Let’s Spread The Fun
In his essay, Ward Churchill presents a couple good points about why the Indian mascots and names of sports teams have proven to be an issue of controversial discussion. As Ward Churchill goes on in his essay, he looks at both sides of the argument, trying to explain to both sides why he views things the way he does. Personally, I think that the Indian mascots and names can be sometimes considered racist and inappropriate as Churchill says. However, I also think that these names were made for the teams to honor the Native Americans that once used to control much of this land. For example, the Kansas City “Chiefs” and the Florida State University “Seminoles” have mascots that represent a group of Native Americans that represented that particular region some time ago. I don’t think that their names are used in a way to disgrace the tribes. Ward Churchill also mentions that anyone can make a team with whatever name they want, for example, Richmond “Retards”, because he says that way the physically and mentally impaired won’t be excluded from being honored in the games. Of course he is sarcastic here, but he comes across with a point that says that Native Americans are dishonored through being names of sports teams. Personally, I agree with some of what he says and if people use their names just for fun, then it is wrong. Still, I think some teams named themselves to show some respect for the tribes that once lived in that region. I think that this issue is quite controversial and each side can present some type of valid argument. For me, this essay shows how people should find other names for teams and stop referring to the Indian tribes’ names so that the Native Americans won’t feel offended, yet still, I think that the tribes’ names are honored and represented through teams being named after them. Furthermore, The express purpose of all this was to facilitate a U.S. governmental policy to bring about the "assimilation" (dissolution) of...