Response To Churchill Articles

Diandra Pierce

I fully agree with Churchill’s views in “Let’s Spread The ‘Fun’ Around” and “Confronting Columbus Day”. “Confronting Columbus Day” seemed more factual, which is and effective way to educate people. But most people tend to become disinterested after a few seconds. “Let’s Spread The ‘Fun’ Around” seemed more emotionally driven. I think “Let’s Spread The ‘Fun’ Around” gives a stronger message to the reader and really makes them think; or at least it made me think.

I always thought that, Washington Redskins and Cleveland Indians, the sports team names brought up in “Let’s Spread The ‘Fun’ Around” were in ways offensive and racist. I just never knew exactly what Native Americans, or Indians, felt about those names because I’m not a full-blooded Native American. When Churchill brought up other offensive names in the article such as the ‘N’ word, it did strike a chord with me, although Chruchill’s intentions were more than likely to prove a point. I believe that point was to make others feel what the Indians are feeling. No one feels what the other person is going through until they take a walk in the other person’s shoes, or until the joke is on them and at their expense.

Although I don’t agree with it, most people go by the saying, “life is funny when it’s not happening to you”. They believe that it’s alright and acceptable to laugh at people or care about certain things if they don’t pertain to you. It’s acceptable to laugh at homeless person as long as you’re not homeless or it’s okay to make fun of gays or disabled people or, in this case, another ethnic group because it isn’t yours that’s being made fun of. You shouldn’t care about what Native Americans are feeling about these mascots and team names since you’re not Native American.

Like I stated before, I don’t agree with that belief. If someone stopped and even took a look at the Cleveland Indians logo, they should begin to see Churchill’s point. At first they may say the name “Indians” isn’t offensive. The logo is supposed to be of an Indian man. His skin is overtly red, he has a feather sticking out the back of his head, and a somewhat goofy grin on his face. I  thought that the logo was offensive and disrespectful nor was it funny. It’s also inaccurate. Native Americans do not have red skin or should be referred to as “Redskins” for that matter. Their skin ranges from beige to brown. Some may have a mahogany skin. But mahogany and red are two completely different colors. Mahogany is a redish-brown color and is not the same as red. For example, Sherman Alexie, a Spokane Indian and the author of the novel, Reservation Blues, does not have red skin. He has lighter toned skin and he’s Native American.

Basically, a name like “Redskins” or a logo like the one for the Cleveland Indians are pretty ignorant in my opinion. There isn’t one set prototype or picture that can be used to define a group of people. All people are different, including Native Americans. Some have mahogany skin and others may have beige or lighter skin. If more people should read “Let’s Spread The Fun Around”, there would be less racism and discrimination against Native Americans and even discrimination against other groups of people. Those people will stop and think about what they are doing and possibly help their cause. Those names and logos might even be changed.

This is the image of the Cleveland Indians logo that was discussed in “Let’s Spread the Fun Around”.