AMERICAblog.com

Dump your big bank and credit cards and disinfranchise the international crime syndicate today! (hat tip: www.dunwalke.com; more resources at www.solari.com)
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 1:11 pm | #

overreacting i see
leeroy | 02.16.07 - 1:15 pm | #

There is only one group of people who can say if the mascot was offensive. The Illini. If they say it is, it is.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 1:16 pm | #

We're facing a simlar issue at the school I'm at now. The University of North Dakota. We're the Fighting Sioux. Local tribal councils say they are okay with the school using the name, but the NCAA isn't. What to do?
Kage no Kami | 02.16.07 - 1:19 pm | #

Were the Greeks massacred by invading American settlers and was their culture and way of life destroyed by said Americans until not much was left except watered-down, misappropriated, reinterpretations/stereotypes of what it means to be Greek?

NOTE FROM JOHN: Actually, the Greeks weren't allowed to even work in real jobs when we first came over, that's why my relatives had to work on the transcontinental railroad, only "dirty work' was considered acceptable for 'dirty people." The Irish, and many others went through the same thing. I'm not a big fan of comparing whose suffering was worse. And in any case, it's irrelevant. If the mascot pays homage to native Americans, then it's irrelevant if they were once slighted - the mascot pays homage so they lose the argument about it being critical of them.

Edited By Siteowner
E190 | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:20 pm | #

FSU got an exemption from the NCAA because the Seminole tribe gave it's support to the name/mascot. FSU works with the Seminoles to make sure the tribe is treated with the respect it deserves and still there are groups who protest (like the American Indian Movement).
How do you spell anonymous | 02.16.07 - 1:20 pm | #

there were nos Illini indians - that's liberal revisionist history. Illinois never had natives living on it's land. The grass was too tall....or something.

When Columbus got lost and ended up on this side of the world, this continent was completely empty. There were no indians at all in fact. A few in New York, but we bought them off. There never were any Illini indians. Anyone who tells you differently is a liberal.
Amerikagulag | 02.16.07 - 1:20 pm | #

John

The problem is that the Chief had sweet-damn-all to do with the actual Indian heritage of the state of Illinois. It was a walking cliche, with Souix regalia, historically and culturally inaccurate. And the vast majority of Illinois' native Americans were run out of the state in the 1830s, so if we want to honor the native heritage of the state, an empty space would do better.

If it were a private entity--the major league baseball club in Cleveland, the NFL team in DC, the Catholic University in South Bend--that's one thing. But my tax dollars support the state university, and I'm against having stereotypes flaunted this way. Native Americans on the U of I campus have been harrassed about this, and that alone should be reason enough to get rid of it.

Bill
bill | 02.16.07 - 1:20 pm | #

I couldn't disagree more! The mascot was an insult to native Americans and the exhausting dance was a characture of native dancing and no better than a minstrel. Native Ameican civil rights organizations condemned it. It would be like the Palistinians adopting the fight heb and having mock rabbis take the court at half time or Old Miss having an Uncle Rhemus half time show. The Professional Organization of Native American Psychologist and Psychiatrists related such shows as attributing to suicide and low self esteme in Indian children. The culture of Illinois that it related to was one of genocide, land grabs and death. As a gay man, I stand with my Native Brothers who say, Please Stop It. Please dont do this to us. To me it is akin to the Snickers issue. If you say you are honoring someone and they say "please, stop, you are hurting me." Why won't you stop!!!!!
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 1:21 pm | #

Off topic but still major breaking news: Anna Nicole Smith's will will be read in a few minutes. CNN will announce the will news willingly.
UNcensored | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:24 pm | #

Off topic but still major breaking news: Anna Nicole Smith's will will be read in a few minutes. CNN will announce the will news willingly.

Is she still dead?
How do you spell anonymous | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

What about the Snicker ad?
Larry | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

This is getting ridiculous. The YMCA has a program that my girls and their dad was involved with. It was called Indian Princess. I wonder how long it will be before they have to change their name, too. Like the Fighting Illini, the Native Americans were treated with respect and they had a guy dressed in full Indian Chief mode and they had a beautiful ceremony at the beginning of every year.
2liberal4myowngood | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

Nicole News is No News
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

I went to Florida State, and we have similar issues. The use of the name "Seminole," as well as the clothes worn by the mascot Osceola and the gear on the horse he rides, are all approved and endorsed by the Seminole Tribe of Florida. There is an activist in Oklahoma who is a member of the Oklahoma Seminoles who does not approve, however, and brings it up in some fashion every few years (even though the Seminoles of Oklahoma as a body do not object to FSU's symbol and mascot). I understand the issue in general, especially with names like "Redskins," but applied to schools like Illinois or FSU, where the states involved have a strong association with the Indian tribes at issue, I just don't see the offense. Calling a bunch of Catholics "Fighting Irish," on the other hand-- now THAT is offensive.
Jeff in Texas | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

I agree with dorothy and vistaguy. If Native Americans don't feel honored by such mascots, then get rid of the mascots. It's such a simple thing to do - far easier than reparations for centuries of annhilation and property theft.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:27 pm | #

Didn't an Indian school awile back change their mascot to the Whities?
TomsOld | 02.16.07 - 1:27 pm | #

OT

McCain will skip Saturday’s Iraq vote.

AP: Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), “a staunch supporter of sending more troops to Iraq, will skip a Senate vote on the war Saturday to campaign in Iowa while other candidates rearrange their schedules.”
lauren | 02.16.07 - 1:29 pm | #

I grew up in Urbana Illinois -- no, we never referred to ourselves as Illini. But I do remember, as a small child, watching Chief Illiniwek's halftime performance. It was spellbinding. Maybe I was just an impresionable kid -- and it was a long time ago, but it was considered and honor and responsibility to get the Illiniwek gig, and there was nothing that was insulting or mocking about the performance.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 1:29 pm | #

Nicole News is No News
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | #

Like it or not, Anna Nicole Smith is major news and will be for months to come. They still must learn who the real father is and the rightfull heir to the fortune her dead hubby left still hasn't been settled. Get used to it because this is going to be spoon fed to us for months.
UNcensored | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:30 pm | #

I disagree, Dorothy. I would argue that your argument is what the term "PC" is all about. PC isn't demanding an end to prejudice. It's demanding an end to prejudice when you haven't proven your point. Just because a native American, a Jew, a gay person, a white guy claims to have been slured doesn't mean they've been slurred. You always have the burden to prove your case - it's a burden I've always felt arguing for gay rights. I don't just holler, I prove. And to do otherwise turns one into a whiny special interest - PC - rather than a civil rights movement.
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 1:30 pm | #

I never thought of that dance as a parody or minstrel as vistaguy says, but it's a good point.
naschkatze | 02.16.07 - 1:31 pm | #

Meaning no disrespect, allow me to remind you that local discretionary decisions were swept away after the unfortunate misunderstanding of 1861-1865. Federal decisions are local decisions; it's the law since 1865. Smile.
Indigo | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:32 pm | #

The reason there were very few Indians here when Columbus arrived is because 90% of them had been killed by DISEASE...spread to them by the Spanish when they arrived, BEFORE Columbus.
prairiedog | 02.16.07 - 1:33 pm | #

"no better than a minstrel" -- in fact, JUST LIKE someone in blackface.
neabinorb | 02.16.07 - 1:34 pm | #

Who care if Native Amreican's are offended anyway???? We have a war against Mars Bars to wage!!!!
The American Public | 02.16.07 - 1:34 pm | #

People have argued that it was a minstral show, but that doesn't mean it was. Joe and I have a favorite term we use about the Bush administration, a phrase that Murtha came up with: Just because they say it doesn't make it so. I'd apply the same here, and in every situation. We proved why the Snickers ad was offensive, because the back-up ads were violent and the players' reactions were full of disgust, not homage, to gays. I simply don't buy the argument being made by native Americans here. And while calling it a minstral show is cute, it doesn't make it so until you prove your point with facts. I don't recall minstral shows being done to pay homage to the proud nature of African-American history in America, leaving the audience with a sense of pride in the role AFrican-Americans paid in their own history.
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 1:35 pm | #

So when will a college team have the "Negros" as a mascot? That would be absurd, right? The same should apply to any race of people used as a mascott.
bejammin075 | 02.16.07 - 1:35 pm | #

Hey John,
I didn't know you went to U of I. When were you there? I was just a drunken fratboy during my time (1980 - 84). I have many fond memories of Chief Illini-wek, my favorite being a hypnotist at a party we had who convinced a friend that he was Chief Illini-wek, who then went on to reproduce the Chief's dance to a fault. It's sad, I think, but inevitable. It's not like we had many actual Illini Indians to draw from, so it was always a little bit of a white man's version of a Chief, although they always claimed they used genuine Native American dance moves in the routine. I hope that they find some way to replace it with something that captures a bit of the same spirit, as it always got the crowd fired up when Chief came out for his routine. I am almost tempted to fly out and see the last performance and yell out "CHIEF" one last time.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:35 pm | #

Yeah, and there is nothing insulting about Little Black Sambo from Sambo's restaurant or the Frito Bandito from Frito Lay. What is the world coming too when you can't represent an ethnic group the way you want too?
Some people are just so sensitive, jeeze. snark.
karol | 02.16.07 - 1:35 pm | #

Anna Nicole: Paying attention now?

Posted by Mark Silva at 11:45 am CST

Most Americans believe the press has gone overboard in covering the recent death of pinup Anna Nicole Smith at the age of 39, the Pew Research Center has found. Fully 61 percent say the Smith story has been overcovered -- far more than saying that of any other recent story.

More Americans were paying attention to news about the war in Iraq.

Even so, Pew reports, "a sizable minority (11 percent) followed Smith’s death more closely than any of last week’s other top stories.

"This is on par with the number who cited news about the 2008 presidential candidates (13 percent) or the Super Bowl (11 percent) as the stories they followed most closely.''

The war in Iraq was the top story for the week of Feb. 5, with 30 percent following it most closely.

The are the main findings of Pew's first weekly "News Interest Index'', a new initiative by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.
http:// newsblogs.chicagotribune....e_pay.html#more
lauren | 02.16.07 - 1:36 pm | #

I'll say it again. Don't just make assertions, prove it. Prove to me that Sambo and Aunt Jemimah leave people proud of the heritage that AFrican-Americans have in America. It just isn't so. Don't just use PC words, PROVE YOUR ARGUMENT or we're no bette than the far-right Republicans who whine and yell but never prove their point.
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 1:38 pm | #

Even George Wallace could find some Uncle Tom Preachers to stand on the podium with him and say they liked segregation and "Negroes" needed to improve themselves and the whites had been really nice to them. Yes there are Native Americans who say they don't mind being objectified, some attention is better than nothing. I would rather see a building or a highway named for a real American hero, such as Leonard Pellitier Health Care Center or Ira Hayes Memorial Bridge, rather than some white boy strutting his stuff to a white audiance pretending he is a mythical chief of a mythical tribe, lets not add insult to injury by saying we are honoring the victims of our genecide by marginalizing them. Now that the buffalo are gone, let us build heath care centers on Pine Ridge and Rosebud Reservations and address the sequeli of White Domination, such as suicide, unemployment, addiction, domestic violence, teen pregnancy etc etc etc.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 1:38 pm | #

With all due respect, John, I would say there was a great imbalance between your love for your alma mater and its mascot and the indigenous people of this continent for the land that we murdered them for and otherwise stole. I think they may be just a tad sensitive about the destruction of their tribes, so if there's a small thing Americans can do to make them if not happy then at least a little bit happier, what's the point in fighting them over it?

Mascots are easily replaced. Entire populations aren't.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:39 pm | #

I was in the Marching Chiefs at FSU and during the early 90's certain apparrel worn by the Drum Major and Majorettes was changed to reflect the apparrel worn by the actual Seminole Tribe of Florida. Including Chief Osceola (our "mascot"), whose costume is made by the Seminole Tribe of Florida.

We did go to Notre Dame in 1993 for a game and we were being persecuted for going to FSU because of the Seminole issue, so we held up a sheet at the game that said, "The Irish are a people, not a mascot." I think that some people actually figured it out...
Kris | 02.16.07 - 1:40 pm | #

I don't know about the legitimacy and accuracy of the Illini mascot, but Indians/Native Americans are still being belittled as mascot names all over. The Atlanta Braves and that ridiculous Tomahawk Chop anyone?

In Houston my daughter goes to Lamar High School, home of the Lamar Redskins. Their mascot is an Indian Brave (in a semi-ridiculous costume). I find it offensive and ironic since my family is involved with perpetuating Native American cultures/song/dance. It's especially ironic for the school since the "Lamar" the school is named after is "Mirabeau Lamar," "famous" Texan, mostly known for killing off the Indians here.

I mean, think about it, would there be schools with the George Washington Carver Brownskins? By and large Indian/Native American mascots are extremely offensive to the Native Americans. But we have a continuing history in this country of not caring about Native Americans.
C | 02.16.07 - 1:40 pm | #

So, you don't see the harm here, but that Snickers ad was out-of-bounds! Get a hold of yourself. Maybe Native Americans don't like their ceremonies displayed at halftimes just like some people don't like homophobic ads.
vince | 02.16.07 - 1:41 pm | #

Yeah, they're sensitive. Now prove their point. I don't make policy, I don't live life, based on what people claim versus what is true. Sometimes gays who complain are right, other times they're PC whiners. We owe it to our cause to define the difference.
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 1:41 pm | #

Given our country's effed-up treatment of the Native population, I'm a little shocked that John is okay with this.

I clicked on the link, and seriously, that photo is THE SAME AS BLACKFACE. I don't get how anyone can not see that. Please stop honoring me - you're killing me.
sue | 02.16.07 - 1:42 pm | #

sentimentalizing people is not honoring them. it's caricaturing them with a patronizing tone.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 1:43 pm | #

There is only one group of people who can say if the mascot was offensive. The Illini. If they say it is, it is.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 1:16 pm | #

---

I agree. I mean, it's just a mascot to us. It's a heritage to them.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 1:43 pm | #

I can't believe we're spending time on this subject when Anna Nichole is still dead...
TheOriginalLiz | 02.16.07 - 1:44 pm | #

You've got somewhat inconsistent sensitivies - you're hair-trigger for anything you think might relate to you, but then argue against anyone having the same reaction. Odd. Are you using this to try and prove that you don't overreact?
timbnyc | 02.16.07 - 1:45 pm | #

You're seriously asking me to prove that Native Americans have a point when they complain that their religious ceremonies and cultural traditions aren't appropriate subjects for American collegiate sports mascots? They're "PC whiners" rather than a legitimately wronged race of people who have been screwed over for centuries by a conquering force? Come on. Be serious.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

This leprechaun is ugly, but I can deal with it.

http://www.oddjack.com/gambling/ ..._leprechaun.jpg
erin | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

Hugh Blumenfeld, a folk singer from Connecticut got it right, in my opinion:

(and for what it's worth, I'm also from Illinois--though, proudly, NOT from Pekin, Illinois, where the high school team was once--and I'm SO not kidding--the Pekin Chinks)

Talking Hypothetical American Pastime Blues

I was hoping for another World Series
With the Indians vs. the Braves
I loved the tomahawk chops and the teepees
And the war whoops with the waves
But I'm really looking forward to the series
When we finally get to choose
Between the Detroit Negroes
And the fighting New York Jews
- I can see the headlines now: "Negroes Steal Opener,"
"Jews Trade Bonds for Late Draft Pick."

C'mon we'll all have a good time
It doesn't matter if you're White or a Goy
The right field stands'll be shouting "Yo!"
Echoed by a doleful "Oy!"
And everyone will wanna see Sambo
Do the moonwalk when Detroit scores
And at the 7th Inning Stretch the Jewboys
Will all get up and lead the Hora
- have a hot dog... have a cold beer.... havanagila, you know, whatever...

I'm sure it's gonna be a close contest
The competition's gonna be fierce
Between the vendors selling bagels and cream cheese
And the ones yelling "Fried Chicken here!"
And you can get one of those big hooded sweatshirts
That say "Detroit #1 No Jive"
I'll get one of those big plastic noses
And start chanting "Let's Go Tribes!"
- The marketing possibilities are endless -
yeah, I'm Jewish - what makes you ask?

Now you may say I'm crazy
And you may call me a boor
But it'd be a shame if sports team names
Can't have local color no more.
Yeah the JDL and the NAACP
Are gonna raise a fuss
But I wish they'd keep the politics out of baseball
And stop bothering the rest of us.
- Now all New York has to worry about is those San Francisco Fairies...
They blow it every time.
martinet | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

I agree with all of the good people above who think it's up to native americans to determine if it's offensive. Not you or me.

Imagine if it was the Fighting Homos. Do the math.
eastriver | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

I don't think any ethnic group should ever be used as a mascot. It is too often demeaning to the ethnic group, and even if not done in a demeaning way, it excludes people who are not in that ethnic group. Period.

I congratulate the U. of Illinois, but I would also do away with that SILLY phrase "the fighting Illini." To me "fighting Illini" is just plain absurd and insulting.
Hephaestion | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

John,

Have you attended a powwow? Would you take that mascot guy in full regalia as your date to a powwow? If any school wants to "honor" the native population, then ask the native population for input. Don't reduce a complicated heritage (the costume, the makeup, the dance) to a charicature designed to entertain.

Sue
sue | 02.16.07 - 1:47 pm | #

I'm native South American. Inca indian, I guess if it were done respectful, I'm ok with it!!!

I have seen some the dance, for some reason it doesn't seem authentic, and Ive been too pow-wow celebrations...

I'm with Dorothy on this one, are there any Illini Indians that blog here??

We could use you input!!

+
High Crimes & Misdemeanors | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:48 pm | #

John, I am not sure what it is you are asking here, but let me try to explain how whites representing Indians might be a problem for Indians.
When you have a white person dressed and dancing around like an Indian, they do not dance the traditional dances, they dance as seen on TV. This misrepresents the Native American religion and culture; also, when a white person represents themselves as red, the audience- including impressionable children, see Natives as European looking. Remember the posters they used to have in the 70s of European looking women dressed in Indian clothing? The Native Woman does not look like that. She has beauty defined in her own right, not comparable to European beauty.
karol | 02.16.07 - 1:49 pm | #

John,

Some people didn't see the big deal with the Snickers ads that have you and I so upset.

The mascot needed to go.
Mark In Chicago | 02.16.07 - 1:50 pm | #

John,
This might be before your time, but just before I started at the U of I, they made Pekin High School (in Illinois) change their name and mascot. The town of Pekin was allegedly named that because if you drilled a hole all the way through the earth you would end up in Peking, China. So anyway, the school called itself the Pekin Chinks. Their mascots were a Chink and Chinkette, who would where pseudo-Chinese garb (I wish I was making this up). Eventually they changed their name to the Pekin Dragons. There were still guys walking around with Pekin Chinks sweatshirts and defending the old name when I was there in the early 80's. I think there was a kind of innocence about it, as I doubt there was anyone of Chinese descent in small town Midwest Pekin, Illinois and they probably didn't know any better, but I think continuing to wear the sweatshirt at U of I, which had a huge Asian student population at the time, was a bit offensive. I have no point here, I just remembered that.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 1:51 pm | #

there are no Illini Indians! again, there are no Illini Indians. when the mascot was invented, as a caricature, there was no need for authenticity. for pete's sake, up until a few years ago the "official" garb of the mascot included a big GREEK letter "I" in the "chief's" face.

http://www.aimovement.org/ncrsm/...crsm/ index.html

maybe cigar store Indians are really statues (like the Washington monument), instead of trophies (like stuffed animals). what say you, John?
erizzle | 02.16.07 - 1:52 pm | #

Uh, settle down John. Nobody is able to prove an argument about whether a mascot is offensive, it is a personal opinion. Given that, the only viable questions are "Who is offended?", "Why?", and "Do we give a crap that they're offended?"

Since it's an opinion, mine is that I'm universally in favor of eliminating indian mascots if there's any objection in the native american community. You're taking the attitude that there's a developed tradition there, but if you're indifferent to the impact of that tradition on the group it's been stolen from, you're not much better than George Allen with his confederate flag and lynching rope (or the people of South Park with their cherished flag). I'm pretty sure you don't agree with all mascots (Washington Redskins, anyone?), so where do you want to draw the line.

Besides, The Illini suck. GO HAWKS!!
Crusty Dem | 02.16.07 - 1:52 pm | #

Former Speaker Dennis Hastert was a big defender of the Mascot! Strange bedfellows!
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 1:52 pm | #

If everyone is expected to accept that the Snickers ad was harmful, you should not feel free to question whether or not this mascot causes similar bad feelings.
Dave | 02.16.07 - 1:53 pm | #

Two quick things: First, Chief Illiniwek wasn't a "mascot" in the traditional sense. He wasn't prancing around on the sidelines cheering in his little costume. And Second, there are still some Illini Indians around Peoria. They supported the University's use of the Illiniwek character until a few years ago, when they "withdrew support." But I don't think they ever actually opposed it.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 1:53 pm | #

Man, imagine if invaders from a differnt country slaughtered most of your kind, then started dressing and dancing around just like them.
Its like "oh look its hunderds of years later and we like you natives now!......where have you gone?"
Most of your blogged thoughts are inciteful, this one is not.
Mr.Mom | 02.16.07 - 1:54 pm | #

(and for what it's worth, I'm also from Illinois--though, proudly, NOT from Pekin, Illinois, where the high school team was once--and I'm SO not kidding--the Pekin Chinks)

martinet | 02.16.07 - 1:46 pm | #

-----

Not sure if it's still there, but in the 80s, they used to have a roller skating rink in town called the "XXXX Rink."

Logo had a guy with a coolie hat and a pony tail on roller skates.

I'm not kidding.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 1:54 pm | #

John,
I am not, and neither are my people, a damn mascot. Honorable position my ass. I am sick of how you are Johnny on the spot when defending gay rights...good for you for doing that...but to turn around and make up Glenn Beck style excuses why it is okay if it is something you like to discriminate against others....who do find it offensive.........SHAME ON YOU !!!!! This Native American...not "Indian" you racist...is sick on being the last group that everyone can discriminate against and then we hear..."don't be so sensitive". You are no better than the other racist and bigots if you think it is okay to make someone from my race a mascot.

Chayna See
Proud member of the great Tsalagi nation and Echota tribe
Chayna | 02.16.07 - 1:54 pm | #

Is it respectful to portray a deeply meaningful religious ceremony at the center of an arena before a football game? Maybe the San Diego Padres should hold a respectful mock Catholic mass before their games? I'm sure no one would have any problems with that.
Adrift on the Cosmic Sea | 02.16.07 - 1:55 pm | #

John, you're comparing apples and oranges when you say that Greek immigrants to this country were discriminated against as if it matters. Indians were not immigrants, they were the first Americans!
astockton | 02.16.07 - 1:55 pm | #

Why do Native Americans accept being called Indians. Lakota Activist, Russell Means once said: "The only reason that we are called Indians is because some Honky got lost,and thought he was in India".

Well being Irish, I plan on doing something about stopping that Fighting Irish Mascot, if I ever manage to sober up.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 1:56 pm | #

Its true how you get so enraged about gay issues then fail to be sensitive to others.
You gotta see how youve made an ass of yorself
Mr.Mom | 02.16.07 - 1:57 pm | #

You wouldn't be making a big deal out of this if you didn't go to school at the University of Illinois. I'm pretty sure you've never complained about anyone trying to get the pro football Redskins to change their name. You're allowing your pride and passion to lead to being selective about your beliefs- which reflects poorly on your credibility. You're no different from Rush Limbaugh and crazy right-wing christian nut jobs.
Ryan | 02.16.07 - 1:57 pm | #

Being a PROUD (I hail from the Red Lake Band in Minnesota) Native American, it makes me sick to see my culture being portrayed in this fashion. As a mascot. We are people. Not to mention, seeing white people ONCE AGAIN demeaning us and telling us to settle down when we want to be treated with respect. WE DON'T LIKE IT!

WE SEE IT AS DISRESPECTFUL, JOHN.

i bet you'd be having a fit if homosexuals were portrayed as stereotypes, or heaven forbid if a black person was made into a mascot. then it's an issue.

once again...native americans, the invisible race.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 1:58 pm | #

I went to a school so bad, our mascot was Don Rickles. He just stood in front of the crowd and insulted EVERYONE.

They also served martinis at the concession stand. No... wait... was that when I went to school, or when I went to Vegas in the 60s?

Nevermind.
BobbyJoe | 02.16.07 - 1:58 pm | #

John,
You keep saying people have to prove something to make it tru. Prove to us how this makes the native americans from Illinois proud. Just because you say it does, does not make it true. That works both ways.
Jerry | 02.16.07 - 1:59 pm | #

Seamus | 02.16.07 - 1:56 pm | #

some Natives don't mind saying Indian. It's just personal opinion. I prefer being called Native myself.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 1:59 pm | #

Come on John-

The Illini- didn't even do an Illini dance, it was a smattering of different dance and dress from different tribes. Reminds you of your heritage? What heritage? Are you native american? The first comment was right- if the Illini were offended that's what counts, you should know that.
Huck | 02.16.07 - 1:59 pm | #

Pekin, Indiana had, until recently, the "Chinks" as their high school mascot. Now they are the dragons.

I shit you not. Ain't the heartland great.
j swift | 02.16.07 - 1:59 pm | #

Sorry John, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. As a previous poster mentioned, some of us don't think the Snickers commercial was offensive. Also as you stated, its hard to compare 'sufferings', but I will submit that your status as a man of greek heritage does not make you a minority (racially anyway) and you don't have the personal perspective of minorities in this country. If the name is offensive to Native Americans, then I think the name should not remain. I found the snickers commercial hilarious, but I realize that it hurt some people, and in that respect, I understand why it was pulled.
JJ | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

With regard to returning the clothing (Native Americans don't refer to it as a "costume") that seems a little different. It does seem like it was a purchase. However, my opinion would vary depending upon what U of I planned to do with it. If they were going to just put it away in a box somewhere, they should consider returning it to the Native Americans. Interestingly enough, MANY Native Americans do not have ceremonial clothing like this (the items are frankly, too expensive for them).

The feathers are a different story. Not just because they are "special" however as John referred to them. Possession of eagle feathers (and any bird that isn't raised domestically or doesn't have a hunting season) is ILLEGAL. (Ridiculous as it sounds, that means if you keep the blue jay feathers found in your yard, you could be arrested). And are eagles still endangered? Adding to the penalty. To own the eagle feathers you have to be Native American or have special documents from some federal agency (Interior Dept., or Dept. of Ag I think). Illegal feathers and ceremonial items have been confiscated by the government at Pow Wows and other events before. (They sometimes get sold back to other individuals--and the appropriate paperwork comes with them)
C | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

I'm fighting to keep the apostrophe.
erin | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

BobbyJoe | 02.16.07 - 1:58 pm | #

-----

LOL
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

Central Michigan University is the Chippewa's. In 1988, the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe passed a resolution in supporting CMU's mascot and name.
In 1989, CMU dropped the Fighting Chipp mascot and depiction from all University logos. CMU is still known as the Chippewa's and Fighting Chipps.
The Chippewa Tribe knows that CMU built Mt Pleasant, and CMU knows that without the Chippewas, Mt Pleasant would die. Seems the only ones with a problem at CMU is the NCAA.
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

John, you're portraying the archetype of the stupid liberal, hypersensitive of any slight on his own group and completely glib about offending anyone else. Stop and think about what you're saying.
Crusty Dem | 02.16.07 - 2:00 pm | #

I went to Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti, Michigan. We were, at one time, the Hurons, named after the tribe that donated land to built the U. The name obviously honored them. Then a few years ago, somebody thought it would be best to pre-emptively self-regulate and change the name to something "less offensive" before anyone actually complained. No Hurons compained, see? And what do we get? We're the EMU Emus now. Friggin Emu as our mascot. How's that for honoring your heritage. I think it's a real shame.
CC | 02.16.07 - 2:01 pm | #

You U of I alum. Get over the Chief! He is just a racist mascot for a lousy football team. U of I has plenty to be proud of. The Chief is not one of them.
david | 02.16.07 - 2:01 pm | #

I wonder if the Chief Illiniwek performance was in any way a depiction of a traditional Illinois Indian dance to traditional music in a traditional costume. I really would like to know that. John, do you know? As children we were led to believe it was. And people, please understand, the character really wasn't a "mascot." It was a performance.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:01 pm | #

A great deal of research has been published about the effects of the mascots on self image of native children; there are hundreds of statements from all of the tribal organizations that ask for an end to this practice of marginalization; there are compelling documentaries and video's directed by Indian organizations. At the center of all the protests Illinois University and the Cleveland Indians are cited as the most intolerable, unacceptable and distructive trivialization of the Native American experience. Stop the bastardization of Native American tradition for entrtainment of the victors.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 2:02 pm | #

vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 2:02 pm | #

wonderfully said. I was just going to post about this.

Being portrayed as a cartoon like figure, our culture bastardized to rev up a crowd at a god damn football game...really does mess up native's POV on their own culture.

native americans have very high suicide rates, especially on reservations.

and we have white people like john telling us to sit down and shut up. again..like always.

when do we ever get respect?
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:04 pm | #

BREAKING NEWS..................

Anna Nichole Smiths condition hasn't changed.
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:05 pm | #

John,
In looking over the posts, I have to agree that the reason you are bothered by this is that you are a U of I alum. This takes a big chunk out of our sports history and collective memory. It's a sentimental thing that only those of us who went to Illinois would care about. I think you need to look at the broader picture. Some things don't stand the test of time and it's out with the old, in with the new. You have to walk a rather fine line to say that this mascot is offensive and this one isn't. There has been kind of a blanket decision made to stop the Indian/Native American co-opted themes for college sports. I can live with that. It's fair on the whole, even if it might not be fair individually.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:06 pm | #

John -- you are usually on the mark, in my opinion at least. You missed it by a mile on this one. Others have said it as well or better than I could, so suffice to say I'm adding my voice to the chorus that is asking you to reconsider your position.

After all, rethinking, being introspective, and changing when we realize we're wrong is what separates us from the wacky right.
Ex-DCer | 02.16.07 - 2:06 pm | #

A few notes

1) The costume is not authentic.; it is Lakota, not one of the Illini tribes
2) The Dance is not authentic. At best, it is based off of early twentieth century fancy dancing.
3) The people performing the dance are Caucasian or (in two instances) Hispanic
4) Native American student organizations on campus find the chief a caricature of native Americans that project an offensive stereotype
5) The Peoria tribe (all that is life of the tribes of Illini) find the chief a caricature of native Americans that project an offensive stereotype.
6) Comparisons to the Seminole tribe, who receive money for the use of their image, are inappropriate. The Seminoles fought against settler, which is part of the reason the tribe still exists. The Seminole warrior hurling a spear into midfield has a vastly different symbolic meaning than a made up dance ascribed to a people who (with the exception of the Peoria tribe) were whipped out for their cooperation with settlers.
7) If you talked with more students at the Illinois universities, you would realize that the chief has nothing to do with honoring Illinois Native American heritage. Chief supporters arte overwhelming ignorant of the native American heritage of the region, and generally view native Americans as a caricature or a stereotype
Joshua Birk | 02.16.07 - 2:07 pm | #

I'm thinking we need a whole new set of "mascots" representing other peoples slaughtered and cheated by American imperialism: e.g. the Illinois Sunnis.
Karen, Mrs. Lloyd Richards | 02.16.07 - 2:07 pm | #

agree with your position on canning the mascots, but actually John Illinois and Illini are in fact one and the same - Illinois is the French word for the Illini - roughly, people from the Illini region.

Have you never wondered where the all those names that litter the midwest landscape came from

Des Plaines, Des Moines, Detroit, Champagne.
Chadman | 02.16.07 - 2:09 pm | #

Prof Farnsworth, I ask with all due respect: Is there no distinction to be made between a red-faced cartoon like mascot that revs up the team with tomawawk chops, and a dance and music performance? Doesn't intention count for anything?
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:09 pm | #

Conoplastic...

Nice I like that Idea when can we expect the team to cum to town?
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:09 pm | #

Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:09 pm | #

we are not mascots.

shall we make an african american a mascot?
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:10 pm | #

Sorry it’s off topic but...
Did I just hear a CNN reporter say “the longer that Anna Nicole Smith's remains remained unburied the more psychologically damaging it would be to her.”
I shit you not!
unrepentant expat | 02.16.07 - 2:10 pm | #

Erin,

It is a losing battle. I can not even get the Credit Card Companies or even most of the online Commerce sites to leave the O' in my last name. I think we may have a strong class action case against all those software makers who keep changing our names. I am now getting junk mail with the name change on them.

A question regarding this Chief IlliniWek. Was their ever such a person in the Illini tribe, or is it just a fictious name. The reason I ask is, if it is just a made up name, and their never was such a Chief, then that would make it hard to claim that the Chief Mascot or Character is their to honor the noble heritage of the tribe.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:11 pm | #

OMG... I'm so pissed off.
As a condom, I find the whole USC Trojans offensive.
Rubbers of the world unite!!!
Durex | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:11 pm | #

i take my culture seriously. our traditions.

dude, they dont even NATIVES performing as mascots. they have white people doing it!

but yeah.....their intention is allright.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:11 pm | #

OK folks. I grew up in Oklahoma. My grandfather came there before statehood (which btw was only 1907). I am as white as they come but spent many a Saturday at pow wow. People seem to think the Native Americans are a dead culture. But they are not. When I was a kid in the 70's they were still referred to as savages in many history textbooks. Yet I would be sitting in class with Arapahoe, Cherokee and Apaches. Sure, they were offended but in those days it wasn't safe to say so. This whold argument is very similar to the one about the rebel flag. (It is just a tradition. Why should black people be offended?)
I don't think it is OK use words like fag, nigger, wop, chink, or gook. Native Americans are real live people. If it offends them then just stop it. That is not PC. That is granting human dignity to everyone. That is way more important than some sports mascot.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 2:12 pm | #

Thank You Professor Farnsworth. I got pretty much "beaten up" when I tried to get a local highschool to drop their "Sachem" mascot. We did get the big nosed pygmy cartoon depiction of an "indian" painted over on the gym wall and ended the war path displays at foot ball games--but they kept their mascot and agreed to review the curriculum to add a little bit about the real American experience to appropriate classes. Since the teachers and principal were among the most outspoken racists, that was small victory.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 2:12 pm | #

me=durex with snark ;)
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:12 pm | #

"This is getting ridiculous. The YMCA has a program that my girls and their dad was involved with. It was called Indian Princess. I wonder how long it will be before they have to change their name, too. Like the Fighting Illini, the Native Americans were treated with respect and they had a guy dressed in full Indian Chief mode and they had a beautiful ceremony at the beginning of every year.
2liberal4myowngood | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | "

So how would you feel if your YMCA had a program called Jewish Princess?
john | 02.16.07 - 2:13 pm | #

2liberal4myowngood | 02.16.07 - 1:26 pm | "

and there aren't "indian princesses"

another racist stereotype.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:14 pm | #

BREAKING NEWS.......................

Anna Nicole Smiths condition has changed, she is depressed that she is not buried yet.
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:14 pm | #

roflmhao @ stu
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

Seamus:

I get mail with Obrien, it hurts my eyes. I think it started with the postal service when they when to all block letters in caps. So we should start our class action suit against the government. Then maybe Google!

As for the Chief issue. There are plenty of people here to take that on.
erin | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

haha
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

Joshua Birk -- thank you for answering my questions. The lack of authenticity of the clothing and performance is very significant. And Prof, thank you for acknowledging that intention matters.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

My little podunk hometown used the indigenous people's ancestory as mascots. We had two 'junior high schools' (commonly known these days as middle schools), and one high school. The junior high schools were the Braves and the Warriors. We all had to go to the same high school from the 10th grade on (yeah, three year high school). It was a big war between the two factions all through it.

The townspeople got a big kick out of it. The students suffered. I won't even begin to describe the stereotypes and humiliating discrimination that was promoted during our "pep assemblies".

And you thought the goddamn Snickers ads were bad. Good Dog.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

while we are at it, the nursery rhyme, 1 little, 2 little, 3 little, indians is no better than little black sambo and when it goes back down to "No Little Indian Boys", it suggests the Final Solution.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 2:16 pm | #

Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:15 pm | #

*rolls eyes*

Intention doesn't count for squat, Babs, if it's drawn by the horse of ignorance and disregard for cultural importance.

USE of someone's CULTURE and RELIGION for an ENTERTAINMENT is disdainful and shameful and just plain WRONG.
I. Conoplastic | 02.16.07 - 2:11 pm | #
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:17 pm | #

John,

So are you an alum of U of I Urbana/Champain campus? Cool. I did an MA and all course work for a PhD there between 1969-1973, in German Language/Lit. But I later converted to computer programming and technology. But I loved the school, the campus, the towns. I even stopped last summer on my way driving to Canada for a vacation to have breakfast with an old grad school friend who ended up heading up one of the major library departments as his career.
HeartlandLiberal | 02.16.07 - 2:17 pm | #

"and there aren't "indian princesses"
another racist stereotype.
Professor Farnsworth"

Actually, a good friend of mine is a Mohegan, and he always told me that his mother's Mohegan name translated as "Princess Butterfly."
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:17 pm | #

A good book on the subject is Dancing at Halftime by Carol Spindel--a prof at UofIllinois.

Interesting note: The fanatic Board of the UofI, who fought so hard to keep the "mascot," kept the UofIllinois Press from publishing it. The author had to go to the UofNew York Press to get it published. Feelings over this issue have been running high for years.

Frankly, I'm glad to see the mascot go (human beings shouldn't be "mascots," it seems to me). The really offensive Native-American mascot is Cleveland's: the big-nosed cartoon Indian. Now that's offensive.
Webster | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:17 pm | #

Prof, I'm sorry. i thought you said intention was alright -- I missed the snark alert.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:18 pm | #

I too am from Chicago and while I did not attend the U of I, many friends and family of mine did. With that said, I'm going to stand strongly opposite of John's oppinion. If you want an example of how to honor an Indian Tribe look at FSU. The school mascot was created with the Seminole tribe and while they have many chants that are traditionally viewed as derogatory towards Indians, these chants were implemented not only with the approval, but at the suggestion of the Seminole Tribe.

Chief Illiniwek served no purpose. He was derived for the sole purpose of enabling the team to actually have a mascot (many schools find themselves in this same spot). Chief Illiniwek promoted every possible stereotype of Native Americans that we have tried to get rid of. There was not one Native American group that stood by Illinois throughout this ordeal. For years Native Americans complained that Chief Illiniwek was offensive and asked Illinois to please remove him with the NCAA finally taking a stand on this issue.

However, here's my take and it probably explains a lot of my political views too. Who the hell am I to tell Native Americans what's offensive to them and what's not? I'm not gay, but John says he doesn't like the use of the term "fag" in any context and I respect that. When Ozzie Guillen called Jay Marriotti a "fag" I just viewed it as him calling Marrioti a name no different than calling him an idiot (which he is), but the GLBT community took offense and asked Ozzie to apologize. I can sympathize with that given the underlying meaning of the term fag. They viewed it as a shot at their community. This is the exact same situation we have here. The Native Americans have repeatedly asked the University to stop what they are doing and have always been blown off. Why couldn't the U of I just respect the Native Americans wishes? You want an Indian mascot go talk to them about how to do it and how to do it right so as to avoid these problems in the future. It's not like they haven't been willing to allow mascots of this nature in the past or present.
stats guy | 02.16.07 - 2:18 pm | #

If the true intention was to honor and present a tribute to the tribe then why don't they feel honored? Are they being hyper-sensitive or is there something in the performance on the football field that reads as being insulting to them?
This reminds me of the Drag performer Shirley Q. Liqour who is performs in Black makeup. He claims he is doing a tribute to the Black women he knows and loves. But a Black woman had his show closed down in protest because she thought it was a modern day minstral show degrading and stereotyping Black women. I viewed his performances as a show of respect. The character Shirley is always the heroine and always gets the better of everone else. It makes me love the power of the Black woman even more...but alas, a Black woman was deeply offended. I really don't understand why?
Dula | 02.16.07 - 2:19 pm | #

Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:17 pm | #

http://www.bluecorncomics.com/pr...om/ princess.htm

http://www.hanksville.org/ storyt...Pocahontas.html
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

Intention counts the first time. If you are not aware you are offending someone and have no hurtful intentions a gentle request to stop will suffice. After you have been told you are offending a culture you can longer be seen as having good intentions when you continue.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

Prof. Farns, I used to get a kick out of it when one of my students would come up to me and say they came from an Indian Princess linage. At first I would get angry and point out there were no monarchies so therefore there were no princesses, but so many believed it was true I just gave up.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

I. Conoplastic | 02.16.07 - 2:19 pm
I never realized that - how awful that kids still use that to this day.
TheOriginalLiz | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

OT... the 'terrrorists' are using karl rove's strategy:

The American troops here are stretched thin. They are not only physically fighting the various diverse elements of the insurgency, but also a battle of perception.

"Those terrorist groups have begun to take advantage of a perception of unwarranted fear that is now becoming actual fear. As we try to drive a wedge between the insurgents and the people, the insurgents are trying to drive a wedge between the people and the government," said Col. David Sutherland, commander of the Army's 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/me...quba/ index.html

so... we're teaching them about how well fear works.

.
Soundboy_Jeff | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

Hey how about a new mascot...

The Fighting Fat-Assed Hastert's
That should be a scary enough mascot for any school ;-)
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:21 pm | #

Just sayin, Prof. Maybe something gets lost in the translation?
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:21 pm | #

I think "shows of respect" should be judged in the eyes of the respected.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:21 pm | #

Soundboy_Jeff | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm
I guess it all goes back to who the real terrorists are.
TheOriginalLiz | 02.16.07 - 2:21 pm | #

karol | 02.16.07 - 2:20 pm | #

oh my god, i still get so many white people telling me they are descended from a cherokee princess.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:22 pm | #

Well, Dorothy, I think that's a good distinction "intention counts the first time." Please remember that my comments are based on my memories as a small child in Urbana.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:22 pm | #

Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:21 pm | #

it's a stereotype. that's all.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:22 pm | #

Illinois is the French word for the Illini - roughly, people from the Illini region.

Have you never wondered where the all those names that litter the midwest landscape came from

Des Plaines, Des Moines, Detroit, Champagne.
Chadman | 02.16.07 - 2:09 pm | #

------

I didn't know that, though I knew Chicago was based on a Native American word for "smelly onion."
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:23 pm | #

Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:22 pm | #

we aren't perfect. john here is a liberal and look at his take on Native issues.

it just shows how natives are still viewed in this country.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:23 pm | #

I'd like to be in the locker room of the San Fran Queers, myself =)
but not so much the Northern Idaho Whiteskins...

but about the topic john is being inconsistent with his outrage at the snickers ad vs the issue, and I think that all person with Illini blood should get to vote on whether or not it is offensive, and if they say it is not then they should be able to dictate terms to the school, since it is 'honoring' them and all. personally i think races/ethnicities are inappropriate for mascots. seattle gooks? compton niggers? dallas beaners, etc etc
war pigs | 02.16.07 - 2:23 pm | #

We were the Patriots and I guess I should find that offensive since I am a decendent of the first white americans.
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm | #

Webster

What about the Atlanta Braves, and all that Tomakawk Chop stuff. It is just vile, and Ted Turner is supposed to be a Progressive. Him, and Jane used to sit there and join in the Tomahawk chop. I guess we all have blind spots.
Seamus

Agree--totally. However, the Cleveland cartoon "Indian" is beyond the pale when it comes to offensive.
Webster | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm | #

Now wait a min...

You all bitch about John's viewpoint, but in the same breath, you use a hatefull term (native) to describe first-nations people...
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm | #

Agree--totally. However, the Cleveland cartoon "Indian" is beyond the pale when it comes to offensive.
Webster | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm | #

------

Yeah, that's the worst. I can't believe they get away with that.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:26 pm | #

NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm | #

um....I am native and prefer to be called that.

many natives do.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:26 pm | #

USE of someone's CULTURE and RELIGION for an ENTERTAINMENT is disdainful and shameful and just plain WRONG.

See you at the flag pole.
afafkd | 02.16.07 - 2:27 pm | #

My grandfather used to say that there was an Algonquin "princess" in our family tree. My father did have some physical features that suggested that there might have been some native endowment. BUT my family was very proud of and knowledgable about its geneology, but knew absolutely nothing more than to say, an "Algonquin princess" I concluded that if they didnt know her name and history and had to make her acceptable by giving her nobility, she was probably not truely welcomed or honored by my family--and I am sorry for that. I would love to have known more about that invisible ancestor.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 2:27 pm | #

My mother is a historian with a specialty in Native American history. I have used the term Native for years. If that is offensive I want someone to inform me so I can use the appropriate term.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 2:27 pm | #

(not helpful, and sort of teasing in a shitty way but I'll say it anyway)

Those Indians are acting like a bunch of big ol' girls.
mo2 | 02.16.07 - 2:28 pm | #

So looka here... it's all just more witchcraft, Satanism and worse:

Word History: A giant strutting bird leading a cheer at the homecoming game may seem a far cry from a witch fashioning a charm or spell, but these two figures are related historically in the development of the word mascot. Mascot came into English as a borrowing of the French word mascotte, meaning "mascot, charm." The English word is first recorded in 1881 shortly after the French word, itself first recorded in 1867, was popularized by the opera La Mascotte, performed in December 1880. The French word in turn came from the Provençal word mascoto, "piece of witchcraft, charm, amulet," a feminine diminutive of masco, "witch." This word can probably be traced back to Medieval Latin masca, "witch, specter." Thus for all their apparent differences, yesterday's witches and today's cuddly mascots can be seen in the same light, as agents working their respective magic to bring about a desired outcome.
Gregory Lyons | 02.16.07 - 2:28 pm | #

NorskBamse, I am a red woman, sometimes Native American, sometimes Indian- but always American. I think I have taken the different names and made them my own so the power to hurt is no longer there.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:29 pm | #

mo2,
OOOOOoooooo.....

You're BAD and very very cheeky!
Gregory Lyons | 02.16.07 - 2:30 pm | #

Funny how people always make claims about having royalty in their backgrounds.

Same with people who claim they were something else in a previous life.

Nobody says, "I was a janitor in a previous life......"
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:30 pm | #

How far do we have to go back in time to claim a land. I think first humans wondered off the African Continent so who is really native and to what extent.
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:31 pm | #

"oh my god, i still get so many white people telling me they are descended from a cherokee princess.
"
Farns, it is ignorance passed down from one generation to the next.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:26 pm | #

I remember reading that many native American tribes were so democratic that they didn't have a chief as we who grew up watching horse operas understand the term.

This made it difficult for the whites who wanted to at least observe the formality of making a treaty with the natives, even if they had little or no intention of abiding by it. So they just arbitrarily picked one of the tribe's adult men to "sign" the treaty as chief.
astockton | 02.16.07 - 2:31 pm | #

Professor Farnsworth

That doesn't sound like the name of an Indian Prince. Just a joke.

At least John is willing to state his case and allow all the dissent that has been posted. He is a good man who loves his college day memories.

So was there ever an actual Illini Tribal Chief by that name. If not, then it can not be considered a sincere cultural tribute, any more than Chief Nokahoma, who celebrates when the Braves hit a Home Run. That one, to me, is one of the most demeaning of all sports mascots.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:31 pm | #

May I suggest you play Bruce's "Glory Days" and get on with your life...
nogo postal | 02.16.07 - 2:31 pm | #

I just graduated with my Ph.D. from the University of Illinois in December and I found the Chief totally offensive and embarrassing, not as a native American, but as a member of the university community. Based on my 5+ years there, I just assumed the Chief was a rich white frat boy from the Chicago suburbs dancing around like a jack@$$. I found nothing honorable about it. In the end, it was business decision for UIUC. Even before the ruling from the NCAA, the university was losing out on academic grants because of the chief. But the prospect of handicapping academic research didn't make them drop the Chief; they dropped it because of the prospect of lost revenue from post-season NCAA sporting events.
Presto | 02.16.07 - 2:32 pm | #

"shame in ancestry of "mere indians" as if the rank and file of Native culture is beneath a white to claim as ancestors.
"

It goes deeper then that. It shows ignorance of one's history and people.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:32 pm | #

As a college basketball fan, I loved the 1988-89 "Flying" Illini team and their uniform. I still want to buy replicas of those long shorts with the mascot's face on the sides. I'll keep looking on eBay, I guess.
Blackacre | 02.16.07 - 2:32 pm | #

So here's the thing: What do we do when some native peoples take offense to these "mascots" but others don't? What do we do when some want to be called native, others "Native Americans." Some, I am told, even prefer "American Indian." Some people of color prefer "black" -- some "African American." I genuinely love and respect all people (except George Bush)and their cultures and histories and am intersted in peoples' histories. Occasionaly, one gives offense unknowingly.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:33 pm | #

bush bites>>>>>> I was an asshole in a previous life and I am still one. I find the shitty kitty mascot offensive.
stu | 02.16.07 - 2:33 pm | #

This is a bit OT, but I'm with Karol. I've taken the word "faggot" as an empowering word. People who say faggot may not know the history of burning people like me at the stake, but I do, and I take the word at its full meaning, which reminds me that there are plenty of folks out there who would be fine with getting back to the old ways.
Gregory Lyons | 02.16.07 - 2:33 pm | #

John I totally disagree with you and I am really surprised that you take this point of view. Can a gay person be respectfully portrayed as a school mascot?

The very act of creating a mascot is a display of power over another group. Native Americans were annialated, and years later we think we can "honor" them by using them as a mascot? We're belittling them - WHETHER OR NOT our portrayl is done respectfully or as a caricature. Using them this way gives us a warm fuzzy feeling, like we're somehow restoring their dignity, but we're not. We're equating them to all the other mascots out there. A destroyed civilization of people is in the same league as a hornet, bull, mermaid, refrigerator - or whatever symbol other schools choose to celebrate on a Friday night with parading cheerleaders and drunk fans all around them?

This is like a German team, a couple of hundred years from now, using a Jewish mascot. They could present this mascot as tastefully and respectful as possible, but it still doesn't matter. The act, by its very nature, mocks them. Erect a memorial, encourage people to talk about it, pray about the sins of your country, but for god's sake don't make them a mascot.

I certainly don't want to be anybody's mascot - even if they tried to portrya me in the best light possible. My dignity and self-worth belongs to no one else but me.
Lostw | 02.16.07 - 2:34 pm | #

Here's another memory from U of I. At one point (around 1983), they tried to introduce a typical mascot a basketball game. They called him the O-B Bird (for orange and blue, the team colors). When the poor joe in that O-B bird costume came running out on the court at the first timeout, I have never seen such hostility. He was basically booed off the court by halftime of his first performance. I don't know how it's possible, but you could see the face of humiliation on that costumed bird as he walked off the court. Maybe it's time to give him another chance.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:34 pm | #

I. Conoplastic - 2:31 pm,
You must be new here.
mo2 | 02.16.07 - 2:35 pm | #

Now wait a min...

You all bitch about John's viewpoint, but in the same breath, you use a hatefull term (native) to describe first-nations people...
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:25 pm |
-----------------------------------
You are an annoying appologist for John sometimes aren't you?

I like John's blog. I think John is usually a nice, pleasant guy. Sometimes he is embarrassingly wrong. I don't expect him to admit it nor do I expect you to quit kissing his ass.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 2:36 pm | #

There is First-Nations' blood in my family. We were told we were of the Blackfoot Tribe. That part of our life was lost and forgotten for whatever reason. Is there a way for UoI to honor the Illini without mocking?
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:36 pm | #

Walter Jones is on c-span.

Isn't he the Freedom Fries guy?
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:37 pm | #

"Is there a way for UoI to honor the Illini without mocking?
"

Yes, but it would require going to the people and listening.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:38 pm | #

and scottinsf, as for me kissing John's ass...

You do not know me, so making that type of statement is both ignorant and counterproductive.

If at anytime in the future you wish to debate a subject in an adult manner, please feel free to address me. If you find that you cannot refrain from such sophmoric comments, please ignore my posts.
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:39 pm | #

Karol, going to people and listening is a good thing!
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:39 pm | #

And yeah, I get that some native Americans didn't like it. But that doesn't mean they're right. First step, you have the right to complain. Second step, you need to prove your point.

Seems awfully callous from a guy who got worked up over a candy bar ad.
Irascible | 02.16.07 - 2:39 pm | #

Honor Illini? How about a library, museum, endowed chair, scholarship. Lots of ways.
dorothy | 02.16.07 - 2:39 pm | #

Walter Jones (R-Gave up on Bush): "let's pass the resolution and God Bless our troops."
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:40 pm | #

The Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma say they are the Illini Indians. What is their opinion?
How do you spell anonymous | 02.16.07 - 2:41 pm | #

scottinsf,

I enjoy John's blog, too. The amazing thing about him is that when he's wrong, he is so often spectacularly, passionately wrong.

This post is an excellent example of passion without reasoning.
Crusty Dem | 02.16.07 - 2:41 pm | #

steve ex-expat
I was at U of I 81-85... what was your major?
angel | 02.16.07 - 2:41 pm | #

I Conoplastic

So your way of protesting, against a perceived smear of one class of people, is to come on here and smear another class of people. Congratulations Sir, you are the founding father of Bigots against Bigotry.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:41 pm | #

Someone else from UIUC.

I, too, found the Chief embarassing and stupid. It epitomized to me the frat-guy "I don't care who I insult" attitude so prevalent among members of a certain age, class, and sex.

Most of the undergrads of UIUC seem to be from the suburbs of Chicago and I have to say, I found a sizeable number of them racist, smug, non-cosmopolitan, and intolerant of people from other cultures. Those of us in grad school teaching them just gritted our teeth and wanted to smack their foolish little faces.
tzs | 02.16.07 - 2:42 pm | #

I have read that the Peoria Tribe used to support Chief Illini, but withdrew that support several years ago.
Babs in Buffalo | 02.16.07 - 2:43 pm | #

I am Umskapi Pikuni from the great Blackfeet Nation of Montana, one of the four bands of the Blackfoot Confederacy.

John, I'm really disappointed. You expect people to bend over backwards to defend and support you when there is something that you and other gay men determine is demeaning, yet you won't grant the same to others?

I haven't read through all of the posts cause I'm so damn mad I had to post before I lost steam.

How dare you decide what is and isn't demeaning or demoralizing to Native Peoples. If we say it is demeaning, then stand beside us. Just as we stand beside you. I didn't think the first commercial by Snickers was that bad, but I took your word without question that gay men found it offensive. After seeing the others, I could understand how you felt. But, at the moment, you didn't need my empathy, you needed my support which I freely gave. I trusted you to know what felt demeaning to you and others in your community. I expect the same from you.

Judy
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 2:43 pm | #

tzs | 02.16.07 - 2:42 pm | #

------

I could see that.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:43 pm | #

NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:39 pm |
----------------------------
Oh please. I'm calling it as it is. If you don't like it sweetie then maybe this is not the blog for you.

I am SOOOO sorry I offended you. sniff sniff
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 2:43 pm | #

Bush Bites

So when is Walter Jones going to thank France for trying to prevent us from creating Bush's Iraqmire.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:44 pm | #

Ah, here's another. When my high school, Huron High School in Ann Arbor, MI was built in the late 60's, they decided to let the students come up with a name for the mascot by a vote. Several names were proposed, including the River Rats (as the school was near the Huron River, I think). Of course, give high school kids something to do and you know the results. I believe they are still called the River Rats. We had a very cool little rat insignia on our gym bags, and I'm sorry I lost mine over the years. I doubt that the local river rats will ever be offended.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:44 pm | #

River Rats is a great name.

Every school near a river should pick that up.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 2:45 pm | #

john: for the record, while i have a great deal of fondness and admiration for you - i think on this one you're completely and totally wrong. if some native americans are offended, then it is by definition offensive. that should be the end of the story and the practice.
scooter in brooklyn | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:46 pm | #

So what is the singular of Illini? Would that be Illinus? Good Grief, Charlie Brown!

GO BLUE!
Rick | 02.16.07 - 2:46 pm | #

I'm an Illinois alumni, too John. I used to support the Chief. I used to wear an orange shirt that said "Save the Chief." I used to sneer at the protestors.

But they're right. The mascot is insulting, and mocking. Its a WHITE SUBURBAN GUY playing dress-up! And running around like a fool!

How does that honor anyone?

Furthermore, it makes my alma mater look like a racist, bigoted school, rather than the proud, challenging, and modern institution that it is.

Furthermore, it hurts our teams, especially basketball, ability to recruit. We just lost the #1 prospect in the country to Indiana, which is coached by a guy who turned the Illinois coaching job down because of the Chief. Kelvin Sampson is part Native American. And the racism that is embodied in the Chief can be used against the school, because it makes the school look ignorant and racist.

Its high time the Chief was laid to rest. And, I'm pretty sure that being from a group of people that suffered the worst genocide in recorded history gives you a lot of leeway to make some demands on how your people are "honored".
Jerry | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:46 pm | #

The Braves were called the Braves becuase one of the early investors was high up in Tammany Hall, I think they called him a sachem. The Cleveland Indians were called that because there was a very popular first baseman in local baseball called the Indian (whom, I guessing, was an Indian). Doesn't change the debate any, just interesting that in each case it was sort of a second-generation naming.
timbnyc | 02.16.07 - 2:48 pm | #

This is wrong. The Native American's have beautiful rituals, and dress and dance with far deeper meaning than we could ever imagine.
erin | 02.16.07 - 2:48 pm | #

Scottinsf,
You cannot offend me. In order to offend me, I must care about the opinion of a person, and you do not qualify.
As for being here at AmBlog, I intend to stay, with or without your blessing.
Rest assured that this is the last I will reply to your comments as I firmly believe in "not feeding the trolls".
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:48 pm | #

worth repeating:

I trusted you to know what felt demeaning to you and others in your community. I expect the same from you.
- Judy
mo2 | 02.16.07 - 2:49 pm | #

Angel,
Math and computer science. I hesitate to tell you much more, as I was quite a different guy back then. Drunken, obnoxious fratboy, I nearly flunked out 4 times.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:49 pm | #

Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:31 pm | #

lol I am actually a female. :lol
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:50 pm | #

I disagree with John on this matter. I agree with him on the Snickers ad. Those who wish to keep using that Gay Bashing Ad as a weapon to beat John into submission are also bashing Gays who do not even have the same stand on the Illini subject as John has. Sardonic or not, it is a very tawdry and offensive way to make a point.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:51 pm | #

Bout frickin time. Chief Illiniwek's dance was one of the most offensive things I have ever witnessed.
patroclus | 02.16.07 - 2:52 pm | #

Two words: WHO CARES?

Silly college mascots, etc. You are an adult now.

And I know of what I speak -- my father got his PhD from U of Illinois and our family lived there for three years, while he was getting it. Big Deal.
Shell | 02.16.07 - 2:52 pm | #

Steve ex pat -- Computer Science in 1981? Did you solder your own machines?
mo2 | 02.16.07 - 2:52 pm | #

All I can say, John, is get over it. Some of us Illinois alumni are pleased they have retired the mascot. He's a relic from a time we have grown away from, I hope. UIUC, '92, BS, BA

But this is a symptom of a phenomenon I have observed several times: White gays expect the world to bend over backwards to their sensetivities, but seem rather blind to the sensetivities of racial minorities.
metalsguy | 02.16.07 - 2:53 pm | #

I have been in Computer Science since 1979. And no, it wasn't an abacus.
Shell | 02.16.07 - 2:54 pm | #

steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:49 pm | #

Ahhh....A fellow "North of Green" person. (I'm a EE class of 94).

John, I don't know what U of I you went to, but the chief being respected? You gotta be kidding me. There were plenty of the drunken LAS frat boys that if they had their way, the Chief would be doing the tomahawk chop (and I have actually seen a few do it)

I think I am going to go get a snickers bar.

NOTE FROM JOHN: But he doesn't do the Tomahawk chop because the university won't let the chief do disrespectful things or take on a disrespectful persona. You just proved my point that this representation is different from the representation that racists or whatever would choose.

Edited By Siteowner
Deuce | 02.16.07 - 2:54 pm | #

Professor Farnsworth

Well that is very different. A female, you say. In that case, I can alway dream, that one day I can descend from an Indian Princess.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:54 pm | #

Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:54 pm | #

what can i say...I like Futurama. :-p
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 2:56 pm | #

"Steve ex pat -- Computer Science in 1981? Did you solder your own machines?"

mo2,
That's funny. We actually used a lot of punch cards. It was awful. The cards aren't numbered in any way, so you couldn't let them get out of order. Each card had one line of code. You'd run them through the card reader and get a printout and pull out old ones and put in new ones as you modified your code. It was quite a big deal when we could start using those big floppy discs in some of our classes.
steve ex-expat | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:56 pm | #

NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 2:48 pm |
---------------------------------
I've been called a troll here on Ablog for about 3 years now. Nothing new.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 2:57 pm | #

John, I usually like your blog but you are so out of line here.
What if there was an Illinois Negroes or Spics or Chinks? or Fags? You'd be up in arms if it were fags. You're such a hypocrite.
MoxieHart | 02.16.07 - 3:00 pm | #

The Republics were trying to have some great sound bite moment with a Texas Congressman who was a POW in Viet Nam talking against the resolution.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 3:00 pm | #

Farns, it is ignorance passed down from one generation to the next.
karol | 02.16.07 - 2:26 pm | #

of course, I know. they really believe that they are descended from it. just shows they really don't put much effort into researching their heritage.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:00 pm | #

For a guy that goes apeshit whenever anyone messes with a gay person anywhere, in any way shape or form, you're sure getting selfish and intolerant when it involves the fact that you went to college there.

Would you accept a dancing gay guy if the people it was a mascot for said they were honoring the contributions of gays after slaughtering them 400 years ago?

Sorry but you're being a bit of a hypocrite.

And the Spartans weren't the most admirable society. Unless you were born perfect.
srgtick | 02.16.07 - 3:00 pm | #

Why, truth hurts?
metalsguy | 02.16.07 - 3:01 pm | #

A simple question. Was this Chief named after a real person or not. Who knows the answer of how the name was selected. If it is a fictional name, then it can not be a historical and cultural tribute. Surely someone who went to the school must be able to answer that simple inquiry.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:01 pm | #

I. Conoplastic | 02.16.07 - 3:00 pm | #

yeah...that happens when your views are poorly received.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:01 pm | #

John,
I cannot tell you how happy it makes me to see this:

UPDATE: It seems some of our readers disagree with me. Feel free to join the heated discussion in our comments section here.

A much better reaction to disagreement than some I have seen in the past.
Very cool.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Pete, If you look at other heated disagreements I've had in the past with some of my commenters, it's almost always (if not always) because those people chose to attack me personally, rather than simply disagreeing politely. I love disagreement, I loathe assholes and don't tolerate them anywhere in life.

Edited By Siteowner
Pete | 02.16.07 - 3:02 pm | #

So?

When's the next Pittsburgh Popes game?
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 3:02 pm | #

Here, let me put it into perspective for some of you who still don't get it.

John, this one's for you. I want to know just how offended you feel after reading this.

The University of San Francisco adopts a new mascot and name for it's teams, "The Groomed Gays", GG for short. They choose an outfit, take your pick of any of the stereotypes Hollywood and others have portrayed of gays, and audition for mascots. They choose someone who's not gay, knows no gays, doesn't want to know any gays and has no clue about the lifestyle and problems the gay community battles daily. He shows up on the field, does a stereotypical mimicry of gay men all the while shouting cheers and using all the hateful slurs and stupid stereotypes that bring your blood to boil. You and others launch a protest, but supporters say "We did it in honor of gay people".

Tell me how honored you feel? Yeah, that's how I feel. Tell me how to explain to the various children in my life who KNOW what a full eagle headdress signifies and why some white guy with halloween-y makeup is wearing such a thing and racing around doing stupid dances that NO REAL CHIEF would EVER do.

Judy, one pissed off Blackfeet Woman
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 3:02 pm | #

Uh, the supporters would all be drunk too.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 3:04 pm | #

A few things to think about:

1. While you might have thought the mascot was done respectfully; he was still a stereotype created by and for non-Indians.

2. It does not matter if a "chief" sold the outfit to the school. Since the Seventies, there has been a war between the traditional and non-traditional people in Indian Country, and I use the word "war" in it's literal sense--people have died; lots of people have died (see Matthiessen's "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" and Hendricks' "The Unquiet Grave"). The war is rooted in the exploitation of the traditional people by the non-traditional people and whites. Your "chief" was obviously non-traditional. The whole oufit, not just the feathers, is sacred to many traditionals. The fact that someone would sell such an object would be very offensive to them.

3. As for Spartans, if your great grandfather had survived genocide, your grandfather denied the right to vote, and you father had been shipped off to a BIA school where he was beaten if he spoke Greek. You'd be offended when your oppressors paraded a stereotypical Spartan in front of you too.

4. It might seem like a small thing to you, but if you lived in impoverished conditions where due to official neglect the lifespan of your people was 44. You'd celebrate any victory you could get.

5. It's a fucking mascot.
patriotboy | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:04 pm | #

Judy,
Is there a good link to research the Blackfeet tribes? I would like to find out more about our lost family heritage. Thanks
NorskBamse | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:04 pm | #

They've started the roll call vote.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:06 pm | #

Vote under way.
Bush Bites | 02.16.07 - 3:06 pm | #

Erin

I predict 257 votes in favor of the resolution.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:07 pm | #

seamus...I've been reading up on Chief Illiniwek...there's nothing that I've found that says he is named after a real native. He originated when some dude in 1926 thought it would be cool to have a Native American war dance during halftime. The expression Illiniwek (meaning "the complete human being - the strong, agile human body, and the indomitable human spirit").

I'm afraid I don't know too much about this specific controversy.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:07 pm | #

Sorry, John, but you are wrong. As an anthropologist who has spent more than 20 years working with Native Americans (and whose son is native), Chief Illiniwek is inherently racist. There is no difference between his halftime show and the old-fashioned minstrel shows. By the way, the remnants of the Illini are alive and well, if not exactly thriving, in northeast Oklahoma under the tribal name Peoria.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 3:09 pm | #

aha, named after the Illini tribe.

having said that...look at the mascot...he's a complete cartoon.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:10 pm | #

There are so many more important issues that stupid sports team mascots, doh!
nostrafarious | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:10 pm | #

John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 1:35 pm | #

"homage" to gays in the Snicker's commercial? Are you KIDDING ME???!!!

Why should anyone pay homage to anyone's private sexual activity or lifestyle or orientation, I have no idea. If the NFL players were disgusted by an accidental homosexual kiss by two hetero guys, why is that a surprise?

I understand the point about the violence...but homage? Really?

Wikipedia: Homage is generally used in modern English to mean any public show of respect to someone to whom one feels indebted.
DMG | 02.16.07 - 3:10 pm | #

nostrafarious | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:10 pm | #

then please go discuss them in another thread.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:11 pm | #

For the record, I thought the Snickers ad was hilarious (though not the supplementary stuff on the Snickers website), and I think the mascot should have been kicked out years ago.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:11 pm | #

There are so many more important issues that stupid sports team mascots, doh!
nostrafarious | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:10 pm |

Yes, and when we discuss them they will be related to the appropriate article. Please enjoy leaving.
srgtick | 02.16.07 - 3:13 pm | #

Again, good book on the controversy:

Dancing at Halftime, Carol Spidel, prof at UofI.

Puts it all in perspective.
Webster | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:14 pm | #

Professor Farnsworth

What surprises me is that no one who graduated from that school has provided an answer to me question. I would expect that if your are going to claim that you are deeply attached to that Chief tradition, you would be expected to at least know the facts about the Chief's name, and if their was ever such a person. Do you agree with my point, that if the person never existed, then it is nonsense to claim that it is a tribute?.

Of course I can't begin to tell you of how complimented I alway feel by ths sight of the Lucky Charms celebration of my heritage.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:14 pm | #

Seamus, I say it passes.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:14 pm | #

Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:11 pm | #

I thought the Snickers ads were in very poor taste. THe ones on the website were downright offensive.

I just dont see why John refuses to understand
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:15 pm | #

[Of course I can't begin to tell you of how complimented I alway feel by ths sight of the Lucky Charms celebration of my heritage.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:14 pm | #]

The Saint Patrick's day cards pay a lovely tribute to our heritage as well...not.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:16 pm | #

Erin

257 for, would mean it passed. That is what I was predicting.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:16 pm | #

Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:14 pm | #

that's why it seems like they don't have much an attachment to the mascot itself. they dont even care to know the history.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 3:16 pm | #

Seamus,

You have got it exactly. I went there for four years, and I have no idea if the Chief is a real person or not. I have no idea if the dance he does is authentic or not. No one there really cares....the stuff about "honoring" the illini is something people who want to kee the chief have made up.....there is absolutely no attempt made to educate the students about native americans or their traditions.
Deuce | 02.16.07 - 3:17 pm | #

there is absolutely no attempt made to educate the students about native americans or their traditions.
Deuce | 02.16.07 - 3:17 pm | #

Spot on, Deuce.
metalsguy | 02.16.07 - 3:19 pm | #

I suspect that Mr. Aravosis is beginning to understand the issue in a new light. You'll get further in enlightening him if you stop calling him names.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:20 pm | #

Well John,

At least you must be glad to see how many people are now admitting that you were right about the Snickers Ad. why else would they keep using it to try and get you to change your views on the Chief issue.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:22 pm | #

Seamus I knew that's what you meant.

And as others have noted, your point about all of the alumni of Illinois being not knowing the history of the mascot is ridiculous.

I graduated from the University of Maryland. The terrapins, or Testudo which is a Diamondback turtle is our mascot.

It was taken from snapping turtles found in the nearby Chesapeake Bay.

The Chesapeake Bay was named after a Native American tribe.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:23 pm | #

I went to Miami of Ohio, home of the Redskins. Now the Red Hawks. The local tribes were fine with this -- which I have to admit feels a little racist -- so, as a result, so was I. When they changed it to the Red Hawks, I can't say that I wasn't disappointed.
Vic Arpeggio | 02.16.07 - 3:25 pm | #

I. Conoplastic - 3:23 pm

I'm guessing no one. Pretty sure the point's been well made.
It'sAllSoSurreal | 02.16.07 - 3:26 pm | #

To whomever wrote: "This is getting ridiculous." Well, interventions are generally uncomfortable but they are necessary. Racism/Sexism/Homophobia and other isms are institutionalized in this 'White supremacist capitalist patriarchy' (to borrow from bell hooks whose books although specific to the African American experience would be useful for those of you who are not attune to the problematic politics of this Native American mascot issue and other representational issues) and therefore ubiquitious. I would hardly think that you would think it ridiculous if you were the victim.

I am very dissapointed to read this post from Mr. Aravosis on this blog since it is the home of so much useful info. And while I appreciate the update on the post with regards to the dissenters in the comments I was thrown off balance by your your kneejerk dismissal of Illini mascot critics concerns. I participated in the Snickers e-mail campaign after reading about it here and I was dissapointed with their response (which, if I remember correctly lacked any sort of apology). There is a stubborness that many of us (corporate entities or individuals) have towards acknowledging the narrowness of our perspectives and our deep set prejudices. You would be well served to divorce yourself from your affectionate familiarity with the mascot and to understand that just because you are incapable of recognizing the problematics of the situation doesn't mean that the groups rallying against it are wrong.

This is pure and simple objectivation and I agree with whomemever commented that it was akin to minstelsy. I think the poster and the commenters who don't understand what's troubling about ethnic groups (esp. the Native Americans who remain victims of a racist genocidal campaign) as mascots should do some reading on the subject. There are a host of academic books on the subject of race, spectatorship and exploitation. People of color continually make their case, although you claim they haven't, it's up to you to tune in and exercise some iniative. If for example there was a representational concern expressed by disability rights activists that I didn't fully understand, I wouldn't rail that they need to make their case, I would educate myself fully on the subject and try my best step outside my privilege.
jb | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:26 pm | #

I suspect that Mr. Aravosis is beginning to understand the issue in a new light. You'll get further in enlightening him if you stop calling him names.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:20 pm |
----------------------------------
Ed, you know that is a crock of poo. John is right and will never admit otherwise.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 3:30 pm | #

Here is a nice summary of the mascot debate.

http://www.tolerance.org/news/ar..._tol.jsp? id=168

Here are some links to information about my people, the Umskapi Pikuni of Montana.

The Tribal Council site is being updated and not very informational at this time. If you need any other information, email me and I'll try to help. ndndancer@gmail.com

Judy
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 3:30 pm | #

have wondered about the "outfit" the chief wears.
always seemed to much great plains natives to me, rather than mississippi valley natives.

anyway, GOOOOOOOO GATORZZZZZZZZZ!!
f$u sux!
so does the teenie, tiny ten!!
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:31 pm | #

It has always irked me to see, around Thanksgiving, photos in the paper of local schoolkids dressed in fake Indian drag with face paint. I wonder what the real Indian kids think of this? Have their opinions ever been sought? Doubt it.

IMHO, white people like to co-opt Indian regalia (proper term--not costume) b/c it's so showy. Nobody would want to knock off the regalia if it was jeans and t-shirts.

There are several schools universities and high schools in Oklahoma who still cling to their racist stereotypes, e.g., the Tecumseh Savages. Supporters say it honors the Indians. I say it demeans and separates them and harms the children.

Tecumseh was a great orator, far from a savage.
JudyLou | 02.16.07 - 3:31 pm | #

"UPDATE: It seems some of our readers disagree with me. Feel free to join the heated discussion in our comments section here."

LOL !!!

SOME ???

SOME ???

Yeah, and Mrs. O'Leary's cow started a LITTLE fire.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:32 pm | #

scottinsf: He hasn't zapped you yet. That's something to notice and hopefully appreciate, isn't it?
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:33 pm | #

heck....

http://www.blackfeetcountry.com/.../ arealinks.html
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 3:34 pm | #

I. Conoplastic - 3:28 pm

I stand corrected. Have fun, I guess.
It'sAllSoSurreal | 02.16.07 - 3:35 pm | #

maybe they don't feel thier image is to be used for whatever purpose by the people who slaughtered them.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:39 pm | #

As an alumnus of another Big 11 school, Penn State, I decry the lost tradition of the Fightin' Illini. This was a great salute to their original inhabitants and always reminded me that this isn't completely our country. Other nations, like the Illini, were here long before us Europeans.

The University of Illinois never appeared to me to be exploitative. In fact I had the clear impression they were honoring this tribe and keeping that heritage alive.

It's one thing for a Free Shoes University to mock American Indians with their tomahock chop or run some stud and his horse around the field in a loincloth ridiculing their warriors (though they were good eye candy), but the Fightin' Illini and their dignified mascot was different.

Of course he often got beaten by our ferocious mountain lion but it was always good sport and the tradition of the real Fightin' Illini will be missed.
John Morgan | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:42 pm | #

Ed Sikov

Who are you saying has been banned from posting on here?.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:42 pm | #

John, I guess "offensive" is in the eye of the beholder.

American Indians are offended by sports teams mascots in the likeness of the American Indians, regardless of how noble the masot may appear to you or others.

Gay people are offended by Snickers ads, anti-gay comments among other things.

Right or wrong if you want people to respect what offends you, you should also respect what may offend others. Regardless of how petty you or others may think something is.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:42 pm | #

Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:33 pm |
---------------------------
I think John knows that debate on this issue is interesting,even if most people disagree with his views.

I definitely appreciate that he allows people to disagree with him without banning them. Yeah, he gets pissy but he still has one of the best blogs out there.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 3:43 pm | #

Tar Heel - NC produced a lot of tar (pine trees), you could identify a NC by the tar on his heels -- ergo, Tar Heel.

Or that's the way I understood it, I could be wrong.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:43 pm | #

I guess I'd say it's like putting on blackface when you're not black. You could conceivably be trying to portray an African American in a dignified mannter, but that doesn't mean it's right.
tireiron chef | 02.16.07 - 3:43 pm | #

Could be worse. My university's mascot is a hen.
escapee | 02.16.07 - 3:44 pm | #

Seamous:

I worked at UNC Chapel Hill for four years.

The main explanation is traced to the Civil War. Tar came from the burning of longleaf pines. North Carolinian soldiers threated to put tar on the heels of fleeing soldiers to make them stick and Gen. Robert E. Lee said God Bless the Tar Heel boys."

That's the short story.

I think my ancestors were located near a peat bog...given my fair skin.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:45 pm | #

Isn't UVA the hokeys? I thought a hokey was a castrated turkey ... I'd think that would be sort of disturbing.
TheOriginalLiz | 02.16.07 - 3:45 pm | #

John Morgan,

You sound like you know a great deal about The Chief. Tell us more about him. Did he exist, or is he a fictional character. How long has your school being in the Big Ten.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:46 pm | #

correction - peet.
erin | 02.16.07 - 3:46 pm | #

Seamus: I was quoting an email I just received from someone who can't post him- or herself. I thought he/she made a valid point, that's all.
Ed Sikov | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:47 pm | #

Irregardless of the mascot's offensive nature, it would probably behoove a few commenters to understand that "The state is named for the Illinois River which was named by French explorers after the indigenous Illiniwek people, a consortium of Algonquian tribes that thrived in the area. The word Illiniwek means "tribe of superior men." per wiki
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 3:48 pm | #

John, why are you being piggish? It's really a very simple issue. Let's reduce it to the basics:
1. These mascots makes people feel bad.
2. It is mean to make people feel bad.
3. It is easy and kind to change a mascot so that people will no longer feel bad.

Really. It's really just that simple. You don't even need to look at all the hoity-toity scholarly explanations. It's really simple.

I agree that it would be a positive gesture to say that you have rethought the issue, and that you understand others' positions on it.
Tiffany PinkDog | 02.16.07 - 3:48 pm | #

The origin of the word mascot may give us some insight as to why this is insulting to some:

Mascot came into English as a borrowing of the French word mascotte, meaning “mascot, charm.” The English word is first recorded in 1881 shortly after the French word, itself first recorded in 1867, was popularized by the opera La Mascotte, performed in December 1880. The French word in turn came from the Provençal word mascoto, “piece of witchcraft, charm, amulet,” a feminine diminutive of masco, “witch.” This word can probably be traced back to Medieval Latin masca, “witch, specter.” Thus for all their apparent differences, yesterday's witches and today's cuddly mascots can be seen in the same light, as agents working their respective magic to bring about a desired outcome.

It is easy for me to understand why it is an issue for the Native Americans to be portrayed as a lucky charm or amulet by ancestors of the same culture that committed genocide against the them and that stripped those who survived the genocide of their independence.

Also, I it my guess that portrayal of the Native Americans at the half-time show is as about as accurate as the black-faced white 'mammy' performers were of black culture. This could also be insulting.
Gary SF | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:49 pm | #

At my high school we were the Beavers.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:50 pm | #

Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:50 pm | #

I won't touch that one!
Gary SF | 02.16.07 - 3:51 pm | #

John, don't get me wrong. I think the Fighting Illini is respectful as is the North Dakota's team name the "Fighting Sioux" which calls to attention to the American Indians who lived in that region in the 1800's.

The thing is we are not American Indians so we can't know how they feel, just as whites can't know how Afro-Americans feel, just like hetero's can't know how gay's feel.

If people think that it is silly to ban mascots or force college or sports teams to change their names due to their offensive nature towards American Indians, why then aren't there any sports teams such as the New York Jews, The Chicago Negroes, The Minnesota Crackers?
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 3:51 pm | #

Marquette University dropped their name of Marquette Warriors, after it was deemed to be offensive, and they won a NCAA Baskeball title under that name. Where there is a will, there is a way. It makes it hard to berate the Southern States for clinging to their outdated Battle Flag symbols, if we are still going to cling to our own.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:53 pm | #

There is also a religious issue. Eagle feathers, facepaint and so forth have religious meaning in Indian culture, and to parade them around an athletic field is like the Saints "mascot" carrying crosses or the elements of communion.
R Ketterer | 02.16.07 - 3:54 pm | #

The illinwek were a confederation of six tribes. I do not believe the confederation ever had a “chief”. The Mascot, as devised in the 1920, is not based off of any historical figure.
Joshua Birk | 02.16.07 - 3:55 pm | #

Actually, Anonymous, that's a good question. If mascots like the Illini are meant to be offensive, then why didn't we have teams like the Jews or the Crackers? Or perhaps we did and I'm not aware, but slur words we find for all nationalities and races. And yes, I do think this debate is useful and healthy, when people don't become assholes - that's why I posed this. Don't confuse disagreeing with being an asshole, they're two totally different things. The first is most welcome, the second will likely get you banned, and has. I tolerate dissent, I don't tolerate freaks.
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 3:55 pm | #

John, my teenage daughter is an athlete of Greek descent at a high school with an Indian mascot. I find it offensive that her team gets referred to as "the Indians." She isn't a Native American, and no amount of "let's pretend" or blonde cheerleaders chanting "We're the Indians!" will make her one.

People here who support the Indian mascot mouth the platitudes of "respect" for the memory of the Native Americans who are no longer in this area. It's about as respectful as naming your new subdivision "Deer Park," when you've driven all the wildlife out. This new "respect" is something that never mattered to them before, as incredibly racist pictures in past yearbooks at our school will show.

Some of us tried to retire that mascot a few years ago, but finally stopped when the issue was becoming too divisive in the community. While the sports fans paid lip service to fair play on the field, those who spoke out against the mascot found nails put in their tires.

In most towns or schools there is usually someone of Native American descent (or alleged Native descent) who gets brought out to say they think an Indian mascot is fine and makes them feel proud. And many Native Americans feel that there are so many more serious issues in their communities that mascot issues are a low priority.

However, my research several years ago found that of the Native Americans who were interested enough in discussing Indian mascot to bring that dialogue to the Internet, there were something like 100 individual web pages condemning Indian mascots, and only two -- TWO -- web pages by Native Americans who supported having Indian mascots.

Schools are for education. Encouraging racial and ethnic stereotypes is not my idea of good educational values.
CarolM | 02.16.07 - 3:57 pm | #

I have long believed that the use of Native American nicknames by colleges and universities is an inappropriate misappropriation of cultural identity in which an institution co-opts a people's heritage and history for its own (and often financial) gain. I completed my undergraduate work at Central Michigan University, which still uses "Chippewas" as its nickname. I fought against the nickname while at CMU, and several students have continued to do so since my departure. I found that lobbying against the continued use of the "Chippewas" nickname presented several unique challenges.

First, the university no longer permits the use of any Native American imagery, and there is no "Chippewas" mascot. Second, although the leadership of the local Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe has never publicly opposed the nickname, for a long time the university made no real attempt to gauge the local Tribe's support. Perhaps more importantly, the university has never offered any justification for why the local Tribe should be permitted to speak on behalf of all Chippewa and Ojibwe. Third, most of the students who have organized against the nickname at CMU are white, which is not surprising given student body demographics. Finally, the Board of Trustees and the previous university president made it very clear that they believed the locus of decision-making power regarding the nickname resides with them, not with the student body.

This final observation has been especially frustrating since the student body, acting alone, adopted the nickname in the 1950s. At the time, the students and the athletic coach who brought the proposal before the student council offered clear arguments for choosing the nickname, with the overriding reason was the potential exploitation of Native American imagery and stereotypes. The nickname's proponents have engaged in a perverse revision of history, arguing that the nickname was chosen to honor the local Tribe -- it was not -- and that its use fosters appreciation for Native American culture. Although the University does sponsor a number of Native American programs, it certainly could do more.

A former director of the Native American programming office was actually required to agree to a gag order regarding the nickname as a condition for taking the job. And the university community's fondness for using a bastardized form of the "Chippewas" name -- Chips -- seems at odds with the promotion of respect for the Chippewa people. The nickname's supporters insist that the absence of pejorative visual imagery excuses the nickname's continued use, ignoring assertions that their manufactured defenses can never be convincingly divorced from the circumstances surrounding the nickname's adoption. Their favored tactic was to ignore history and lazily accuse us of political correctness.

Although we have been vilified as members of the "PC Police," we have not been alone in our criticism of the university. Nearly 20 years ago the Michigan Civil Rights Commission recommended that Michigan's public schools abandon Native American nicknames and mascots. Indeed, The previous university president's own 1991 advisory council recommended, by a vote of 13 to 7, to change the nickname, but the president and the Board ignored the report.

Regarding the "Fighting Ilini," I would note that there is no such thing as the "Illini" tribe. Also, the "exhausting dance" John references is an imitation of Native American ceremonial dance-it is not authentic. Just because you say that a dance intends to honor someone doesn't mean they are honored to see it performed.

Finally, equating Illini or any Native American mascot/nickname with "Spartans" is wholly fallacious. The Spartan nickname is historical and does not capture any past or ongoing American social dynamic. Indian nicknames/mascots, on the other hand, are the product of conscious choices made by white people to selectively appropriate elements of an American minority culture, and then use those elements however they saw fit. First we took their land. And then we took their names, and for what?

A fucking basketball halftime show.
Jeff | 02.16.07 - 4:03 pm | #

For those who don't like wiki as a source, try here
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 4:05 pm | #

John, I wasn't trying to be an asshole and do not believe I am a so called freak for what I said.
Anonymous | 02.16.07 - 4:06 pm | #

John,

I love your blog. But to your question, the mascots aren't *meant* to be offensive, but they still are offensive. The Snickers commercial wasn't meant to offend, either. I'm guessing it was there to sell candy, but it was still offensive.

Sue
sue | 02.16.07 - 4:06 pm | #

Let's see...

In order of importance...

Steelers--OK.
Penguins--OK.
Red Rose Army--OK.
Pirates--OK.
The Bath Rugby Kid--OK and REALLY cool. A new kid photo caption winner every week.
Red Wings--OK.
Saints--OK.
Gunners--iffy, but not offensive.
Phillies--it's like the Illini situation, only not.

Whew!

In the clear.
comsympinko | 02.16.07 - 4:06 pm | #

If mascots like the Illini are meant to be offensive, then why didn't we have teams like the Jews or the Crackers?

They weren't meant to be offensive when they were adopted. Many of the current Indian mascots date back to the forties and fifties, when playing cowboys and Indians was a popular childhood pastime. Indians were idealized as being Noble Savages, and the warrior notion fit in with the notion of team sports being "war" rather than "play."

Then there was the "spiritual and close to the earth" stereotype, which many people believe until a tribe wants to build a casino in their neighborhood to fill their roads with soot-belching buses filled with grannies who sit slack-jawed feeding quarters into slot machines. ;)

Positive stereotypes are still stereotypes, and get in the way of reality.
CarolM | 02.16.07 - 4:07 pm | #

This is my Grandfather, what we call in your languag "a long time ago ancestor". He wears a headdress of bald eagle feathers. You can't see it in this picture, but it goes down to the ground. He EARNED each one of those feathers. That headdress is more then just a "warbonnet", it chronicles his achievement as a Kainah Man (Kainah means Mountain Chief, the white man calls them the "Blood" Tribe). It also denotes his stature within our Nations, there are only a very few men with the full headdress. It honors his service to his Peoples, the battles he took on over his years to protect and preserve both his Peoples and the land and animals that sustain us to this day.

"Chief" Illiniwek had no stature, earned no honors, did nothing for the Peoples he was supposed to honor. He didn't earn any honors from them and had no right to wear a full headdress. In my community, the traditional women and elders would have pee'd to show their disdain. Litterally, we would have gone to him and one by one, squatted on the ground and pee'd. To be shamed by women, is the greatest shame of all.

Judy
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 4:07 pm | #

The racial stereotype of the native american is of a savage, brutal warrior -- which adapts well to the faux-combat that is a team sport. The racial stereotype of blacks, jews, hispanics are not warlike.

So those offensive stereotypes weren't adapted into sports team names and mascots, but the native american stereotype was.

That doesn't save your bacon on this one, John.
Mike H. | 02.16.07 - 4:08 pm | #

White privilege rears its ugly head in the strangest places.
Jay | 02.16.07 - 4:13 pm | #

New Berlin, Illinois' mascot is a pretzel.

Yep...Goooooo...Pretzels?
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 4:19 pm | #

Additional thought: Can you think of any other scenario in the year 2007 where it's acceptable for a white person to dress up as and perform as a member of a minority group in the same exaggerated way that Chief Illiniwek does?

Were I to see a white person in black face, I'd be offended. Were I to see a white person imitating a person of Asian descent, I'm offended. And on and on.
Jeff | 02.16.07 - 4:21 pm | #

The Atlanta Braves and that ridiculous Tomahawk Chop anyone?

That one pisses me off. As a white southerner I have always believed the team should have kept their AAA designation - The Atlanta Crackers - rather than keep using "Braves" after the Milwaukie franchise moved there.
Sarcastro | 02.16.07 - 4:31 pm | #

Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 4:07 pm | #

INDEED! i just cringe when seeing these people wearing a headdress. It is so sacred, and so is each and every one of those feathers on it.

to add to that, judy...the individual who is a mascot, isn't even native.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 4:42 pm | #

I would point out to those that suggest FSU is endorsed by the Seminole Tribe that FSU is not endorsed by the entire Seminole tribe and there is still some controversy regarding their mascot - which so far as I know is still banned from championships the NCAA controls, despite a statement of support from the Seminole Tribe of Florida. Beginning 2008 the cheerleaders and band members must stop using indian nicknames as well.

It would appear the NCAA is applying this policy across the board and I'm unaware of any exceptions, even for colleges that "celebrate" the Native American culture they take their mascot from. (Note that FSU added a class on Seminole history after the NCAA made its initial ruling.)
Missing Stargate | 02.16.07 - 4:42 pm | #

Dear John in DC:

I have to say that Dorothy in the 3rd post nails it the most succinctly. I can certainly empathize with you.

I did not go to the U of I, but my father did, I applied there, and my grandfather used to teach Architecture there and designed many buildings at the Champaign Urbana campus, including the above/below ground library. So I feel a certain kinship with the fighting illini. I rooted for their teams along with my father. I have known them all my life as the Illini and knew it was named after an indian tribe and thought it was fine. So I agree that keeping the name because it sounds like Illinois is lame.

My Alma Mater also changed it's name but before I got there. It used to be the indians I think, which is a good less sensitive to the Native Americans than the Illini. What did we end up with? A color. A lousy color. We are the Cardinal. Not the bird, the color. And our mascot is a tree. A tree that a certain bear likes to tackle every year and that a certain Trojan warrior tries to chop down every year.

The students tried to pass a petition to rename the mascot yet again to the Robber Barons, which was much more fitting to the genesis of the creation of our school. Anyway, I certainly agree with you in many respects in that the U of I was very respectful of its mascot or symbol, much more so than most other schools and sports teams and it is a shame that the current Illini authority (elders?) find fault with it.

However, it is their namesake and much like one's personal image, cannot, nor should not be used without the permission of the owner. Unless the Illini tribe granted perpetual rights to use their name to the U of I, they can take it back at their discretion. Even if they did give perpetual rights, you must agree that Native American tribes have been signing bookshelves full of "agreements" that the U.S. Government could not be bothered to adhere to, even when the U.S. Supreme Court told the President he was wrong to march so many of them across the country and many of those to their death. I am often struck at how many streets and towns and lakes and rivers are named after Native American tribes or use the names they gave the natural features and the people that gave us those beautiful names we drove out at the end of a bayonet. So it is unfortunate that the Illini have revoked their support for letting the U of I use their namesake, but it belongs to them, and they can give it away and take it back when it suits their purposes.

I really think the Robber Barons would have been hilarious.
coltergeist | 02.16.07 - 4:43 pm | #

Pekin, Indiana had, until recently, the "Chinks" as their high school mascot. Now they are the dragons.

I shit you not. Ain't the heartland great.
j swift | 02.16.07 - 1:59 pm | #

that makes sense. they should have to ditch the mascot but they should still be allowed to keep the name, since "Pekin" is short for Peking and everyone knows that place is full of Chinks.

;)
SkippyFlipjack | 02.16.07 - 4:44 pm | #

Ok, my bad - I found where the NCAA withdrew the order late November of last year, regarding FSU. I find it interesting they did so only when faced with a possible legal battle which would basically put the Seminole Tribe of Florida against the NCAA. I thought I had glossed over something about it recently but I just assumed it was the nickname ruling.
Missing Stargate | 02.16.07 - 4:47 pm | #

Why is it up to another group (non-Native Americans) to decide whether something honors Native Americans? What if straight people decided to "honor" gays by coming up with a straight-interpretation of an homage to gays, but one which was terribly offensive to the gay community. No matter how well intentioned, it seems very paternalistic to say, "Don't worry--we'll tell YOU what we think is the right way to honor you--never mind what YOU think." Hey, let's celebrate MLK Day by having a big party with everyone in black face, drinking 40-ouncers and eating fried chicken! Oh, wait--that's already been done (and we've all read the news reports of the fallout.) Were those miscreants off the hook just because they said this was their way to pay tribute to MLK? I think not.
kublai | 02.16.07 - 4:48 pm | #

interesting point, kublai! :)
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 4:50 pm | #

Perhaps, John, you'd understand the native American viewpoint better if you reflect on the fact that the native people did not practice their religion one day a week in a building set aside for that specific purpose. Their dances were not a recreational sock hop, they were religious expressions. That mockery, however unintended, of religious ritual is what's offensive about "Indian" impersonators flouncing around an athletic field.

Which, incidentally, is the answer to remarks like "So what, I'm Irish and I don't find Notre Dame's leprechaun mascot offensive." The leprechaun is not a religious figure.
astockton | 02.16.07 - 4:54 pm | #

ACTUALLY, John, the US used to have teams called the "JEWS" and many teams with "CRACKERS" in their names back when baseball was dominant as local live entertainment.

In fact, there was a Negro League team called the "BLACK CRACKERS!"

My son used to try to get my goat by calling me a cracker and was was totally unsuccessful until I convinced him that the term was meant to describe southern or southern culture whites and that he needed to come up with some other term OF racial disparagement. Now he calls me "white bread" which I sort of find offensive, so he is a more articulate person, thereby validating that I as a parent have somehow contributed to his education.

John, you are totally white bread. I'm so glad you are gay. Otherwise, I think you would have had a lot of trouble developing empathy for people different from your white bread ass.

Luckily, you are who you are and we all benefit through your wonderful blog.

But, I think you're wrong on this one.
Mirror | 02.16.07 - 4:57 pm | #

I have to agree with several of the other posters here. Chief Illiniwek is exactly analogous to the Snickers add (which I also find offensive). Yes, there are more important issues facing both groups. Yes, the creators of both did not "intend" any offense (actually, I do not think they even thought about the possibility). None-the-less, both are offensive to the people represented and those peoples' views should be respected. Further, Chief Illiniwek is a cartoonish characture. He dresses in Northern Plains ceremonial dress, rather than in authentic Illini dress (there are a number of excellent Catlin paintings of the actual Illini accessible on the net). The dance is a REALLY bad choreographer's nightmare which no tribe anywhere ever did anything similar to. It is a white student "in drag" pretending to be a stereotypical Indina. Finally, as has been pointed out, no one at the U of I sems to have any interest at all in learning anything about the actual Illinwek people and their fate. Remember, they are still around. I actually went to high school with one.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 4:58 pm | #

Seamus, I was trying to make the point that the U of I wasn't ridiculing their heritage but honoring it. I see nothing wrong in honoring our heritage. I have native American blood going back to the days of our earliest settlers coming here.

It doesn't take 50 years of Big 11 membership to appreciate the Fightin' Illini, especially since their football teams are so bad. In fact we enjoy siccing our mountain lion on the Illini.

The Nittany Lion is actually similar as a mascot to the Chief because it honors heritage, the days when these majestic creatures freely roamed the mountains of central Pennsylvania. The Fightin' Illini, to me, honored the time when this land's original inhabitants freely roamed these lands.

The University of Illinois did this with honor and integrity, it wasn't crass exploitation like the Cleveland Indians and Washington Redskins do.

I spent Christmas Day at a native American pueblo in New Mexico. It was a moving and serene experience to share that holy day in an ancient mission church watching native American dancing. It was a most wonderful Christmas. That village has been continuously inhabited for 1500 years. We should honor these noble peoples.

I posted numerous pictures from Acoma on my blog. They're quite spectacular and remain in the December archives.
John Morgan | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 5:01 pm | #

“Can you think of any other scenario in the year 2007 where it's acceptable for a white person to dress up as and perform as a member of a minority group in the same exaggerated way” Well the gay community is having that debate now about Shirley Q. Liquor. Amazingly there are many otherwise liberal white gay men who are defending this shit and they resort to the right-wing “PC” arguments to defend themselves too. It is incredibly hypocritical for people to criticize Republicans for “Maccaca" and tom-toms and then defend either of these things. Of course John isn’t the only one with different levels of sensitivity. Steve Gilliard has a very different level of sensitivity where race is concerned than other issues of bigotry. I have also noticed the completely double standard applied to John versus Steve Gilliard. He can call people pussies and call men bitches not to mention all the attacks on black feminists and I have yet to see him get anything near the criticism that John got for something far less egregious. There is a lot of hypocrisy going around.
Claude Wynne | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 5:01 pm | #

Sorry John. You're dead wrong on this one. It seems that we are often blind to offense, unless it's we who are being offended. BTW, I'm a die-hard liberal, african-american, gay man, 54 years of age, who just happened to find the Snickers ad extremely funny.
Mikey | 02.16.07 - 5:01 pm | #

By the way, if you are interested in learning something about the living Illiniwek, here is a lik to the Peoria Tribe's website (http://peoriatribe.com/)
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 5:02 pm | #

To John Morgan:

So you are saying that Native Americans are "noble" and "majestic creatures?"

Stereotypes, even positive ones, are harmful.
Jeff | 02.16.07 - 5:07 pm | #

When the greeks have been victims of genocide and are then mocked, then maybe your spartan example would mean something.
Me | 02.16.07 - 5:09 pm | #

How! Me thinkum you palefaces drinking too much firewater, makeum bad medicine, ugh.
Chief J. Strongbow | 02.16.07 - 5:13 pm | #

how is having a mascot of a native american paying homage?

it doesn't matter if the outfit was provided by the chief of the tribe, this is not how one pays homage to a race or group of people, especially one that our ancestors decimated.
Lewis_Stoole | 02.16.07 - 5:14 pm | #

John, I'm from Illinios also and my heritage has nothing to do with Native Americans. As a matter of fact I never met a Native American until I was in my 30's and that person was visiting from out of state. It is one thing to appreciate the history of the area, it's another to dress up like someone you know nothing about and "honor" them with a dance mimicing that persons heritage and religion. If the students want to honor the Native Americans there is a lot to be done to relieve the poverty and discrimination that Native Americans suffer still today.
ckerst | 02.16.07 - 5:14 pm | #

When I was a child, in the 50s, the only thing I was taught about my people in public school was how they helped the white people with Thanksgiving, and how they murdered innocent soldiers like Gen. Custer.
As a young teenager, I made a trip to Oklahoma to the capital of my people's nation and saw a bumper sticker that stated "Custer got what he deserved." I was shocked and somewhat confused until I did my own research.
My high school mascot was the Redskins.
Karol | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 5:15 pm | #

Claude Wynne | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 5:01 pm | #

i would call steve gillies on it...but i had no idea who he was and what he said. now i do. and it is bullshit.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 5:17 pm | #

to claude, many of us, no matter how much we read, can't stay on top of everything. you are assuming people know about steve gillies comments.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 5:18 pm | #

lol, gillard. i knew i got the name wrong.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 5:20 pm | #

John in DC, I'm on your side. For decades my high school has had as its mascot the proud "Chieftain". It pays respect to Native Americans, especially the Indian tribes that once populated the area where my alma mater is located. That's a lot different -- as is Illinois -- from the tomahawk waving "savages" portrayed at some schools.
Jack L. Allen | 02.16.07 - 5:22 pm | #

Prof. Farnsworth, my ancestors did not look anything like the plains Indians, did yours?
I have a picture of my 5th great grandfather and he had tattoos, pierced ears to his shoulders, and a medal of President Monroe in his nose. But other then that, he looked just like my daddy. Laugh.
Karol | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 5:25 pm | #

I would encourage you to read this: http://www.apa.org/releases/ AmIn...dRes101805.html

"APA Calls for the Immediate Retirement of American Indian Sports Mascots
Such Sports Mascots Promote Inaccurate Images and Stereotypes and Negatively Affect the Self-Esteem of Young American Indians

WASHINGTON – The American Psychological Association is calling for the immediate retirement of all American Indian mascots, symbols, images and personalities by schools, colleges, universities, athletic teams and organizations, the Association announced today.

APA’s action, approved by the Association’s Council of Representatives, is based on a growing body of social science literature that shows the harmful effects of racial stereotyping and inaccurate racial portrayals, including the particularly harmful effects of American Indian sports mascots on the social identity development and self-esteem of American Indian young people..."
Jeff | 02.16.07 - 5:25 pm | #

John you are just paddling around in shit creek with tissue for a paddle. Illinois has a long history of rabid racism. You are too young to have seen the Chicago police in action against Dr. King. He often said that Chicago was worse than any city in the South. I sat as a young teen and saw the dogs let loose on people tearing into the protesters repeatedly. Chicago didn't believe much in tear gas. The cops preferred being able to get close with the dogs, clubs and blackjacks so they could get off on giving the beating personally. They felt it increased the fear factor and eventualy made the submission more effective. Now that I mention it you never do seem to report on the current horrors of the Chicago cops. Such as running a widespread torture ring, running shakedown schemes on business people etc. Come on John you proud man from Illinois let's hear all about your great state.
chuck | 02.16.07 - 5:39 pm | #

If Native Americans find it offensive by all means change the damn thing. It's about being sensitive to other groups of people. It's like the Snickers ad, to some straight people the ad wasn't a big deal, but to gays it was a big deal.
K | 02.16.07 - 5:42 pm | #

How about the Dancing Queer for a mascot. He can be like, totally respectful of queer culture in his dance. At least, not being gay, I can decide he is.

Or the Fighting African American mascot...again -- totally solemn and dignified in his on-field presentation. I bet I would find, as a white person, his "Fighting African American" mascot dance completely respectful of African American culture.

You're right John. This whole PC thing has just gone way too far!

/sarcasm

Utterly amazing how blinkered you can be...
Ramon | 02.16.07 - 5:49 pm | #

Two quick posts for two different ideas.

First, to reiterate what a couple of people put so succinctly up above:

"the only viable questions are 'Who is offended?', 'Why?', and 'Do we give a crap that they're offended?'"

and

"Native Americans are real live people. If it offends them then just stop it. That is not PC. That is granting human dignity to everyone. That is way more important than some sports mascot."

It's not just John--there are a lot of people, even you and me, that have uneven sensitivities and blind spots. How many people have you known who were for the advancement of a racial minority, but who were homophobic? Gay men who also managed to be sexist towards women?

It's true that you ca't please everyone on eveything, and you could kill yourself trying. But John--and all of us--you have to decide whether or not others' offense MATTERS as much to you as your own. Because it it doesn't, you're a hypocrite.

And that will only damage your cause in the future, in lost respect and credibility, from people who would otherwise support you.
Vi | 02.16.07 - 5:53 pm | #

what the fuck is wrong with my post?

I'm going to assume haloscan has indigestion... ;P

It's like it has a big white box in the middle of it. Did I do that somehow????
Vi | 02.16.07 - 5:55 pm | #

Hey! Out of sight,out of mind! Soon forgotten.The indians aren't helping themselves by their protest.
Jim Houston | 02.16.07 - 5:56 pm | #

Try reading Sherman Alexie, John. He's more eloquent than I. As an American Indian from the Pacific Northwest, I believe using American Indians as mascots is racist. One reason is because usually the non-Indians who create these mascots know nothing about the culture. Like Hollywood and all its misrepresentations of history. Thus, you open yourself to being disrespectful to an entire race of people. Some of the dances are very spiritual and represent series things in the lives of American Indians. For those who are Catholic, how would you like to see someone dressed up in full regalia waving rosary beads, etc. Your Chief represents stereotypes. And, despite your protestations that it is an homor, it is not.
Bonnie | 02.16.07 - 6:06 pm | #

Out of curiosity, should native american derived place names be changed as well (i.e. cities, lakes, rivers, states)?
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:09 pm | #

Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:09 pm | #

how are these issues the same?
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 6:10 pm | #

As a mostly Indian (as opposed to the PC Native American)-- I think the whole debate is semantic nonsense. We had the same argument in my area; the PC crowd won and now there's hard feeling everywhere and two or three smug, self-satisfied native americans who stuck it to the man. Wow. What revenge!

The honkies owe us nothing. We own no one nothing. The sins of our fathers are the sins of our fathers. Why don't we leave this shit alone and take care of serious problems affecting people right now? Like Iraq. Phew. What a waste of cyberspace.
highdancer | 02.16.07 - 6:15 pm | #

Just asking whether the logic or premise extends to states and/or cities established by white people on former tribal lands.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:17 pm | #

highdancer | 02.16.07 - 6:15 pm | #

showing respect for a people's culture is being politically correct? by asking white people to stop using our dances and outfits incorrectly...is semantics??

what-ever.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 6:17 pm | #

Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:17 pm | #

are these rivers, lakes, cities cartoonish parodies of an entire group of people?
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 6:18 pm | #

highdancer | 02.16.07 - 6:15 pm | #

yes, i regularly go to my reservation and do what I can.

i also do alot of work in native american rights. and i also call racism/prejudice when i see it. i will stand up and say when my people are being disrespected.

you are in the minority, my friend. you really are.
Professor Farnsworth | 02.16.07 - 6:23 pm | #

I would suppose it depends on your opinion of a given city, state, or body of water.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:25 pm | #

Well I can't speak to the native american issue, not being a native or having seen the mascot. But being Irish, I have never been bothered my the drunken stereotype or the "Fighting Irish" mascot. The lack of apostrophe or the use of the small letter "b" on mailing with my last name don't bother me either.

But that's just me.....
Kerry | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 6:26 pm | #

To Distaste and highdancer

This is not just about "the sins of our father" or semantics. This is about ongoing racism and oppression. No this is not the most important issue, but it encourages the attitudes which perpetuate the big problems. Racism, and discrimination, against Indians is alive and well, as I have seen growing up in Oklahoma and currently living in Montana. Indians earn less money than any ethnic group in the US (62% of the national average), have the lowest life expectancy and the highest infant mortality rate in the US, and have the highest rates of crime victimization, including racially motivated assault.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 6:33 pm | #

DrDick | 02.16.07 - 6:33 pm |
----------------------------------
They also have some pretty nice casinos here and there. A lot of indigenous Americans are trapped in poverty though. The wealth is not being spread around.

Take, for example, the Agua Callinte band of the Cahullia in SoCal. They are raking in the money. They give millions back to the Palm Springs area. Their tribal members are doing good. The Agua Caliente also send millions of dollars every election to REPUGS. They don't give much to the dems. They watch other tribes suffer and offer nothing. Nothing.

They bought the neocon idea through and through. It will come back to haunt them.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 6:49 pm | #

Let me clarify that I will not miss the "Chief" but the issue has been conflated somewhat to include the Fighting Illini name as well. So I suppose my question is, does maintaining the name encourage an understanding of the area's history? Is it an acknowledgement of heritage? If there are place names like Peoria, Cahokia, Kaskaskia, Sangamon, etc.. should the largest state universty also acknowledge that past?

I understand there are broader and certainly more pressing issues of racism and poverty but those problems are not germane to the narrow issue regarding the appropriateness of names and imagery adopted by the University of Illinois.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 6:56 pm | #

As a current University of Illinois grad student- I'm typing this in a lab on daniel street, about a block away from the legendary KAMS(and yes it still smells awful when you walk by)- I may have some interesting things to add.

John... The Native American House here at UIUC has posted this statement on their website

"Therefore, the Native American House and American Indian Studies faculty insist that the University of Illinois Board of Trustees discontinue the use of 'chief illiniwek' in name, performance, and symbol."

The group representing Native Americans at the University of Illinois does not support Chief Illiniwek. The group that the Chief is meant to honor does not feel honored by the Chief. A Native American student had a threat against her posted on the Facebook group, "If they get rid of the Chief, I'm becoming a racist."

John... What more proof do you need? Native Americans at my school, your Alma Mater, do not feel that the Chief pays homage to them.

The Chief should go.
Jake | 02.16.07 - 7:00 pm | #

"It's one thing for a Free Shoes University to mock American Indians with their tomahock chop or run some stud and his horse around the field in a loincloth ridiculing their warriors (though they were good eye candy), but the Fightin' Illini and their dignified mascot was different..."
John Morgan | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 3:42 pm | #

Bullshit. Please don't let your distaste for my school, which probably has more to do with football preferences than facts, lead you to spread garbage like this around. You obviously dislike FSU for personal reasons, and that's your right; but judging by your comments, you've never even been here and seen the mascot.

He doesn't run around in a fucking loincloth, he's in a full outfit. He's based on a real person, with a real history, that is still genuinely respected--both by the students here, and the Seminole leaders, in Florida AND Oklahoma, that endorse him as a SYMBOL, not a mascot. Can your "dignified" school say the same? No, and that's why they're being shamed here.

"...Colleges that "celebrate" the Native American culture they take their mascot from. (Note that FSU added a class on Seminole history after the NCAA made its initial ruling.)
...Ok, my bad - I found where the NCAA withdrew the order late November of last year, regarding FSU. I find it interesting they did so only when faced with a possible legal battle which would basically put the Seminole Tribe of Florida against the NCAA."
Missing Stargate | 02.16.07 - 4:42 pm | #

I was part of the first "Seminoles and Southeast Tribes" class last fall. That course was the first, and to the best of my knowledge, the only class on that subject at any college in the United States. It was one of the most profound experiences of cultural dialogue I've ever been a part of, and I've lived overseas. It was taught outstandingly well, by a professor that wanted it to genuinely be more than a publicity stunt or a bone thrown to the PC police. He brought in every resource, speaker, film, and book he could find, and opened up every debate you could want--self-determination, history, inter-tribe racism, economics. It could not have been a more brutally honest, uncomfortable, balanced, illuminating class. Try discussing the possibility of your own racism with a real live Native American, at ten in the morning, with ABC filming and a NYT reporter making notes. The class made people confront their shit, on both sides. Whatever the reasons for the course's inception, it was done right, and could stand as a model for what college courses ought to be in general.

Tina Osceola, one of his descendents and head historian of the Seminole Tribe of Florida, spoke to us. A number of Seminole students took the course; however representative they were of their tribe, they agreed with the use of the symbol and dismissed the NCAA's concern as another form of patronizing racism.

In 1993, Chief James Billie of the Seminole Tribe wrote:

"... I do not have time to participate in such manufactured controversies that serve no purpose whatsoever, than to promote the egos of those few instigators who have assigned themselves the lofty job of telling us Seminoles how we feel."

When it's done wrong--blatantly racist, or dismissive of tribes' complaints--it should be condemned and looked into. But when it's not, when steps are taken, year after year, to ensure that the respect between the school and the tribe is watertight, that needs to be acknowledged and held up as an example--not snarkily torn down, because of other personal prejudices against FSU.

Face it--Florida State University is doing this, and a lot of other things, right. You can hate on the school for other reasons if you feel the need, but make sure they're based in facts.
Vi | 02.16.07 - 7:01 pm | #

I'm only 3/16ths Cherokee, so maybe that doesn't give me room to talk, but I think the whole thing is silly. I would have no problem with a school using a Cherokee as a mascot, even if it was a caricature.
Ryan S | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 7:01 pm | #

Distaste for Dissent: some place names have been changed and must be changed. All references to Squaw are not only insulting but obscene. The word Squaw is derived from the word in the Algonquin languages for vagina, but it was used by the early french explorers, to designate native women much as sometimes women are refered to as C*nts. So squaw lake squaw mountain squaw flower etc are not only insulting but obscene.

My favorite place name is Lake Chagogagog-munchogagog-chabun-agungamog! When I was a kid in Northern Rhode Island it was a rite of passage to learn how to pronounce it. The lake is actully in Mass.
vistaguy | 02.16.07 - 7:04 pm | #

scottinsf

There are a few tribe who are doing quite well off of tribal gaming enterprises and related businesses. Unfortunately, just 21 of the 562 federally recognized native groups in the US account for 43% of the gaming revenues and 60 groups account for over 70% of the revenues. It has been highly beneficial in recent years to these few groups, but does not make up for five centuries of suffering and deprivation. Nor does it do much for the other 502 native groups around the country. In terms of political contributions, Indians have historically given (both tribes and individuals) overwhelmingly to Democrats. Given Republican domination of the political process (and sleazy lobbyists like Abramoff) many have begun giving to Republicans of necessity, but nationally the bulk goes to Democrats. Here in Montana, Indian people were instrumental in the elections of both Gov. Schweitzer and Sen. Tester.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 7:06 pm | #

I'm only 3/16ths Cherokee, so maybe that doesn't give me room to talk....

Ryan S | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 7:01 pm |
------------------------------
You can always talk here Ryan. Don't expect your fractions to garner any sympathy though. Go back and read the first 50 posts and you'll figure out what I mean.

Speak up.
scottinsf | 02.16.07 - 7:13 pm | #

Here http://members.tripod.com/~RFest...ster/ index.html

is an excellent resource on the Illini, an association of five Algonquin tribes believed to once have been one tribe - the Illini. There is also mention of Chief Chicagou, who went to France in 1725. You think that is where Chicago came from? Anyway, these tribes identified themselves as Hileni and Illiniwek, which means - men. So, Illini is not short for Illinois, (you were right, nothing is), the word means "men" and Illiniwek is the same word.
Just want to get the history of the tribes and the words right.
As a good American mutt, I am some part, among many, many parts, Chickasaw Indian, (one of the five "civilized" tribes - first to get screwed), and that part of me gets mad at the rest of me when issues like this come up. So I've decided, since my ancestors were here originally and came over the pond, (some came before the U.S. gained independence, many came shortly after and the most recent addition - my daughter is 50% Chinese and closest to pure blood anyone in my family has been for generations - just adds more flavor to the mix,) to call myself an American and forget the rest. Time to move forward, forever. At some point, the melting pot melts everyone - all Americans. It should be below Americans to make fun of each other's heritage, it only demeans the American heritage being passed on to our descendants.
Smitty | 02.16.07 - 7:14 pm | #

We should be secure enough in the diversity of our heritage to be of good humor about it all. The descendants of slaves are also the descendants of slave owners. And in many instances the descendants of Anglo-Saxons who scalped Native Americans are also the descendants of Native Americans who scalped Anglo-Saxons.

But that's beside the point of honoring brave Native American warriors by conducting athletic contests in which their spirits are invoked. Those who would not have others honor their ancestors, dishonor their ancestors. The last thing any ethnic identity should be is an excuse to dishonor your ancestors so.
Flash | 02.16.07 - 7:33 pm | #

"My junior high school mascot was a Spartan."

Last time I checked, they're weren't many Greeks on the Trail of Tears....
Stuart | 02.16.07 - 7:41 pm | #

2Lib:

At my local Y (in Illinois), the Indian Guides/Indian Princesses thing has already been renamed.
Andre LePlume | 02.16.07 - 7:59 pm | #

In 2002, in protest of the mascot issue, a group of students, mostly Native, but also black and white, named their intramural basketball team the "Fighting Whites". Everyone out in Indian Country cheered *L*.

They became so popular, in spite of winning only two games that year, that they designed a t-shirt and began selling them. That initial entrepreneurship turned into a cottage industry and they now have a whole website of jerseys, caps, and the omnipresent mugs. All of the profit goes into a scholarship fund for Native students.

What they did, was done in an Indian way. They used humor and teasing to make a point and chastise others who would use a caricature, a stereotype, to "honor" other people against their will and without their permission.

*proud owner of a mug*

Judy, Rez Diva
Judy from Montana | 02.16.07 - 8:05 pm | #

Here's something interesting. Unfortunately it doesn't mention the Peoria Tribe's opinion regarding "Fighting Illini"

"In 1995, the Peoria Tribe, the direct descendants of the remnants of the Illini Tribe, approved the use of the Chief by the University. At that time, during a WICD (the Champaign affiliate of NBC) broadcast, Chief Giles of the Peoria tribe stated:"To say that we are anything but proud to have these portrayals would be completely wrong. We're proud that the University of Illinois is the major institution in the state, a seat of learning, and they are drawing on that background of our having been there. And what more honor could they pay us. "As part of that same broadcast Ron Froman, an officer in the Peoria Tribe was quoted on the Chief Illiniwek Home Page as saying that the protestors do not speak for all Native Americans and certainly not for the Peoria Tribe. The Home Page continued that the opinions of the Peoria tribe members should bear more weight because they were the only descendants of the Illini. However, on April 20, 2000, after the Dialogue Intake Session of April 14, 2000, the Peoria Tribe passed a resolution by a vote of 3 to 2 requesting that the University cease the use of Chief Illiniwek." link
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 8:16 pm | #

Actually you are all wrong about where the name Illinois comes from. As one from the great state of Wisconsin,I know that the name translates from ancient Wisconsin language and loosely translated means "flat-lander jerk-off Super Bowl losers".
chuck | 02.16.07 - 8:25 pm | #

John - I can not disagree with you any more than I do right now.

I turn to you for want offends the gay community I suggest you turn to the indian community to do the same in regards to this subject.

Please, please, please read this thoughtful essay by Joseph P.Gone. Written in 1995. http://www.inwhosehonor.com/GONE.HTML

Respectfully,

Tony T.
Tony from Illinois | 02.16.07 - 8:29 pm | #

Here is another great post.

http://www.prairienet.org/prc/an...ti.html/ qa.html
Tony from Illinois | 02.16.07 - 8:31 pm | #

I think John has shown his ignorant and arrogant side regarding this issue.
Hairsquare | 02.16.07 - 8:32 pm | #

This is a long running controversy. Despite my disagreement with John regarding the "Chief", I would say that ignorance and arrogance characterizes those who have chimed in sanctimoniously despite lacking any previous knowledge of the story surrounding the U of I and Chief Illinwek.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 8:41 pm | #

I have to agree that nothing is gained by attacking John personally. I have the greatest respect for John and what he is doing here. I do agree that he has displayed a definite lack of awareness on this issue, but we all have our blind spots. My hope is that through this discussion we can improve his awareness of the issues. For the record, I have taught the Chief Illiniwek controversy in classes for 10 years. I should also mention that my best friend is also a U of I grad and we have also had this conversation. I am slowly making headway there.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 8:54 pm | #

Kage no Kami:

What local tribal councils? Individual opinion may vary, but the last I heard, the tribes were united in their opposition to UND's use of the names.

For very good information on the UND name, check out http://www.und.nodak.edu/org/bridges/
Paul | 02.16.07 - 9:01 pm | #

John
I've been reading your blog for a while now. It's one of my favorites. I am really disheartened to see your lack of sensitivity and understanding on this one.
I thought the closed minded narrow view was something you fought against.

There is a much bigger picture here than your college years prejudice .
Really sad you don't see it.
Merv | 02.16.07 - 9:18 pm | #

Imagine a school with gays as a mascot and then you'll understand, John. Imagine an extreme gay stereotype as a mascot. Imagine Bobby Trendy. 'Nuff said?
Catherine | 02.16.07 - 10:08 pm | #

TheOriginalLiz--- please! It isn't UVA (the Cavaliers) but their arch-rivals Virginia Tech who are the Hokies. I grew up there, and when I was little, they were indeed the Gobblers. (No joke.) Their icon was an orange turkey, neck up, wattles, little head. They were the laughingstock of the east, so they changed the nickname to the secondary nickname, The Hokies. Now I'm sure that the same people who thought it would be great to name the team after a turkey also thought calling the team Hokey would be cool. All I remember was how those damned Wahoos (the Cavaliers' second name) used to chant "Chokey Chokey Chokey" whenever Tech blew a lead.

Point is, if there is one, the people who choose team names aren't always really rational. And changing a team name isn't really all that painful. Remember, there's a new crop of students every four years. I can just about guarantee in four years, you won't find a student who cares on the Champaign campus.

And alums who refuse to give money to a university because the school changed the team name should really think about their priorities.

All I know is... Tech didn't start winning championships until they got rid of that turkey mascot. :)

As far as the Illini go, John, really, the whole definition of "offensive" is that it offends people. If Native Americans are offended, then it's offensive. And come on, you just have to watch that dance to know it's nothing like real NA dances. Imagine a mascot for a team called the "Blacks", and it was a white guy in blackface, and he dressed in a zoot suit and sang what he called "jazz" but really sounded like Frank Sinatra. And everyone said, "But this is honoring the great African-American music!" but they had made no effort to consult anyone who was actually black, or sang jazz songs either. It would be offensive. "Honoring" people by misrepresenting them is going to offend them, even if there's nothing inherently offensive. It's like your name is John, and there's this guy who ALWAYS calls you "Jay." And when you point out your name is John, he smirks and calls you Jay again. And keeps calling you Jay. That's going to be annoying even though it's just another name. You have the right to decide how you are going to be represented.
lab | 02.16.07 - 10:30 pm | #

I've said it before, to those of you who know how to discuss issues like adults, thank you. To those of you disagree with people by acting like small asshole-ic children, grow up. And Catherine, you have no idea what the mascot was like at Illinois, as I've already explained, it wasn't a caricature of anything, it was quite respecful. That doesn't mean people have to agree that they like it, but the caricature argument is faulty here as this is not a case like schools and teams who use the cute little furry mascots cheering the team along, or who use tomahawks and other silly things. Our mascot was different, and some of you need to take the time to do your research on both sides of the issues. Again, be good liberals, don't be unthinking conservatives.

As for offensive being defined as anything that offends people, well, we'd have a very small world in terms of art and literature and more if everything that offended anyone was deemed per se offensive. Some of us choose to exercise our minds and our reason and argue with facts rather than our guts. Prove to me that something is offensive, and I'll listen, but spare me the "it IS because I SAY it's so." That's the kind of thinking that got us into a war based on a lie. Not to mention, I find several of you offensive by the way you argue, does that mean you are offensive? :-)
John Aravosis | 02.16.07 - 10:31 pm | #

John
Caricature is not limited cute and furry, tomahawk chops, or even the grinning imbecility of the Cleveland Indians logo. Caricature is by definition an image which distorts and misrepresents. Chief Illiniwek does just that. Again, he dresses in Northern Plains Indian ceremonial attire, not in the manner of the Illiniwek (see http://catlinclassroom.si.edu/ca...fm? StartRow=201 for actual life paintings of Peoria and Kaskaskia - members of the Illiniwek Confederacy). His "dance" is a grotesque gymnastic exhibition which bears no resemblance to any form of Native American dancing. This is a white kid playing dress up with theatrical clown make-up. Representing people in a manner which they do not wish to be portrayed does not in any way "honor" them. It does not really matter that neither you nor the other students and alumni intended any offense. Does it matter whether someone intends to be offensive when they use the word "fag"? Does it matter that the college students who staged the black-face parties did not intend offense? The fact is that it offends Indian people to be misrepresented in this manner. Further, the Peoria Tribe, the sole living remnants of the Illiniwek Confederacy, are on record as asking that the University stop using the Chief.
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 10:55 pm | #

John-

Your value judgment of the Chief as respectful is based upon your life experience as a Non-Native American UIUC Alum.

As I stated earlier, I am a current UIUC student. I saw the full three-in-one, chief and all, three times this year at Illini football games. I am not a Non-Native American and I feel that the University made the right decision.

But we can not fully feel the impact that any stereotype can have on another group of people.

We can not fully judge what the impact of the Chief on Native Americans.
Ultimately, the words of Native Americans at UIUC should carry the most weight in this argument. They are members of this community and it is THEIR culture that is personified in the Chief.

They have seen the Chief perform. They know what the Chief supposedly stands for and what he actually is in the eyes of most UIUC students.

The Native American House and the Professors in the American Indian Studies Department do not support the use of the Chief as a symbol of the University.

www.nah.uiuc.edu

Their words, their hurt, their feelings should be held at the utmost in this debate.

I've read this blog for at least a year now. I usually agree completely with you. Not this time. Even though you have dismissed others on this issue because they "have no idea of what the mascot was like at Illinois," I hope you will at least consider mine as a valid, informed argument. I believe that I may be the only person on this board currently in Champaign-Urbana. Hopefully that means something. I may not be an influential blogger, but I am in the middle of this debate in the most literal way.

NOTE FROM JOHN: The only people I've dismissed are those who either launch personal attacks, threats, or who didn't read what I wrote but then criticize what I didn't write. All the rest are welcome, otherwise I wouldn't have posted this or invited more comment. I think it's an interesting issue, and the fact that it doesn't bother me, but bothers others, is why I wrote about it in the first place. What I don't tolerate are assholes who think they need to boycott the blog every time they disagree with some of my analysis. I'll dismiss jerks like that every time.

Edited By Siteowner
Jake | 02.16.07 - 11:02 pm | #

oops.. meant to say that i am not a Native American.
Jake | 02.16.07 - 11:04 pm | #

Somehow our students who participate in the Science Olympiad manage to do so without cheerleaders or mascots, as do our orchestra members who have participated in competitions.

The issue of whether sports teams have disproportionate power and access to money and resources is another aspect that rarely gets discussed.

What power should nostalgic alumni have over a non-educational component of a school? I have fond memories of our ono-Indian mascot at my high school, but I wouldn't dream about having a say on whether it was appropriate or not for these times.
CarolM | 02.16.07 - 11:14 pm | #

Umm. . .John, I think you missed this post about 20 posts ago (before the asshole-ic rant) where the article showed how it IS a caricature. Here's the link again.

http://www.inwhosehonor.com/GONE.HTML

Do your research :-)
SK | 02.16.07 - 11:16 pm | #

I've said it before, to those of you who know how to discuss issues like adults, thank you. To those of you disagree with people by acting like small asshole-ic children, grow up.

Is describing some of the people who disagree with you "small asshole-ic children" discussing this like an adult?

NOTE FROM JOHN: Carol, you talk like a Republican. They're very good at attacking us when we finally defend ourselves. I expressed an opinion and invited debate on it. Some people decided to attack me personally and then threaten me. That makes them assholes who can't discuss things rationally, and your chiding me for responding to such assholes makes you sound like Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman, always attacking the Democrats for being "mean" when in fact we're responding to Republican attacks. Nice try, though. I tolerate dissent all the time on this blog, but I don't tolerate assholes. Mature adults know the difference.

Edited By Siteowner

Edited By Siteowner
CarolM | 02.16.07 - 11:22 pm | #

my brother-in-law's chief illini toilet-paper is very honorable.

all of the effigies of Indians that UI's rival schools (UIowa, for example) put up all over their campuses before games - very honorable.

John - go rent "in whose honor". watch the part where the Native American woman describes how her children reacted to seeing themselves "honored" when they went to a basketball game. then watch the part where a bunch of illini fans spit all over her because she protests the use of religious symbols (eagle feathers) at a state school.

look up the definition and root of mascot. to be one is to be, by definition, less than human. think of it this way: homosexuals are constantly (and horribly) defined by what they do, rather than who they are. the religious right perpetually identifies homosexuals through sex acts, rather than as human beings.

does the ui's depiction of indians encourage people to think of indians as complete human beings? like the ones you ask to dinner, converse with, or love? or does the ui's depiction of indians encourage people to think of indians in stereotypical and demeaning ways? kids don't leave ui basketball games feeling enlightened about indian heritage. they leave wanting to play cowboys and indians. they leave wanting to watch pocahontas.

one last thing, before i cut my recently purchased americablog t-shirt into dishrags...your "peice of flesh" line, given the context of your words, is particularly creepy. really creepy.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Actually, it's creepy to you because you apparently have some fucked up notion of native Americans that I don't. Taking a pound of flesh is an old expression in English that goes back to Shakespeare, and in fact, it was used in the just the last week when Donohue got the Edwards bloggers fired, or resigned, or whatever. So get over yourself. If you can't disagree with someone and discuss your point of view without freaking out, then you are very free to go elsewhere.

Edited By Siteowner
erizzle | 02.16.07 - 11:23 pm | #

"If the mascot pays homage to native Americans, then it's irrelevant if they were once slighted - the mascot pays homage so they lose the argument about it being critical of them."

Uhm, who gets to decide if the mascot "pays homage" to Native Americans? White people or the Native Americans themselves? As you would not want straight people deciding whether or not gay people can marry, we do not want white people deciding what "honors" us and which images of our people and sacred artifacts can be used for cheerleading purposes (or displayed in museums or cut up in laboratories). And have you listened to some of the unvarnished bigotry of the pro-"Chief" factions? Do you really want to throw in with folks like that? I agree with the previous poster--please stop "honoring" us. Or better yet, if you want to "honor" Indians, pick one treaty, just one, and actually follow it. That would provide far more "honor" than having someone dress up in "redface" and prance around a football field.
The Local Crank | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 11:23 pm | #

John,
One final question. Who gets to decide what is offensive to gays? Is it you, who is gay, or is it me, who is not? The same standard must apply in all cases.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Often, society decides because I happen to believe in presenting my case rather than just whining about it and saying that my gut proves it so. Read up on any campaign I've launched previously, there's lots and lots and lots of information that goes along with it explaining the problem, comparing it to other situations, etc. I don't believe I've ever said "I can't explain my reasoning, my gut just tells me I'm right, so screw you." Usually I take my case to the American people through the media in print and TV and actually take the time to explain myself. That's how we win people over.

Edited By Siteowner
DrDick | 02.16.07 - 11:34 pm | #

If I could point out a previous post that highlighted the fact that the Peoria Tribe did endorse the "Chief" before they withdrew their support 5 years later. It is inherently unfair to place all blame on supporters of the "Chief" when in fact Native Americans have been less than consistent in their opinions when dealing with the school. The fact that the regalia was provided and in fact presented in a ceremony to the school also reinforces the fact this controversy has not just been ignorant insensitive whites vs. Native Americans. The "Chief" WAS a proud symbol that was explicitly and implicitly endorsed at various times by members of the Native American community. Let me emphasize that the "Chief" will soon be relegated to the past tense. It may be far more productive to discern exactly where the line is between honoring and insulting so that controversies like this can be avoided in the future. FSU has a strong relationship with the Seminoles, perhaps U of I needs to foster a similar relationship with the Peoria Tribe.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.16.07 - 11:43 pm | #

Frankly, I think it takes a lot of damned gall to commit genocide of about 20 Million people, destroy dozens of Nations and cultures - many of whom had democratic governments - steal their land, kill the buffalo that sustained them, suppres their religion and reduce them to a state of dependence on those who destroyed them, then turn around an want to use one of our names for a sports team.

White people have no shame.

Was that offensive? Good.
Morgaine Swann | Homepage | 02.16.07 - 11:45 pm | #

http://www.aistm.org/cartoons10.htm

now i get it.
erizzle | 02.17.07 - 12:00 am | #

As a resident of North Dakota, I am embarrassed by UND's effort to hold on to the "Fighting Sioux" nickname. I think Illinois made the right decision.

I think a much better name for the lot of us, especially for all the people that keep backing this ignorant stereotype portrayed at UND games, would be "Stupid Norskys," "Lefse Lickers," "Rommegrat Rump Pirates," or better yet, the "Krumkake Killers."
Hanna | 02.17.07 - 12:04 am | #

Geez - I'm done with this. John if you don't get it by now I don't see how to change your mind on this.

Have you read any of the links provided?
TonyT | 02.17.07 - 12:18 am | #

chuck,
California is going to overtake Wisconsin as the number one producer of cheese. What will you have to be proud of then?
Distaste For Dissent | 02.17.07 - 12:32 am | #

Yes, Tony, I read some of the links, and I don't agree. I think we still have the right, in our seventh year of George Bush's America, to analyze something, say "I don't agree," and then invite debate on a topic in order to learn more about what the other side thinks, even if, possibly, you still won't end up agreeing with them in the end. It's a blessing of America, and adulthood - having a civil conversation and sometimes not agreeing.
John Aravosis | 02.17.07 - 12:42 am | #

Alrighty John, I’ve been following this issue for a very long time. Since I first heard of Charlene Teters and watched as Susan Harjo began her battle against the “Redskins”. I’ve also worked with the reservations schools and communities to change the racist mascots here in Montana. I also worked to help push through legislation here in Montana to get rid of the word “squaw” from the beautiful mountains, streams and other natural landmarks here in Montana. Below is my reasoning for celebrating the demise of “Chief” Illiniwek. It’s a good day!

From the State of Illinois Museum Website
In the late 1600s there may have been as many as 12 different Illinois tribes. However, by the end of the century seven of these tribes--including the Chepoussa, Chinkoa, Coiracoentanon, Espeminkia, Maroa, Moingwena, and Tapouaro--had disappeared or merged with other Illinois tribes. Five principal tribes survived into the 1700s: the Cahokia, Kaskaskia, Michigamea, Peoria, and Tamaroa. Only the Kaskaskia and Peoria continued to exist in the early 1800s.
When they first came into contact with Europeans, the Illinois wore clothing made from the skins and hair of bison, deer, and other animals. As time passed and they became more dependent on French trade goods, the Illinois began to replace their traditional clothing with garments made of wool and other fabrics.
Illinois men often wore very little clothing in the warmest months of the year. Sometimes they would wear breechcloths or leggings made of bison hide or woven bison fur, but at other times they wore nothing but their leather moccasins. Women commonly wore knee-length skirts. They often covered their upper bodies with deer-skin cloaks or other garments, but at other times they chose to wear no tops. Children's clothing styles are not well known, although boys probably dressed like their fathers and girls like their mothers. In winter, the Illinois warmed themselves in leather cloaks or robes that retained the animal's fur
The hair styles of men and boys differed from those of women. On males, the hair on top of the head was clipped short and stood erect, similar to the "roach" style worn by some other Great Lakes tribes. The hair was somewhat longer on the front and back of the head, where it was combed downward and trimmed horizontally. But it was allowed to grow very long on each side of the head, where one or two long locks hung down from the ear to the chest.
Women wore their hair long and braided it down the back. However, on the front and side of the head it was combed forward and neatly trimmed to keep it out of the face, similar to the style worn by men.
http://www.museum.state.il.us/ mu...eemoraniaa.html
Illinois men and women adorned themselves with ornaments and colored garters. Traditional ornaments included carved pendants made of Catlinite, a soft red stone, and gorgets and bead necklaces made of white shell. When French trade goods became available, the traditional ornaments made by the Illinois were supplemented with glass beads, brass Jesuit rings, brass tinkling cones, silver armbands, and silver crosses.
Men wore headresses made of multicolored feathers. Men also wore long necklaces made of woven bison fur and decorated with feathers, brass cones, deer-hair tassels, and porcupine quills. These were not of the type worn by Plains Indians with long feathered trails, but instead formed "garlands and crowns" of feathers placed on top of the head. Men also wore headbands attached to long pendants decorated with feathers, hair, and porcupine quills.
http://www.museum.state.il.us/mu.../C1civ1- 200.JPG
Tattoos and body paint on three Illinois men visiting New Orleans, 1735. (colored pen and ink by Alexandre de Batz, 1735)
Although Illinois men often wore very little clothing when the weather was warm, they commonly decorated their skin with tattoos and body paint. The tattoos were permanent markings that formed geometric designs on the arms, legs, chest, back, and sides. Based on a 1735 Alexandre de Batz painting of three tattooed Illinois men, the designs were brownish in color and included open triangles, nested triangles, and parallel zig-zag lines. The circle-and-cross design was also common; it appears on the shoulders of all three men and on the knees of one. Women also wore tattoos, but these may have been limited to the cheeks, breasts, and arms.
Red paint was commonly applied to the faces of Illinois men, women, and children. This paint was traditionally made of ochre, a reddish mineral that the Illinois obtained from natural deposits of oxidized iron. However, vermilion began to replace ochre as a source of red pigment in the early 1700s. Vermilion, a bright-red mineral composed of mercuric sulfide, was imported by the French and obtained by the Illinois as a trade item. As indicated by the 1735 de Batz painting, women and children applied red paint to their cheeks. Men often covered their entire faces with paint: red, black, and sometimes white. Some men also applied red paint to their torsos, shoulders, and upper arms, highlighting and filling in their tattooed designs.
http://www.museum.state.il.us/mu...s/ timeline.html
Historical timeline of the Illinois Tribes.

In contrast, here is “Chief” Illiniwek. The first one.
http://www.chiefilliniwek.org/ph...rary/1931- 1.jpg
http://www.chiefilliniwek.org/ im..._90a46b2f45.jpg
Current “Chief” rendition. Today, he seems to be a caricature of a caricature. In no way do either the first “Chief” nor the latest one resemble anything close to the original inhabitants of Illinois. That kind of blows huge holes in the “honor the original People” theory.
The “dance”
http://www.chiefilliniwek.org/ph.../ threeinone.htm
Here is a quote from the Chief Illiniwek Educational Foundation.
“Since 1998, the Foundation has sought to utilize the presence of Chief Illiniwek to promote greater education and awareness of Illinois Natives', culture , tradition, and history to the students, alumni, and friends of the University of Illinois.”
1988 – Charlene Teters, Native student (Spokane) began her protests of Chief Illiniwek. It took them 10 years to begin to “educate” about the culture, tradition and history using “Chief Illiniwek. I guess someone had to put up or shut up, finally.
Here is the website of the documentary of Charlene’s battle with the now defeated “Chief” Illiniwek.
http://www.inwhosehonor.com/
So, how was this “tradition” born? It was the “brain child” of a football coach and a band director who used to be a boy scout. They came up with the mascot, the song and the dance. The boy scout had an interest in Native dance. Listen to the song, it’s a Hollywood kind of theme. Sounds like a mixture of Zulu and the tom tom beat of the old Disney Indians.
How about the “outfit”? It comes from the Ogalala Lakota People, traditional enemies of the Illinois People. The Lakota and others (Sauk, Fox) drove the Illinoian Tribes out of Illinois.
Thank Creator we won. We all won. Another racist stereotype defeated and dead. It’s somewhat surreal that it died because of economics and the politics of sports and not because it was the right thing to do?……. ah well, it’s still one more dead white Indian!

Judy, *does a REAL Blackfeet victory dance to a war dance song by the Young Grey Horse singers, my nephews*
Judy from Montana | 02.17.07 - 12:50 am | #

Wow - Judy

Wonderful post. Thank you.

Peace,
Tony from Illinois | 02.17.07 - 1:14 am | #

John, I've read all the comments, and I saw very few that attacked you, and very many that discussed the issue. Are you pulling a John Harris here and focusing on a very few posts because they're easy to deny, while ignoring the ones that have arguments you probably need to consider?

And think about it-- if you're offended by this, maybe offense is important. And you OWN this blog. You are not in the position of a Native American whose people were just about wiped out by the ancestors of those who want to "honor" them. And as for the mascot being so important to U of I-- well, you have heard from recent graduates and current students who simply don't care about a mascot. And really, in 4 years, NO ONE will remember Chief what's his name. No one will care.

I hate to say this (as a college teacher), but universities are not for alums. They're for current and future students-- especially state universities. Alum opinion is interesting but (cough) seldom important. Frankly, if alums had their way, everything would stay the way it was when they were at the school, and we'd all be young and gorgeous forever. Sigh. It isn't going to happen. We are going to be replaced quickly by other young and gorgeous types, and pretty soon, the students will still be y and g, and we won't be. :)

College is for college students... not for the rest of us.
pippen | 02.17.07 - 1:26 am | #

In sort of the same way I don't get to decide whether or not I am attractive to, say Sandra Bullock, I don't get to decide what is honorific for anybody else. I don't get to sit and weigh the arguments why something may or may be not offensive for somebody else in much the same way that I can't call up, say Sandra Bullock, give all my attractive points and features and expect/command her to dig me. That's patronizing at best. You can believe that some person or group is too thin-skinned or perhaps misguided with regard to whatever you believe is honorific, and you might even be right. However when you are talking about peoples that have suffered genocide many times over, and continue to suffer from a long and sundry list of other crimes and offenses, well I tend to give the benefit of the doubt. Sort of like if I were Richard Ramirez or a re-animated John Wayne Gacy with a thing for, say Sandra Bullock.

And if Sandra Bullock is reading this I'm not actually Richard Ramirez, or a zombie John Wayne Gacy for that matter. Honest whitey.
spark | 02.17.07 - 1:28 am | #

--Yes, Tony, I read some of the links, and I don't agree.--

John, what is it you don't agree with in these posts?

---I think we still have the right, in our seventh year of George Bush's America, to analyze something, say "I don't agree," and then invite debate on a topic in order to learn more about what the other side thinks, even if, possibly, you still won't end up agreeing with them in the end.---

What in the hell does George Bush have to do with this debate? Also, your saying you've learned how the native American's feel about this subject but you disagree with there take on it?

-- It's a blessing of America, and adulthood - having a civil conversation and sometimes not agreeing.--

This constant refering to adulthood, assholeic children etc. makes me wonder if this is what you believe folks like Snickers, John McCain et all feel about you when you write about them.

Using your previous logic I should boycott your site and advertisers just as you would have us boycott Snickers or Disney or ABC or whoever else.

When I find my buttons being pushed I look at what is being said and why I am reacting.. Here is what's going on.. althought there are almost 400 post's in disagreement to your post you still are not in agreement with the very thoughtful rebuttals. Because this is your blog your opinioin weighs heavy in the discussion. Once again I go back to a phrase that has helped me in past confrontations. Can you say ex-wife!!

Unshared expectations. Often we forget that others get to feel how they want and we don't get to change their mind. The anger comes in when we want to change others. Well we don't get to.

Thanks for allowing me to revisit those feelings and thanks for showing me your feelings on this. I've grown up a bit and will think twice the next time I read a post from you calling for a boycott of someone.

Nameste,
Tony from Illinois | 02.17.07 - 1:32 am | #

Carol, you talk like a Republican. They're very good at attacking us when we finally defend ourselves. I expressed an opinion and invited debate on it. Some people decided to attack me personally and then threaten me. That makes them assholes who can't discuss things rationally, and your chiding me for responding to such assholes makes you sound like Karl Rove and Ken Mehlman, always attacking the Democrats for being "mean" when in fact we're responding to Republican attacks. Nice try, though. I tolerate dissent all the time on this blog, but I don't tolerate assholes. Mature adults know the difference.

John, I've been registered as a Democrat and voting for Democrats for 35 years, long before your recent conversion. To compare me to Rove and Mehlman is one of the most extraordinarily silly things I've ever heard. I never realized I was so dangerous! :o

I didn't say anything whatsoever about whether you should or shouldn't respond to the people you called assholes to their faces here. This has actually been a fairly rancor-free discussion compared to many others on this blog, mostly on topic and relatively civil.

I'm not quite sure who you mean is the "we" and what that "we" might be being defensive about. In my town, all of us who worked to retire the Indian mascot were Democrats and Greens, and all of us were life-long supporters of progressive politics.

I just don't think that calling people assholes is mature adult behavior that furthers thoughtful dialogue, but you do. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on that point, John.

NOTE FROM JOHN: Well, actually, Carol, we don't get to agree to disagree on this point. I think those people who threatened me and launched personal attacks against me are assholes, I found them offensive. And apparently the rule around here is that if I find them offensive and wrong, then they are offensive and wrong simply because I feel that way. So, you don't get a point of view when I feel slighted. That's the rule you all adopted. And in any case, I deleted the threats, so perhaps that's why you don't seem to get it.

Edited By Siteowner
CarolM | 02.17.07 - 1:45 am | #

sorry, cleaned cookies. last post mine.
erizzle | 02.17.07 - 2:03 am | #

Go over to DailyKos.com and see my post on "Goodbye Chief Illiniwek". I've put up a poll so folks can vote on whether or not he should have been retired.

Peace,
Tony from Illinois | 02.17.07 - 2:06 am | #

Tony from Illinois | 02.17.07 - 2:06 am

thanks, T.
erizzle | 02.17.07 - 2:07 am | #

miles,

the image of chest hair pulling is just so offensive! you do realize that native americans from the northwest did that? oh my gosh, the backwoods hicks that sometimes post on this site!
hyacinth | 02.17.07 - 2:10 am | #

back off, hyacinth--there's enough hatin' in the world.
miles cvrdl | 02.17.07 - 2:12 am | #

Yes, celebrating America's native american heritage will be difficult now that there won't be any Chief-logo toilet paper around.
Beatrice | 02.17.07 - 2:12 am | #

Beatrice = TROLL.
miles cvrdl | 02.17.07 - 2:14 am | #

Only a troll would knock wiping your ass with the face of the Chief.
miles cvrdl | 02.17.07 - 2:16 am | #

miles, you called it. beatrice works for the the toilet paper association!
hyacinth | 02.17.07 - 2:17 am | #

of course, miles, i think we can tell what your pet hobby is!

miles is a chief of the posterior indeed!
hyacinth | 02.17.07 - 2:18 am | #

Worse than a troll--a CORPORATE troll!
miles cvrdl | 02.17.07 - 2:19 am | #

I've thought for some time that, given the Native American genocide that began with Columbus, it is really inappropriate in this day and time to further exploit Native Americans by naming sports teams and mascots after them. In this case it does not show them proper respect for all they have suffered at our white hands.
Anonymous | 02.17.07 - 2:26 am | #

I'm curious why no one seems willing to clarify what is and is not offensive. As previously stated, FSU has the explicit approval of the Seminoles, UND apparently faces opposition, and UICU has recieved mixed signals. It would seem that if this were the black/white issue that people like to portray it as then we would see some consistency. However, a consensus opinion on what is innappropriate seems to be lacking. The "Chief" is dead but the underlying question has yet to be resolved.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.17.07 - 2:28 am | #

Geez, where's your sarcasm meters people? I'm just saying that logos are ridiculous but without them where would we be?
Beatrice | 02.17.07 - 2:29 am | #

More importantly, where would we be without Legos?
selim | 02.17.07 - 2:30 am | #

Beatrice, you are a well-meaning idiot.
selim | 02.17.07 - 2:32 am | #

Perhaps your ultralogicalish request for indigenous people feeling offended to PROVE IT would seem reasonable if it weren't for the fucking fact that they were slaughtered and hunted and to this day are colonized on the land that nobody had a right to invade. So keep your logic and debate team smokescreen. Just be honest, why don't ya and say "I don't give a shit."
Nezua Limón Xolagrafik-Jonez | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 2:53 am | #

My 17 year old daughter just took a Native American anthropology class at community college and she had a better grasp on this issue than I am reading here.

We took everything from them. Their land, their people, their culture, their spirituality. In recent decades we polluted their lands with uranium strip mining. Can we not use them as mascots and denegrade them any further?

We've denied for so long what we've done to the first people of this country, it's deplorable. As someone who claims to be a civil rights advocate, I'm surprised to see this here.

Even after the AIM had shown in the 70's that they were not going to be oppressed by the white father's of our nation any longer, American Indians are struggling to have a voice in this nation. They still don't.

Tell your former alma mater to get a dog if they want a mascot.

"Hanging From the Cross" - John Trudell (Bone Days)

"We weren't lost and
We didn't need any book
Then the great spirit
Met the great lie
Indians are jesus
Hanging from the cross
Hanging from the cross

In the name of their savior
Forcing on us
The trinity of the chain
Guilt sin and blame
The trinity of the chain
Guilt sin and blame
Hanging from the cross
Hanging from the cross"
Pamela | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 3:34 am | #

"'m curious why no one seems willing to clarify what is and is not offensive. It would seem that if this were the black/white issue that people like to portray it as then we would see some consistency. However, a consensus opinion on what is innappropriate seems to be lacking."
Distaste For Dissent | 02.17.07 - 2:28 am | #

Well, I think for one thing, the actual *treatment* of Native American groups is inconsistent. If whites started with a basis of taking their claims and opinions seriously, I bet that there would be more consistency in what was actually asked of white people to do.

Some organizations dismiss the offended feelings of Native Americans. In those cases, the Native Americans seem to respond with more militant requests, usually because situations are allowed to come to a head.

Some organizations work *with* the Native Americans, or with whatever minority is involved. These groups, and these tribes, generally have a more benign and stable relationship.

I mean, are *you* more likely to have stable, consistent reactions to those who treat you with respect--or with those who treat you with disrespect and patronization?

It would be a mistake to ask Native Americans to come to a nice, "black/white" consensus, as there are hundreds of tribes, and thousands of different circumstances. The best anyone can do is educate themselves and commit to listening to others and to attempting respect.
Vi | 02.17.07 - 3:52 am | #

Thank you for your response. I don't know if got to the gist of what I was hoping for but it was enlightening.
Distaste For Dissent | 02.17.07 - 4:07 am | #

The PC crowd is out in full force. According to their logic, they have to stop being PC because I get offended by it, and it is up to me to decide. Sticks and stones has stuck around all of these years because it is true. People need to toughen up and quit whining everytime someone hurts their feelings. There are tons of emotionally stunted people, and I will not cater or accommodate their inability to mature.
Oakland | 02.17.07 - 7:11 am | #

my opinion on stuff like this is if the people your mascot are representing are offended then its a problem and it shouldn't even be questioned.

I mean its not a stretch for a thoughtful person to understand why a native american mascot would offend native americans.
Sanfranguns | 02.17.07 - 8:24 am | #

Its quite simple John, the Chief is derogatory, regardless of your personal feelings on the subject.

You are applying your own feelings of the subject and applying them to how others should feel. You are acting in the full role of the reactionary, grasping at straws as your argument deteriorates into nothing.

The Chief is a negative image of American Indians. He's bad for the image of the University, as he makes it appear that the University is run by racist hicks. And he's bad for athletics, as the racism that is embedded in the Chief is used against the University in recruiting. He also damages academics insofar as talented professors may choose not to work for the University over the racist Chief.

All around he's a mascot who's time has come (and don't even get me started on the mascot vs "symbol" - "symbol" is the PC horse manure that the Board came up with when it was still working on protecting the mascot)

-Illinois Alum, Class of 2000.
Jerry | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 1:14 pm | #

John, I love ya but you're just wrong here.

I, too, am an Illinois alumnus - twice over - and I agree that the Chief was never intended to mock or stereotype Native Americans. That, however, is wholly beside the point. The only remaining representatives of the Illiniwek nation are on record opposing the Chief, and that is enough, in and of itself, to require the University to jettison the Chief.

It isn't really for us non-Native folk to decide what should or should not be considered "offensive" to Native Americans. We don't get to make that decision. If it offends Native Americans - especially, the very group whom the Chief was supposed to represent - then we need to act like grown ups and say, "Sorry, we didn't mean to offend you; we'll stop doing it now that we know how you feel." That's what adults do when the run rough-shod over somebody else's feelings, however inadvertently. If you're doing something that happens to piss off your neighbor, and your neighbor asks you to stop, ordinarily you stop doing it unless there is some very good reason to continue.

Here, there is no compelling reason to keep the Chief in the face of nearly universal condemnation by Native Americans. Don't tell me "tradition" is, in and of itself, a justification to keep the Chief. That's the same type of crap they use to justify flying the Confederate flag all over the place - it's just "tradition," "heritage," etc. Or, the same argument the right uses to deny equal marriage rights to gays and lesbians - "tradition" is it's own justification.

Nonsense. The University finally did the right thing, albeit for the wrong reasons. Let's give the Chief a dignified send off - and be done with this Godforsaken embarrassment once and for all.
Dave von Ebers | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 2:57 pm | #

Dave, a fair and sane and intelligently presented point, thank you. To the few of you who can't handle someone disagreeing with you without freaking out, I hear Sesame Street runs a very nice blog where you can sing songs, hold hands, and never have to discuss anything you might possibly disagree about, other than your favorite letter. The rest of us will, like Dave, continue to discuss the issues of the day with respect and intelligence.
John Aravosis | 02.17.07 - 4:11 pm | #

Wow, the rest of us being not respectful, nor intelligence.

I really really hate passive agressive backhanded slaps. It's a tool used by those who are intellectually bereft when they have no more intelligent argument to use.

I applaud you John.
Judy from Montana | 02.17.07 - 4:52 pm | #

John - you say "To the few of you who can't handle someone disagreeing with you without freaking out..."

Than you proceed to "freak out" and say "I hear Sesame Street runs a nice blog where yo can sing songs, hold hands etc."

Fairly condescending don't you think? Where is this adult attitude you talk about? To quote you you sound like an "assaholic kid".

In the words of my italian gradmother, "Potete avere un boil il formato del mio pugno sulla vostra estremità posteriore."

My thumb is flicking my tooth.
Tony from Illinois | 02.17.07 - 4:53 pm | #

Erizzle,

Just saw you thank you. Right back at you. Until we meet again...
Tony | 02.17.07 - 5:09 pm | #

John, you're welcome.

Though I disagree, I think it's patently ridiculous to label you "racist" because you support the Chief. Most of my Illini friends support the Chief and none of them - not a single one - is racist; that, I guarantee.

I stand by my comments; I'm glad the U of I finally chose to jettison the Chief. But I think it's unfair to label all Chief supporters "racist." Unfortunately, those who lump all Native American representations together - the Chief, the Cleveland Indians, the Washington Redskins (ugh!) - are basically saying that intent doesn't matter; that there's no distinction between a misguided (in my view) but obviously respectful attempt to portray Native American tradition, and outright buffoonery (in the case of the Indians) or worse (in the case of the Redskins).

While I strongly believe that the Chief should go, I also think it is imperative to be able to distinguish between degrees of "wrongness". You can't be a moral person if you can't distinguish between minor and major wrongs.

By the way, isn't that the problem with the current administration - a complete lack of judgment when it comes to issues of right and wrong? I rather think so!

Anyway, John, no boycotts here!

I still think you're wrong, though.

Regards,

Dave
Dave von Ebers | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 6:09 pm | #

"Unfortunately, those who lump all Native American representations together - the Chief, the Cleveland Indians, the Washington Redskins (ugh!) - are basically saying that intent doesn't matter; that there's no distinction between a misguided (in my view) but obviously respectful attempt to portray Native American tradition, and outright buffoonery (in the case of the Indians) or worse (in the case of the Redskins)."

That is PRECISELY the point. "Intent" does not, in fact, matter and is wholly beside the point. The point is simply this: who gets to decide whether representations of Indians and Indian sacred artifacts are "offensive" or not? Indians or white people? Who gets to decide if Indians are used as "mascots" like animals? Indians or white people? In practically none of these instances were Indians asked BEFORE the "mascot" was adopted if they found it offensive. Ocassionaly, Indians were asked AFTER THE FACT and only listened to if and when they said it was okay. We would never EVER stand for this kind of depiction of ANY OTHER racial or ethnic group, "intent" notwithstanding. Why then should Indians be treated any different? Why are Indians required to "prove" that images are offensive? Don't you think after 500 years we have a pretty damn good idea?
The Local Crank | Homepage | 02.17.07 - 6:25 pm | #

Tony, you fail to understand a basic point. Once someone responds like an asshole with personal attacks and/or threats, they have given up the right to be treated like an adult. They lose the right to whine about being hit back when they threw the first punch. I've already said that a large number of you know had a civilized discussion here and I thank you for that. But more than a few were brainless whiny children, and they got just like they gave.
John Aravosis | 02.17.07 - 10:37 pm | #

Whoa, Local Crank ... try reading what I wrote, in two separate comments - yes, the Chief was a bad idea from the beginning, and yes, it's about time the University got rid of this embarrassment.

I also said that the University's "intent" - i.e., to honor Native Americans - is irrelevant to the issue of whether the Chief should stay (or, for that matter, should ever have been).

The language you quote goes to an entirely different point. It is wrong - morally wrong - to equate outright racism with a misguided, but well intended, misuse of Native American symbols. The Cleveland Indians use a logo and promotional materials that mock Native Americans; the University of Illinois never did. The Washington Redskins' name is a racial slur; the Chief was not. You can't argue credibly that these are equivalent wrongs.

If you can't see degrees of wrong, then, in my view, you might as well vote Republican. See, it's like this: Saddam Hussein was a bad guy who could, theoretically, have been a threat to the U.S. someday. So, since we make no distinction between degrees of wrong, why should we make distinctions between degrees of "threat"? We don't need to get into fine distinctions; just take the s.o.b. out.

Except that's morally wrong. It does matter whether a foreign dictator actually poses a threat to the U.S. right now, or whether there is only some theoretical, possible threat way down the road. And, it does matter whether a person acts with a pure heart and an empty head, or with, y'know, malice aforethought. That's the whole basis of our criminal justice system.

But the point is, if you read what I had to say, Local Crank, you'll see that we're on the same side of the issue. The University's intent does not make the Chief okay, period. And I said that quite clearly.

By the same token, though, the Indians and Redskins are far worse and should be treated as such. Now that the Chief is gone (or will be this week), let's hope you bring the same level of determination against Cleveland and Washington.

Oh, and good luck with that!
Dave von Ebers | Homepage | 02.18.07 - 12:57 pm | #

Dave, I suspect what's going on is that there was a blanket decision made to oppose any use of Indian names, symbols etc. because it's too difficult to get into the nuance of which usage is respectful, which is benign, and which is harmful. I don't disagree with that approach, but I think that's what happened to U of I. A benign/respectful usage got trashed. I wonder whether a truly respectful usage would be permitted - if the image was "real," the real traditions were used and honored, etc.
John Aravosis | 02.18.07 - 1:09 pm | #

Times change. Mascots are symbols. A mascot should symbolize the best in a team or an institution.

You can't fix the meaning of a symbol for all time. It's unrealistic to think that Chief Illini means the same thing today has he did 82 years ago.

Maybe John's 100% correct that the Illinois' rituals and iconography are "respectful" in the sense that they aren't intended to ridicule, degrade, or trivialize any group. In that sense, the Illinois mascot traditions remind me of the pseudo-classical trappings of the "Greek" fraternity system.

No matter how well-meaning the Illini fans are, the fact remains that there's an ugly, racist tradition of Native American mascots for sports teams. The NCAA did the right thing in banning these representations.

There's no need to keep these anachronisms alive if they're an ongoing source of strife and controversy. Mascots should be fun.

Let's just put the Chief to bed. Have one more game. Let everybody get all sentimental.

Then, move on. Have a big contest for a new mascot that really represents the best values of the school and the athletes.
Lindsay Beyerstein | Homepage | 02.18.07 - 2:53 pm | #

A question regarding this Chief IlliniWek. Was their ever such a person in the Illini tribe, or is it just a fictious name. The reason I ask is, if it is just a made up name, and their never was such a Chief, then that would make it hard to claim that the Chief Mascot or Character is their to honor the noble heritage of the tribe.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 2:11 pm | #

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illiniwek), the Illiniwek were a coalition of Native American tribes similar to the Iroquois. There was never a Chief Illiniwek
ekwhite | 02.18.07 - 5:45 pm | #

Erin,

Strangely enough, I knew what a Terrapin Turtle was, even though I was raised in in a Pine Forest in the Hills of Tipperary by a Pack of Wolf Hounds.

Some thing that they never taught me: What the hell is a Tar Heel?.
Seamus | 02.16.07 - 3:37 pm | #

Tar Heel used to be a derogatory term for North Carolinians, because of the pine tar and turpentine trade in that state (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tar_Heel). Of course, I was always taught that it came from the Civil War, when Gen. Lee commented that NC troops were so unlikely to retreat that they must have had tar on their heels.

PS: I'm a native North Carolinian going back at least to the 1800's, and I am NOT descended from an Indian Princess.
ekwhite | 02.18.07 - 6:24 pm | #

Lindsay Beyerstein - Thank you; I think you said what I was trying to say. But you said it much better!

Cheers!
Dave von Ebers | Homepage | 02.18.07 - 10:00 pm | #

As another Native American woman who read your post and comments, I just wanted to say that I really wish that you would have taken the time to engage those who attempted to provide you with what you asked for.

As long as you refuse to examine what Native Americans have to say about this issue and you ignore all of the information that shows what effects these mascots truly have on Native Americans, you can go on claiming that nothing has been proven to you.

"There's none so blind as those who will not see."

NOTE FROM JOHN: I really wish that you had taken the time to do your homework on this issue before speaking falsely about it and criticizing something that didn't even happen. Had you actually done your homework you'd know that I engaged everyone on this issue in the comments, quite politely in fact, until a number of concern trolls tried to take over the thread and started posting threats, personal attacks, calling me and my entire university racist, threatening boycotts of the blog, and more - all because they were infuriated that I would dare analyze and issue and come up with a different conclusion, whlie inviting discussion. There were a number of people interested in having a mature, adult discussion about this issue, and a number of very interesting comments were made on your side of the aisle, but unfortunately the crazy angry children came in and spoiled it for everyone. So seriously, you need to get your facts straight before you get all sanctimonious on us because it makes you look just as non-credible as the trolls who took over that thread. Unfortunately, sometimes you make an enemy of someone who his actually your friend.

And actually, none are as blind as those who lie.

Edited By Siteowner
bint alshamsa | Homepage | 02.20.07 - 5:08 am | #

What are these attacks and threats of which you speak? And how you can be so casually dismissive of bint, of all people, who is ten times the person you are, John, is just more proof of your blindness. And you are the ultimate king of name-calling--as soon as people disagree with you they are crazy angry children, concern trolls, and creeps. Nice, John. Real nice.

Oh, and I fully expect this comment to be deleted, so for posterity's sake I'm posting it on my own blog, too.
kactus | Homepage | 02.20.07 - 1:21 pm | #

Fret not, kactus. Nothing ever disappears completely on the "internets." Ask Deborah Howell.
Philip | 02.20.07 - 1:51 pm | #

John:

all because they were infuriated that I would dare analyze and issue and come up with a different conclusion, whlie inviting discussion.

Is this even logical or probable? Do you really believe that everyone who engaged in behavior that you disapproved of did so because they thought you SHOULDN'T analyze what you're saying?

There were a number of people interested in having a mature, adult discussion about this issue, and a number of very interesting comments were made on your side of the aisle, but unfortunately the crazy angry children came in and spoiled it for everyone.

Please reconsider this locus of control issue you have going on here, John. No one can spoil something for you unless you decide to allow it to. There was never any reason why you had to respond to those supposed "control trolls". You could have ignored them and simply focused on those who provided you with the information you asked for. It's no one else's fault that you chose to do otherwise.

By the way, since I did not align myself with either side in my comment to you, how is it you came to believe that you know exactly what "side of the aisle" I fit in with? I certainly hope that you aren't just assuming that since I'm Native American, I must hold certain views. We are as varied as the individual members of other marginalized groups. Just as there are homosexuals who are Republicans, there are plenty of us Native Americans who don't feel the need to engage in whatever groupthink you believe you're seeing amongst those who (you think) disagree with you.

So seriously, you need to get your facts straight before you get all sanctimonious on us because it makes you look just as non-credible as the trolls who took over that thread.

Who is this "us" you're referring to here? Exactly who sees me as non-credible because I wished you'd have spent your efforts discussing the material provided to you by those who believed that you truly did want them to explain the reasons why they think you are dead wrong on this particular issue? So far, I've received nothing but support from those whose opinions of me matter. Instead of complaining about personal attacks and then claiming that your own personal attacks are justifiable, why not just stick to the facts and discuss the topic of your post? Is anyone stopping you from doing so? Are those mysterious "control trolls" stuffing mittens on your fingers preventing you from responding to those who have provided a plethora of links and information that you could be discussing right now?

By the way, I'd certainly be interested in hearing exactly what it is I've supposedly lied about. I definitely get the point you're trying to make but your altered quote just doesn't make any sense.

If one is lying, then that means that they are aware of the truth but have chosen to engage in deception. If they've chosen to deceive, then they aren't blind at all. Perhaps you should try a bit more originality and leave Swift's quote intact.
bint alshamsa | Homepage | 02.20.07 - 5:05 pm | #

Edit: "control troll" should read "concern troll"
bint alshamsa | Homepage | 02.20.07 - 9:21 pm | #

UIUC is a stellar school and a lot of stellar people there have been saying the Chief needs to go for quite some time.
Professor Zero | Homepage | 02.24.07 - 8:28 am | #

Comment Policy / Terms of Service
AMERICAblog has a large and diverse readership. We encourage free speech, and do not care if you are a Republican, Democrat, or even French. We therefore assume no responsibility for what is written in our comments sections -- the comments in this forum express solely the views of the comments' authors, and do not necessarily reflect the views of AMERICAblog or any of its staff. We are interested, however, in fostering a respectful debate and community. We have therefore added site monitors to patrol the comments. The monitors will delete comments, and ban commenters, in a timely manner when we are notified that a comment violates our terms of service. Violations of our terms of service include, but are not limited to, posting comments that are perceived as: personal attacks on other members of our community; violent/threatening; bigoted/discriminatory; slanderous; hurtful to members of this community; and/or intended to disrupt the debate. Spam and "sock puppet" comments will also be deleted and banned. We also reserve the right to delete any comment, and ban any commenter, for any other reason we deem appropriate. Decisions are final, and not open to debate. By posting in our comments you agree to accept and abide by these terms.

Commenting by HaloScan.com