University of Chicago Lab School- Ms. Jacobs' Page

Friday, October 10, 2008

In Whose Honor?


Write a paragraph response to the movie In Whose Honor? Respond to the following statement: Native American mascots are always a sign of disrespect toward native groups of people. If you agree, give supporting statements from the movie to illustrate your point. If you disagree, use specific examples to show your point. Be sure to follow the "paragraph burger" method of paragraph writing. Think carefully about your topic sentence and your conclusion. You may also reply to other students, but be careful to be respectful even if you disagree. REMINDER: SIGN YOUR POST WITH YOUR FIRST NAME ONLY, NO LAST NAMES. WRITE YOUR CLASS PERIOD AND TEACHER'S NAME ON YOUR POST AS WELL.

posted by Charlotte Jacobs at 6:28 AM

33 Comments:

  • i think that it isn't right to have a indian for a mascot. if a team was called the "Abrahams" and was jewish or biblical it would get shot down in three seconds tops. i don't know a lot about 9indians but the chief was probably wearing some swacred things so it would be putting down the indians. like i said it is not right to have a indian mascot.

    blake
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:18 PM  

  • Parading around with a fake native american chief as your mascot is disrespectful and steriotipical. And in the movie the people who ran the school only kept it because it was making them so much money. It is disrespectful to native americans because in some cultures they are taught to treat the feathers, the dance and the coustom with respect. So turning it into a blown up thing they see it as an insault. Also now at the cerant time if people made any other kind of rase their mascot everyone would get very angry. The mascot is also very steriotipical because it says that all native americans are a certain way. So in my opinion it is very wrong to have a native american as mascot!

    Sophia
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:31 AM  

  • I agree with Blake. It is not right to have an Indian mascot. in the movie (i forget her name) but she says "I would rather there be a really cartoony fake looking american indian mascot than one who is wearing real spiritual clothing and attempting to do a real indian dance". she said that she was more offended by a serious mascot because she felt like they were mocking her. i do not think that American Indian mascots are very nice. if someone had a mascot of any other race or ethnicity like asian, african american, hispanic, or italian, people would be shocked, offended, and furious. how would you feel if your religion or race was being mocked by a sports mascot. not very good, right?

    Grace
    Ms. Jacobs
    per. 8/9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:02 PM  

  • In the movie, it seems that with every actor that players the role of "the chief", that there is a different stereotype that's being portrayed with every actor. For example, in the movie, one of the actors portrayed the chief as a bald person with a tomahawk. Another actor described an Indian chief as always wearing face paint, and wearing a headdress made out of feathers. Therefore it is easy to understand why Native Americans are insulted by "the chief"

    Arjun
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:46 PM  

  • I think that it is not alright to have a mascot of a racial group. I think that the mascot of the University of Illinois might have been accepted for many years because it took someone who grew up on a reservation to realize that the dances were insultingly untrue, and steriotypical. The mascot of the Cleveland Indians is extremely steriotypical as well. It shows Native Americans as mischevious and chihldish, I think. Since these mascots are very different from each other (one trying to be realistic, the other one more animated) and people find both of them offending, I believe that mascots of particular races, including that of Native Americans are not right, and insulting whether they are trying to be realistic or more cartoonish.

    Sonia
    Ms. Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:22 PM  

  • I agree with the fact that it is isn't right to try to portray a culture you are not part of. It is completely disrespectful and rude. I also wanted to bring another view on to this argument. If you've ever gone to a college sporting event, you will notice that the football or basketball or the sport you're watching isn't all the fun. The other half is all the spirit from the crowd. If its an enthusiastic student section, they won't care what the mascot is as long as everyone is wearing their colors and cheering. I still think it is wrong, but part of the problem probably was the crowd being oblivious to this insult to American Indians. I am guessing they got so attached to their mascot and team, by the time they realized it was hurtful, they didn't care. I think the school was not very empathetic, and the students and alumnae who didn't want to retire the chief didn't see why it was so offensive. So, in conclusion, I think it's wrong and rude to have an Indian American mascot.

    Lindsey
    Ms. Jacobs
    8/9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:42 PM  

  • It is not as important that the University of Illinois had a Native American mascot as it was thaT once people were rallying against it they should have removed it imediatly. Back when the mascot was created people did not know any better. the history of Native Americans was not taught much in school. the only resorce these people had were probably the old wild west radio shows, and the early movies that showed Native Americans as people who ran aroung whoping and swinging their tomahawks through the air. the Native Americans as a whole make up about one percent of the population of the USA. they were cut off from the world by being herded into tiny plots of land.that gives them a notice able dis advantage because their numbers are so small. When people, especially Native American people stood up against the chief actions to remove him should have been made. Just becuase they were not "Illinois tax payers" did not mean their voices should not have been heard. The Native Americans deserve as much respect as any other race, even if it means changing the mascot of the University of Ilinois

    Carah
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:02 PM  

  • I think it is not ok to have american indian mascots. The mascot is a symbol of disrespect and mockery. The clothing "the chief" wore, were "so beautiful" according to the main girls name (i forgot it) and for it to be used in such a disrespectful way, was unacceptable and very stereotypical. "The chief" to non-american indians, was a figure. The representative of a team. For them "the chief" was a sales tactic. Something to bring the people together, for the love of "the chief", so they'd buy stuff, and the sales people would make money. Money was the reason behind it all. But it was not only stereotypical to american indians, but it sent the wrong message. The message being that all american indians are this way, they all dance around, and wear feathers, when thats not necessarily the case. So using american indians as mascots it wrong.

    Lily B.
    Jacobs (8-9)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:43 PM  

  • Having a fake native american cheif as a mascot is disespectful and foolish. It is disrespectful because the native americans were taught to appreciate and respect everything the "cheif" was wearing and doing. It is foolish because native americans are people, if there was a white or black man or women as a mascot it would not be approved of, it would be booted out, like Blake said. So, if having a white or black man or women is not exceptable, then why would having a native amercan "cheif" be? It is not fair that eveything the native amercans were taught was destroyed all because of some greedy, money making, school running people. I dont think that there is any honor in having a native american mascot because we are making everything that the native americans look up to, into a mimicking little fake dance to give people entertainment. The movie shows that the native americans were taught to respect the feathers, the dance, and those customs, so why shouldn't we?

    Rosie
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:58 PM  

  • I agree with the statement: “Native American mascots are always a sign of disrespect toward native groups of people.” How would you feel if someone put your race on a flag and treated it like it was a plaything? For an example, most of the people in the team that was using the chief as a mascot in “In who’s Honor” probably didn’t realize how racist they were being. You don’t see medieval knights of honor, African American people, or Caucasians as mascots. African American mascots and Jewish mascots have disappeared over time, but people just think parading around Native American mascots is fine. The first person to protest said “I did it for my kids. They were taught to respect eagle feathers, and the dancing chief just landed alot of blows to the ego of my children.”
    No one realizes the extent of the damage they are doing to young Native Americans Many people do not realize that even though we love the mascot, it causes alot of pain to the race.

    Lily Z.
    Jacobs
    8/9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:07 PM  

  • I do not think it is right to have an indian mascot for a sports team. One way to understand why it is not w=right is to think what if and a person came out in daily arab cloths and started to do a dance from their culture. Then people would start to feel bad inside and this would show you how the indians feel about a mascot out their doing a dance that they respect but is being used to intertain people with

    Kaleb
    jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:49 PM  

  • I think it isn't right to have an indian for a mascot because if someone is indian they will get really offended by the dance. In the movie the woman got really offended so she tried to rally against it. It eventually worked but a lot of indians got very offended if they knew about it. So they helped her rally against it. If they didn't cheif illiniwek would still be the mascot for illinois university. The woman (I forgot her name) got so offended and was afraid that her children were too. That's why she started rallying. The fighting illini was offending indians because of the dance. The only sacred thing about it was the costume and the dance people from the university just made it up. Not knowing that it would hurt people.

    Niki
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:03 PM  

  • I think that having a mascot of a certain racial group isn't necessarily a very bad thing. But I do think having a native american as a mascot is a bad thing. It all depends on what racial group it is. The Notre Dame Fighting Irish could be seen as to insult Irish people, but they aren't. The reason may be due to the large Irish population. Most people have at one time met an Irish person, and knows that they're perfectly normal. Irish people probably aren't offended either because they know that everyone else knows it is a joke and there are lots of other Irish people who feel the same. If there was a larger Native American population they might not be as offended. But there is only a very small population of Native Americans and it might cause them to feel all alone or picked on. I do not think it is right to have small racial minorities as mascots. I think the colleges and professional teams should just stick to animals for mascots.

    kelsey
    jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:05 PM  

  • My mom said, "You know why it's okay? It's a ball team." That really made me mad, and I convinced her against it with these reasons. If by doing something "funny" or "entertaining", and it hurts a people, then, it might not be okay. Also, I would put down pretty much exactly what Blake said in my own words but I thought that would be stupid. So, I agree with Blake (and anyone who agreed with him), because for Jewish people or Christian people, or Blacks or Asians, or Hispanics it isn't right but for the Indians it is? somehow that doesn't follow me.

    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Blogger Unknown, at 5:07 PM  

  • Do not think of the dance in the intermission as merely the lark that the woman thought it to be. This is indeed how the presentation started out – a history buff making a show of himself with a funny jig, but later on in the history of the war dance, the people attending the games had a different take on it: some considering it a slice of history unifying the Illinois-and-football culture or as a symbol of esprit de corps. Many sports teams are named as military groups or working-class jobs. However, in spite of the differences, all the interviewees agreed that the acrobatic performance was used as a symbol and a theater and a part of popular culture and was not by any means a political statement. Though the interviewed fans’ argument of non-tax payers not having the right to tell them what to do did seem foolish and narrow-minded, which was the point the documentary appeared to be making, there is some reason to it. The Native American woman seems to be telling everyone else to see the problem from her culture’s point of view and not allowing for any other way of thinking about it. It is naught but a symbol and an idol for spirit and drive, by no means a mockery! (Though it is not really worth hurting someone’s feelings like this just for a sports team.)

    Rush, Jacobs 8/9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:59 PM  

  • I think that its not o.k. to have a native american mascot without permission from the specific tribe. I think it is o.k. to have a native american mascot if it is fine with the tribe that the mascot is dressed like. The Florida state seminals have permission from the real tribe they are named after. The Washington Redskins do not. I think that it would feel more like being honored if the sports team had permission to the native americans than if they didn't. Sports teams should have to get permission from native american tribes before the have a native american mascot.


    Jonathan
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:13 AM  

  • In a way, its fine to have a native American mascot, but only if they are not making up something about their culture that offends them. Because in the movie,the thing that they did which was wrong was that they had a native American mascot who they made a dance and said it was a traditional,spiritual dance. Which, to some native Americans with a lot of religion, could offend them. But if they used a real dance, and said it was real, it might not offend them. Or if they made up a dance just for the half-time games, and said that it wasn't real, it would not be as offense either. Another way that a native American mascot would be offensive is if the mascot wore clothing that was fake, or did not symbolize native Americans, in which they called native American. However, Florida state (a college) has permission to use a native American mascot, and they have a traditional dance, and traditional clothing. Which in this case, the native American's might be proud. But in most other cases, they would be offended.
    Elyse
    Jacobs
    Period 3 and 4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:23 AM  

  • I think it's fine for a sports team or organization to use a Native American mascot so as long as it isn't disrespectful. For example, Chief Illiniwek may not have "authentic" Illini feathers, gear, or clothes but the image is not disrespecting the Illini tribe or other Native Americans/American Indian. It would be different if he was smoking a pipe or drinking a figurative alcoholic beverage. Although some people believe Chief Illiniwek is a stereotype of an American Indian, he is displaying the traditional stoic, energetic American Indian. This is not a bad thing, and I think some or maybe even most can look at Chief Illiniwek and enjoy the entertainment without being offended. After all, he isn't doing anything mischiveius while wearing a t-shirt saying "I'm a typical American Indian!".

    By Blogger James Duran, at 6:49 AM  

  • I think it is not right because people are mimiking things (like for example the dance or the paint) that is sacred to the Native Americans.
    In the film they said the NA risked their life for respect, and now look what they got.
    The woman who first protested against the chief being a mascot said: "when you see yourself mimiked, your self-estime goes down."
    I think that many Native Americans have spent all their life teaching their childen and then later on their grandchildren to dance and all the things they need to learn to keep the tradition going from one generation to another. then some people come and copy everything in the blink of an eye.
    I think having an NA like a mascot is NOT good.

    Eira
    8-9
    Ms. Jacobs

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:07 PM  

  • Native American mascots can be disrespectful to the culture. I don't think the purpose is to make fun of the culture, but the Native Americans see it that way. In the movie, the children felt that the mascot was insulting their traditions because he was wearing a real headdress but was making up a silly dance that had nothing to do with the culture. This is why I feel that Native American mascots are insulting to the culture.


    melora
    Ms. Jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:47 PM  

  • I thing it is wrong to have an indian mascot. The mascot is wearing tradidtional clothing that is for religious ceremonies. Not for running around at a sports game. I feels like peole dont appreciate your culture so the making fun of you. "They spat on me" Charlote Teeters said as how they treated her. Just because the NAtive Americans were the first people here is cool to know but as a mascot it is just racist.

    Allie
    Jacobs
    3/4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:11 PM  

  • I think that it isn't alright to have American Indian mascots. I agree with Blake when he said "if a team was called the Abrahams every one would be out raged." If there was any other racial mascots then every one would hate it but because the American Indian population is so small no one really can do anything about it. That really goes to show never pick on the little guy.


    noah b.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:58 PM  

  • About 2 minutes into the movie, I started to think that Chief Illini wasn't all that bad. The people said that it was an authentic dance, a real costume, all that other fun stuff. But when the lady started talking about how the eagle feathers that were worn by the mascot were sacred, and then how it started showing people kind of even mocking the sacred rituals. They never even thought of how the Native Americans felt. I think that it was fine until they started to claim that the dance was really authentic.

    Hiroki
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:28 PM  

  • I don't think it is right to have a native american mascot. If there was a NA mascot then other sports teams could adopt other ethnicities as their logo. It would then prompt a racial war between various ethnicities. Each sports team would be followed by that group and then play some other team with a group of itself. It would bring more competitiveness than there already is in sports. It also could be politically incorrect and become criticized for those reasons. So i don't understand why other sports teams would follow suit in having an ethnicity as their trademark.

    Jeff
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Blogger Jeff, at 2:35 PM  

  • I think that it's okay to have a Native American mascot , but only under specific circumstances. If the tribe says okay you can have a Native American tribe mascot then it's okay. For example the Florida State Seminoles have special permission from the Seminole tribe. Meanwhile the Washington Redskins do not point out a specific tribe, but it is obviously racist. I mean it's like being the Washington Blackskins, or Whiteskins. In Chief Illinewek's case in a way it was mocking, but the tribe no longer exists so you can't ask the tribe for pemission. Also, Chief Illini is a fictional character!!!! I guess this really isn't right, but if you say this isn't right I'm going to throw something else out. In the state if Texas you have to say the words "Under God" as part of the state and national pledge. The national pledge didn't originally include the words "Under God", and the Texas pledge added the words a couple years ago. I'm really surprised no one has started protests against that as it's forcing someone to go against their own beliefs.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:03 PM  

  • I agree with Grace and Blake completely because when you see a mascot and it is about your culture you probably will get offended. I think that the people who decided to put the NA mascot they don't see how it may offend people because they are not apart of that culture. Therefore, I think you shouldn't have a NA mascot.

    Sabrina
    Ms.Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:04 PM  

  • I do not think that it is right to have a Native American mascot. A lot of people don't know Native Americans. They don't know what they are like. Native Americans are not all the same. Being Native American is not a role or character that is played. A chief is a leader that is highly regarded. Many Native Americans are offended by having someone who isn't a chief dressed as one. Chief Illini is supposedly honoring Native Americans. If Native Americans are offended, than Chief Illini is not doing his job. It's just not right.

    Akilah
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Blogger Unknown, at 3:17 PM  

  • Having a native American mascot is completely wrong. I think this way because I think it is mocking the native Americans and setting all sorts of stereotypes.


    Anoop
    Jacobs
    8-9

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:33 PM  

  • The Indian "Chief" of the Illinois University is a huge disrespect to the Native American culture. First of all, wearing Native American traditional clothing and then dancing with ti on for people's entertainment is outrageous. The costume is worn for traditional purposes not for getting people pumped up about a stupid game. Second of all, the mascot doing the traditional dance is, I think, extremely racist. This is because the dance is a ritual meant for specific reasons such as, scaring away the bad spirits. Lastly, hearing the crowd scream, "CHEIF,CHIEF, CHIEF!", seems like they have absolutely no respect for the Native American culture. They are chanting and encouraging bad and racist things. In conclusion, I think that the Illinois University should not have even thought about making their mascot a "Chief".

    By Blogger Unknown, at 3:40 PM  

  • I think it isn't right to have an American Indian as a mascot. The guy was wearing traditional clothing, but he was abusing the traditional clothing by jumping around and doing gymnastics which is not a traditional ritual. Its a disrespect to lots of people, but it's also cool and exciting to other people too. Now some people are happy that the mascot is gone.

    Paul
    Jacobs
    3-4

    By Blogger Paul, at 5:37 PM  

  • I don't think it is right to have a mascot that represents native americans. A mascot is for entertainment. No matter how authentic the costume may be it is still disrespectful. Feathers, face paint, and many other things could be considered sacred. What these people have grown up to respect is being mocked. How would you feel if that was the case for you? Something that big in your life being mocked for entertainment purposes? You may feel differently about a native american mascot as long as it is all authentic but what about the fans? Not only are we seeing native americans being mocked but we learn to mock them too. We wear face paint and headdresses to games when these things have more meaning. How is it right to be entertained by part of someones culture.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:10 PM  

  • well personly i think that it wasn't realy rasist i just kinda thought that if i was a native american i wouldn't feel bad i would sort of feel proud that they want to use a native american as a mascot and that i would think that the native americans would feel proud but then kinda offended because that the dance was kinda fake. so thats the only way that they could realy feel offended in my point of view

    domagoj
    jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:18 AM  

  • i think that it is only okay to have a native american macot if the native americans are okay with it. if there was any other race as a mascot then people of that race would get offended and the mascot would have to go. i think at first the mascot was okay but after people got offended they should have taken it away. they probably didnt take it away at first because most of the people in charge of the school may not have met a native american and did not realize that their mascot was an inacurate representation of native americans. i think it is okay to have a native american mascot if they agree with the tribe to have a real dance or real clothes like the florida state seminals. then its okay to use a native american as a mascot but otherwise it is not.
    delana
    jacobs
    3-4

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home