Change often comes slowly, often inexcusably so. It is often met with resistance, sometimes for financial reasons, or cultural reasons, or sometimes just for the sake of resistance. Today, though, a little bit more change has come, and it is long overdue. If you’re a fan of the NFL — or are friends with anybody who is — it’s likely you already know, but today the U.S. Patent Office ruled on the case Blackhorse v. Pro-Football Inc. that the trademarks of the Washington Redskins are derogatory and offensive — and are thereby cancelled.
It’s likely to be appealed again, of course. And it’ll probably be at least two generations before people stop clinging to the racist nickname. But it’s a start.
Those of us whose ancestors are native to this continent have put up with a lot over the centuries, to say the least, including the ongoing question of what we are to be called. I am a member of the Osage Nation; I would prefer to be called Osage when someone is referring to my people, as I am not a Nez Perce or Seminole or Choctaw. But I understand the need to refer to the entire race, as there are times when the entire race is being discussed, and because it is understandably difficult for people to always know exactly which of the several hundred nations an individual belongs to. In 1492, a confused white idiot underestimated the size of the planet and thought he landed in the Indies (today’s Indonesia), and dubbed us “Indians”. In the 1900s, the geographical inconsistency — as well as the confusion with the actual people of the East Indies, plus the people of India — led to the introduction of the term Native American. This term names the race after the continent, which is in turn named after a possibly-fraudulent Italian mapmaker. Both terms are still largely in vogue today, along with American Indian and Amerindian. All terms have their flaws due to potential confusion with other peoples, as The Simpsons once gently parodied (with Homer saying he was a Native American due to being born in the U.S., and Apu saying he was an American Indian due to naturalizing.) The Canadians may actually have the best term so far, calling the various tribes the First Nations. As for myself, I tend to use Indian; up until a recent rewrite, the Constitution of the Osage Nation referred to us as the Osage Nation of Indians. Still, I am generally unoffended by Indian, Native American, American Indian, Amerindian, or First Nations, so long as the term is being used with respect.
But Redskin has never been acceptable.
The word is a racial slur, and was conceived as such. It was used by the same people who attempted genocide, who then confined the native tribes to reservations in the hopes they would gradually die off. For an Indian, it carries the same emotional weight the n-word does for a black person, and for the same reasons. It was meant to dehumanize, to justify the unjustifiable; “It’s OK to do this; they’re only Redskins, they’re not like real people.”
It is disgraceful that a team anywhere in this country has been allowed to use such a vile slur as its nickname. It is doubly disgraceful that it is a team in our nation’s very capital. It says to Native American youth that their culture is worth mocking, that their heritage is something for other people to put on as a shallow pageant, as non-natives dress up in knock-off costumes of a mish-mash of tribes. It says that the very color of their skin is something to be derided as non-natives put on redface and “war paint”. The other day, ESPN’s Mark Schlereth made a point that echoes one my father has been saying my entire life, almost word for word: if they were called the Yellowskins or the Blackskins, it wouldn’t be tolerated.
Social media outlets have been blowing up today over the ruling, and sadly but unsurprisingly, there are a lot of people still clinging to attempts to defend the indefensible, just as Washington owner Dan Snyder has been doing. It’s called a tradition, but we’ve ended other racist traditions before. The fact is, it shouldn’t have been allowed in 1932, as the term was known to be violently offensive even then. But it certainly shouldn’t be allowed today; “we were jackasses before” is not a justification for being a jackass now. Some have said that not all Native Americans are offended by it. That may be true, but this is true of other racial slurs as well. There’s a rather well-known black rap group called N.W.A. — the N stands for the N-word — but there are still a lot of black people who find the word so offensive that it is considered taboo to type it even for the purpose of discussing how offensive it is. Of course, N.W.A. was trying to be provocative, but it’s not hard to find black people who toss the term around casually. The point is, “some of them might not be offended” is not logically equivalent to “none of them should be offended.” I’ve already been told three or four times this morning that I shouldn’t be offended by the team name. But it’s not up to someone else whether I or anyone of my race is offended. I am an Indian, and I am offended by the use of a deliberately derogatory term for my people as a team nickname.
I’ve also had my heritage called into question today. Nobody ever seems to doubt someone who says they’re Italian or Irish, but apparently if you’re an Indian, saying that you’re offended by a racial slur against you is an open invitation for people to ask what percentage of Native blood you have and whether you practice your tribe’s culture; whether you’re “a real Indian”, in other words. If you’re thinking of asking someone this, do me a favor first. Go talk to a black person. If you want to keep it related to the topic of sports and racism, ask them their opinion on Donald Sterling. Then ask them what percentage of African heritage they have, and whether they “really” practice African-American culture and beliefs. Can you even picture yourself doing something so offensive? And yet it’s a fact of life for an Indian who dares to speak up. I am an Osage. I know my heritage. I know the stories and histories of my tribe. And I know that it is not acceptable to use a racial slur against me and then try and make me justify my offense.
The last half-ditch attempt at defense I’ve seen is that there are other things to be worried about. Some have said the government shouldn’t have gotten involved. However, the Patent Office did not decide to take a look at this on their own; they were ruling on a case that was brought to them by a group of Native Americans. The right to petition the government for a redress of grievances is part of the First Amendment; it would set a very bad precedent for the federal government to ignore the First Amendment at whim. Others have said that Native Americans have bigger issues to be worried about; in fact, there was a poll a while back supposedly showing that Natives didn’t view the team nickname as a major problem. But I know something about polls and how they can be artificially skewed. There’s an old saying about how “numbers never lie”, but I’m a programmer with training in data analysis and statistics; I know that numbers do whatever they are told to do. In the case of this particular poll, it asked whether the team nickname was the biggest problem Native Americans face. Well, of course it’s not. There’s the widespread crushing poverty both on the reservations and off; the rampant alcohol and drug abuse as a result of that poverty; an epidemic of diabetes and digestive disorders due that same poverty and dietary changes forced upon generations through reservation life. There’s an abundance of violent crime against Native Americans; a report I read a few years back estimated 1 in 4 Native American women is raped at some time during her life. Then, of course, there are all the attempts — still ongoing in many cases — at depriving Indians of their lawful property, be it land or mineral rights.
Yes, there are certainly worse problems than the nickname of the Washington Redskins. But problems are not solved by ignoring all but the very worst of them. They are solved by asking if something is a problem, and whether it has a solution. And in this instance, the answer to both of those questions is an obvious “Yes”. The team name must be changed.
As to what the new name should be, I do not know. There is a nigh-infinite number of nouns that could be used without slandering any ethnic group. Would I be accepting of the team name if it were a different, non-pejorative term for a Native American group? I don’t know. It’s not that it can’t be done with respect. While I won’t say the Kansas City Chiefs have always had entirely respectful traditions, there’s nothing inherently wrong with their team nickname. Given the nicknames of teams that started in KC — the Royals and Kings (who have since moved) — it’s actually fairly respectful. They went with a theme for all their teams, and that theme put traditional Indian tribal leaders on a par with traditional European leaders. I’m OK with that.
But when it comes to the question of Washington changing their name to a different term for American Indians, I’m concerned because of the associated baggage. Braves isn’t a terrible nickname, being essentially equivalent to Warriors, but Atlanta does have the “Tomahawk Chop” and other casually racist traditions. Cleveland’s baseball team is called the Indians, which isn’t quite an offensive term but still feels uncomfortable somehow; could you picture them being called the Cleveland Jews or the Cleveland Greeks? (I could have said the Irish, but then I remembered Notre Dame; it honestly wouldn’t surprise me if some Irish-Americans find that nickname and mascot offensive, and I wouldn’t blame them if they do.) And of course, the mascot for the Indians is a horribly racist caricature. Again, put it in the context of another culture; remove the feather and make “Chief Wahoo”‘s skin black, and there would be calls for somebody’s head. But because it’s the Indians, it passes without comment from most fans.
That’s what makes me think that Washington needs to change their name to something completely unrelated. Because while their nickname is the most prominent aspect of the embedded racism in that fandom’s culture, it’s not the only one. Even if they were called the Washington Warriors, I suspect the same fans would keep putting on fake headdresses and making themselves up in redface, and would think they were entitled and supported in doing so. Change it to the name of an animal or some non-race-related occupation, and the racist holdouts will gradually taper off. As to suggestions, I don’t know; as I said, there are a near-infinite number of possibilities. (It’s too bad both Eagles and Patriots are already taken, as both would fit nicely for our nation’s capital.) Perhaps they could be the Minutemen, or perhaps they could honor old George himself and call the team the Generals.
Of course, that is looking to the future. For now, the team will almost certainly appeal the ruling as Dan Snyder persists in clinging to a racist tradition. Even if the ruling does fully take hold, it doesn’t stop the team from using the name, or even from making money on it — it just means that they are no longer protected from other people doing the same. Whether the loss of exclusivity will lead to sponsors putting enough pressure on Snyder and the NFL to force a change, I do not know.
What I do know is this: today, in a rare move, a branch of the U.S. federal government said to Native Americans, “Yes, you are a people worthy of the same respect as everybody else.” Felt kind of nice.
