Native American mascots can be tasteful

The argument

Proponents of this position argue that the objection to Native American mascots generalises from the worst examples rather than the full range of them. Often, regional high school sports teams invoke Native American imagery and symbolism in what proponents regard as a very tasteful way: they do not always have caricatures as mascots, and at times depict elegant chiefs and humble spear-wielding warriors. The distinction being drawn is between a depiction that exaggerates features for comic effect and one that presents a figure with dignity, and on this view the second kind does not carry the insult attributed to the first. The example offered is the Florida State Seminoles, whose mascot is an actual Native American on horseback rather than a cartoon. Proponents argue that a portrayal of that kind propagates no negative stereotypes about the appearance of the Native American people, because there is no distortion to propagate — the image presents a person as a person, in a role the team treats as honourable rather than ridiculous. The element proponents treat as decisive is consent. That mascot has been approved by the people of the Seminole tribe, which they take to settle the question of whether it demeans them: the group whose identity is represented has judged the representation acceptable, so an external objection made on their behalf is not speaking for them. Where such approval exists, the reasoning goes, the imagery functions as recognition rather than appropriation. From this proponents conclude that offensiveness is a feature of particular depictions rather than of the practice itself. Because Native American mascots can be tasteful — dignified in their imagery and, in at least some cases, endorsed by the people depicted — it is not offensive for sports teams to have them.

Context

Many sports teams invoke Native American warrior imagery; however, they do so in a very tasteful way that is not offensive.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Using any people or ethnicity as a mascot is not acceptable. It objectifies the culture and the people within it. Think about a sports team called the London Chinese, with a Chinese person being their mascot. It doesn’t matter how tasteful the logo or the mascot is, the fact that it is objectifying an ethnicity in this way is offensive. Also, offence is subjective. In the example provided of the Florida State Seminoles, it is true that the members of the Seminole tribe living in Florida approved the use of their people as a mascot for the football team. However, members of the tribe living in Oklahoma have not condoned the use. If even one Native American finds the practice offensive and unacceptable, then it is. It is offensive because it causes offence.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P3] Using a race or ethnicity as a mascot dehumanises and objectifies a people and culture and is always offensive.