Chicago Blackhawks logo

Last week, Damian Cox published an article in the Toronto Star discussing the Chicago Blackhawks’ logo suggesting it was perhaps time to abandon the stereotypical image.  Since I am of Native heritage, Goddess Kaat suggested that perhaps I weigh in on the topic.  We have had numerous conversations about sports teams and the use of Native names and mascots and she thought it was finally time for the Goddesses to address it.

Initially, I was hesitant.  After all, we have much larger issues that are pressing to First Nations peoples, but upon further investigation I was shocked to find that Cox’s article had spawned a racist backlash on numerous message boards.  This is not uncommon when people feel their sports team’s history is being threatened.  Nothing gets people as riled up as their home sports team and its traditions.  Yet the misinformation and racism that was being thrown out on various forums was too disturbing to ignore.

Let’s briefly address the issue that has caused the big uproar.  Cox claims that the Indian head logo is much like the cigar store Indian and that the time has come to stop using ethnic groups as mascots.  He erred on the side of caution – by proposing the removal of the Indian head on the Blackhawks’ jersey.

This is a legitimate debate.  Indians have had their names and likeness appropriated by the dominant culture for years.  Yet whereas some issues seem pretty cut and dry (the nickname “Redskins” or the caricature Cleveland Indian,) the Indian head logo is not.  Some Native tribes actually use this same logo for their own sports teams.  When asked about the logo, Blair Atcheynum, a Native and former member of the Chicago Blackhawks, said it didn’t bother him.  But to other Natives it is still a symbol of the European conquest and hegemony.

To me, the real issue seems to be the fallacies in arguing for keeping the logo and the racism that has reared its ugly head in response to such an article. Such as:

-       “It’s the third most popular jersey in the league!  Thousands of people spend their money on team apparel because they like it.  It’s stupid to get rid of it.”

This is the ever popular “bandwagon fallacy.”  Think 5 billion Chinese people can’t be wrong?  Why not?  Guess what folks, they can.  The thousands of Nazis all thought they were right too.

-       “I don’t see it as insulting. I see it as honoring Native Americans.”

Great.  But this isn’t about you.  It’s about the group that is being represented.  They should be the ones determining what is honoring and what is insulting.

-       “Other teams are named after ethic groups.  What about the fighting Irish?”

Ever hear the term “two wrongs don’t make a right?”

-       “People are too PC anymore.  Indians need to get thicker skins if they’re offended.”

Well, we have pretty thick skins as it is.  We wouldn’t have been able to survive 500 years of conquest if we didn’t.  It’s not being PC. It’s common sense.  I think we can all agree that if a team logo was an Arab man with stereotypical Arab features wearing a Muslim headdress there’d be trouble.

-       “I’m from (such and such) tribe and don’t find it offensive.”

We’re getting closer.  If the people that are being represented are not offended, then perhaps it’s not an issue.  But if some are, then clearly it is.

-       “That’s not offensive.  Offensive would be a dirty Indian huffing glue … even though it would actually be more correct.”

Wow.  Really?  And this was one of the tamer of the racist posts I saw.

Unfortunately, what this post really brought to light was that Native Americans are the one ethnicity that are still allowed to be represented without their consent.  It also revealed that such ugly racism is accepted when it comes to certain ethnic groups.  And while I was initially on the fence about this particular team identity, I am beginning to think that the casual acceptance of such logos only tells people that it’s ok to be not only culturally insensitive but outright racist about that particular group.

Don’t get me wrong.  I am a sports fanatic and can appreciate the tradition behind many teams.  I understand that many people’s identities are largely based on their sports teams.  I’m more than willing to engage in an intelligent conversation about the topic at hand.  I simply think that in today’s society it’s become an all about “me” scenario and what might be disappointing to an individual fan of a sports team, rather than the good of an entire group of people.

Seems a bit petty when put that way, doesn’t it?

Image: Chicago Blackhawks logo from NHL.com.

I got the most recent edition of The Hockey News today and lately I’ve been so pissed off at that publication. The glee that many of their writers (and readers) seem to take at the prospect of plucking the Thrashers out of Atlanta just gets to me. People who have never even been south of, say, Washington, D.C. commenting on what Southern people will or won’t do. Or what Southern people are like.

I know Atlanta and I know that the people of that town — and most towns (duh!) — love to watch good teams. But more than that, people in Atlanta love a good time. When the Thrashers were competitive — the year they just missed the playoffs and then the year they did get in — there were really good crowds and lots of local celebrities at games. People in the ATL love a good show and will turn out for whatever happens to be going on that is good. If the stupid Thrashers owners would solve their stupid dispute and concentrate on putting a good team on the ice, attendance would not be an issue. I know many people in Canada like to think that all of the people in “the South” are dumb hicks that don’t know about hockey. Not true. Or that all we care about is NASCAR. That’s crap.

Funny that the Penguins struggled in the attendance department when their team stunk. The Chicago Blackhawks couldn’t fill their building. Why would you expect hockey fans in Atlanta to be any different than the people in those cities? The Colorado Avalanche have been losing and guess what? Attendance has fallen off — as Goddess Sasha, a season ticket holder, can attest. Why are Southern hockey fans always raked over the coals and derided when they don’t go watch a crappy team play? Yet people in Chicago didn’t go for years and nobody was saying: “hey let’s move the team.” Why is that? Oh yes, it is because in the South it doesn’t snow and, therefore, people didn’t grow up playing the game and THEREFORE, shouldn’t be allowed to learn the game now or have a pro hockey team there.

The solution to the issues in Atlanta is simple: Ice a good team. (And maybe fire Don Waddell — there is a large group of former season ticket holders who would be season ticket holders again if he were gone.)

All that being said, I was delighted with The Hockey News today. I was half-heartedly flipping through it when I stumbled on their picks or suggestions for the 2010 Olympic teams. For the Russian team, THN writers suggested Slava Kozlov would be a wonderful addition. I was so amazed that somebody finally recognized the oft-forgotten Kozlov that I squealed with glee and demanded my husband come look at the article and the accompanying list of suggested players.

I seriously doubt Kozlov will be selected. He seems to be either out of favor with Russian hockey higher-ups or rejects their offers or is passed over in favor of bigger, flashier players (Fedorov anyone?). I don’t know. But I appreciated THN appreciating Mr. Kozlov.

I know it’s wrong.

I know I shouldn’t.

I know it’s shameful.

But I have almost gotten to the point where I want the Thrashers to lose to get that No. 1 draft pick. It’s a horrible thing isn’t it? But there you have it. No, I’m not saying that I am actively cheering for them to lose because, in the moment, I just can’t do that. But after the inevitable loss, I console myself by thinking: We’re one step closer.

In other news, there was an intriguing article in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Well, more like a blurb. Here’s what it said:

Captain Ilya Kovalchuk sounded Sunday afternoon like a guy who expects to be with the Thrashers for the 2009-10 season. He was answering a question on what it’s like to play alongside Slava Kozlov, who skated at right wing across from Kovalchuk for a short time on the power play on Sunday and for a little bit of time Friday, too. “Hopefully, Kozzy is going to play on the right side, because I think if we play together, we’ve got a good chemistry,” Kovalchuk said. “Maybe next year, he’ll go on the right side, and we’ll play together all year long.” Next season is the final one on Kovalchuk’s contract, and unless the team can sign him to an extension it’s unlikely he would be playing “all year long” with any of his current teammates.

I like the sound of this. I love the idea of Kozzy and Kovy playing together. I’d love to see more of it.