Tribe not going to settle, recommend new Fighting Sioux name

[SonomaCat]

You might notice that Browning is a school ran by Indians, so they probably treat the Indians mascot in a way that is respected by and of the Indians, seeing as how Indians are the ones making those decisions.

You might notice a distinct difference between Browning and UND.

This is a very important distinction, by the way.

[College Recruiter]

You might notice that Browning is a school ran by Indians, so they probably treat the Indians mascot in a way that is respected by and of the Indians, seeing as how Indians are the ones making those decisions.

You might notice a distinct difference between Browning and UND.

This is a very important distinction, by the way.

But what about the white kids and hutterite kids in the minority there...if they object to being called an "Indian". Should the school respect their wishes?

Oh god this political correct/victim stuff gets complicated!!!

[SonomaCat]

You might notice that Browning is a school ran by Indians, so they probably treat the Indians mascot in a way that is respected by and of the Indians, seeing as how Indians are the ones making those decisions.

You might notice a distinct difference between Browning and UND.

This is a very important distinction, by the way.

But what about the white kids and hutterite kids in the minority there...if they object to being called an "Indian". Should the school respect their wishes?

Oh god this political correct/victim stuff gets complicated!!!

Only when people are placing rhetoric above a simple approach of having respect for other people.

[ChiOCat]

Okay, time to chime in. I understand how and why Native Americans can be upset with representations of themselves as sports mascots, particularly when they have no or little association with the institution. Buy my question is why must the school/team completely do away with the mascot and develop a new one? Why can't the tribe(s) work with the school to enhance the image so it is not tarnished or made fun of? This could lead to an entire new process of Native Americans and universities/colleges working together to the betterment of both. Let tribal officers assist in the design and marketing of the mascot. In turn, the university could develop awareness programs to assist Native Americans with easier access to higher learning and outreach that teaches whites more about their culture. Why does everything always have to be an "end-all" decision?

Because that makes sense!

[ChiOCat]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

[Bleedinbluengold]

BBG: Do you not find it ridiculous to use an Indian tribe's name and likeness as a unauthorized marketing brand for a sports team?

No more ridiculous than any mascot I guess. One of the problems with this whole mascot business, in terms of trying to compare apples to apples, mascots such as trees, birds and mammals don't really have an avenue to complain compared to a group of people who think that a particular mascot, which fictionally depicts a human being in one form or another, is derogatory toward that group in personal manner.

I wonder if real sharks are offended by the San Jose mascot? Sharks are necessary species in the food chain, and I wonder if they are offended by being depicted as an angry fish with long teeth, which doesn't really depict a real shark in any way.

I wonder why the Seminole tribe seems to have a completely different opinion?

I wonder why the Sioux aren't railing against the Washington Redskins? If ever there was a derogatory depiction of a Native American, this is it.

Later down in the thread, you indicate that mascots are cartoons. I guess I don't understand why everyone doesn't realize that, especially the people who take such cartoons personally, in a completely irrational sort of way.

I guess I don't see how the UND mascot has anything to do with Sioux heritage, present or past. Like I said, a reasonable person does not think the UND Fighting Sioux mascot actually depicts a real Sioux Native American.

If the question you are posing is that UND financially benefits from a trademarked emblem or likeness, I guess you might have point. If the Sioux wanted to sue for trademark infringement, they probably could make a good argument.

[SonomaCat]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

[College Recruiter]

You might notice that Browning is a school ran by Indians, so they probably treat the Indians mascot in a way that is respected by and of the Indians, seeing as how Indians are the ones making those decisions.

You might notice a distinct difference between Browning and UND.

This is a very important distinction, by the way.

But what about the white kids and hutterite kids in the minority there...if they object to being called an "Indian". Should the school respect their wishes?

Oh god this political correct/victim stuff gets complicated!!!

Only when people are placing rhetoric above a simple approach of having respect for other people.

Or even more importantly when the voice of a few politically active folks can create tryranny over all people.....most Native Americans included.

Even most Native Americans find this argument silly! But the few whiners have got things all stirred up for everyone.

Suffice to say, the jig is up on this entire argument and the day is not far off when Indian culture, Indian pride and Indian history in America will be left to history books in dusty libraries, and will fade into anonymity in American lexicon.

[Billings_Griz]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

Fighting Sioux Falls, SD and Fighting Sioux City, IA

[SonomaCat]

BBG: Do you not find it ridiculous to use an Indian tribe's name and likeness as a unauthorized marketing brand for a sports team?

No more ridiculous than any mascot I guess. One of the problems with this whole mascot business, in terms of trying to compare apples to apples, mascots such as trees, birds and mammals don't really have an avenue to complain compared to a group of people who think that a particular mascot, which fictionally depicts a human being in one form or another, is derogatory toward that group in personal manner.

If they are "fictionally" depicting people, then why are they using their real names?

I wonder if real sharks are offended by the San Jose mascot? Sharks are necessary species in the food chain, and I wonder if they are offended by being depicted as an angry fish with long teeth, which doesn't really depict a real shark in any way.

Are you seriously comparing Native American people to sharks in terms of the level of respect we should pay them? That's kind of creepy, actually.

I wonder why the Seminole tribe seems to have a completely different opinion?

They don't ... I don't believe the Seminoles have opined on the Sioux mascot. They have, however, worked with FSU to make sure that the FSU mascot is done in a way that is respectful of their own tribe's wishes and thereby given permission to FSU to use it.

I wonder why the Sioux aren't railing against the Washington Redskins? If ever there was a derogatory depiction of a Native American, this is it.

I am quite sure that Indians of nearly every tribe, including the Sioux, have rallied against the Washington Redskins (thus far, ineffectively, because the NFL cares a lot more about money than it does this issue that doesn't impact their primary ethnic groups). This certainly doesn't preclude them from focusing on the mascot in their home state that affects them the most directly, however.

Later down in the thread, you indicate that mascots are cartoons. I guess I don't understand why everyone doesn't realize that, especially the people who take such cartoons personally, in a completely irrational sort of way.

Being a cartoon doesn't minimize the impact these images and representations have on our culture. It just means that they aren't bound by reality when making these depictions, as they are creating whatever they want to create while calling it Sioux.

I guess I don't see how the UND mascot has anything to do with Sioux heritage, present or past. Like I said, a reasonable person does not think the UND Fighting Sioux mascot actually depicts a real Sioux Native American.

If the question you are posing is that UND financially benefits from a trademarked emblem or likeness, I guess you might have point. If the Sioux wanted to sue for trademark infringement, they probably could make a good argument.

I have no idea how the trademark laws work with regards to something like a name like "Sioux" ... that's an interesting point.

[College Recruiter]

Sports Illustrated in March 2002, which found that although most Native American activists found Indian mascots and nicknames offensive, the majority of non-activist American Indians were not disturbed by them.

Tyranny of the minority!

[SonomaCat]

Sports Illustrated in March 2002, which found that although most Native American activists found Indian mascots and nicknames offensive, the majority of non-activist American Indians were not disturbed by them.

Tyranny of the minority!

I don't suppose it would help if we stuck to the facts here, would it?

The vast majority of the elected leaders of the Sioux tribes in North Dakota are the ones speaking out on this issue.

This is rule of the majority in its most simplistic and obvious form.

[ChiOCat]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

Becuase it's using a slur the Lakota's used to be called.

[SonomaCat]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

Becuase it's using a slur the Lakota's used to be called.

Ahh. Well, seeing as how the Sioux call themselves Sioux right now, it doesn't appear that anybody considers it a slur, so those town names are probably safe.

[Sportin' Life]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

Becuase it's using a slur the Lakota's used to be called.

Ahh. Well, seeing as how the Sioux call themselves Sioux right now, it doesn't appear that anybody considers it a slur, so those town names are probably safe.

Not all of them do. Most probably call themselves Lakota, Dakota, or Nakota. But they probably don't find it offensive to have Sioux City, because Sioux has been and is the English word for their tribe for some time, and will continue to be. I imagine they take no more offense to Sioux City than a Frenchman would to Frenchtown.

What they are objecting to is not any and all uses of the word 'Sioux'. They are objecting to the caricaturization of their culture.

[AlphaGriz1]

The name Sioux (pronounced Su) is an abbreviation of the French spelling of the name by which they were anciently known to their eastern Algonquian neighbours and enemies, viz. Nadouessioux, signifying "little snakes", i.e. little, or secondary enemies, as distinguished from the eastern Nadowe, or enemies, the Iroquois. This ancient name is now obsolete, having been superseded by the modern Ojibwa term Buanag, of uncertain etymology. They call themselves Dakota, Nakota, or Lakota, according to dialect, meaning "allies". From the forms Dakota, Lakota, and Sioux are derived numerous place-names within their ancient area, including those of two great states.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14017a.htm

i honestly dont know what to think about this

I wonder when Sioux Falls and Sioux(er) City will have to change their names?

I'm not following you ... why would those cities need to change their names?

Sioux Falls are you kidding me? This is degrading as hell. It could indicate that those indians are very clumsy and fall down all the time.

It may inject the possibility that the indians are so drunk they "fall'

Come on this is blatant and should be stopped at once.

Dodge Dakota? What a slap in the face!! Possibly the most *******y vehicle ever made. This is degrading.

North and South Dakota need to be wiped from the lexicon since it implies that the indians in each state may end up fighting a civil war.

Look the Sioux need to choose, they only get to use one of the folowing:
Sioux
Native American
Indian
American

They only get one, they pick and can't use each one individually for leverage and getting sympathy. Face it they are just trying to start a problem and wasting a lot of money that could be better used somewhere else. I mean they could waste it on education like the rest of the country.

[College Recruiter]

Sports Illustrated in March 2002, which found that although most Native American activists found Indian mascots and nicknames offensive, the majority of non-activist American Indians were not disturbed by them.

Tyranny of the minority!

I don't suppose it would help if we stuck to the facts here, would it?

The vast majority of the elected leaders of the Sioux tribes in North Dakota are the ones speaking out on this issue.

This is rule of the majority in its most simplistic and obvious form.

not true!.....in fact a minority of the tribal council voted against the UND mascot. Here is how the vote came down:

8 - Yes (vote to disallow the UND mascot)
1 - no
2 - no vote
6 - excused

So of 18 possible votes......8 council members voted to disallow the UND mascot. So that would be clearly a minority based on my math class at MSU...right?

The majority of all Indians in the US could care less about this issue!

I find it humorous that a full 1/3 of the Tribal Council thought so little about the subject that they did not even find it important enough to vote on "such a critical and turbulent issue" to Native Americans!!!

[Bleedinbluengold]

BBG: Do you not find it ridiculous to use an Indian tribe's name and likeness as a unauthorized marketing brand for a sports team?

No more ridiculous than any mascot I guess. One of the problems with this whole mascot business, in terms of trying to compare apples to apples, mascots such as trees, birds and mammals don't really have an avenue to complain compared to a group of people who think that a particular mascot, which fictionally depicts a human being in one form or another, is derogatory toward that group in personal manner.

If they are "fictionally" depicting people, then why are they using their real names?

I wonder if real sharks are offended by the San Jose mascot? Sharks are necessary species in the food chain, and I wonder if they are offended by being depicted as an angry fish with long teeth, which doesn't really depict a real shark in any way.

Are you seriously comparing Native American people to sharks in terms of the level of respect we should pay them? That's kind of creepy, actually.

I wonder why the Seminole tribe seems to have a completely different opinion?

They don't ... I don't believe the Seminoles have opined on the Sioux mascot. They have, however, worked with FSU to make sure that the FSU mascot is done in a way that is respectful of their own tribe's wishes and thereby given permission to FSU to use it.

I wonder why the Sioux aren't railing against the Washington Redskins? If ever there was a derogatory depiction of a Native American, this is it.

I am quite sure that Indians of nearly every tribe, including the Sioux, have rallied against the Washington Redskins (thus far, ineffectively, because the NFL cares a lot more about money than it does this issue that doesn't impact their primary ethnic groups). This certainly doesn't preclude them from focusing on the mascot in their home state that affects them the most directly, however.

Later down in the thread, you indicate that mascots are cartoons. I guess I don't understand why everyone doesn't realize that, especially the people who take such cartoons personally, in a completely irrational sort of way.

Being a cartoon doesn't minimize the impact these images and representations have on our culture. It just means that they aren't bound by reality when making these depictions, as they are creating whatever they want to create while calling it Sioux.

I guess I don't see how the UND mascot has anything to do with Sioux heritage, present or past. Like I said, a reasonable person does not think the UND Fighting Sioux mascot actually depicts a real Sioux Native American.

If the question you are posing is that UND financially benefits from a trademarked emblem or likeness, I guess you might have point. If the Sioux wanted to sue for trademark infringement, they probably could make a good argument.

I have no idea how the trademark laws work with regards to something like a name like "Sioux" ... that's an interesting point.

I thought Fighting Sioux was not the real Sioux's name? So, UND is not using "their" real name.

Shark reference: I was saying that comparing animals to humans is not comparing apples to apples...obviously I didn't make that clear enough.

The Seminoles have opined on the "issue" BAC. Just because the Seminoles have not opined on the Fighting Sioux issue does not mean that their opinion is irrelevent. It is most certainly relevent because they are Native American. Furthermore, the Seminole mascot is obviously more war-like than the Fighting Sioux mascot. Maybe it came down to money for the Seminoles, I don't know. Does FSU pay a royalty for the use of the name?

I have no idea what you are trying to say regarding your response to my cartoon comment.

So far, the only rational argument I've heard on this whole matter from you is the argument that UND is financially benefitting from the use of the name "Fighting Sioux," and that UND is not authorized to use such a name because that name, apparently, has been trademarked by the real Sioux, so to speak.

As for the argument that "Fighting Sioux" = "N" word......that is irrational thinking. I know the derogatory names that were prevalent in my days growing up, and "Fighting [insert tribal name here] was not what was said to be derogatory.

[AlphaGriz1]

Why were 6 of them excused?

If this doesn't imply a certain stereotype WHAT DOES??

[SonomaCat]

Who has argued that "Fighting Sioux" is the same as the "N" word? I certainly haven't.

As Sportin' quite simply and accurately stated, this is an issue about how the Sioux people are being caricatured by UND by way of their use of the mascot, and their displeasure with that, and not simply about the name of the mascot itself.

I guess we can work outselves into pretzels trying to justify this mascot and spin logical loop-tee-loops about other mascots, but when it boils right down to it, we have a situation where a state school is using an Indian tribe's name and likeness without permission for marketing purposes, and the Indian tribe wants them to stop.

I have a hard time thinking of a valid argument to deny the Indian tribe's request, outside of telling them that we care more about the continuity of UND's sports marketing than the people of the Sioux tribes.

I'm not sure that we should require that people trademark themselves in order for them to be treated with respect.

And since you seem to be mixing arguments a bit ... I do suspect that many Seminoles are against the use of selected Indian mascots ... the fact that they have agreed to the FSU mascot is not a blanket endorsement of all Indian mascots, obviously.