• It is not offensive

    When the Native American mascots were created they were not created as an insult to Native Americans. It is not a racist thing to use a Native American as a mascot and it does not stereotype them . Using the Native American as a mascot honors them and it brings support to the team.

  • Respect respect respect

    I would guess that every single person who responded NO are white. The bottom line is that if the Native Americans are offended by it then it should be stopped. We are not talking about people from another country being offended by this in America we are talking about the people who were here before us and tried to exist peacefully with the European nuts that came over an destroyed their entire culture. You can be sure that if a white man was offended by something it would cease to exist. This country lacks respect.

  • It's Vulgar and Disgraceful

    It's time to let it go and grow up. I'm sorry, but how hard is it to treat people with respect. Using Native Americans as mascots is one of our proudest and most racist traditions. Having some teenager run around in war paint and head dress whooping it up at the high school football game doesn't honor anyone's culture. It's just glorifies racism and encourages people to learn nothing about our real history.

  • Think about others

    If you're not a Native American, you might think "What's the big deal?", but when you really think about the names, logos, and the mascots, etc. you'll understand what is wrong. When logos have weapons, Native Americans looking angry, these depict something that's not true. What if I made a logo of you that was the completely opposite of who you actually are and saying it is you? People have to understand that there's other things you can name teams, it shouldn't be that big of a deal.

  • I simply believe that...

    Lets keep it simple. If it offends Native Americans, the use of mascots should end. The word redskin can conjure up hurt or embarrassed feelings. If they are offended by them, who are we to say "No its not!" Native Americans are only 1% of the US population, which is why they have been going unheard over this issue for so many decades. Americans need to be more insensitive and open their eyes to see that if Native American mascots are inflicting hurt, then perhaps it is not a tribute after all.

  • The negative CONNOTATION

    The connotation of "REDSKINS" really? Its the same as a team named "Yellow Asians"...Its really offensive to the Natives...Red skinned..Same as to the africans calling them the n-word..It probably really should be banned...It could be good in some ways not to ban. But it is offending with a negative connotation to everyone who hears it.

  • It's time to acknowledge and address the intercultural ignorance that plagues this country, otherwise we will never move forward...

    First, I must state that I believe this is an issue that TRUE Native Americans should truly be addressing, not people with Native American ancestry who do not actively identify or incorporate the culture into their daily lives. However, I say they should be banned because:

    1. Native Americans did not create the sports games (professional, minor, and school leagues) that their cultural identities are ignorantly being used to represent, with the exception of lacrosse.

    2. To claim its an "honor" is blatant ignorance and avoidance of the core problem-- the lack intercultural communication and respect, especially when considering the history of this country.
    -- If was truly meant to be an honor:
    The tribes would receive a portion of the revenue that their cultural identity is being exploited for.
    Their cultural identity and their role in American history would truly be acknowledged (with visible information) at both the sport's establishments and schools.

    3. Their culture should not be exploited until this country and the powerful people who run it learn to acknowledge the many tragedies inflicted by the people who stole their land, murdered them, and placed them on reservations as well as the Native American influences on American culture.

  • Rude to natives

    It is a very racial team name. It makes fun of the native American culture and isn't respectful toward the natives. It is just like saying the Florida Whites or something similar to those lines. Many native American culture groups feel that is a disrespect to their culture. I feel that it is a racial term and is very disrespectful.

  • Why the entitlement?

    I don't understand why some people feel so entitled to Native American mascots-especially when it is not their culture. I don't understand how not having a Native American mascot can negatively affect someone's life, but I do know how a Native American mascot can. I am pretty sure that all of us can continue our lives just fine without a Native American mascot.

  • Rascism on a National Scale

    Many people know very little about the Native American culture other than what is presented by sports teams, which is often incorrect and stereotypical information. These racial images are very offensive to Native American people and should be long gone by now. Whether in the form of a red-faced, grinning "Chief Wahoo" or a "redskin", these outrageous mascots should be gone.

  • No, Native American Mascots Should Not Be Banned.

    The only thing that should be banned is negative stereotyping of Native Americans. There is nothing wrong with celebrating and honoring our country's history, and the first and only non-immigrant people in our country. If we banned Native American mascots it would be just another step towards forgetting our own history and shaping the over-sensitive nation we have become.

  • No, absolutely not.

    Let's get the "Redskins" mascot out of the way: Yes, "Redskins" is a *slur,* and Washington should be pressed to change their mascot because of its directly offensive nature.

    However, Native American mascots in general are not naturally offensive. A Native American mascot doesn't "mock" Native Americans any more than a tiger mascot "mocks" animals; any more than a trojan mascot "mocks" the culture of Ancient Greece; any more than a hoosier mascot "mocks" those from Indiana.

    Notice anything in common with all these things? Teams choose nicknames of things that they respect -- things that exhibit the traits that they want their athletic programs to embrace: Bravery, respect, admirability, courageousness, perseverance, wisdom, etc. Is the University of Southern California making fun of Ancient Greek culture by condoning the use of a Trojan mascot? No -- in fact, they are showing their reverence for the traits commonly associated with Trojans. The same goes for Native American mascots.

    You know what's really "offensive?" A small group of people believing that an entire society should cater to their "feelings" no matter how irrational they may be. That's offensive. A bear attacked and nearly killed my dearest grandmother when she was in her younger years. I hate bears. Say, it is offensive to me that the UCLA Bruins have a BEAR as their logo! I demand them to change it.

    Sorry, the world doesn't work that way. I'm yet to see a legitimate argument in favor of banning Native American mascots -- people are too busy whining about feelings and illusory "racism" to give the issue any actual thought.

    Posted by: SD12
  • They shouldn't be banned

    It is honoring the Native Americans. You don't hear anybody complaining about the Notre Dame Fighting Irish. They are trying to keep the tradition and the identity of the tribe and its people. Not to mention that Native American Elders gave them permission to use the names in the first place.

  • Native Americans should be Honored

    Many civil rights, religious, athletic, educational, and academic organizations consider the use of native names or symbols by non-native teams to be harmful form of ethnic stereotype. Native Americans should be honored to have teams that represent their bravery, courage, and strength and fighting skills. Some may say that teams use names that can be offensive such as the Washington Redskins, but Native Americans do not have red skin; they have a pure brown color with a trace of red. Research shows that many Native Americans are offended by the team names, mascots, and logos. But there are also many Native Americans that are not offended. Eunice Davidson 57, who wore a fighting Sioux sweatshirt stated “I have to tell you, I am very honored that they would use the name.” This comes from the article: In twist, tribe fights for College Nickname. In that case Native Americans should be honored.

  • No. It would cost to much money!

    No. This change is not needed because 75% of Native Americans don't even care about this topic. Also what would we do with the other team names like "The Saints", "The Irish", etc. Plus, in this economy( United States) we are already in 16,800,000,000+ in debt. Making this change would result in some money from the state and government being wasted on changing a sport team name/mascot.

  • Too Much Money!

    We are already in debt as a country. We should be focusing on bigger problems. It would cost an unreasonable amount of money to change everything. The gym floor, the logos, uniforms, football fields, paint, etc. So unreasonable to go through all that work. It is an honor to have a team be named after your tribe, not a mockery.

  • Oh come on, really?

    All these sports teams are doing is showing pride in their schools. They are also showing pride in the history and the different cultures we have. I don't see racism at all - its just pride, and they aren't showing it in a bad way. They are respecting the rituals and showing pride in their school.

  • No, that's just wrong.

    Are you kidding me? That's like asking to take away someones rights. Just no, that's immoral. Like segregating all over again. Besides who is it hurting being a mascot? Everyone loves mascots; they have a special place in peoples minds when they watch a game, or hear about a certain team.

  • No, Because All The Others Would Have To Go

    Well, getting rid of Native American mascots would mean that the Fighting Irish and the Mountaineers would have to change theirs, too. If the mascots are racist or stereotypical, then they would need to be changed. However, many of those teams are not engaged in racist activity, so it is best to let them keep their mascots.

    Posted by: rpr
  • Mascots banned, really?

    Well, many believe that the Native American mascots are racist &/or offending. I, for one, am not Native American but I duly believe it would be an honor to have a professional sports team representing your race/nationality. But I do understand the other side's opinion when many say that some logos are racist.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Bissell says2014-07-31T03:08:26.010
Currently there is a debate in the sports world. Several college and pro teams are named after Native Americans. One side of the debate says the use of these mascots is demeaning to the Native Americans. Slang terms that are not politically correct or are a form of ethno-stereotyping, giving a certain characteristic to a group of people, to the Native Americans. Groups would like the names changed. The other side of the debate would like to honor the Native Americans by using the names. By using Native Americans as mascots, teams are remembering the contributions of the Native Americans to history and the names should not be changed.