indian activists'" causes. Not all attention is good attention.

I agree. What I meant was it helps the activists, and only the activists, by giving them exposure and sometimes some more money in fundraising due to their visibility. It is a Jesse Jackson type scam. It does nothing to help real Native Americans and their real problems, though. You are right.

[JW]

Originally Posted by ChiMatt

No one is forcing them to be a part of the NCAA. If they dont like the rules why don't they just leave the organization?

And go where? There is no viable alternative. Not yet.

[King of New York]

Originally Posted by illinifan999

I'm still highly offended and disgusted that the Notre Dame Fighting Irish are allowed to use their nickname.

As someone who is three quarters Irish-American, I, too, am outraged. In fact, every time I see someone wearing "Fighting Irish" paraphenalia, I feel like beating the holy bejezus out of them right then and there.

Wait...

[Karlifornia]

I feel that, after a genocide on par with Hitler's holocaust, if even one person of Native American descent finds the mascots offensive, they should not be used.

[Grammaticus]

Well, they could always be the North Dakota NAMBLA's.

[Karlifornia]

Dola, what if a German football club had a nickname "The Honorable Jews". I've used this example before, and some have derided me for it, but I do feel it's applicable. These nicknames are in poor taste, but then again, this country elected Dubya to two terms, so I guess there's no accounting for taste.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

Dola, what if a German football club had a nickname "The Honorable Jews". I've used this example before, and some have derided me for it, but I do feel it's applicable. These nicknames are in poor taste, but then again, this country elected Dubya to two terms, so I guess there's no accounting for taste.

If this was the argument across the board, I might be on the NCAA's side more. The complete inconsistency of it makes the NCAA lose any moral high-ground though.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

I feel that, after a genocide on par with Hitler's holocaust, if even one person of Native American descent finds the mascots offensive, they should not be used.

Do you feel that way about the losers in every war? Or just the ones who aren't of anglo descent?

[Karlifornia]

Pick up a book about the trail of tears.

I like that Simpsons episode with the Christmas parade. It has a float of Cleveland mascot "Chief Wahoo" as "A tribute to native americans". One of the commentators chimes in with "This float was made entirely out of broken treaties".

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by JW

And go where? There is no viable alternative. Not yet.

No, but there needs to be. The NCAA is a joke. Not as much as their inconsistencies with this, as their ignorance in other issues.

[clintl]

Originally Posted by JW

http://www.nationalreview.com/daily/nr030802.shtml

[b]The Peter Harris Research Group polled 352 Native Americans (217 living on reservations and 134 living off) and 743 sports fans; the results are published in SI's March 4 issue.

Here's the most important finding: "Asked if high school and college teams should stop using Indian nicknames, 81 percent of Native American respondents said no. As for pro sports, 83 percent of Native American respondents said teams should not stop using Indian nicknames, mascots, characters, and symbols."

Thanks. I just had never seen such a poll.

[WVUFAN]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

I feel that, after a genocide on par with Hitler's holocaust, if even one person of Native American descent finds the mascots offensive, they should not be used.

That's a silly statement. Someone, somewhere, is gonna be "offended" by virtually any kind of mascot they select.

Political correctness is the bane of this country.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Do you feel that way about the losers in every war? Or just the ones who aren't of anglo descent?

That's something of a strawman. I think it's more than a fine line between 'losing a war' and 'nearly being slaughtered out of existence'.

[MrBigglesworth]

What standing does the state of ND have to sue a private business over their rules? That's not a rhetorical question, I'm really asking. I feel like it is the NCAA's job to determine what they want associated with their product, even if I disagree with a lot of what the NCAA does.

[WVUFAN]

Is the NCAA considered a private business, or is it federally funded in some way?

[sovereignstar]

It's private.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by sovereignstar

It's private.

It also does not sanction a Division I Football Champion. In other words, there is no NCAA National Champion in Division IA Football.

The state would have a right to sue a private business over their rules. In this case, the merit may be not equally applying the rules as other posters have pointed out.

Best course would be for schools being singled out and the conferences that support them to pull out of the NCAA, eliminating that organizations relevance and value altogether.

Although I do not know enough about how the NCAA is run. Can schools and conferences exert enough influence to eliminate this nonsense without pulling out of the organization?

[Wolvendancer]

I see a lot of bluster in this thread and not a lot of thought.

Yes, the First Nations face a lot of other trouble. But 'things are worse over there' has never been a good reason to continue bad things happen over here.

That aside, can anyone honestly answer this question: Why do racially-charged , -derived, or abusive names belong in sports at all?

The etymology of the word 'redskin' is pretty clear, and its use has been consistent over quite a number of years. The Cleveland Indians logo is obviously a racial caricature. Yet some people equate love of their team to love of anything their team does, which is always a bad idea, whether you're loving a team or a human being.

This issue drags up almost everything I hate about sports, and none of the good. Is the purity of The Catch, or that kid shooting 7 threes in a row, or some guy right now working out to run the marathon at 40, lessened by their team changing its name from The Fighting Endangered Americans? Please.

Just get rid of it.

(love the name Warhawks)

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Do you feel that way about the losers in every war? Or just the ones who aren't of anglo descent?

You're right Franklin - I take it you have no problem with the Honorable Jews nickname ? I don't particularly care for the NCAA (can't stand them - if college sports comes crashing down because of these idiots, I will be thrilled), but the idea that the Native Americans were simply "losers" of a war is absurd.

[Franklinnoble]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

You're right Franklin - I take it you have no problem with the Honorable Jews nickname ? I don't particularly care for the NCAA (can't stand them - if college sports comes crashing down because of these idiots, I will be thrilled), but the idea that the Native Americans were simply "losers" of a war is absurd.

Just because we had larger numbers, better technology, and made the land grab over hundreds of years doesn't mean it wasn't a war. America exists as the result of the Western European civilization imposing its will over a less advanced population.

I really don't even see it as that unfair. It's no different than what the Roman Empire did earlier in history. But somehow, we're all stuck with this "white man's burden" complex... because in recent history, the only time we've been on the receiving end of any real slaughter is when we've done it to ourselves (from a racial perspective).

Personally, I'm a little tired of being told I have to apologize for it. The great nation I am proud to call home wouldn't exist if we'd decided to get back on the boat and leave the place to the natives.

[Wolvendancer]

Originally Posted by Franklinnoble

Just because we had larger numbers, better technology, and made the land grab over hundreds of years doesn't mean it wasn't a war. America exists as the result of the Western European civilization imposing its will over a less advanced population.

This is one of the 'great lies' about the entire sordid affair.

The story is actually about Europe, through deception, trickery, and even occasionally outright warfare, stealing land from an indiginous population who had lost or was in the process of losing 90 to 95% of its population to disease.

It wasn't in any important way a military thing, and it didn't have anything to do with technology. Most tribes adapted their methods of fighting very, very quickly. They wre brought down by lies, diseased blankets, and sheer weight of numbers.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

You're right Franklin - I take it you have no problem with the Honorable Jews nickname ? I don't particularly care for the NCAA (can't stand them - if college sports comes crashing down because of these idiots, I will be thrilled), but the idea that the Native Americans were simply "losers" of a war is absurd.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there are several soccer clubs in Europe (Tottenham is one) with nicknames like The Honorable Jews.

Yes, obviously if a nickname/logo is offensive or racially charged, it should not be used. But a lot of these nicknames/logos, like the one in South Dakota in particular, are quite popular among the tribes. Thats what some of you aren't getting - it's not just that they're not offended, they LIKE them.