Uncategorized

Proud to Be: A Native American Ad That Wasn’t Aired During the 2014 Super Bowl

Submitted by Elaine Magliaro, Weekend Contributor

Here is one ad that never aired during this year’s Super Bowl:

The Proud to Be video was made by Change the Mascot, a national campaign that was launched by the Oneida Nation. The video was released by the National Congress of American Indians a couple of days before this year’s Super Bowl. Change the Mascot’s aim is to end the use of the term “redskins” as the mascot for Washington, D. C.’s NFL team. The campaign “calls upon the NFL and Commissioner Roger Goodell to do the right thing and bring an end the use of the racial epithet.”

Not being a wealthy organization, the National Congress of American Indians couldn’t afford to “buy a television slot during the Super Bowl to run its ad.”

Writing for ThinkProgress on January 31, 2014, Alyssa Rosenberg said the following:

It’s a gorgeous ad, and it’s a strikingly effective illustration of why the word “Redskin” is so troublesome. It’s not just that the term has evolved from its origins as a basic explanation of physical difference, to a slur that was used to reduce Native Americans to the value of their skins, for which literal bounties were offered. In a less violent but no less significant sense, “Redskin” collapses the remarkable particularity of Native American experiences into a single identity and set of attributes.

The NCAI ad is a forceful and often beautiful reminder that Native Americans aren’t a monolithic community. That’s a term that subsumes hundreds of specific identities, a huge range of cultural and artistic practices–and yes, as the ad doesn’t neglect to leave out–specific sets of social and political issues.

“Native American” may be a blanket identity category, but it’s one that invites curiosity, asking hearers to consider what came before the political and territorial consolidation of the United States, and the fact that American identity is rich and multifaceted, rather than a single way of being. “Redskins” is both a slur, and a term that invites the listener to skip over the work of thinking about what it means. “Redskin” reduces Native Americans to simply the color of their skin, and to the attributes we associate with football (a practice that’s also a product of a very specific marketing history, as my colleague Travis Waldron reported in his epic look at the fight against the Washington football team’s name): physical strength, maybe speed, and not much else. Not only is that kind of thinking profoundly lazy and racially reductive, it’s a tragedy both for the people who are subjected to it, and the people who deny themselves the experience of more of the world by practicing it.

The NCAI ad is a reminder of precisely what they’re missing out on, making all of these points without having to spell them out the way I do here. That’s great advertising, in service of a critically important message.

Last May, Daniel Snyder, owner of Washington, D. C.’s NFL team was quoted as saying, “We will never change the name of the team.” He then repeated himself when a reporter followed-up on his comment, “We’ll never change the name. It’s that simple. NEVER — you can use caps.”

Then last June, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said that the Washington Redskins‘ nickname was a “unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect.”

Clem Ironwing (Sioux) doesn’t think the word “redskin” is a term of respect. In 1996, he spoke at a public hearing in Wichita, Kansas, on the subject of Wichita North High School’s sports mascot. He talked to those present at the hearing about having been removed from his family by the government when he was a young child and forced to live in a Catholic boarding school. Matthew Richter posted the comments that Ironwing made at the hearing. Here is an excerpt of what Clem Ironwing said:

“When my hair was cut short by the priests, I was called a “redskin” and a savage. When I spoke my native tongue, I was beaten and called “redskin”. When I tried to follow the spiritual path of my people, I was again beaten and called a “redskin”. I was told by them to turn my back on the ways of my people, or I would forever be nothing but a dirty “redskin”.

           “The only way “redskin” was ever used towards my people and myself was in a derogatory manner. It was never, ever, used in a show of respect or kindness. It was only used to let you know that you were dirty and no good, and to this day still is.

Is it time to change the mascot? What do you think?

Submitted by Elaine Magliaro

The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers.  As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.

SOURCES & FURTHER READING

Change the Mascot Website

Wichita North Redskins “Remarks by Clem Ironwing, Sioux, during a public Mascot/Identity Committee hearing.” (The People’s Path)

House Dem: ‘Redskins’ as offensive to Indians as ‘N’ word is to blacks (The Hill)

An open letter to Dan Snyder (Grantland)

The Harmful Psychological Effects of the Washington Football Mascot (Change the Mascot)

American Indian Boarding Schools Haunt Many (NPR)

Why ‘NEVER’ Abandoning ‘Redskins’ As His Team’s Name Might Soon Cost Dan Snyder A Lot Of Money (ThinkProgress)

Redskins, NFL Take Heat From Congress Over Team Name (Only a Game)

Members of Congress urge Redskins to change name (Big Story)

Read Roger Goodell’s Letter To Congress Defending The Redskins Name (DeadSpin)

NFL is ‘listening’ to those who oppose Redskins’ name, Roger Goodell says (Washington Post)

A slur or term of ‘honor’? Controversy heightens about Washington Redskins (CNN)

Native Americans Tackle Redskins at Press Conference: On the heels of an NFL conference, the Oneida Indian Nation confronts the organization for its use of what the deem a racial slur as a mascot (Time)

Bob Lutz: North High, it’s time to change the nickname (The Wichita Eagle)

The Other Redskins (Capital News Service)

Hundreds rally in Minn. against Redskins’ name (Yahoo/AP)

The Super Bowl Ad You Never Saw (Huffington Post)

ICTMN Exclusive: NCAI Releases R-word Video Ahead of Super Bowl (Indian Country Today Media Network)

Monk, Green: Mull name change (ESPN)

ENDING THE LEGACY OF RACISM IN SPORTS & THE ERA OF HARMFUL “INDIAN” SPORTS MASCOTS (National Congress of American Indians)

National Congress Of American Indians Releases Anti-Redskins Ad (Deadspin)

Here’s an ad about R–skins that its makers don’t have the money to show during Sunday’s Superbowl (Daily Kos)

The Best Ad You’ll See This Super Bowl Weekend (ThinkProgress)

The Epic Battle To Save The Most Offensive Team Name In Professional Sports (ThinkProgress)

Roger Goodell defends Washington Redskins’ nickname (NFL)

248 thoughts on “Proud to Be: A Native American Ad That Wasn’t Aired During the 2014 Super Bowl”

  1. After several attempts to post a comment with editing each time, it seems it is OK to question Redskins in football, but not SEALS use of Geronimo in the killing of bin Laden the “terrorist” (with obvious implications that are more repugnant than the use in sports. But the comment (so far) in its entirety has been refused as a posting.

  2. Bruce,

    No one is censoring comments. If certain vulgar words, however, are used in a comment, it will not be posted. Sometimes, comments are swallowed up by the spam filter. It’s happened to me many times. WordPress can be quite temperamental that way.

  6. From The Onion:

    Report: Redskins’ Name Only Offensive If You Think About What It Means
    http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-redskins-name-only-offensive-if-you-think-a,33449/

    WASHINGTON—A new study published Monday by the University of New Mexico confirmed that the name of the Washington Redskins is only offensive if you take any amount of time whatsoever to think about its actual meaning. “When you hear or say ‘Redskins’ in the abstract, it’s completely harmless, but we’ve discovered that if you briefly pause to remember it’s a racial slur for an indigenous group wiped out by genocide over the course of a few centuries, then, yeah, it’s awful,” said lead researcher Lawrence Wagner, adding that only if you allow the NFL franchise’s name to register in your mind does it evoke the thought of human beings devastated by the forced removal from tribal lands, intentional exposure to smallpox, and countless massacres. “It has the potential to come across as a degrading relic of an ethnocentric mentality responsible for the destruction of an entire people and their culture, but that’s only if you take a couple seconds to recognize it as something beyond a string of letters.” Wagner recommended that the NFL franchise should change their name to something more appropriate and historically accurate, such as the Washington Racist F*cks.

  7. Washington team meets ‘Change the mascot’ protest in Denver
    By Mark Maske
    October 27, 2013
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/wp/2013/10/27/washington-team-meets-change-the-mascot-protest-in-denver/

    Excerpt:
    Tessa McLean, another organizer from the Ojibwe Nation in Canada, said that she and many of the protesters were subject to verbal abuse by fans.

    “A lot of the passers-by supportive of the Washington team name were swearing and cussing and booing at us,” she said. “We heard, ‘Get over it. Go home. We’re honoring you.’ When you hear that it feels hurtful, right where your heart is.

    “If they wanted to honor us they could honor our treaties, they could honor the earth, they could honor our people. But not with mascots.”

  8. nick spinelli
    As I said several times, it is elitist Indians and whites on this PC campaign. This argument is repetitive.
    ======================================================

    actually, i believe that means your argument is repetitive

    i say we change the name to the real power in washington

    GO LOBBYISTS

    boy, that rolls off the tongue like a wad of snot. just think of the ideas for a new team logo. a big stack of benjamins. uncle sam bent over. (oops, can’t do that, it would look too much like the old patriots logo).

  9. This is personal on several levels, which is one reason the racist BS spouted in the thread above sandpapers me more than usual. My wife’s uncle Bud fought with Ira Hayes on the bloody sands of Iwo Jima. Bud was hit in the leg by two rounds from a Nambu machine gun, and passed out from loss of blood on the beach, but not before they got the machine gun nest that wounded him and killed several of his buddies. When he regained consciousness, he was on a litter on the deck of a ship just off the beach. From his stretcher, he saw Ira Hayes, along with four fellow Marines and a Navy corpsman, raise that flag on Mt. Suribachi.

    So yes, that logo and team name is offensive as hell to me, and as far as I know, I don’t have a drop of Indian blood. One does not have to be a member of an ethnic group to find cloddish racist behavior racist. What is bullshit is to accuse those who call racism for what it is in all its ugliness, “Elitism.”

  14. There is no doubt that the r-word is extremely offensive to those of indigenous heritage, probably a vast majority of the traditionalists — those who actually know, believe in, carry on, and attempt to preserve traditional ways. Even if the general aversion to the word is a new thing, which it isn’t, why should it matter. Why wouldn’t people go out of their way to avoid giving offense over such a trivial — as judged by their own arguments — matter?

    Because privileged white people ain’t about to give up any of their privileges — why, that would be persecution.

    Wasichus, everyone of them.

    [BTW, Professor, “Wasichu” describes a state of mind, not a race or ethnicity.]

  15. Samantha,

    You still don’t get it.

    Bonnie,

    Don’t worry! I apologizied for Samanta. When she becomes more mature and/or more understanding of our history toward Native Americans and Europe & America’s history of our treatment toward women, she will be standing outside of Mr. Snyder’s door, holding signs and boycotting. She will probably be chanting: “We shall overcome.” And regurgitating MLK’s ‘I Have A Dream’ Speech, as well.

  17. Native American Group: Fight Against ‘Redskins’ About More Than Just The Name
    BY TRAVIS WALDRON
    OCTOBER 11, 2013
    http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2013/10/11/2772101/major-native-american-group-fight/

    Excerpt:
    One of the main criticisms of the opposition to the name of Washington’s professional football team, at least one propagated by name defenders like ESPN’s Rick Reilly, is that the efforts to change the name are driven largely by white apologists who aren’t in touch with the Native American community. That isn’t and hasn’t been true, but as controversy over the name has escalated to new heights this year and as the media has taken a new interest in amplifying complaints against the name, Native American groups are renewing their fight and shaping the argument in new ways.

  19. RWL, if your only view is through the lens of racism, of course you only saw a singular pronoun when in fact I had used a plural one, making it pretty obvious to most, certainly not you, that I meant no one person of any race is exempt from karma. Get rid of that bigoted lens, so we can see you for the bright person you really are, not one who is compensating for emotional challenge!

Comments are closed.