Return to CreateDebate.comskarie • Join this debate community

Skarie ACE Debate


Debate Info

74
93
Proposition Opposition
Debate Score:167
Arguments:51
Total Votes:263
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Proposition (17)
 
 Opposition (30)

Debate Creator

askarie(40) pic



Spring 2015 (White) - Ban Controversial Mascots

Proposition

Side Score: 74
VS.

Opposition

Side Score: 93
4 points

According to the Huffington Post, California, the state with the largest Native American population in the U.S. is trying to make the nickname “redskin” banned from use in schools. Therefore, the Native Americans do not like the nickname "Redskin".

Side: Proposition
20evandeneng(11) Disputed
0 points

Just because it has a large population of Native Americans doesn't mean that all of the tribes or ANY of the tribes are against Redskins. This is merely a inference.

Side: Opposition
4 points

On Wiki I look up the means for some of the team names. Some of them might these words and I thought these we were disrespectful and made them look dangerous. “Mean, violent, and aggressive."

Side: Proposition
20epogreba(3) Disputed
1 point

You used Wikipedia. Not the most credible source. Anyone could've written that. Chances are that it was someone who didn't like controversial mascots. Also we want are mascots to seem scary. We aren't called the Wisconsin Butterflies for a reason.

Side: Opposition
3 points

USA today says, "There have been many big universities that have changed their name such as Stanford changing their name from “Indians” to “Cardinal” in the year 1972 and St. John’s changed their nickname from “Redmen” to “Red Storm” in 1994 which is the same year Marquette changed their mascot from “Warriors” to “Golden Eagles.”

Marquette university has changed its name from the Warriors to the Golden Eagles in 1994. The Marquette university president stated,”We live in a different era than when the Warriors nickname was selected in 1954.”

Side: Proposition
3 points

I think that they should ban controversial mascots because According to www.infoplease.com they said that Native Americans are only 2% of the population and then they cannot speak up to the nation and tell them that they want it to stop.

Side: Proposition
20lendries Disputed
1 point

2% of the U.S population is about 3.2 million people. And just one person can make a huge impact so 3.2 could make a huge difference and would not have trouble stating their opinion especially when the topic is about them.

Side: Opposition
20evandeneng(11) Disputed
1 point

Just because Native Americans make up a small percentage in our nations population doesn't mean we give them no respect. There have been many colleges such as Dartmouth College who changed its unofficial Indian mascot in the 70's. I found this information using this article http://jayrosenstein.com/pages/honormascots.html.

Side: Opposition
20evandeneng(11) Disputed
1 point

I don't agree with this claim. Just because many universities have changed their names doesn't mean that everyone is against it. In the article Honor or insult? Florida State University kept its Seminoles nickname after receiving support from Seminole tribes.They also have a Seminole chief (Osceola) as their mascot that they kept.

Side: Opposition
3 points

I believe that you should ban controversial mascots because there has been problems in pro sports about mascots. There has been an argument for a while about changing the NFL team name, the Redskin. According to to Wikipedia, Redskin is a slang term for Native Americans defined in dictionaries as offensive and or insulting.

Side: Proposition
3 points

Also, according to Wikipedia, many people in Chicago and around the us want the Chicago Blackhawks names changes too. A Blackhawk is like a “fierce warrior.” I also thought fierce warrior makes the native Americans look very violent.

Side: Proposition
20evandeneng(11) Disputed
0 points

I think that Wikipedia is not the best source for information. Other than that though there will always people against Indian mascots ALWAYS! Another example is the Washington Redskins are always going to have haters and there is no stopping that. The real thing that we should be worried about is if it affecting those ethnic groups. I don't see any information or facts that say they were against it in this scenario.

Side: Opposition
20mbartol(1) Clarified
3 points

I believe that you should ban controversial mascots because there has been problems in pro sports about mascots. There has been an argument for a while about changing the NFL team name, the Redskin. According to to Wikipedia, "Redskin is a slang term for Native Americans defined in dictionaries as offensive and or insulting."

Side: Proposition
3 points

I think that controversial mascots should be ban because it is hurtful for those of that race. The name Redskin is as bad as some other choice words for other races because of the meaning, but other people will not give up the name because of tradition but the name also refers to the Indian history people sold their scalps and hence the offense for it. Some to act on it so,”In March, several lawmakers introduced a bill in Congress that would amend the Trademark Act of 1946 to ban the term “redskin” in a mark because it is disparaging of native people. Among the sponsors of the bill is civil rights activist Rep. John Lewis, D-Georgia,” Says the article, Native American mascots: Pride or prejudice? Written by Moni Basu. It is bad enough that they had to take it to court and there was enough people offended that it was taken to court.

Side: Proposition
3 points

I think controversial mascots should be banned because more states are starting to do it. "Wisconsin is the first state to pass a law like this. They started by banning certain logos and nicknames." States the article "Mind Your Own Mascot."

Side: Proposition
20mschupp(9) Clarified
3 points

I think controversial mascots should be banned because more states are starting to do it. "Wisconsin is the first state to pass a law like this. They started by banning certain logos and nicknames." States the article "Mind Your Own Mascot." Also "Over 2000 high schools and colleges have stopped using Native American mascots and symbols because they feel they are racist.” Says "Mind Your Own Mascot." This is a good start to getting rid of controversial mascots.

Side: Proposition
20evandeneng(11) Disputed
2 points

I also disagree with this because just because one state has gone through with a ban doesn't mean that it is the right thing to do. Many colleges and schools have kept their mascots because of support form their fans and Indian tribes.

Side: Opposition
20lotis(5) Disputed
1 point

I disagree with max because he's proposing that we ban controversial mascots just because other states are starting to do it. He provides no evidence showing that they are bad.

Side: Opposition
20lendries Disputed
1 point

I also disagree with Max because there is an old saying that "If your friend jumped off a bridge would you jump to" and the answer is usually no. This is like your example because you provide no evidence but you just say other states are doing it so let's copy them, with no real evidence to do so.

Side: Opposition
3 points

Another reason is that they are racist and people will protest over them. If they end up banning the mascot, some people will protest. If they don't, other people will protest. People protest either way. My thinking is we try making this a law slowly and progress. Like in one of my other posts it stated that Wisconsin made a rule like this and over 2000 high schools and colleges.

Side: Proposition
3 points

On debate.org this girl said when she went to an away game this one person from her high school made fun of the team's mascot by dressing up as a native American and bring a bow and jumping up and down and making their calls. She said that the guy was being very racist.

Side: Proposition
2 points

According to Washington Times, there have been riots against Native American mascots and in particular the “chief wahoo” which is the Cleveland Indians mascot. Protesters, mainly Native Americans were chanting,"We are people, not your mascots." Philip Yenyo, executive director of the American Indian Movement of Ohio, said that “When you start to explain to people how it affects us as a people and it puts us in a category with animals, they begin to see our side. “This imagery, most sports teams are named after animals and they put us in that same category. We’re human beings. We’re still a living culture and we still exist.” Therefore, Native Americans do not like themselves being referred to as mascots.

Side: Proposition
4 points

Some more evidence to support that many think of it as a sign of respect include this. In Florida State University in the article, Honor Or Insult, they were going to get rid of their nickname Seminoles. Whilst trying to do this they got massive support from the Seminole tribes to keep the mascot and nickname. There are many ways to come back the negative image other than getting rid of the mascot and nickname all together. A article http://glhsreflection.org/2014/03/28/native-american-mascots-are-a-form-of-respect says that, “The only thing that should be banned when it comes to this topic is the negative stereotypes that come along with the individual mascots.”

Side: Opposition
3 points

It is also a tradition to have these mascots, The Cleveland Indians who recently had to change their logo have had that mascot since 1904, and the Washington Redskins have had that mascot since 1932. These are all reasons that teams should not change their mascots.

Side: Opposition
20amartzahl(4) Disputed
6 points

According to a Native American named John Two-Hawks who is talking about a mascot being a tradition to a school or team,”Your 'tradition'?? Really? 80 years? We have tradition that is countless tens of thousands of years old. And none of those traditions bear any resemblance to the stereotyped, caricatured images and

antics associated with so-called "Indian" mascots and team names.”

Side: Proposition
3 points

I think University's don't need to change their mascots don't need to change their mascots because the tribes that are used to represent the mascot are honored to be apart of that. At Marquette University’s Native American community, stated that “They've always seen the Chief as a positive symbol”

Side: Opposition
3 points

I believe that controversial mascots should stay because they were chosen because of their bravery, and courage. Take the Indian Squanto. According to Heritage history books, he helped the Pilgrims stay alive through harsh winters. Black Hawk went to a war he started, and won. This is why they chose these people as mascots.

Side: Opposition
3 points

I agree because all of these people helped and we honor them. If a school was to choose a mascot like the "Nazis" for example, then there would be a huge problem because the Nazis were terrible people, but we are not talking about Nazis here we are talking about people who did great things and who we look up to.

Side: Opposition
3 points

They say it’s racist, but I agree with Jim Smith "It's a chance for us to talk about family and tradition and loyalty," said Jim Smith, principal of Banks High School — home of the Braves — who grew up on the Fort Peck Reservation in Montana. According to www.cbsnews.com

Side: Opposition
3 points

They say the redskins mascot is racist but on www.cnn.com the team owners strongly dispute any racism behind the mascot and won't change it, saying the Redskins name honors "where we came from, who we are." Found on www.cnn.com

Side: Opposition
3 points

Many decide to keep their mascots, nicknames, or logos is because it has been in the school, or sports team for a long time. A good example of this that I found in the article Honor Or Insult is about the Mukwonago School District. Their nickname was the the Indians and it was going to be voted to get rid of or just keep it. Because it had been in place for 86 years and has deep meaning in the community they keep the nickname and are still called the Indians.

Side: Opposition
3 points

They say it's racist but this is what I found on the Washington post Large groups of Native Americans say the images are often crudely drawn stereotypes created by white people who have not taken the time to learn about Indian cultures ravaged in the 19th century by U.S. military forces. But Even polls disagree. A survey conducted in 2002 by Sports Illustrated found that 81 percent of Native Americans who live outside traditional Indian reservations and 53 percent of Indians on reservations did not find the images discriminatory. Is what www.washingtonpost.com said.

Side: Opposition
3 points

MY CLAIM: Mascots shouldn't be banned because they show honor & tradition

REASON # 1 Tribes who represent mascots are honored to be.

EVIDENCE Marquette University’s Native American community, stated that “They've always seen the Chief as a positive symbol”

EVIDENCE David Hinkle, graduated from Coachella Valley High School, He said that “I don’t think it can be viewed as offensive,” He also added “He is proud to be one of the Arabs” (His schools Mascot)

REASON # 2 Mascots can promote historical background

EVIDENCE When people see the logo or mascot it can show them how certain cultures dressed or still do, leading people to respect that type of culture even more.

EVIDENCE With a certain mascot that has a historical background behind it, people are almost forced or want to learn why that mascot is historical, giving good background knowledge of that culture to people.

EVIDENCE They provide historical background when schools sometimes reenact why their mascot is their mascot, showing why their mascot is so honorable.

Side: Opposition
2 points

I think that they should NOT ban controversial mascots. It says this line in the article Honor Or Insult, “Many people believe that the mascots are actually honoring Native American culture.” The way I think about it is if it is your ethnicity group and you find it offensive, ban it. But if it isn't your ethnicity group then it isn’t your call.

Side: Opposition
20mbartol(1) Disputed
1 point

20evandeneng stated that many people believe that mascots are honoring Native Americans, but I disagree because according to the article Honor or Insult? "More than 2,000 high schools and colleges have stopped using Native American mascots and symbols." This shows that schools believe it's disrespectful, so they stopped using Native American mascots and symbols.

Side: Proposition
20epogreba(3) Disputed
3 points

According to mbartol, he says the schools believe that it is disrespectful. I disagree saying that, they changed their mascots because they don't want to deal with lawsuits, and all the junk that goes with it. They'd rather have their dignity than a mascot.

Side: Opposition
2 points

I believe that offensive mascots should not be banned. While some would say the mascots are offensive and use the story in time magazine of a girl that went to a football game and when she saw the opponent's mascot that was a warrior she cried and left the game, I think that was over reacting. A school chooses a mascot because it represents the towns history or it represents something like courage. A team would not pick a mascot they would not be proud of.

Side: Opposition
20sloebbaka Disputed
3 points

I think that is not true because we wouldn’t like it if a native American or other racing were pretending to acting like us and bring weapons and acting crazy and making fun of us.

Side: Proposition
2 points

I do agree that the story in Time Magazine was an over exaggeration. I mean, it did sound like it the girl was little and doesn't understand controversial mascots. Personally, I feel that the story was based off of a little kid crying. I also agree that it shows the towns history and some people are very attached to these mascots.

Side: Opposition
2 points

I think that mascots should stay because they show honor to the tribes/ethnicities that the mascots represent, therefore mascots aren't here to to "insult" races, they are here to show that, the mascot is respected and honored otherwise, it wouldn't be a mascot.

Side: Opposition
20mschupp(9) Disputed
7 points

I disagree with this statement because if kids think macots are honorable they will cheer for them. If they do that, they will be racist without even knowing. Really it's not honor it's just being racist.

Side: Proposition
20lendries Disputed
2 points

The mascots are not racist because if a school was picking a mascot they would not pick a mascot they would get picked on for they will pick a mascot that people will look up to and like.

Side: Opposition
20mschupp(9) Clarified
2 points

I disagree with this statement because if kids think mascots are honorable they will cheer for them. If they do that, they will be racist without even knowing. Really it's not honor it's just being racist. Also we don't want people or children to feel bad about themselves if they are accidentally racist.

Side: Proposition
20plevinson(2) Disputed
3 points

You may say that but according to John Two-Hawks - Oglala Lakota Activist, speaker and musician it is not an honor, “There are so many things I can tell you about the sports team names, mascots and imagery that are anything but an 'honor' that it would take up more time than you have to read. So let's just hit the basics - the 'R' word is racist, not an honor. The word 'Braves' is a racial slur, not an honor. Mascots and fans dressing up like 'Indians' is insulting and highly offensive, not an honor. Fans performing 'tomahawk chops' at games are insulting and highly offensive, not an honor. Are we seeing a pattern here?” Also the mascots schools usually have are some sort of a cartoon and it's showing their culture in a cartoon like way which is offensive to many to see their culture imitated in such a why. That's why I believe that it is against them and their culture and it is not an honor.

Side: Proposition
20plevinson(2) Clarified
4 points
Side: Proposition
2 points

Others say were mocking them, and making fun of them, but I think we should not change the controversial mascots. because a lot of native Americans actually like the mascots. Here is some evidence from The Washington post. "We feel like it gives the type of recognition that allows people to identify with the name 'Seminoles,' " Ken Chambers, the outgoing chief of the Great Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma, told the Palm Beach Post.

Side: Opposition
2 points

According to Mind Your Own Mascot two people were vandalized for thinking it was okay for them to have mascots. Vandalism is an act against the law and should not be tolerated. That is not okay. You can have your own opinion about what mascot you want. But vandalizing something of someone’s else should not be tolerated for due punishment. In doing so we should let them have their mascots due in their sentence

Side: Opposition
1 point

While some mascots do change it comes at a big price, according to marketplace.org it costs about 15 million dollars to change the average mascot.

Side: Opposition
2 points

I agree they would have to change everything not just their costume but if they had their mascot painted on their field the team would have to repaint what the mascot is and that would cost more money than just keeping it the same

Side: Opposition
0 points

Some Indians like the Sioux tribe of North Dakota think that it is honoring them and that is why when North Dakota University was going to change their mascot from the fight Sioux that the tribe sued the university. In an article by the Washington post a girl said that “in college we had the mascot of the Indians and we were honored to have that as our mascot.”

Side: Opposition