We in Maine have seen offensive American Indian monikers such as “redskins” and “squaw” removed from landmarks and high schools within the past few years ”“ most notably with the Sanford High School’s recent change to Spartans. It’s time now for the same to happen to one of the United States’ National Football League teams.
Since its inception, the team in Washington, D.C. has been known as the Washington Redskins. For years, many non-native people didn’t think twice about the name, considering it just another mascot in the same realm as the New York Giants or the Dallas Cowboys. Unfortunately, the name is not on the same level: “Redskins” is offensive.
The term “redskins” conjures up a time in the United States when white settlers and soldiers would scalp American Indians after battles. It was a practice the Dutch started in New York as a way to instill fear into natives, according to historical reports, and the term references the scalps themselves, not the color of the natives’ skin, as many people in our culture believe. The term is from a dark period of genocide in this country’s early history, when American Indians’ scalps, “redskins,” were collected for bounties. These natives were kicked off of their lands and brutally slaughtered, with often near-entire populations wiped out.
With that history in mind, a progressive movement is currently afoot asking that the Washington Redskins change their mascot name. Team ownership has publicly said that it will not change the name, saying that it is the team’s identity and part of the team’s culture.
It might be the team’s identity, but it’s the wrong one with which to be affiliated.
The Washington Redskins are a proud and successful organization, having won several Super Bowl titles. Changing the name does not rewrite that history. If anything, it shows that the team is willing to adapt to a changing society, where racism and bigotry will not be tolerated.
No one would ever name a team after a racial slur for blacks, Hispanics, Asians or a name that disparages any other group of people. It would be considered offensive, and there would be protests to change the name.
If Washington does not change its name, then it will be sending the message that it is OK to use racial slurs toward those of American-Indian descent, which isn’t right. Even those teams that want to use a mascot that represents the pride of native peoples’ history should avoid a mascot focusing on race. There are plenty of examples of such use, with the Florida State Seminoles, the North Dakota Fighting Sioux, the Atlanta Braves and so on. These names, while not racial slurs, are still not appropriate or respectful of American-Indian heritage, which becomes apparent when other racial or religious terms are substituted.
The term “redskins” for a mascot is archaic, based in a time gone by when people were categorized by race, and we hope Washington realizes this and makes the right decision to change its name.
Our nation’s capital has a rich history from which to draw inspiration for a name without causing hard feelings.
Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ
Today’s editorial was written by Sports Editor Al Edwards on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.
Comments are not available on this story.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
