The Portrayal of Indigenous Team Names and Logos in Sport

The Portrayal of Indigenous Team Names and Logos in Sport  

  By: dagen.armstron on Sept. 19, 2024, 8:03 p.m.

King discusses in chapter two called You’re Not the Indian I Had in Mind in the book The Truth About Stories an essential problem with the colonial history of how people have a fixed understanding of how an Indigenous person is supposed to look; this made-up perception of Indigenous people does not show the evolution of Indigenous people in modern society. Edward Curtis’s photos portrayed stereotypical Indigenous people, and he even brought older traditional wear for the Indigenous people to wear to give a more authentic look as if they were still the same people who had not come into contact with colonial settlers yet. Reading this chapter made me think of the controversy over how sports teams today still use traditional Indigenous names to represent their organization as their team mascot. I recognize the similarities between how Edward Curtis wanted the Indigenous people to be depicted throughout his photos. This is similar to how some sports teams use Indigenous team names and want their logo and mascot to look a particular way. Curtis, as well as the sports teams, want to use Indigenous symbols and people in their name, and both want to portray what a stereotypical Indigenous person would look and act like. The name and mascot can be interpreted as a derogatory term that introduces several problems. There have been several teams that have switched their name because of this; for example, the Washington Redskins changed their name to the Washington Commanders, the Cleveland Indians changed their name to the Cleveland Guardians, and the Edmonton Eskimoes changed their name to the Edmonton Elks. These teams have decided to change their name. However, some teams still have Indigenous characters as their team names, like the Kansas City Chiefs, the Atlanta Braves, and the Florida State Seminoles. This controversy is significant and leaves me wondering where to draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable. These sports teams sell their fans memorabilia, which has Indigenous cultures intertwined with them, and continue to make significant profits using the image and likeness of traditional Indigenous people without giving back to the Indigenous community.

Fans can buy their Indigenous sports team apparel and wear it to the games, but fans are also known to take it to another extreme by wearing traditional headdresses and other cultural clothing to the games. This can be interpreted in many ways based on people's various perspectives. Still, from my point of view, these sports clubs that use Indigenous team names need to recognize the impact they are making and either be an active part of the reconciliation process or switch names. Discussions need to be made with Indigenous communities about how they feel about their cultures being represented by a sports team. There is a problem of people being uneducated on the subject and constantly wearing and dressing like traditional Indigenous people without understanding the impact they have on the culture and the Indigenous people as a collective.

Re: The Portrayal of Indigenous Team Names and Logos in Sport  

  By: dustinangle on Oct. 6, 2024, 8:46 a.m.

Ive been toying with this. Clearly, using slang terms is bad, dressing up in "Red-Face" is disrespectful, and wearing sexual versions of traditional clothing is awful. But there seems to be a way that with consultation, forethought, and planning, Indigenous names can be used respectfully. Its interesting that it comes from the US military of all places.

https://www.army.mil/article/68842/armygetsfastermorecapableapacheaircraft

Here an Apache attack helicoper is blessed by elders. Armed with dozens of Hellfire missles and capable of levelling city blocks from miles away, there are certainly those that would say a warmachine of this calibre could be labelled as "savage" and hated. However, that does not appear the case from an official Indigenous standpoint.

https://www.army.mil/article/86746/northdakotaguardtribesdedicatelakotahelicopter
Utiltiy helicopters are also respected. Here a Lakota ceremony is held for the helicopter bearing its name.
https://www.army.mil/article/12630/pilotsflylakotatosioux_powwow
Here they were invited to a powow!

https://www.lakotatimes.com/articles/lakota-helicopter-unveiled/
The powwow articles points towards a process where people can put names forward about what they want the helicopter to be called. I would have loved to find a canlii or open source reference about all the documents that went forward, and what kind of debate took place, but I can't find anything nice and primary source like that. But I did find this one that indicates that Chief Bordeaux was consulted, was heard, and allowed the use of their tribes name for that helicopter because it correctly encapsulated their beliefs.

Of course there is the alternative view. Are these just more Edward Curtis propoganda pictures? Is the US military perpetuating the thought that Indigenous were only warriors? Is "riding on the backs" of Indigenous as they carry soldiers to war a sign of disrespect or respect? Or is naming a helicopter that saves lives an act of respect? Does it matter that those lives are government soldiers that carry out missions that some argue are colonialism? Does the hose swing as fast as helicopter rotors?

What does everyone think?

 Last edited by: dustinangle on Oct. 6, 2024, 9:02 a.m., edited 7 times in total.