Podcast: Play in new window | Download (23.6MB) | Embed
This year marks the 100th year that the Cleveland baseball team has used the “Indians” name. The Cleveland Indians mascot, Chief Wahoo, has often been criticized because of its cartoon-like caricature of a Native American. With all of the attention on the Washington DC Football Team’s trademarks, where does the Cleveland Indians fit in the mascot fight? Are you offended by Chief Wahoo? Do you think it’s time to retire the mascot? Or do you feel that the mascot is not offensive to Native Americans?
Guests:
Robert Roche (Chiricahua Apache) – executive director of the American Indian Education Center
Amanda Blackhorse (Diné) – social worker and plaintiff for Blackhorse v. Pro Football Inc.
Jacqueline Keeler (Dakota and Navajo) – writer and co-founder of Eradicating Offensive Native Mascotry
Break Music: Stick Game Song #9 (song) Judy Trejo (artist) Stick Game Songs of the Paiute (album)
Natick people are not the only people mascotted. Many teams use the Irish for instance. Notre dame uses even the Fighting Irish and their mascot is a drunken leprechaun. Should we get rid of this?
Yes if the Irish Catholic institution wants to do away with the their little fairy tale creature that they chose to represent them ,, by all means go for it ..I think many Irish people would be happy to not be represented as drunks.
As the Irish Mascot might offend it does not carry th legacy of genocide like it does to the native American Indian. You don’t see any Irish living on a reservation or fighting to keep their language and culture and heritage. Trying to compare is not a valid argument.