The madness started a tad earlier than March this year for the University of Illinois. In fact, it started on Feb. 21 when the school's mascot, Chief Illiniwek, was retired to comply with NCAA guidelines. The whole saga is sad evidence of how entrenched the grievance lobby has become in our schools and in our culture.
The University of Illinois has been getting a lot of flak for discontinuing the mascot, but the real culprit here is the NCAA. It was the NCAA, after all, that decided in 2005 to punish schools with "hostile and abusive American Indian nicknames." Chief Illiniwek, who has been a part of the university since 1926, was deemed offensive. So was the school's logo, which featured a Native American with a traditional headdress. If the University of Illinois refused to comply, the NCAA said it would be banned from any postseason tournaments or events - essentially a death sentence for the athletics program.
The university saw the chief as a way to honor the confederation of Native American tribes that are the state's namesake. And for a long time, the Native Americans appreciated the gesture. A student who dressed as Chief Illiniwek in 1930 traveled to South Dakota to receive authentic garb from the Oglala Sioux. In 1967 and 1982, Sioux representatives came to campus to help decorate the outfit before basketball games.
But in our modern, enlightened era, the chief seemed to be a relic of an insensitive past, at least to the NCAA. A 2002 Sports Illustrated poll, however, revealed that 81 percent of Native Americans said that sports teams should not stop using Indian nicknames.
Interestingly, Native Americans were more supportive of such symbols than college students.
A survey of University of Illinois students revealed that 69 percent were in favor of maintaining the chief.
Even the Office of Civil Rights in President Bill Clinton's Education Department rejected the claim that the Chief and the name Fighting Illini created a "hostile environment" on campus.
Despite all of this, the Chief had to go. So too may the University of South Carolina's Gamecocks, a nickname being protested by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals for supposedly encouraging cockfighting.
The University of Massachusetts was wise to deal with its team name issues back in 1972, changing it from the "Redmen" to the "Minutemen." Portraying Native Americans with tomahawks is apparently offensive, but colonials with long rifles is fine. At least until the anti-gun lobby gets involved.
The point here isn't whether a school's symbol is offensive or not. No doubt, some Native Americans are truly offended by Chief Illiniwek, although polls reveal that most don't mind the mascot. But there's no doubt that some Irish are offended by being caricatured as a leprechaun by Notre Dame, although obviously most could care less.
As the columnist George F. Will has asked, why should anyone's disapproval of a nickname doom it? "When, in the multiplication of entitlements, did we produce an entitlement for everyone to go through life without being annoyed by anything, even a team's nickname?" he wonders.
Bearing this in mind, future schools considering mascots should take a page from the University of California, Santa-Cruz.
So far, the Banana Slugs haven't aroused much controversy. Then again, there's still time.
Andrew Buttaro is a Heights staff columnist. He welcomes comments at buttaroa@bc.heights.com.
Be the first to comment on this article!