You’re out! ” argues that removing Native American names and mascots from college and professional teams is the appropriate thing to do. The context of this article appeared after a Los Angles Times editorial about legislator in North Dakota struggles over whether the University of North Dakota should be forced to change its team name and mascot from the Fighting Sioux ( Langford, p. 20 Shackles exigency is to support his argument as well as responding to those who live there is no need to get rid Of Native American mascots. Through this book in which the article is placed in the audience is college professors and students, but the intended audience are Native Americans, professional and college teams. I recommend this article for Paymasters persuasiveness prize as it argues why Indian mascots should be removed from college and professional teams due to Native stereotypes.
He appeals to the audiences with ethos, mainly with his manyleadershippositions in Native American affiliated associations; pathos through his first-hand experience with the effects of the stereotypes; and logos, giving facts and statistics. Jack Shackle is former chair of the Los Angles City/ County Native American Commission and president emeritus of the California Community Foundation (CLC). ” Emeritus is a title of honor granted in the business world upon retirement to someone who has made important contributions to a company, corporation, or foundation over a long period of time” (Langford, p. 20). The CLC is a local nonprofit philanthropic organization that supports ” transformation change” in the region and the larger world. Shackle was president of the CLC from 1 980 until 2004 and now he is a current member of the Board of Advisors of the Center of Philanthropy and Public Policy at the university of Southern California. Shackle comes across as knowledgeable in the subject at hand due to his past and prior experiences. He also comes across as fair some would say because he is a mixed-blood Muscle/ Creek.
Shackles intentions are to defend Nativeculturefrom the stereotypic ideal mascots as described as ” big – nosed and buck – toothed” (Langford, p. 520). Jack’s exhorts that there are many things in this country that are subject to majority rule; dignity and aspect are not among them. As a young boy, in the early 1 9505, Jack went to a Cleveland Indians – New York Yankees game with his father. ” l loved the Yankees, but being a mixed – blood Muscle/ Creek, I felt a (misplaced)loyaltyto the Indians. So I bought a Cleveland cap with the famous Chief Wahoo logo on it.
My mother took one kick at the cap with its leering, big nosed, buck toothed redskin caricature just above the brim, jerked it off my head and threw it in the trash” (Langford, p. 520). His mother had been fighting against Indian stereotypes her entire life. At the age of 10 seeing eternal in your mothers eyes and knowing you put it there could not have been easy. Not all Native Americans have a problem with the names of the professional and college teams. The problem is with negatively portrayed mascots. ” Many of these mascots -maybe most of them- act like fools or savage cutthroats” (Langford, p. 22). In the 1 9705 jack went to yet another professional baseball game. The Atlanta Braves who mascot was the Chief NCO – A – Homo. To Shackle the Braves name was not the biggest problem. The problem for him was the way ” cringe-worthy Chief NCO – A -? Homo came tamping and war-dancing his way out of a tepee in center field every time the Braves hit a home run. He was dressed in a Plains Indian chiefs eagle bonnet and acted like a village idiot” (Langford, p. 522). All the Native Americans are looking for is their dignity.
This appeals to the audiences emotions because dignity is not only self-respectbut also a token of respect on how others will respect you. ” In a 2002 study on changing mascots, Sports Illustrated reported 84% of NaiVe American poled had no problem with Indian team names or mascots” (Langford, p. 521 The methods used to retrieve these numbers were later criticized. Pools are not always a reliable when it comes to surveys but that is not the important part. If 16% of Native Americans find something wrong then why is that not enough? Since the creation of the NationalCoalitiononRacismin Sports and Media in 1991, that group of Native American organizations has been protesting negative portrayals of Indians, hammering away at what is behind our discomfort with Indian sports mascots” (Langford, p. 521 Shackle is not saying it is easy or inexpensive to remove ethnic and racial stereotypes from college and professional sports. ” When Stanford University changed from the Indians to he Cardinal in 1972, recriminations were bitter. Richard Lyman, a friend of mine, was president of Stanford at the time.
He said the university lost millions of alumni dollars in the short run, but it was the right thing to do” (Langford, p. 522). In the 21 SST century no one in their right mind would name a sports team after any other ethnic group so why Indians are not equal to the same treatment. If Jackie Robinsons breaking through the color barrier of the major baseball league put an end to the Atlanta Black Crackers, why is this treatment not permitted for Native Americans? Therefore, I recommend this say for the persuasiveness prize.
