This is the current Chief Wahoo logo.
It was adapted from older versions in 1951.
And look how the logo has changed over the years. Has it gotten 'better' or 'worse?'
This Chief Wahoo logo appeared on the Indians Uniforms and hats in 1946 and was the first such logo for Cleveland's baseball team.
And what about some of these other logos. Are some more offensive than others?
This is the Florida St. Seminole logo, endorsed with with an official sanction from the Seminole Tribe of Florida, Inc. and the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma.The Utah Utes have a similar a similar endorsment from area tribes.
The Illinois Fighting Illini also have used Native-American logos and mascots.
Chief Illiniwek, a Native-American figure, was the mascot/logo of Illinois athletics from 1926-2007.
Other popular sports teams that use Native-American names, logos or mascots include:
The Atlanta Braves, The Kansas City Chiefs and The Washington Redskins.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei think it got worst because Indians nickname are the redskins, and with new mascot it really is a redskined Indian. So people are going to think it is ok to call them redskins now. The old moscot did have a long pony tail. People all think that had need to have long hair which they dont.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is harder for you to speak on the issue of the mascot because, like you said, you aren't Native American. But that doesn't mean you don't have a say in your favorite sports team. Personally, I don't see this a that big of an issue because using their culture as a part of their mascot would make me feel(if I were Native American) honored more than anything. Many people show pride for their sports team by wearing the mascot, and by wearing this logo allows us to be proud of the indians, rather than disrespecting them. But through the eyes of the Native Americans on this issue, i think your opinion doesn't matter because you don't know what its like to be them.
ReplyDeleteI think that killa kam had a good point that the indians changed their skin color to redskin, which I think is worse than the tan color it was before. On the other hand, I think that the current mascot looks more like a character and not as much like an indian, since the ponytail is no longer present. The Utah Utes' mascot is the least offensive of the others because there's no picture of an indian, just the feathers. Are the feathers in any way demeaning for the Native Americans?
I actually think that it is offensive. The pictures clearly stereotype indians as wearing feathers and face paint. Some tribes take part in that apperance but not even all indians do. I think its all right to keep the name "Indians" but to use a cartoon version of an Indian that does not represent all Native American tribes is wrong and degrading. I am also not native american so I cannot express how they would feel but I know that we do not see any teams called the Caucasians and have a cartoon version of a white male with any stereotype of them.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is hard for us to make a judgement on the topic because we are not Native-American. We can say all we want but we can't ever fully understand how these make them feel. Of course we can put out two sense in, and for me I do not find a problem with mascots as long as they are not showing thwem in a bad manor. My father grew up in Cleveland (went to St. Ignatius)and he is a huge Cleveland fan. That has definately rubbed off on me and I think that it would hard to see the Indians without "the indian".
ReplyDeleteI think that since im not a Native American its hard to debate this topic. One side of me feels that having indian mascots could be a way of honoring Native Americans. The teams are showing their traditions within their mascots. However the other side of me finds it really offensive. The Clevelands Indians mascots face is completely red and that is a stereotype Native American's have. If there was a team called the Cleveland African Americans it would be really bad. It would show the stereotypes of African Americans and would hurt a lot of people. So having a team called the Indians or the RedSkins is just the same.
ReplyDeleteI completly agree with what luke had to say saying that we will have no idea how it feels until we are in a marginalized community like them. We may say it would be funny if a team was named the Crackers or something derogatory, but we were never looked down upon in American history. if we were not the spieces that have always been on top in America we would also find it offensive. we have no room as whites to put a say into this arguement because we have no idea how hurtful it is.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a tough concept to comment on because I see both sides. On one hand I see the sports logos as part of a teams heritage and history. Taking the logo away may hurt the teams following or reputation if people do not agree with the change. Also, I think that as long as the logo is not a harmful representation of the Native America culture and is not out to hurt them physically, than the logo should be allowed. However, I understand why the Native Americans are upset with the logos because they seem to be the only real culure that our country will use for a mascot. For example, like the overhead pictures showed in class the other day, we will never create a sports logo with an African American dipiction as the logo. I understand that the logo may hold Native Americans back from being apart of our culutre in a positive way. Overall, I feel that it's really hard to comment on this subject because I don't know how the Native Americans feel towards the symbols.
ReplyDeleteI don't think anyone who is not native American truley has a say in whether the mascots are offensive or not. If the mascot for a team represented your own nationality in a slightly offensive manor, you would most likely find it offensive. so, it really isn't anyone's place to say that a mascot representing an Indian tribe is not offensive because we are not in their shoes. The input given by the Native Americans on whether a mascot is to be considered offensive or not is what ultimatley matters.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with luke on this. Its hard to have a say either way because we have no idea what its like to have this affect us. I am an indians fan and I think ist's just part of the team now. Its hard to just change it to something else after having them be the Indians for so long. Also not being from that culture, its tough to say what is acceptable and what isnt, but I think that as long as it isnt incriminating or making fun of the race it should be ok.
ReplyDeleteHow can you just change a teams logo when it's been there forever? It just doesn't seem all that offensive. I'm not Native American so it's not offensive to me, but I don't know how others actually react to it. I feel like it's just a logo. Why does everything have to be about race? Every minority pulls the race card. The logo has been there since 1946, why change it now.
ReplyDeletei think that it has gotten worse and that it is terrible for that to be the mascot but we also are alowed to do things like that and even though it may be mean we shouldnt have to change a symbol that means a lot of good to a lot of people just because a few ppl are ofended by it you have to hurt a few ppl to make a few more happy
ReplyDeleteThe Indians are also my favorite team and if they did change their mascot it would be really hard for me to get used to it. As a little girl every year I went to watch the Indians and Reds play each other and ever since then they have been my favorite team. If the Indians mascot were to change at first it would feel like it would never be the same again but over time I think that would change. But I think that it is completely up to the Natives Americans on whether or not they want Chief Wahoo to be the Indians logo. I personally think I have no say in this because I am not Native American, but if the Native Americans truly are offended by this then it should be changed. I know when Chief Wahoo became the Indians mascot people were trying to honor the Native Americans but it just didn’t come off the right way. I believe that the Native Americans should be able to have the choice and be able to vote on whether the Indians mascot should change.
ReplyDeletei am the biggest indians fan too so i understand what ledcorduroy is talking about. i cant picture the indians without chief wahoo. through all my years as a indians fan i really never thought i was mocking or making fun of natives. my opinion is that i wont think that native americans would see this as an insult but i will never now because i am not native american. anyways go indians
ReplyDeleteYou could could say that the logo got worse because of the fact that Chief Wahoo's skin is deffinatly red in the modern day logo, but I bet they tried to add non human looking features like the pointy eyes and unusually large happy smile. However the newer version of the logo doesnt resemble an indian as the older one looks more like a guy drawing a cartoon of a native americans face. I personally think that the logo is harmless but i am not native american so I wouldn't really understand.
ReplyDeleteI believe that these logos are ok. I do not believe that the creators of these sports teams or universities maliciousy made these to offend people. The Washinton Redskins and Cleveland Indians are two very storied franchises in major leauge sports. They have both contributed a lot to our nations sports history. I think that if you take those away, you are going to lose some of the rich history of the NFL and MLB.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with shoemaker on this one. Growing up as a kid i loved the Cleveland Indians and the team mascot, chief wahoo. I never really found the mascot offensive in any way and i think most of my friends and family agree that its just a national symbol of a MLB team. I also think that Native Americans should have a say in the mascot because i wouldn't want my own race represented in a negative manner.
ReplyDeleteI feel that the logo that is being used now is deffinatly worse then the one being previously used. It over-exaggerates certain features of what people see when they hear the word Indian. The other logos, mainly the Illinois and Utah logos, do not use an Indian in a cartoonish or offensive way. The Utah is just a simple feather while the Illinois is a what a traditional warchief would look like.
ReplyDeleteWell i think there's nothing wrong with it because to me its just a name but to native americans it probably hurts them. I know its not meant to hurt them but the people who came up with the name was just making a name not a insult to native americans. If you think about it maybe the teams that has to do with native americans is maybe where some native americans settled at! The native americans that take the team name offensive should write the teams asking them to change it.
ReplyDeletepsterling's comment really doesnt make any sense to the fact that we have the right to judge. Its like saying when someone wears something you dont like, theres no dought that there hasnt been a point when you havnt talked about it. in my head your comment basically says when a country's in a war, leave them to die. it doesnt work that way. another reason we have the right to judge is because the americans did this! you cant take a pen and when you're blamed for it, not be able to argue on your behalf. opinions are opinions and everyone has the right to judge on whatever they'd like, we're in the same shoes as them because we created that image for them.
ReplyDelete-->OH HAIL THE CHANCELORS<--
to belle, how do you think it is not hard for me to speak on this issue. how you know that i am not native american. well i am i am part black foot and part cherokee so it is not harder
ReplyDeleteI think the Indian logo should not be used because even though it is just a harmless logo it is still extremly offensive. When we saw the other logos of the other races I wondered how socity would react if instead of the indian the mascot it was a mascot of a mexican or an asian. I was offended when I saw logo for the Washington Blackskins and the Kansas City Zulu Chiefs.
ReplyDeleteOn this issue i find myself to be in the middle. I think that for Native Americans this could be offense but i wouldn't know because i'm not Native American. This has also been the teams mascot since the team was created so the team doesn't want to change what they have been forever. Chief Wahoo has also been given a smaller part each year in the teams exsistanse. They used to have Chief Wahoo on the hats and now it's an I. I'm not sure if they should change the mascot because its been Chief Wahoo for so long.
ReplyDeleteI think that people are taking the mascot thing to far. When it comes to the cleveland indians the mascot itsnt as big as it once was. its smaller and on some jerseys there not even used. The indians arent running around with an indian mascot at games they use something completely different. a furry animal named slider. Just as most other teams do. I dont think the intensions were bad when naming the teams. if u want to take this far why is it called the fighting irish. that just plays into the stero type that irish people are angry have tempers and like to fight. so its something that every culture can find if u really want to. Dont take it to heart in this situation.
ReplyDeleteI can see both sides. I feel that Native Americans would be upset that they were practically forced to change their image and now the same people are "honoring" them by making them their mascot. On the other hand many fans of the sports teams really do support Native Americans and mean no harm. I think they could make the mascots look less weird though. Atleast the Cleveland Indians could change the big goofy smile and the red skin.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Slisi because it's true. there is something from every culture around out there and we're not debating about that. Why is it now that we're trying to fight about the mascots? before obviously it wasnt that big of a deal. I do believe that after i heard of all the things that was offensive about it i was like 'oh yeah that is really wrong' but it was after they said something. and although i find it very offensive i also think i wouldnt have before because i was used to it..
ReplyDeleteIn class we touched on the fact that many teams use Native Americans as a mascot and yes it has been around for years, but just because it's been around for years dosen't make it right....slavery was around for years but it wasn't right.....i feel that teams being able to use Native American as a mascot even though there is protest shows that Native Americans may not have the powerful voice needed to help with there protest. People may see it as honoring Native Americans, but i see it as people representing a culture that Americans diddn't want in the country in the first place. From the start of the "finding of America" Native Americans where looked at as foriegn human beings. They were then forced to move out of their homelands and change there culture completely in order to stay in the place they lived their entire lives. This tells the Native Americans that they are not worthy enough to live with white people and still practice their culture.Why would Americans want a mascot that they tried to get rid of earlier on. Its like saying Native Americans are not allowed to be Native Americans, but whites can pretend to be Native Americans when they dress up for their favorite baseball team.I totally disagree with the comment that every minority pulls the race card because at a point in history women were a minority and that did not concern race at all.
ReplyDeleteI do see how this could be offensive. Just like Miss Smith showed us in class if the mascot was of black people, asians, or mexicans people would go bonkers. To add to wat Luke said i think the Cleveland Indians are representing native anericans in a bad manor. Native americans dont have bright red skin, they also dont wear feathers on there heads on a regular basis. i find that offensive, its a stereotype that some people dont even notice. Its almost like people dont realize that native americans are real people. Also to touch on the Seinfeld episode we saw in class; i think it was really interesting. i thought it was crazy how the image of a native american was just traded and sold from one caucasian to the next. It was just a decaration and thats wat people thought. Also im glad the episode briefly touched on the term "indian giver". Ive never really realized how giving someone something and taking it back makes you indian, or more indian than u already are. I think some people need to wake up and smell the cofffeeee.. :) T$productions
ReplyDeleteI THINK USING THESE PICS AND IMAGES AS MASCOTS MAKES THE NATIVE AMERICANS GET OFFENDED AND I DONT BLAME THEM FOR THAT BECAUSE FOR EXAMPLE, LETS TAKE THE NAME REDSKINS. THATS A NAME GIVEN TO INDIANS FOR THE COLOUR OF THIER SKIN,AND NOW PEOPLE ARE USING IT TO STEREOTYPE THE INDIANS AND I FIND THAT OFFENSIVE BUT THE POINT IS USING NATIVE AMERICAN IMAGES AS MASCOTS IS NOT RIGHT
ReplyDeleteI feel that this whole thing about Native Americans being marginalized, has just now been brought to attention is a little suspet because these have been the mascots of these teams for a number years so why now do they choose to make a complaint. But that could also be due to fact that they were less unified compared to any other cultural society. Also when we talked about the Utah Unts that they had the permission of these tribes. Which bring the point why do some take offense while other could care less so. So I think that the only way to fix this situation is to ask for the permission.
ReplyDeleteI think having a Native American team logo is offensive. I’m not Native American and I don’t know how they feel about this, but to me using a stereotypic depiction of an Indian as a mascot is wrong. Native Americans aren’t running around with feathers in their hair and their faces painted. I know some people might say that the mascot/name is a part of the team’s tradition and history and that it doesn’t matter, but I think it does. I know we wouldn’t get away with teams called the American Americans or the Asian Americans, I don’t think we should get away with a team called the Indians. It might be easy for me to say that because I don’t follow sports at all, but I do think being respectful is important. I can’t even imagine how derogatory headlines are with team names like the Indians.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe it should be offensive because its just a way of showing America's heritage and where it started. I don't think the names of the teams were meant to offend anyone intentionally. I believe that some people are over analyzing it and its just a logo. There are many views so it all depends on how you see it.I'm not native American but i don't think it should be a big issue.
ReplyDeleteThis is to ayaan123..I see your point but I'm gonna have to agree that the logo is offensive, maybe not to you but I'm sure alot of Native Americans think it is because not only did white men drive them from their land but they also tried to teach the "Indian" out of them by sending them to those "white" schools and forcing them to dress like they were white and not by their Indian heritage. Also white men basically tried to commit genocide with the Native Americans, and I don't know about you but if I was Native American (which I'm not) I would be extremely unhappy that Americans are using Indians as logos for sports teams...I would feel offended...like they didn't care at all about what they did. But that is just my opinion, you can take from it what you want.
ReplyDeleteAlright so i have read everyones comments so far and i find all of them to be very insightful. I would like to adress SLISI I think you made a very good comment about the fighting irish also being a sterotype, but there are not alot of fans or people from the irish culture going on a rant about it. I could agree with both sides of this arguement about it not being that big of a deal because the sports teams are not doing it to intentionally hurt the Native American culture. On the other hand we talked about the exaggerations of the skin color,large smile,feathers and all the small things to create the sterotype. So i never knew much about this topic so i decided to do some research of my own. My grandma is Black Foot,and my grandpa is Cherokee Indian; so instead of assuming i called and to ask for myself. My grandma told me that it was a bigger problem when the team first came about (1946), but since then they have changed the logo alot. She also told me for her reservation they did not have crazy riots or anything at the baseball games because Chief Wahoo is from the Penobscot tribe. I can definetly see how it could be offensive but I can tell you from seeing it first hand or personal experiences some Indians are Clevland Indian fans. I do not think that the mascot needs to be removed from the sports teams its just a matter of the fans being appropiate, and not trying to flat out disrespect the Native American culture.
ReplyDeleteWell, i think you have the right to say your opinion on this issue but only to a certain limit. If this topic becomes a big issue than in my opinion you do not have the right to say what you feel. You look at chief Wahoo as a symbol towards your team. As you said, your team cannot be the same without his logo. A Native American might consider this more like an insult. Why could they not choose any other logo. Plus, it seems like it is even a bigger insult that they changed the logo/mascot of the team to this guy with brown skin and this silly smile across his face with a smaller feather over his head. it is completely and truly an insult to try to change him. I don't know, that's just what i think. to tell you the truth, I think towards the eyes of a Native American, you do not have the right to say your opinion. They have been through so much and you would not understand how they feel to be judged and insulted. I think they ould like it better if you keep your opinions to yourself.
ReplyDeleteto killa kam, i wasn't saying that you aren't native american, it was part of the prompt in which the teacher was asking if he had a say in it, not you. just look at the end of the first paragraph..
ReplyDeleteI really don't think that we can say if it is wrong or not because most of us are not Native American. If it were like the pictures of the different sterotyped mascots we saw in class there would be mass outrage. I think because there are now less Native Americans then there were has an effect on this because there are less people that can convey outrage about the issue. I'm sure I would not like it if someone would make money off a sterotype that would offend me. So that's just my two cents...
ReplyDeleteI feel that these mascots do come off as offensive to Native Americans. The Indians logo/mascot, I think, has improved. It was very cartoon-ish. Until I really looked at the Indians mascot I had thought it was just wearing a hat with a feather sticking out of the back. I believe that the Indians shouldn't be made to change their name and mascot because it does not seem too offensive like some of the other teams. The red skins for example should be made to change since that name has a bad background. Yet I don't think I really have a place to talk on this issue. This issue doesn't affect me personally, but I do have a question. Why did this come up now and not sooner?
ReplyDeleteMy first reaction, like many others was to think that this is very insulting. I completely understand how other people could see this as offensive and would want these mascots to be taken down as team's symbols because of their stereotypes of Indians. I would not be happy if someone was making fun of my identity with a insulting cartoon. All this makes sense to me, but I'm still torn. I wonder how offensive these really are to people that are Indian. Most wear face paint and feathers, and this cartoon is simply depicting a general Indian. Also, since the team was formed this has been the symbol of the team, and would be hard to change the team title and images. I think that in order to make everyone happy, a less insulting image should be created and used. This way the team could still exist, and a easy transition could occur that would eliminate people's feeling being hurt.
ReplyDeletePersonally I believe none of these logos are offensive. These teams are honoring the Native American heritage. Sure they may have "fighting" in them but it's not literally. It's just to make the name sound better. It adds "flavor" to it. Now, i know and the rest of you know that when you see these names that you don't automatically get a bad name about the Indian tribes. Our whole lives we have grown up seeing these names and thought nothing of it. It's just a mascot and it sounds good and looks good on a uniform. I do believe though that if the Native Americans are really that offended that they have a right to get it changed. It's not hurting anyone or anything.
ReplyDeleteI also don't think that non Native Americans should comment on this issue. Even me, who is part Cherokee on both sides of my family, because I've never had to deal with the stereotypes that people that actually look "Indian" have to deal with. Their opion maters more. Maybe because I don't identify as Indian it's not offensive to me.
ReplyDeleteI don't think it maters weather your native American or not your able to give your opinion on baht ever you want. If people were really offended by these mascots don't you think some one would have said something? And if people are accusal dumb enough to think native Americans are any thing like these mascots then they need to leave we don't need more stupid people in this country. and whether the logos have gotten better or worse doesn't matter they all still have some stereotype in them but u cant do any thing to completely erase stereotypes. There caused by the way the brain stores information ad files identity's.
ReplyDeleteok honestly i think it is completely pointless to try and get rid of something that has not only represented the MLB but a mascot who has been a global icon for over 6 decades. yes i can see how it can be offensive to the indian culture but people need to stop thinking about what other people think and worry about themselves for a change.
ReplyDelete-conner turk
a lot of people arent aware of the true history of native americans and have some how been sheilded from everything. which is the main reason they have gotten away with using these logos. we could also compare this to the clothing line that uses a shadow of a women pushing out her butt and boobs and has an unnatural skinny waste. not all women are like that or want to be presented that way so some find it offensive.
ReplyDeletea yo dog, i beleive the logo should be removed because it is disrespectful to the native americans and if it was of any other groups like blacks or whites it would have been removed a long time ago because it would of been deemed racist, holla for dolla
ReplyDelete-mohamed wali
I feel that these teams have no intention of being disrespectful to these cultures. They are just trying to make their team more popular and easier to advertise. Especially with these professional teams, money plays a major factor and these names are easy to advertise. I do see why native americans are offeneded by these logos, because they portray them as something that they are not.
ReplyDeleteI dont think they did it to hurt people but then again some people say ohh i dont find it that bad. But when you think about it, it is that bad how would you like it if there was a team called "the slaves" and there mascots was a slave owner beating a slave? Or if there was a team called the "crackers" and there mascot was wonderbread or crackers? I dont know just think about because i know i would be piss off. So how do you think Native Americans feel?
ReplyDeleteI think even if your a Non-American-Indian doesn't mean you don't have a say, feeling, or good point to bring up. I think your opinion should matter because you are an educated individual on a lot of the things that went on that American indians had to face. Your opinion should be valued more highly than say someone who just wants a funny mascot for their team.
ReplyDeleteI for one am native american, my dad is 1/2 and my grandpal is more then half and my grandmal was full. My father and grandfather are big indians fans have not missed one game in there lifetime haha can we say obsessed! Buti nor have my family ever thought of the logo or anyother logo for that matter is making fun of someone. There are many mascots and logos out in the world that symbolizemany things such as, Dallas cowboys do formol cowboys take that to defence no that that we have heard of, trogens are we making fun of our worriors back in the days? i really dont think that we pick these mascots to upset people we do it for spirit, the school, for names and titles. So I in my opinon see nothing wrong with it.....
ReplyDeletei would have to agree with fujiyama because the logo now doesnt seem that bad at all because it doesnt look alot like an indian as the first logo did. The first one looked more like an indian because of the skin color. The current logo i think is alot better due to the fact that they changed the skin color, but it can still be offensive to native americans so theres still that part.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have to say that I don't believe that the logo is offensive because no one is really using it offensively. It is simply a mascot for a baseball team and nothing more. I honestly didn't even think about the fact that this could possibly even be offensive to anyone until it was discussed in class. If it were being used to attack a certain group of people than i would say, by all means, change the logo.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that its my place to say anything about the situation. But I will say that it wouldnt be right to take away something thats been around for so long. I mean that logo probably has a really big meaning to it. and its important to alot of people.
ReplyDeleteI think that the logos r wrong. Like the pics we had in class, there would be an up-roar if the mascot was an exagerated picture of a black man. Why should it be any different with the mascot as a Native American? If everyone is calling for equal rights then EVERYONE needs to be equally respected and that extends to the mascots of sports teams.
ReplyDeleteI being mostly native american, see no problem at all with sports mascots being intravenously derived. Yet with chief wahoo, I do have a problem with his skin being as red as red gets. The stereotype of indians having red skin is one that I myself have a problem with. I'm not sure what drives me to be offended by it, maybe because our skin really isn't red..i'm not sure.
ReplyDeleteI think that the mascot is very derogatory, and probably needs some minor changes, but other than that, I really have no problem with it.
i dont see it as being offensive because its just a mascot representing a team. but i am not native american so that is just my opinion. i would only find it offensive if i were to be native american and my tribe didnt support the things that most indian mascots look like. to a native american i think anybodys opinion would matter and they would be interested to feel what anybody had to say. i dont see most of them taking the mascots offensive but there has to be a couple native americans that really do care and are trying to do something about it.
ReplyDelete