Is It Offensive for Sports Teams and Their Fans to Use Native American Names, Imagery and Gestures?

The Kansas City Chiefs will face the San Francisco 49ers for Super Bowl LIV. Chiefs fans regularly use a “tomahawk chop” to urge on their beloved team: Is it offensive?

Comments: 161

  1. If the group being affected is being disrespected, then I think that that the chant should be altered. If the fanbase is truly connected with the team and community, changing the chant will only benefit those around us. When it comes to names and mascots, Native Americans shouldn't be advertised as something they're not. For FSU, if the tribe doesn't see a problem and gave them permission, then why not?

  2. If the fans of certain sports team are blatantly disrespecting the opposing team maybe a change in chant would be better. But as for the Chiefs tomahawk chant that should be tolerated it is a tradition by fans that has been carried on for the NFL’s 100 years. This chant is a trademark for The Kansas City Chiefs it would be a disappointment to see it go.

  3. The Kansas City Chiefs will play in the Super Bowl this Sunday. The chiefs have been around for decades doing the same chants and cheers they do now, so why are people pressuring them to change it now. I think that these fans should be able to continue saying the same chants that they do now. Many fans have been watching the Chiefs for a long time, and many of them watched them with their parents growing up. As kids they would say the same chants and have a passion for their team. I think that these chants bring people together, as everyone chants the same words in unison, it creates a great atmosphere for the teams playing. The chants are as much apart of the game and tradition as anything else and should be kept.

  4. In the article is it offensive for sports teams to use native Americans names ,cheers, or imagery it talks about how the Kansas City Chiefs use the tomahawk chop as a cheer. In my opinion I don't think it is offensive to use native Americans cheer or names in any sporting event. I think this because Native Americans Were one of the first ones to the USA and we should let that be known. So we use their names and cheers to remember them and what they did. In a way I can see how it can be offensive to them by using their names and symbols in a bad way. But overall I think using their names and cheers in sports are not offensive if we use them correctly and in a good way.

  5. @Josah I agree with everything you said. I don't believe it is offensive because Native Americans were a part of American history. I like how you stated people should use them in the right way, because it could be offensive but its only if you make it offensive. People should be able to cheer for there team as long as they keep anything negative of Natives out of the picture.

  6. @Josah In my option I totally agree with our statement. It is not offensive for sports teams and there fans to use Native American names, imagery and gestures. A lot of sports teams in cites choose there names base on the history of their city as of pride. EX: Pittsburgh Steelers, New England Patriots, Florida State Seminoles, and Green Bay Packers. A lot of sports teams that use Native American related stuff are on the ground of which the once were. Native Americans were one of the first people on America and I feel like they show be allowed to be honored in an American sports. I agree I see nothing wrong with teams and fans using Native American related stuff because I see it as pride. As long as they know the history as of why there doing it and not doing it in an offensive way.

  7. Teams like the Chiefs have used their logos and chants for decades, but now it is becoming a bigger and bigger issue. I see no problem with them using the images and chants as they are not doing it to intentionally disrespect the Native American population. I think it’s a part of the fan culture and identity, something that’s necessary to create a wining atmosphere in sports. I wholeheartedly agree with the Chiefs involvement of Native Americans in their team and game day experience, however, I believe it’d be a shame for them to get rid of/change their chants and logo all together. I look forward to watching them take on the 49ers in the Super Bowl and while learning more about the origins and relations with Native Americans would be beneficial, I hope debates like this don’t overshadow one of the greatest sporting events of the year.

  8. @Will Humble I agree with You. The gestures and chants that are used are not meant to offend anyone and are all in good fun. I would understand people being offended if the gestures and chants disrespected them but I don't think that they do.

  9. I do not think that it is offensive to use native american names and gestures. There is a way that using them may be offensive to people if it is disrespectful or it gives them a bad name. I would be honored if there was a football team with my name. If they are all like bad people and do terrible things than I would hate it. The people who are getting offended are probably uneducated on the situation and why would they want to put the players out of jobs. I belive that this article is about people being offended over small things. They care about people using their name only they dont see how it brings people together because they like the samae team only thier own self image.

  10. @Ethan Considering that Native Americans once faced extreme oppression and discrimination by colonists for who they are just to have their traditions, imagery, clothing, names, etc. used inappropriately and without permission to promote sports and entertainment by the very people who discriminated against them is ironic. This is a matter of cultural appropriation, where a cultural minority’s traditions are being used without understanding or respecting the original culture and context, not “uneducated people” who get “offended over small things.” If this team were to change their name and use their own, unique one, they would probably get more attention and respect and the players would most likely not lose their jobs. Minority groups want representation and acknowledgment, not to have parts of their identity (culture) used and abused.

  11. @Ethan Considering that Native Americans once faced extreme oppression and discrimination, by colonists, for who they are just to have their traditions, imagery, clothing, names, etc. used inappropriately and without permission to promote sports and entertainment, by the very people who discriminated against them, is ironic. This is a matter of cultural appropriation, where a cultural minority’s traditions are being used without understanding or respecting the original culture and context, not “uneducated people” who get “offended over small things.” If this team were to change their name and use their own, unique one, they would probably get more attention and respect and the players would most likely not lose their jobs. Minority groups want representation and acknowledgment, not to have parts of their identity (culture) used and abused.

  12. I plan on watching the Super Bowl this year at first didn’t give too much regard to who won. Now after reading the article, the Kansas City Chiefs have an offensive name and when I see a tomahawk chop I will immediately think about the offense that is gives, and start rooting for the 49ers.

  13. I think it is offensive to use native American imagery and gestures but names are okay. Of course only if you get permission from those specific tribes. General names like Chiefs and Braves are okay use though. The Chiefs fans say they aren’t trying to demean Indian culture. Well, guess what, ultimately it isn’t up to them or me to decide what’s offensive and what’s not it’s up to that group of people so if the actual member of the Standing Rock Sioux says it’s offensive you should listen. As for getting permission for a logo or team, I think that is perfectly okay. I have witnessed to “chop” before at an Atlanta baseball game. I’m a Phillies fan so I obviously didn’t participate in it but I did think about how clearly racist it was and that people either just don’t think about it like I do or are racist and don’t care. I will watch the super bowl ( Kansas City is gonna win) and the “tomahawk chop” won’t take away from my enjoyment but I will be thinking about it.

  14. I do not think that it is offensive to use native american names and gestures. There is a way that using them may be offensive to people if it is disrespectful or it gives them a bad name. I would be honored if there was a football team with my name. If they are all like bad people and do terrible things than I would hate it. The people who are getting offended are probably uneducated on the situation and why would they want to put the players out of jobs.

  15. @Ethan. I agree with you on the fact that some people are making this situation worse than it is. It is important to realize that people don't do this to be offensive but its a fun tradition that people started and it just continued. I do disagree with the fact that people are trying to take athletes out of a job but they are just under educated.

  16. @Ethan I believe that its not offensive to use native american names and gestures, but I do believe taking a knee during recognition for our soldiers that put their life on the line for our country is extremely disrespectful. But i believe some people who get offended might be uneducated on this topic.

  17. As someone who is not of Native American descent, it would be obvious to assume that I think the use of Native American names is not offensive. The origin of the Chief’s brand name came from a fan contest when the team was being announced. The name “Chiefs” was the most popular choice that viewers wanted the franchise to be named. This name also came from the Mayor of Kansas city at the time, H. Roe Bartle, AKA “The Chief”. He got this nickname from forming a Native American honor society within the Boy Scouts of America. The name was chosen as a result of helping the Native American community; not mocking it. Also, There are multiple sports franchises named after people of Irish descent, such as the Fighting Irish and the Boston Celtics. As a person of Irish descent myself; I can confidently say that I am not offended by the use of those names, but more joyous as a result of the representation of my ancestors within American sports franchises. At the end of the day, I fear that some people are just in search of something to play victim to. And when in need of some exposure, calling something “offensive” goes a long way and gets a lot of public attention. I think that is why people are playing the “offended” card; to get publicity.

  18. I don't think that the chiefs are being offensive with their tomahawk chop so I don't think they should stop. However, I do feel like there are some sports teams that are being offensive and they are much worse than the chiefs’ simple pregame routine. I think that the name Washington redskins is much worse because it is a slur for Indians and they have been called the redskins since 1933 and they are still called that to this day. Also, the Cleveland Indians use an image of a red-faced Indian which in my opinion is worse than doing a tomahawk chop. With that being said I completely understand why Indians take offense to it and I think that if it really bothers them they should be able to get it changed

  19. Personally, I am not bothered by the use of Native American names, imagery, and gestures as long as they are not demeaning. However, since I am not Native American, I feel like I don’t really know what crosses the line when it comes to those things. But because local and national Indian groups are offended by the tomahawk chop, the Chiefs should end it. Ultimately, the opinion of the groups that are at risk of being offended should carry the most weight. I remember the first time I heard the chant, I thought everyone around me was going crazy. I didn’t realize that it was mixed with Native American symbols, but I did find it off-putting. This article made me realize the magnitude sports symbols have on the groups they’re being used from. The only teams that should change their names are the ones who hurt the culture of the minority group or “evoke a racial slur,” such as the Washington Redskins. When involving Native American culture in a sport, teams should work with Indians to make sure the product being put out isn’t offensive, but respectful.

  20. I think that it is offensive to do things such as the Tomahawk chop, considering the fact that a lot of the players on the team are Native American. The chiefs did not make the name of the team or the mascot a Native American and I think the crowd is being offensive to the team by doing this chant. In my opinion, it is even worse when Washington Redskins fans paint their faces red. Although their name is the Redskins, it is rude to dress up as a Native American when members of the team are Native American. In my opinion, dressing up as Native Americans and chanting the Tomohawk chop during their games could be rude and offensive to the team.

  21. I guess that the names and pictures of some sports teams, such as the Washington Redskins, can be offensive to some people. I understand what people are saying about the names and logos being offensive, and I do agree that the names or images should be changed. However, for things like the tomahawk chop, I think that something like that doesn’t have to be changed. Like the Chiefs fans said, the tomahawk chop is not intended to demean Indians, it is just a chant to support their team. So I guess I am in the middle about this problem. My opinion is if the Native Americans really think that all of the things like the tomahawk chop are really offensive, then I guess the teams should change it, but I think that some of the Chiefs fans would not agree to change their chant and it would just be too much effort to change the chant. I am not sure how offensive these things are to Native Americans, but I think everything but the Redskins’ name and logo are fine. Yes, I am going to watch Super Bowl LIV, and I am going to watch it on TV. Personally, the chant is not going to affect me at all. I am not sure if they would even show the fans chanting, but if they do, it won’t really change the experience of watching the game or make me not enjoy the game because of it. I think that this just isn't that important to me, because it really doesn't affect me that much. It could be offensive to Native Americans, but something like the tomahawk chop doesn't change the game for me.

  22. I feel like some names and imagery shouldn’t be used unless you get permission from the Natives. Names such as the Redskins are what I feel like are racist. The tomahawk chop isn’t is as bad as I thought because I know that there are other stiff like painting your face red. That, right there, is what I feel is racist. When they are doing the tomahawk chop, they are rooting for their team and in a way, representing the Natives. Sure, it might be mostly wrong, but, at least the Natives get represented. Sometimes we tend to forget that the Natives have been living in America for a long time and here we are, trying to erase something that made us remind of them. It could go two ways: one being racist, and two, they are trying to represent them. I mean, it’s a professional football team that has the name. I feel like the Washington Redkins should especially change their name since the term “redskin” was a racial slur used for the Natives. I feel like as long as the name and image are pretty accurate to what the Natives are, it should be fine. But if you get a certain tribe’s permission, that’s even better (ex. Seminole tribe gave permission for the Florida State Seminoles). It’s always good to play safe and to go with a broader name.

  23. @Mary Nguyen I agree that it is better for teams to get permission before they use Native American names and themes. However, what way do you propose to get that permission? Though some could ask local tribe leaders if they are named after local tribes, but what about generic Native American names? Teams names like the Chiefs do not represent any one tribe, so who would give permission in cases like that? Also, the tomahawk chop celebration is very similar to naming a team after a Native American tribe in that it is appropriating Native American culture in an offensive way, so it should be considered offensive as well, regardless of the intentions of individual fans.

  24. I think that it is offensive for sports teams to use anything that relates to Native Americans. In my opinion, I think that these people aren’t respecting the Native American culture, and what they think is fun and not demeaning may have the opposite effect on a Native American. “Redskins” is literally a racial slur, and is very offensive, as is fans painting their faces red, and even the tomahawk chop. Less offensive names like “Chiefs”, or “Braves” is fine, but it would be best if the team could get permission to use the name (like the Florida State Seminoles). I never watch the Superbowl, but if I was, the tomahawk chop would most likely ruin the effect. We have learned all about the harsh treatment toward the Native Americans, and I would get sick in the stomach just thinking about it or seeing anything mocking them, even if the people doing it don’t think it’s harmful or offensive in any way.

  25. While fans may find the way they celebrate the Kansas City Chiefs as simply a cheer, the tomahawk chop is offensive to and mocking of the Indian race. The logo of the chiefs is an arrowhead and the mascot a wolf. These are not as insulting as the Washington Redskins logo and mascot which are Indians. This is a racial slur and offensive to people of this race which I find unacceptable.

  26. @Reese Sanderson I can see your point of view but I think rather than making fun and mocking Native Americans, that they're representing them instead. The teams that have Native American names or mascots are cities that had or have great heritage to Native Americans. So I think this is a way for them to still be shown as important by even using things from their culture such as the tomohawk chop.

  27. @Reese Sanderson I understand where you are coming from thinking that these logos and gestures could be offensive or mockery. But have you thought that maybe it's just people wanting to cheer on their team? It's not so much about what they are doing but who its for. If you look at places like Florida State University, they have deep Native American roots and traditions that I think are very respective to the tribes they model.

  28. The usage of American Indian logos names and gestures should not be considered offensive for the majority of instances. My personal opinion on the tomahawk chop is that I really have no emotion towards it, however, if enough Native Americans deem it offensive and racially insensitive I would not care the slightest. The Chiefs use their name and Logo as a piece of honor towards American Indians just like many other Sports Franchises like the Braves, Indians, and Blackhawks. I have really never witnessed a tomahawk chop ritual at a Chiefs, Braves, or Florida State game. I do not have a emotional connection to the chop so it does not matter to me if they remove it. On the contrary, with the concept that the usage of mascots to be racist and offensive. I disagree with everyone who believes that for every team except the Washington Redskins. The word Redskin is an offensive slur which demeans American Indians, but others are used to honor. I have a personal connection to this issue as I am a supporter of the University of Illinois. Ten years ago, the school lost its mascot and a fight song over the charges of Racial insensitivity for Native Americans. However, I still see in at Florida State University, a man dressed in Warpaint ride to the middle of a football field on a horse and plant a stake while the crowd participates in the tomahawk chop. This is why public legislation should decide if all Indian names are ok for use or none of them are. There should be no discrepancy

  29. @Ben Galvanoni The Chiefs were named after a White man who started a fake Native Tribe with a fake Native name. It literally, in absolutely no way, was chosen to honor us.

  30. Sports teams and their fans should put an end to Native American mockery towards offensive names, imagery, and gestures. For example, the NFL, Redskins is overall highly insulting. To start, their team name, is a dictionary defined racial slur. Another example of mockery is their logo and mascot, which is a Native American dressed up in a faux Native American outfit. Lastly, fans of this team, as well as the Kansas City Chiefs participate in a cheer called the tomahawk chop, which is demeaning to Native Americans. I think that these fans are not respecting Native Americans and their culture. These reasons should ban NFL teams’ from participating in offensive acts towards Native Americans.

  31. I come from a Notre Dame family. From a young age, my father taught me to cheer for the "best" teams in basketball, football, and more. In my youth, I never once thought about the meaning of Notre Dame's team name: the "Fighting Irish". Years later I thought about this name choice, and coming from an Irish family, I was somewhat offended that this was how my heritage was being represented: by a short, angry-looking Irish man. I felt that this was a stereotyped idea that had no place in sports. Soon after this, I learned of the debate about teams named after Native American tribes. Hearing about this and celebrations like the "tomahawk chop" made me think about the Fighting Irish and their stereotyping of those with Irish heritage. Sports teams should not stereotype with their mascots. Celebrations like the Chiefs' "tomahawk chop" should be stopped. The argument by Native Americans against these symbols makes sense. It is simple to create a celebration which is not offensive, no matter what fans' intent is. Team names like the Washington Redskins' name are quite literally insults toward Native Americans, and also need to be changed. I no longer watch Notre Dame games with my father the same way. Rather than thinking about the football, I think about the mascots. When I watch Super Bowl LIV on this Sunday, I will similarly be thinking not quite as much about the football, but also about the mascots, team names, and what can be done to improve them.

  32. I have always been very opposed to any sports team or mascot that I feel unfairly represents Native Americans. I like to compare it to if a group of young people made a sports team and called themselves the "Boomers". Based on recent events, I feel like older Americans would absolutely flip out and rail against the team until they changed their name. In both cases, it's the taking of an identity and distorting it for comedic or monetary means and in both cases, it is offensive. Just as we should never have a sports team called the Boomers that portrays baby boomers in a negative light, we should get rid of sports teams that portray Native American culture in a negative light. What this comes down to is that people of Native American descent do not approve of the practice of the "Tomahawk Chop" and as a society, we need to respect that. White Americans have done enough harm to Native Americans, taking their land and resettling them in far off places, killing many along the way. This is not a group of people that we have any business culturally appropriating. The fact that this is still happening in 2020, even after all the way we have come as a nation, easing racial tensions and working to create a more harmonious and respectful environment for everyone, is simply deplorable and must be ended as soon as possible.

  33. @Cooper Hyldahl, I agree that the Native Americans have suffered enough cruelty by white Americans throughout history, I do not believe having a sports team named after a them is something bad. It is an honor, in my opinion. I would love to have a sports team named after me or named after something related to me. The teams are not named the Chiefs, and the Redskins, to be racially insensitive, they are doing it to honor the Native American history in their area. Also, if the Native American population in the U.S. is getting offended by sports teams being named in honor of them, then why aren't they upset by all of the towns throughout the United States that bear the names of their tribes?

  34. @Mairead Benson I understand why it would seem awesome to be named after a sports team. But if that team is using your nationality or tribal traditions in order to get money off of it, then it becomes a little offensive to those such as the Native Americans. I wouldn't be so negative to the subject if there wasn't a team named 'The Red Skins'. Out of all the different and creative things the Native Americans did differently from us, we chose to pick out their different skin color. Could you imagine having your land taken from you, after centuries of living there, and then someone had the idea to name a sports team called Red Skins in "honor" of the your tribe? Also to answer your question, some towns are named after tribal leaders because the town respected the tribe and wanted to honor their name, they didn't name the town "Red Skin Person".

  35. I think that it is extremely offensive to use Native American names, imagery, and gestures for a sports team to use as their brand. It is a racial slight and I fully believe that it is not acceptable. It is very disrespectful and mocks the people who have survived through famines, genocides, and natural disasters. The Native Americans still have the courage to keep living the way they do even after what people put them through. To use racist imagery without consent from the people you are depicting is wrong.

  36. @Adelaide M. I would have to politely disagree with you. These sports teams have been around for years and their names or icons are in no way used in a derogatory or “comedic” way. These names coincide with the history of their area. Although, I respect the Native Americans, their culture, and all that they have been through and if teams were using these names to be racist, I believe that would be different. Regardless, these teams are not doing anything to purposely disrespect Native Americans and are keeping certain groups as a title of their team for recreational purposes.

  37. @Adelaide M. I see your reasoning. But, most fans are just trying to be the loudest and best fans they can be. I see it as almost a way to honor the tribes in naming a team after them. It might also bring awarness about the tribes to those who aren't familiar with them.

  38. I do not believe that the use of Native American names, imagery, and gestures are offensive if they are simply being used to support a sports team. The teams do not intend to be racist or to "mock an entire race of people," they are using the names and symbols because they are a part of the history in that area. Several years ago, groups of Native Americans filed a lawsuit against the owners of the Washington Redskins, which tried to define the term "Redskins" as an offensive, racial slur in an attempt to keep the team from using it. It was eventually brought before the Supreme Court, who decided that the term "Redskins" was not being used in a derogatory way, therefore trying to restrict the team's use of it would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. I believe that it is an honor to have a team named after a group of people, especially one who has such an important role in the history of our country.

  39. @Mairead Benson The Supreme Court case I believe you are referencing is "Matal, Interim Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office v. Tam" which was decided in 2017. The case was regarding a band, named "The Slants," who were denied a patent based on the fact that their name could be taken as a racial slur against people of Asian descent. The Redskins was never directly mentioned in the case but the case was used as a legal precedent for the team owners to fall back on. What must be remembered is that there is not a single Justice of Asian descent in the Roberts Court. Therefore, in the case of "The Slants," none of the Justices had experienced racism against Asian heritage when they made their decision. The same goes for Native Americans. I believe that if a case similar to Matal v. Tam was brought before a court that was racially representative and all of the evidence specifically relating to the Redskins, the outcome would be different and their franchise would be struck down. Legal precedents and circumstance aside, it is not up to a group of 9 Justices to decide whether a name or franchise is offensive, it is up to the people that take offense. Native Americans have been marginalized by white America for too long and it is time that we start to recognize them and follow through on our promises to respect and treat them better than our ancestors. That starts with removing cultural appropriations like the Redskins and Chiefs.

  40. @Mairead Benson The court ruled on free speech grounds, "that federal trademark registrations may be granted even in most cases where they are considered derogatory". So yes, it is derogatory, but they can use it anyway. It is in no way an "honor" to have a racial slur as a team name. There are lots of other names teams can use. It is only football, they all need to get over it.

  41. @Mairead Benson I think you have a very good point by saying that the mascot was created to honor a group that have had such an important role in our country. Personally, I would argue that while that was most likely the original purpose, it doesn’t accurately portray their culture. The mascots and traditions are found to be offensive to Native Americans, which is shown in studies. If what was once a way to honor Native American culture now offends them, it may be time for a change.

  42. I think that saying the tomahawk chop honors Native Americans is a cop-out. There is no way that this type of extreme cultural appropriation should be excused! To me, it is revolting to see white, or non-Native American people in general, wearing a traditional Native American headdress or mocking tribe rituals. In addition, racist team names are only perpetuating stereotypes. Take, for example, the Washington Redskins. Keep in mind that the Washington Redskins are owned by Daniel Snyder, a privileged white male. Not only is the team name a racial slur, the logo depicts a red-faced man with feathers on his head. This encourages the use of red-face. Needless to say, I think that this blatant racism needs to end.

  43. It is incredibly offensive for sports teams and their fans to use Native American culture as a face for their team. The Kansas City Chiefs’ use of a made up war cry and a tomahawk motion is offensive because it makes a mockery of a culture that has routinely been stripped from the people it belongs to: Native Americans. Native Americans, throughout history, have been forcibly unable to practice their culture. They were indoctrinated with the Christian religion and their people were relentlessly murdered in a genocide for refusing to conform to the white Christian culture. They were forcibly relocated from their ancestral lands during the Trail of Tears and other forced migrations. For a team of mostly white males to take the culture of an extremely oppressed group, who have desperately worked to reclaim their culture, and make it an inaccurate, mocking sports chant is a prime example of privilege and appropriation. It is time to give Natives the respect they deserve, and stop using racism and colonialism in sports.

  44. I think it is offensive for sports teams to use Native American names, imagery, and gestures, especially when the sports teams do it without permission. It mocks Native American culture and appropriates it. Even if they don’t mean to mock, if Native Americans have stated that it is rude and offensive, then the sports teams and fans should be respectful and stop. I have never witnessed or participated in a tomahawk chop, and I don't think I ever will. The Washington Redskins should definitely change their name, as Redskins is a slur, and I think the other teams should at least ask the Native American population in their city for permission in using those names.

  45. I believe that it is not offensive sports teams and their fans to use Native American names, imagery and gestures. I think that when they use them it is a sign of respecting the Native Americans. The team is using Native American names to represent them which is special. However, it is mostly how the imagery and gestures are being used that matters. When fans aren’t giving much notice to the real Native American culture, they might do something that is very offensive. Fans should only use Native American imagery if it is true. I think that fans should end their use of the tomahawk chop or give it a new name because it like mocking Native Americans since they never used it.

  46. As someone who is a sports fanatic I always pay a lot of attention to a team's colors, uniforms and mascots. There hasn't been a moment that I have thought that what one team does and wears had a negative correlation with a group of people. There is a way however that in using them can be disrespectful or give someone a bad look. Most people that get offended by these arguments just want to start an argument and may not be the ones affected by the conversation. Some people just want to pay attention to all the negative but don't realize all the traditions, fun, and comradery behind it all.

  47. I believe that using a mascot that negatively represents another culture is not okay. While some may use the argument that the mascot is simply being used to represent a team and the culture should be honored, they are not accurately portraying Native American culture. As the article said, over half of Native Americans are offended by the mascot and by the Chiefs tomahawk chop. Fans are throwing around something important to their culture for fun without thinking twice. The chop is arguably culturally insensitive and mocking. Native Americans are already looked down on in America, and these traditions uphold the negative stigma of people within their culture. I know that tonight, as I am watching the game, I will be embarrassed when Chiefs fans are doing the Tomahawk chop, even though I am not a chiefs fan.

  48. @Keira McWilliams These sports teams are doing nothing but support Native American culture to say that they are dishonoring heritage is a accusation with no backup evidence. The "Chief Chop" is not aimed at any cultural group it is aimed to be a chant for a sports team it's that simple.

  49. I do not think it’s offensive for teams and fans to use native american names, gestures and imagery. We are living in a time where people take everything offensively. It’s like no one can do anything anymore without someone taking it the wrong way. Most teams and fans are in no way trying to make fun of or offend native americans. They’re simply cheering on their team and using the resources they have. Yes, there might be some people who are using these things in a way to offend these tribes. But that’s not a reason to ban it for everyone. Everyone is just trying to be the loudest and best fans for their team.

  50. @Sydney Short I agree with you that people seem to get way too offended these days, making us all try to be politically correct. Also, that these fans are just doing this cheer to support their team in the ways they can. But when it comes down to it, instead of getting all of the backlash that will come from not changing the cheer, they should try to change it to get away from the scrutiny that will undoubtedly keep coming. People will always find offense from it and the team will never get away from that, which will ultimately cause the chiefs to get a bad name. If they act now, and tell their fans to stop doing the chant or change it, they can get as little judgement as possible and maybe even get respect from others for doing the "right thing"

  51. I don't believe that using Native American names, imagery, or gestures is offensive. I've always been a pretty big baseball fan. I think mascots and team names are a great way to show your spirit and what makes a team different from the rest. I'm an Atlanta Braves fan, which has been one of the most controversial teams for this reason. The Braves started out with a mascot known as Chief Noc-A-Homa, who was dressed as Native American. No one really minded this fact until the television channel WTBS started airing the Braves exclusively in all fifty states. Then of course people started to notice the mascot and the famous "tomohawk chop" which is still used today. Eventually the people won and Atlanta has changed their mascot multiple times since but I just don't think it's really necessary. With this however, I am very happy that the fans still held strong and didn't stop the tomohawk chop! There is no moment like when the whole stadium is in sync chopping!

  52. I personally don't find the use of Native American names, imagery, and gestures in sports offensive. Then again I am not Native American so I wouldn't really know how they feel about this use of they're culture in sports. I would understand being offended if the teams portrayed them in a negative way, but I don't really see them doing that. The commonly known "Tomahawk Hawk chop" is a gesture used used by fans to celebrate, I understand how people could be offended by it but It is all in good fun and not meant to offend anyone. I think people should be less worried about issues like this and focus on more important things. But in the end I think it should be the Native Americans choice wether they're culture is used in sports since they are the people who are affected by it.

  53. @Camden Peterson How is this issue not important? Racism is one of the most prevalent topics in today’s political and social discussions, and this is another perfect example of racism, even if it is unintended. Sure, the Chiefs have involved the Native Americans in many stadium practices, but their most common practice is obviously bothering those that the team aims to support. Portraying someone in a negative way is not the only way to offend someone. Derogatory motions or sayings are not always objectively negative. Asians doing math problems isn’t a negative practice, but it is seen as derogatory to the Asian community and bothers many. All of the time, people make jokes about certain people or say certain phrases “in good fun,” but that does not justify that they did that act. For example, there have been multiple cases where people unnecessarily squint their eyes to look Asian after winning a point or scoring a goal. And they usually think it is “in good fun.” But that does not make it right to do. The tomahawk chop offends a very large group of people, and therefore it should be taken out of the game. Football should be enjoyed by everyone, not miserable for certain groups because of racist acts.

  54. Every team has a chant or cheer often unique and important to the fans. It brings the fans together and helps them get involved in the game and show their support. This team needs a chant, but I don't think that the tomahawk chop is the one they should use. I know how important it is to the fans and that the fans are not attempting to offend anyone. However, if they are bothering Native Americans, the people the team should be supporting the most, they need to stop. The chant should bring joy to everyone, not bring up racist stereotypes that hurt others. I have always loved watching football, especially my favorite team the Washington Redskins. They also have an Indian name, but it is far more criticized. I never realized how bad of a name it was until recently. These names, chants, and other things that offend Native Americans should be taken out of the game of football. This is a sport that is meant to be cherished by everyone. Everyone just wants to watch football. That is it and nothing else should matter. Everything else is changeable and unimportant. Some fans may not accept these changes in the chant and name, but need to look at the bigger picture for the games sake.

  55. @Kevin O’Malley I agree. I do think the name "chiefs" is less derogatory than Redskins as it is not a racial slur but is kinda like naming a team the "kings" or "captains". And while it would be hard to get rid of a long-standing tradition, it is way more important to respect the opinion of the Native Americans. As you said, "that is it and nothing else should matter." I'm sure that the vast majority of fans do not even see it as something remotely related to the image of Natives, but as a unifying and energizing cheer for their team. But the truth remains no matter what the intent was- Native Americans are feeling demeaned and shamed, and something needs to be done about it. It's so easy for us to get caught up in the whirlwind of excitement that the game brings and forget the origins of things, to forget where we come from. I think that can be applied to things outside the game as well, like ignoring someone who is eating alone just because we are so caught up in the excitement of our friends.

  56. When I watched the Superbowl I took no offense to the tomahawk chop. After reading this article by John Eligon he says “ their mascot is not a red-faced caricature” which means the Chiefs have no racist mascots or logos. The Chiefs chop is the only offensive thing, but I think the Chiefs need a chant and the chop is not racist in my mind.

  57. I don't think the Kansas City Chiefs tomahawk chop is offensive. I don't think it is offensive because they are not trying to demean the local Standing Rock Sioux. According to the Celebrating the Kansas City Chiefs, the Chop Divides, "they understand why Native people might find it offensive, but say they do it to celebrate their team, not to demean Indians." They do it to intimidate the opponent, not to insult a Native American. From the Celebrating the Kansas City Chiefs, the Chop Divides, "also employed by fans of the Atlanta Braves, the Florida State Seminoles and England’s Exeter Chiefs rugby team — are a way to show solidarity with their team and to intimidate the opposition."

  58. For a century now, professional sports teams such as the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves have promoted covert racism through their team names, mascots, and chants. During the creation of these teams in the early 20th century, few saw an issue with naming sports teams after Native American culture, but, in the 21st century, these symbols and names only add to the ever-growing issue of cultural appropriation. Not only are these teams named after a minority group with little to no representation on the actual team, but fans also take part in offensive chants as a reference to Native American culture. The famed “tomahawk chop” used by teams is a perfect example of what fans view as a seemingly harmless action, but in reality, their actions hold more weight than they think. Beginning with invasions by Spanish explorers, Native Americans have never enjoyed the same liberties as other groups in North America. For this reason, non-Native Americans should bend over backward to ensure the Native Americans receive equal treatment in the US, but the fans of these sports teams have done the opposite. While the ignorance of these fans causes many to believe they are “spreading Native American culture,” they are poking fun at a group that has endured centuries-long struggles. Unfortunately, in today’s culture, compassion towards minority groups is rare, but all Americans should discontinue their covertly racist chants and team names to provide respect to Native American culture.

  59. After reading the article, I think it can be offensive to the Native Americans because the fans are using Native Americans tradition lightly and they don’t care about the tradition. According to the Native Americans survey the results were, “Around half of respondents were bothered or offended when sports fans did the tomahawk chop or wore Indian headdresses.” As a result, not all Native Americans were offended but around half of them were, so in order for the people to show some respect they should end their use of the tomahawk chop.

  60. In my opinion, I do not feel that for sports teams like the Kansas City Chiefs it is offensive to be called the Chiefs or to use the tomahawk chop. I think most people think it’s not offensive because they don’t know any better. They’re not educated enough on the topic to know if its offensive or not.“The Arrowhead Chop is part of the game-day experience that is really important to our fans,” Mark Donovan, the team president, recently told The Kansas City Star. This quote supports my opinion because it shows how important the gesture and all the traditions they do are to the fans and the entire franchise.

  61. I believe that the Kansas City Chiefs should be allowed to do the tomahawk chop and that it will not ruin my experiences later on in the future. I was able to watch the superbowl and I also was able to watch the tomahawk LIV. I thought it was very interesting to watch people do a cool chop in the air. I feel like I would watch the Kansas City Chiefs again because they are not making fun of native americans. In one section of the article it says “Their name does not evoke a slur like the Washington Redskins, and their mascot is not a red-faced caricature like Chief Wahoo, the logo that the Cleveland Indians began phasing out two years ago.” This shows that the Kansas City Chiefs are not provoking any negative opinions or ideas against native americans. Their mascot is not stereotypical and they are only doing one hand gesture in the air. I feel like I will be watching them play again because they are not doing anything wrong. It will not ruin my experience on watching the Kansas City Chiefs because they will be doing the tomahawk chop.

  62. I believe that the American teams that have Native American teams shouldn’t have to change their mascots. Especially, if the location of the team has a large population of native Americans. I think the teams picked those mascots to honor America’s true history that dates longer than the colonies set on the new world. The fans should be honored of their culture being spread across the football fields in Super bowl and regular games. Furthermore, the fans are enjoying to do the Indian gestures and are willing to keep them, in the article, Is It Offensive for Sports Teams and Their Fans to Use Native American Names, Imagery and Gestures? they wrote, “It is likely that at some point during the game, Chiefs fans will begin their favored cheer: the tomahawk chop.” The quote shows that fans adore the cheer, and they frequently do it during games.

  63. I believe that it is offensive for teams to use these Native American names, imagery, and gestures. I think that the use of the tomahawk chop shouldn't be allowed, but sadly I know that fans are set on using it to cheer on their team. Team names such as the Chiefs and the Redskins, are offensive. I don't understand why this even exists because it's obviously racist and derogatory. The thing about this that really makes me angry is that our country's capitol Washington D.C. (home of the Redskins) sets a bad example for us. The place that we are supposed to look up to, has a racist Native American team football name. That doesn't make even partial sense in my mind. It grosses me out. In conclusion, yes it is offensive.

  64. @Neko Houghton, while I do agree that it is can be considered offensive to use signals that were part of Native American's culture, the only way I feel it is possible to eliminate these names and motions is by coming up with alternatives. There is no possible way that someday at some football game the gestures used to signify a teams success are just going to suddenly go away unless there is some reinforcement for it. Some ideas might be to change the name of the Kansas City Chiefs to something relating to their culture which includes jazz, theater, and even barbecue. Then I would assume most of the chanting which is mat be considered hurtful or derogatory that comes with the name Kansas City Chiefs would go away.

  65. The use of Native American imagery is offensive to some, if not all, people, especially Native Americans or descendants of Native Americans. I think the Chiefs should end the Tomahawk Chop cheer. Regardless of whether it was meant to be offensive, it was received as such. I have seen the Tomahawk Chop happen on TV, and during the Super Bowl. I did watch the entire Super Bowl, and enjoyed it, but I commented on the offensive cheer to my family who I was watching with. If the specific Native American tribe gives you permission to use their name or symbol, you should treat it with respect, but it should be accepted.

  66. @Charlotte G. You have a point with how disrespectful the name, and pregame rituals are, but I feel like the name has been around for such a long time, and they were fine using the name when it was first created so there is no reason that it should be changed now. Also the fact that they put respect on the name and don’t treat it as a joke proves how the name should be allowed. If there were circumstances where jokes and imitations were used against the tribe to prove a point against them then I agree the names should be changed, but until them it is fine keeping the names.

  67. I personally don’t watch football, so I don’t know many cheers like the tomahawk chop. I do, however, think that if it offends a group of people, then it shouldn’t be done. For example, a name like the Washington Redskins is an extremely racist name. It deeply offends people who are Native Americans. Yes, you could make the point that it’s just a team name and that it's for the fun of the game. Going by that logic, I could argue that the n-word (that many people despise) is just a word and that saying it is for the fun of saying it but many people would disagree. It’s important to keep in mind that just because you don’t find something hurtful, doesn’t mean another person doesn’t find the same thing hurtful. Offensive things like that, whether it is a name, mascot, or something else should definitely be changed as soon as possible.

  68. It is offensive for sports teams to use Native American names, imagery, and gestures, unless Native Americans say it is fine. They are disrespecting their culture and stereotyping Native Americans. People do the tomahawk chop, wear red face, and dress up as Native Americans. Chiefs fans should stop doing the tomahawk chop and other offensive things. People may think that these things are honoring Native Americans, but they are not.

  69. I think that it is very offensive to people of the native race in the world today. For example, the Washington Redskins I feel is a very offensive sports name to native people around the world and it should definitely not be used. For the tomahawk chop, I really don’t know enough of the history for it so I don’t really have an opinion. But if I were to give my best opinion I would say that it isn’t really appropriate to be using that form of celebrations because some people might take offense to it

  70. I think that the costumes and the face paint the fans use are racist because it is cultural appropriation, but I don’t think the name Chiefs is racist because it isn’t a slur word like Redskins. Even with Washington having this name in 2016 a poll found that 9 in 10 Native Americans did not find the name Redskins offensive, which I think is a lot more offensive than Chiefs. Even the chant Tomahawk Chop doesn’t have any words it’s just swinging your hand back in forth, but I can see how some people would see that as mocking. I think there could be a rule prohibiting Native American costumes and a change of the chant but I think the Chief’s name can stay.

  71. I think for some teams it is offensive like the Redskins and the Chiefs. The only exception is the Seminals because Florida asked to represent their culture. But the Redskins wear red faces which obviously is racist and tomahawk chop might seem like a friendly dance but it’s definitely against the natives. Also, the name Redskins is a racial slur against Native Americans.

  72. I believe that teams with culture inappropriate names should change their names. Native American tribes still don’t get the recognition or treatment they deserve. The tomahawk chop is highly offensive along with painting your face and body red. The Washington Redskins team name, mascot, and logo are all highly disrespectful. Some teams over the years have made changes to their mascot and logo to accommodate for Native American tribes, but others like the Redskins haven’t. Washington Redskins is a slur and derogatory term to Native American, they should change their name to something less offensive. My opinion would change if a tribe gives its approval, a tribe is letting a team use their name unlike how other teams achieved their name. Chiefs, Indians, and Redskins aren’t even names of a tribe they are insulting terms people called Native Americans in another time. The tomahawk chop should not be done anymore as well, it is a gesture of dominance over an opponent, but is hurtful to many tribes.

  73. The fact that these people had to endure genocide and a complete invion into their rightful land is already a reason why people shouldn’t use racial slurs on them. A name like blackskins or whiteskins wouldn’t be accepted at all even in the smallest team. But the fact that it’s even sanctioned by the NFL is disturbing. Washington’s logo would be a little bit more acceptable as it’s a Native American man with feathers on his head. The team failed to explain their name at all since it was created. The name alone wouldn’t be accepted if it was any other color so, why is it accepted now? But, shifting gears to the Super Bowl Champs, Kansas City Chiefs. The team has gotten controversy from it’s favorite chant, The Tomahawk Chop. The chant is a series of singing and waving their hands back and forth. I see nothing wrong with these chants and the fans have also said that it was a way of remembering and honoring the Natives. It’s not only used for the Chiefs. The Atlanta Braves also use it as their chant. If it was any other race it wouldn’t have been accepted, so why is it still going on for Native Americans? Hopefully, in the future The Redskins will change their name into something more appropriate.

  74. This is a super controversial subject today and I honestly don't know how to feel about it. As sports teams get called out for using symbols and gestures originally adopted by the Native Americans I am split in two. One part of me believes that the "tomahawk chop" is a simple meaningless gesture that fans use to show their loyalty to the Chiefs. The optimistic side of me believes it is a way that the fans honor the heritage of their city and community because it was once inhabited by large amounts of Native Americans. The cynical side of me is disgusted by their acts. The “chop” can also be seen as a disrespectful motion. Ever since the Europeans came to America, the Native Americans have been persecuted. They were driven from their lands that they had lived on for centuries and stowed in camps far away from their homes. They were not seen as people but pests, living on the white man's land. Even when the Chief's organization was founded in 1960, the Native Americans were still not seen as equals. White people have no business infringing on the culture and history of an entire ethnic group they ravaged.

  75. I am kind of torn between offensive and not offensive on this one. I know that fans only do gestures like the tomahawk chop to celebrate and rally their team and they do not intend to offend anyone of any race, ethnicity, or culture. But, I also understand the Native people’s point of view, as it seems like the gestures mock their culture. I do not know which side to pick, so I am in the middle. I do think that the Washington Redskins should definitely change their name because the term “redskin” refers to Native American people in the same way that “black” refers to African-Americans and “yellow” refers to Asians as they are all racist slurs and I find them extremely offensive to people of those races. I also think that the Redskins, along with the Cleveland Indians and the Chicago Blackhawks in the NHL, should change their logos as they all have pictures of Native Americans on them which I find to be stereotypical.

  76. Sports teams and games create riled up crowds, and passionate fans, but some lengths that fans go to can be borderline offensive. Superbowl LIV last sunday provoked this conversation as the victorious team was the Kansas City Chiefs. Specifically, the “Tomahawk/Arrowhead Chop,” was debated to be offensive. Although the intent of fans is not to offend Native Americans, the clothing and pieces they wear and their chant appropriate Native American culture, revealing the large scale racial issues America has not fully owned up to nor shut down for good. The major issue is that most chiefs fans do not recognize that they are in the wrong for wearing customized versions of Native headdress or loudly chanting the Tomahawk chant, with the team president saying, “[the chant] is part of the game day experience.” They see it as support for the football team rather than the culture they are stripping down and appropriating, failing to acknowledge history as well as the current treatment of Native people. Some do recognize how foolish the fans look like the owner of a restaurant, Howard Hanna, where the chant filled his place saying, “It makes us look stupid,” which is most certain in the fact that it shows a blatant sense of ignorance. The stereotypes this behavior encourages is damaging to Native communities and should be reconsidered as part of the game day experience for some because appropriating other’s culture is never necessary under any circumstance.

  77. @Annie Conrady I agree with your stance on this issue. Even though some people may say we are being sensitive, derogatory costumes, chants, or logos of any kind are not okay. We have heard this issue emerging recently, and I am glad that some people are finally taking a stand towards it. Whether people realize it or not, they are making fun of Native Americans and it isn't okay. Once people realize that what they are doing isn't okay, we can start taking steps towards fixing it. Sadly, people are closed minded and will not listen to what other people have to say. Once open mindedness can come to the forefront, we can start fixing the racist issues in our society like this.

  78. I believe the use of Native-American names, imagery, and gestures by sports teams and their fans is a very offense. Although most, if not all fans do not mean it offensively, it was proven in psychological studies that it still affects native American children negatively so, no matter how good your intention you can be ruining the self-image of many young native Americans watching. I believe the Chiefs should end their use of the tomahawk chop and should try to communicate with many native American groups that are located in the region. They should try their best to improve relations with local groups and not only listen to the one that they want to listen to which is what they are doing.

  79. This is a difficult and controversial issue. Let me first clarify that I am of European descent, I have white skin, and I have never felt personal racism. That being said, I don’t believe the Native American names or references were ever intended to be racist; if they were, they are not intended to be racist now. Many names for American sport teams were created to honor American history, such as the Milwaukee Brewers, San Francisco 49ers, and the LA Dodgers. In my opinion, the sport teams in question should communicate with modern Native American tribes and groups, and agree open what should be kept and what should be discarded, be it names, actions, or symbols. However, what I find inappropriate is when white people take advantage of a situation, claiming something is racist before consulting Native Americans. They should be given the opportunity to speak, not to be spoken for.

  80. I think that it depends weather or not the team represents the Native American groups. If the team is offensively representing these groups i think that is wrong, but if they are honoring the groups in a respectful way then I don’t see a problem. But I am not a Native American and they might have a different perspective and see it as rude and offensive the way that sports team represent their culture.

  81. I think the viewpoint of the actual Native Americans affected by these chants makes a more compelling argument. It is not up to the team and their fans to determine what should or should not be offensive to a group they are not themselves a part of. It doesn’t matter if the fans think they aren’t being offensive, because it’s not their decision how their actions feel to someone else.

  82. The teams that have names that ressemble Native Americans should not be forced to change their names or logos do to the fact that it is an honor to have a team or organization find pride in being an Indian. As much as Indians have been suppressed in our culture, it's nice to have a large fan base see them in positive image. We also have to remember that it is just a name that they call the team or whatever it is not done out of spite.

  83. I do not think it is offensive. Now I feel like people look too far into things, I understand the argument if it were intended to be offensive. I do not think fans say these things just to upset someone, that does not mean people are not offended by it. It almost seems like they are accepting of the culture ? Nothing derogatory is being said, so I don't think anyone should have a consequence for supporting their team. It also is not anyones place to deter wether or not someone should become offended by these things.

  84. I don’t think it is offensive to use Native American names or imagery. I think Native Americans should be honored by teams using their names. Native Americans and Football are two things that are distinctly unique to America. Football has been around for more than a century, and Native Americans have been around for way longer than that. When people were trying to think of a good name for a new NFL team, obviously they wanted something very American if they picked the chiefs. I think people are too sensitive about stuff like this. The chiefs have been a football organization in the NFL for many years, so why is this all of a sudden a problem? If Native Americans had a problem with the name, they could’ve easily protested it when the team was first founded. I also don’t think the tomahawk chop is offensive. I think it's a fun way for fans to cheer on their team. People are trying to turn football into a big racial issue, even though it’s just football. The team names shouldn’t be offending people.

  85. The Kansas City mascot, the chiefs should not be seen as derogatory or discriminative. When Chiefs fans start their “tomahawk chop” cheer, they are simply trying to encourage and rally on their team. I do not think it is disrespectful, their logo is not a nasty version of the native Americans, it is simply a chief Indian from early America They do not use any hurtful words when talking about the chiefs and their culture. Earlier this year I went to the Final Four basketball game to cheer on the red raiders. While we were there many people commented on how the “Guns up” signal is offensive and that we should not be allowed to do it so often and especially not in pictures. This is something we as tech fans do so often without question, with the only goal being to cheer on our team. The other people at the basketball game should not have the authority to strip us of our “guns up” tradition. I think the same applies for the Chiefs.

  86. I personally am not a fan of stereotypes; however, I see absolutely no problem, when these "generalizations" are harmless. I think with this example, people are trying to make an issue simply for the rush of opposition and argumentation. Ironically most people opposing this "injustice" don't even belong to the culture relating to it. American society has been known for the oppression of others in the past, which was morally incorrect. Though the oppression that Americans participated in was horrible, you cant apply those standards upon harmless sports teams. In conclusion, in a vain attempt to not sound too harsh, people simply need to grow up, and get past issues that have absolutely no effect on the way society functions. To any chiefs fans out there, "tomahawk chop" on as you please. Regardless of who you are, it is your right to as a free American citizen.

  87. You don't have to be part of a certain race to oppose injustice. For instance, the reason that blacks were given rights in this country was because of both whites and blacks speaking out against the injustices. In most cases people won't listen to the victims of injustices because they see them as inferior but they will listen to those whom they consider equals. Often times someone else has to speak up for those who are being oppressed because no one will listen to them.

  88. @Mason Threadgill I like your opinion on this, and I agree for the most part. Some of our history is not something to be proud of such as the hundreds of years of racial discrimination against Native Americans forcing them out of their homeland, and more against other groups. I think it is extremely important for us to refelect on these actions and notice them. I don't think that a harmless football team is trying to offend others, but no matter what it's important to pubically say that the past actions are acknowleged and things that comefrom groups oppressed in the past are reflected on.

  89. When it comes to racial slurs, and how offensive they are, I think it is important to look at the time period. The Kansas City Chiefs, for example, were founded in 1960. In the 60s, saying racial slur would not prompt the same reaction it would today. At the time the team was founded, this slur may have seemed like nothing to the people who created. Now, as people look back on these name choices, owners and fans alike realize what the name of their favorite team means. Like many other things, offensive sports teams should change their names to something less offensive.

  90. Racial and cultural stereotypes are somewhat of an old joke at this point, most of them harmless if not just annoying. I have no problem with using these stereotypes for a sports team or organization if they mean no harm and there is no hidden meaning behind it. I don't see the tomahawk chop is mocking or offensive, but I'm probably not the best judge of this. The Redskins, Browns, and Chiefs are completely harmless names and there should be no reason to change it after decades of playing under that name.

  91. Why do people make such a big deal out of something so small and insignificant, that doesn't even affect anything at all except for someone's mood. People who are getting worked up over things like this are just posers trying to get into the spotlight and be called a hero for eradicating a “Offensive Gesture”, but this was disproved by a member of the Arapaho and Cheyenne United Tribes when they said that it has no real meaning in Native American Culture and therefore cannot be offensive or demeanig. It is merely a rallying call for excited fans rooting for their team to win, much like other team’s fans have.

  92. I think it is offensive for teams to use Native American names, imagery, and gestures because they are profiting the culture of the Native Americans while most Natives suffer in poverty in US reservations. Particularly, the use of the tomahawk chop gesture further embraces the common “savage” stereotype that oppresses Native Americans. I think sports teams like these that use Native mascots should focus their philanthropic efforts on the improvement of Native reservations and dispelling harmful stereotypes about Native Americans. Overall I think it would be best for Kansas City fans to stop using the gesture because there are many other chants or cheers that can replace it that don’t involve mocking a race of people.

  93. @Leah Gonzales Even if the Chiefs were to suddenly condemn the tomahawk chop, I'm afraid it would make no difference. These Chiefs fans have been doing this chop since they were children as a celebration of their team's victories. It is so ingrained in their culture at this point that no condemnation, denouncing, or protesting is going to keep fans at Arrowhead stadium from celebrating with this gesture. Ignoring the fact that this celebration will likely be around for years to come, these fans mean no harm; they only want to celebrate successes and have fun while doing it. Because these people perform the tomahawk chop as a way of cheering on their team, I believe it is an acceptable gesture. Intent is very important when determining whether or not something is disrespectful or not and the only intent of these people is to support their team. This gesture is a symbol of happiness, excitement, and coming together over a common cause. Perhaps in the past the tomahawk chop represented something different, but the Chiefs have turned into something to rally around in good-spirited fun, which I believe makes it acceptable

  94. I feel in today’s society, people tend to get offended for others much more than others feel their culture is being attacked or appropriated. Earlier this year (2019) many were attacked for mouthing along to a song on tik tok that used the term “gypsy”. However when actual Romany users viewed the videos they argued they didn’t have a problem with it. The problem is the question of wether or not someone should be able to make claims for a group they don’t belong to. I think the answer is clear, no, however the other side only sees what their doing as right.

  95. I think some of the imagery and mascots in professional sports that depict Native American culture got to go, but the KC tomahawk chop is not one of them. If you do not watch the NFL religiously or maybe not at all, it’s hard to understand why some fans are absolutely crazy about their team. From the outside looking in, it seems like these people are excessive and over the top. However, growing up watching football and being a Bears fan my entire life makes me understand why fans feel the need to show their support. At the end of the day, the chant is not directed as a racist gesture and really not directed at Indians whatsoever. It’s merely an encouragement of their favorite team and just because the Chiefs are finally good, doesn’t mean that the chant or the name “Chief’s” should be taken out of context. If the organization continues to work with local Indian groups and show respect, the chant should not be an issue.

  96. Despite the fact that someone could be offended, the use of Native American imagery in sports has never been offensive. A Washington Post survey found that 9/10 American Indians do not find the use of Indian imagery in sports offensive. Yes, 1/10 do find it offensive. But does this matter? The fact that the overwhelming majority approve the use of the imagery provides a glimpse into the culture of the Native Americans. If Natives had a problem with the images, they would be overwhelmingly against them, not for them. We live in a society where the risk of “offending” someone is at an all time high. People get offended about everything, and the use of American Indian imagery in sports logos is not one of them.

  97. It is offensive for sports teams to use Native American names, gestures, and imagery. These actions and pictures are more often than not stereotypes of what people imagine Native Americans to look like, and are therefore racist. Moreover, these sports teams are using Native American perceived “culture” to make personal profits, while Native Americans are more often than not struggling in poverty. What is more, the stereotypes used by the teams attempting to portray Native Americans are often times ignorant and paint them as savages, when in reality they are just normal human beings too with a different culture. Taking all this into account, I strongly believe sports teams should get rid of Native American names and imagery, unless given permission by the actual tribes.

  98. The use of Native American imagery in sports in highly controversial and believed by many to be offensive. While I do see that the image of Native Americans can been perceived as barbaric, as Native American themes within sports are often used to demonstrate strength and willingness to fight, I believe that is not the true intentions of the use of Indian traditions. I believe the use of Native American imagery in sports brings a sense of culture to sports, if done in the correct manor. The impact of Native American culture often dwindles on the average American citizen, but through sports there are opportunities where people can still see and be aware of the history of Natives. That is if people are actually intrigued by the history of a team and why they chose their ethnic name. I believe that the use of Native American names within sports can be seen as almost a compliment, teams want to choose a name that inspires strength and power within their opponents. Using a name of Native American origin almost demonstrates that those franchises have a positive outlook on what Native Americans represent, but it is also important to note that Natives shouldn't always be remembered for their fierce warriors and willingness to survive.

  99. There are certainly fans out there who have mal intent when participating in chant such as the Tomahawk chop, which there is no place for in our society. But that being said, I do not see he chant being offensive one bit. Chiefs fans are passionate and LOUD. Arrowhead stadium is one of the loudest stadiums in American sports and the chop is part of this. The chop is something that gets the crowd going and gets them into the game. Which they do to help their team win. As long as chief’s fans are respectful towards the native Americans and the Chiefs organization makes sure to support the natives, there is no problem at all with the chant.

  100. While using Native American names, imagery, and gestures in a sports franchise can be offensive, it is important to recognize the factors in which it is used respectfully. Teams like the Redskins have faced controversy because “Redskins,” is a word many Native American groups and linguists consider a slur. However the Blackhawks face less controversy, because they have argued that their team name is not a generic racial stereotype. It honors a real person, Black Hawk. It is hard to hard for me to claim the extent to which these team names are offensive or as I do not belong to the group that they would be offensive to. Moreover I will suggest that a team or franchise should respectfully represent history and controversial topics.

  101. Imagine this, your whole life you have been taught by your own culture and traditions that a certain headwear or garment is something to be revered and something to be respected. All of a sudden someone makes a caricature of the leader of your culture, darning the sacred garments of your religion and culture. To make the situation even worse, most of The big corporations behind these mocking graphics give little money or aid to the thousands of struggling people of your nation who once were the original settlers of the territory where the sports team plays. At the end of the day how would you feel? Would you be upset with the corporations and their vast fortunate franchises based on your history, while your people see very little prosperity? I know that I certainly would.

  102. As a kid that has Native American ancestors that I have direct ties too. I have recently talked to them about similar topics and the way they have come off is they are not offended. I can't speak for all Natives but my family just loves the sport of football. Maybe the whole redskins name and label is racist in some people's eyes. I totally see that I 100% don't know because I am not a full native american. With similar topics like racial names having to do with African Americans yes I do take offence to that so these people probably feel the same way. The tomahawk chop has been around for so long and there is so much history about it. I mean you really can't control what people do but the chop is used all different times of sports as a way to cheer. I believe half the people using it don't really know the real purpose or meaning behind it which also man people take offence too.

  103. The use of Native American names in sports is a highly debated topic. I spent part of my summer on a Native American Reservation in Montana and this was one of the topics we discussed with the member of the tribe. They said that there is a difference between honoring the culture with a name like the “Chiefs” and offending the culture with a completely inappropriate part of the history like “Redskins”. I think that using a slur like that is completely unfair and hurtful to many people of Native American culture.

  104. There are many sports teams across the country who use Native American mascots, gestures, and symbols. I think the fans who participate in things such as the Tomahawk chop have absolutely no bad intentions at all, however, sometimes thats not enough. The Native Americans have a very rich culture that has been developing for thousands of years. It is unfair to them for us to use part of their culture and religion as a way to hype up the crowd at a sporting event. Most Americans are not nearly educated enough on Native Americans and their culture to truly say that they are “honoring” them. I believe sports teams should either take initiative to incorporate proper Native American culture and educate their fans so they can respect it, or they should ditch the name completely.

  105. I think it is important to retain the culture and represent it correctly, rather than let it get distorted and ultimately become offensive. I think a perfect example of this is seen by looking at the Chicago Blackhawks. In their logo, they accurately and respectfully depict a Native American, as seen in his facial structure, accessories, and more. Now, on the very opposite end of the spectrum is the Cleveland Indians logo. It is an offensive caricature of a Native American that has been the cause of controversy for quite some time. The line between right and wrong here is pretty clear, but when it comes to the actions and traditions of teams, the line gets fuzzy. It’s important to consider how these actions affect real people, and if these decisions are in the best interest of being respectful.

  106. This has been a much debated topic in sports for a while now. I do not think it’s offensive to use Native American names for sports teams, as long as they are using it for the purpose of respecting them and not mocking them. The same goes for the imagery and gestures, however I think that using gestures like the Chiefs tomahawk chop may be pushing the boundaries. The teams have to realize what they can and can’t do, and most gestures used by teams like the Redskins and Chiefs could potentially be used to mock them. The imagery they are using for the teams has to be used in a way that portrays the Native Americans in a positive aspect. I think that it’s important the Chiefs are working with the Native Americans to ensure that they are representing them well, but many of the fans do not want to let go of the traditions they hold with the team. There has to be a delicate balance that favors the Native Americans.

  107. @Aidan Murphy I agree that there should be a balance of tradition and respect towards the relationship between American and Native American culture, moreso favoring the latter. They’ve gotten the short end of the stick since 1492 and have been openly mocked for expressing themselves, giving them at least some cultural respect seems a bit overdo. That being said, I don’t think that the dreaded “tomahawk chop” is that insensitive, I’m not Native American but a hand gesture that goes back and forwards doesn’t seem like it’s trying to illicit hate, rather illicit hype. Although the dance thing needs to not happen, that’s an actual religious dance don’t do it for entertainment it’s unbecoming for the team.

  108. I have often pondered this question, when I heard about who was playing in the Super Bowl, my first question was “they’re STILL called the Chiefs?”. I myself am not Native American, so who am I to say if its offensive towards them, I don’t know their experience. But I do know that on Indian reservations, they usually name their sports teams after Chiefs, it’s a source of pride and identity. The problem comes when Americans start to do it too, because this is cultural appropriation. We have taken something that is a Native American source of pride and commercialized it, named a team of Americans after it, with no regard for its original intention. This is textbook cultural appropriation, Americans profiting off of another culture while not experiencing the negative stereotypes associated with that culture because of their privilege. The founding of this country relied on taking everything from the Native Americans, their land, way of life, even their dignity. I think it’s time we stop stealing from Native Americans. There are plenty of alternatives for team names, for example, Kansas City is known for their Jazz music, they even have a Jazz museum. They could change their name from the Chiefs to the name of a Jazz musician or something related to it. It is just a name, but it could so easily be changed to something non-offensive, and they would still be an amazing football team.

  109. I think that in some cases sports teams use of Native American names, gestures and imagery can be offensive but also invasive. Although there are sports teams that use the name and respect it and honor it, there are also many cases where people misrepresent and disrespect the cultures of Native American groups. For example, the University of Illinois’ mascot was an Illini chief, and while many thought nothing of the chief dancing at halftime it can actually be viewed as disrespectful and invasive. The dance performed was a sacred religious ritual, which I don’t think is fair to be presented at a halftime show for entertainment purposes, where the meaning and sentimental value of the dance is disregarded. For reasons and incidents such as the one described above, I feel like the use of Native American names, gestures and imagery can be offensive.

  110. Football games, and football teams are a trivial thing when discussing the misuse of Native American Culture, and the Ignorance of historical context. Since the beginning of European's contact with Native Americans, they've continued to push Natives out of their rightful land, and disregard their culture and traditions. Throughout the late 1800's and early 1900's Native American's began to be forced out of their homes and taken to boarding schools, where they would be taken of everything which defined them as Native Americans, and forced to assimilate to a 'European Way of Life'. For Native Americans to have faced hundreds of years of oppression, and be shamed in and mocked for their culture, for it now to be taken so carelessly and misused for a fun football game tradition is unacceptable. It's not only inaccurate to any Native American’s culture or traditions, but it generalizes who Native American’s are. They aren’t the chanting and hollering cartoon’s depicted in old movies or television, they are people, and they are people who hold unity in the rich and unique cultural traditions and values they share. They aren’t mascots, and they shouldn't be treated as such. It’s extremely degrading for a person’s culture to merely be simplified and desensitized into a 2D caricature, or a mocking chant, and I hope the Kansas City Chiefs and their fans, as well as other sports teams such as the Indians and Redskins start to realize that.

  111. @Sydney Pugh I have to respectfully disagree. Yes they were mistreated and it’s a cultural symbol. But these two things are separate entities. Let the football team use there logo and leave anything personal behind. I have heard people of that culture complain so I don’t see why it is a problem....

  112. Although many Native American team names and the related paraphernalia and activities have somewhat lost their original connotation to the fans who view it more as a team tradition than anything else, it is still offensive to continue using these people as mascots. Native people are still a real and modern group of people who are attached to their culture like any other culture in the world, something I feel is not very well portrayed in American schools or American society as a whole. Sports teams misrepresent these native people and demean them to a two dimensional, fierce, violent, brutish old stereotype that should have died by now, while also putting native practices on display disrespectfully, like the dancing chief at halftime which takes a sacred practice and makes it into a spectacle by and for people who don’t know what it means.Overall, the practice of using Native people for team mascots started as a racist practice and therefore continues to be rooted in racism and misrepresentation.

  113. Growing up in Chicago, I have become a big Blackhawks fan and don’t think twice about the name of my favorite hockey team, but many people are offended by the name. Many collages have been forced to change the name of their mascots, because they were offensive toward Native Americans. I have no filiation with Native Americans so I do not know what it is like to have sports teams named after something that is very offensive. While some pro sports and collage mascots/names are not offensive and actually give credit to the native Americans, many others are very offensive towards them. The football team, the Redskins are an example of an offensive team name and should probably be look at for a renaming.

  114. It’s not up to the majority to decide what’s offensive to the minority. The people who have the power to decide whether or not the tomahawk chop is offensive are Native Americans. If they don’t want stereotypes about themselves spread, their wishes should be honored. It doesn’t matter what the intention of the tomahawk chop is, whether it’s to demean American Indians or just to cheer on the team, because there’s still negative connotations behind the gesture. This isn’t a new issue, it’s just only coming to light now. My generation is often called the snowflake generation because we supposedly take offense more easily than previous generations, but maybe we’re just more aware. The tomahawk chop has always been offensive, it’s just that now Native Americans are taking action to stop it. The team should ask their fans not to do the chop anymore. In the article, Joyce Parker said that she felt guilty about doing the chop but that she did it because she would get caught up in the moment of group joy. The right thing to do would be to stop, but peer pressure and being in a group makes people do things they might not do alone. If the team asked their fans to stop, they would make their stance clear on the issue of Native American racism and their fans wouldn’t feel pressured in any way to do the chop. Even if their fans didn't feel the same way about the issue, they would probably stop so as not to disappoint their team.

  115. While I am not Native American, and thus will never have a true say in whether or not actions like the tomahawk chop are offensive to Native American culture, I believe that certain pieces of sports teams and their fans are derogatory. For example, as mentioned in the article, The Redskins were named to make fun of natives and thus I see it as wrongful to keep such a name when we have come so far. Some may argue that it’s unfair to change the name, or actions such as the tomahawk, because it’s been around so long and people are aware of how it’s offensive, that it’s impractical to change it. However, I argue that it’s a constant reminder to Natives that they were once seen as lesser than “true” Americans, and by ignoring those that do wish for a change, we’re still treating them as lesser. I, and many others, are aware that even if a team makes a change people will continue to use, do, or wear the thing deemed offensive. But if the team and players make it known they wish for a change and ignore those that don’t follow suit, people will eventually see no point in continuing. Instead, new traditions can be made, hopefully with input from Natives in order to create something new that is inclusive and fun for everyone.

  116. I do not think it’s offensive for sports teams and their fans do use native American names, imagery and gestures for their teams because they have been like this for so long and we are just now having a conversation about it. On the other hand, I can understand from the Native Americans point of view how it could seem offensive but I don’t think anyone is intending it to be offensive. I believe that these teams should continue to work with Native Americans to come up with a solution, but they should not have to change anything about the things they’re doing they should just be more considerate in what they represent for natives. Teams such as the “Redskins” should change something about what they are doing because that is looked at by everyone as a derogatory term, where as teams like the “Indians” or “Chiefs” names aren’t, they’re just describing.

  117. At first I was completely on-board with getting rid of the tomahawk chop, but after watching an actual video of fans doing it, it’s not as bad as I thought it was going to be. I imagined many Chiefs' fans wearing traditional headdresses, painting themselves red, and recreating some tribal dance, but it was just them waving their arms. But if actual Native Americans find it offensive, then it is offensive. That doesn’t mean all fans should be forced to stop doing it though. Their intentions are to support a beloved team, not bring down an entirely different culture. I imagine if another country called their team the “Presidents,” with Uncle Sam as their mascot, and had an embarrassing American chant, we would feel some type of way too. At least the Kansas City Chiefs are trying to educate their audience by handing out pamphlets, including Native Americans in their pre-game ceremonies, and spreading information. These actions are helpful, but they’re only going halfway. If they really cared they would change their team name to a non-Native American related title. So not until the team changes their name should fans be forced to give up their chant. If Native Americans don’t like it, they always have the option of switching off their television. By now, the tomahawk chop has assimilated itself into local culture, so getting rid of it would be a lot to ask of the thousands of fans that don’t understand the pain it’s causing Native Americans.

  118. Sport teams have had a long history of using derogatory terms to name franchises. The most egregious examples being blatant offensive terms or mascots like the Washington Redskins or Cleveland Indian’s mascot “Chief Wahoo,” who is colored red and displays crazy mannerisms to poke fun at Native Americans. While the Indians have discontinued this mascot since 2018, the Redskins show no signs of changing their traditional name and logo. The Kansas City Chief’s latest Super Bowl victory puts the franchise and their name in a big spotlight, one they haven’t experienced in a long time. Many Kansas City fans have pride in the history of their team name, and even celebrate with their infamous “tomahawk chop.” I think there’s a fine line between being offensive to minority groups and patronizing these people by getting too worked-up over language. I think that these teams should change their names, imagery, and gestures. While not every Native American feels offended by them, neglecting those who do is neglecting the principal ideal of supporting minorities in America. There is a long history of oppression towards Native Americans and other minorities in this country. Maintaining these names (which were created at the peak of white American’s sense of superiority over these groups) is damaging to our society. If we can’t consider everyone, or at least the most amount of people, we have failed.

  119. Native America Indian mascots and gestures have been a staple in US sports for decades, but now people want that to change. Native American activists feel that these mascots and gestures are extremely racist to Native American culture. Some native Americans though feel that it honors their culture with some teams as they are represented in the sports world. So this leaves America split between keeping tradition or possibly offending Native American people. I feel that there is a middle ground between all this that the Cleveland Indians did. The Indians had a mascot, named Chief Wahoo, who was red in the face and had a Native American headdress on which caused a lot of hate from Native American activists. So the Indians began to phase out majority of merchandise with his face on it, but keep the name while also honoring native culture. That is what I think all teams should follow if they have a name representing American Indians, cut out the blatant racist stuff and honor the Indians that you’re naming your team after.

  120. Growing up, my dad always used to watch football on Sundays. As a little girl I would sit with my dad on the couch and chant for the teams that were playing on the TV, one of these "chants" being the tomahawk chop. As I got older I would ask "why they continue to use this motion in football?", as well as, "why hadn't the NFL changed the name of the Washington Redskins"? Names and actions like these are EXTREMELY racist to the Native American population in our country. In a sense, our country has take one step forward and two steps back. With the civil rights movement and black lives matter, people are fighting all over the country to make sure that African American voices are heard and respected. Now, that is amazing, but what about the Native Americans? America has spent all of this effort to respect African Americans, yet we still have a football team called the redskins, and fans doing the tomahawk Chop as a way of cheering on the Chiefs, also an offensive name. So I believe that these names should definitely be changed, and the motion should be banned in the NFL. Don't Native Americans have the same right as African Americans, and all other Americans have? The right to respect?

  121. With Native Americans being such a prevalent part of the United States past, personally I believe that the use of Native language and gesture, respectively, is tolerable. Racial slurs like “Redskins” which were used to diminish and degraded an entire culture and race should never be tolerated in or outside of sports. But terms like Chief used respectively and with proper credit in place are okay. Gestures like the tomahawk chop when used to encourage or unite team members is good, when used to make fun of or mock other teams I believe it is still tolerable because like many other cheers and chants, they can be quite aggressive and rude so the tomahawk chop could be fine.

  122. ---Part 1--- The issue of whether Native American Names and gestures are racist towards natives is not one for me to answer. It’s one for the Natives to answer... and they have. After an offensive sign was put up at a Sonic referencing the Chiefs, the American Indian Center of the Great Plains arranged a meeting with them to inform them of what they found offensive. After this meeting the team, believe it or not, immediately fixed these offenses. So yes, the Natives did speak on it and it has been fixed to their liking already. Although, on a side note, I know the Chief of the Cheroenhaka Nottoway tribe of modern day Virginia and have visited their Pow Wows before and this Chief finds it racially incorrect to say ‘Native Americans’ as the land they lived on was not ‘America’. So according to this chief, the title of this article is still one of racism and European demoninace. (However he is an extremist on these issues) However since I am a White American, let's talk about teams with racial slurs towards white people because I can decide whether these are racist. (HINT: They aren’t) So the first one to come to mind in the New York Yankees. They are a New York based baseball team and to my knowledge they have never gotten any hardships about their name.

  123. ---Part 2--- However, the word yankee is considered a slur and was originally spelled Jan Kees and was a derogatory name the Dutch used for English settlers of New Amsterdam (modern day New York). It was later adopted by the south as a derogatory name for northerners. So yes, this is a negatively charged word, but I find this to not be racist in any way. There is just way too much history in the name to not rally behind it, no matter your opinion. Go Yanks!

  124. While some may argue that the names, traditions, and attire associated with these sports teams aren’t directly offensive and are important to the tradition of the team, I think it’s a really overlooked issue when it comes to taking into consideration how these things affect Native Americans. In essence, majority of sports fans today participate in these things harmlessly; likely, many fans don’t even know the history behind what makes these things offensive. However, that could be the very issue in this situation, as not enough people understand the offensiveness of these topics. To understand the horrible history of how the Native Americans were treated in the past, and in many ways how there’re still trapped in a cycle of this treatment today, it’s hard to not see these things as rude.

  125. In many cases, it is offensive for sports fans and teams to use Native American gestures, imagery, and names. Most of these teams are not using these things in a respectful way. Many teams are using stereotypical names and imagery in their teams. Maybe if these teams were to be respectful about what they are doing, it wouldn’t be such a big issue.

  126. @Lilu Trueschel Hi, while I do agree with your original point of sports teams not using the Native American identity respectfully, I've got to disagree with your ides of them being able to use it respectfully in any scenario. I feel that given that they have absolutely no relation to Natives, nor fully understand the intent behind their traditions, any mimicking on the team's part would only work to further disparage Native identity. Their use of the Native American identity holds no reverence for what the Natives believed in, their only intent whilst adopting the Native persona, and mimicking their traditions, is to commercialize their culture.

  127. If a minority openly finds something that people—mostly their oppressors, from what I can tell—do offensive, the only good reaction is to stop doing it. The completely separate acts they use to show kindness and respect to Native American people seem empty when they refuse to stop doing what brought up the controversy in the first place.

  128. I think it is highly offensive for sports teams and their fans to use Native American names, imagery, and gestures. Using any other race as a symbol or mascot of a sports team would very clearly be established as wrong by society, which raises the question as to why Native Americans being used as a sports team symbol is any different. Many people may not know the history or the culture behind the names or gestures that they are using. Many people do not know the brutal and harsh way Americans treated Natives in the past—and still do today to some extent. Using them as a symbol wrongly covers up the past and mocks the Natives as we have not really addressed what we have done to them and their families, yet we are taking their names and imagery and gestures and almost claiming it as our own when we use it in our sports. By doing this, we are continuing our history of forcibly taking whatever we want from the Natives, stereotyping them in a way that portrays them as savages and reinforces racism against them.

  129. I believe that it is offensive for sports teams and their fans to use Native American names, imagery and gestures. While many people may not know the history behind the names and gestures, they are most likely aware of the harsh treatment that Native Americans were subjected to in the past, and are even experiencing today. If the Native Americans find these things offensive, then there should be no debate about whether or not these things should be changed. Just because it is only offensive to a minority of people, does not mean that it should be overlooked in favor of the majority. For example, the tomahawk chop used by the Chiefs’ fans is seen as offensive to many Native Americans, yet fans feel that they do not want to get rid of it because they only mean to celebrate a team. However, while the fans might view it as a positive, this false sense of honoring can cause physiological harm to some Natives. It should not be left to non-natives to decide on a question of how offensive something is, seeing as we might not actually know the full history of how this can be encouraging stereotypes. Since the Native Americans have already spoken about finding these things offensives, the NFL should lead the effort of changing them. There are no other teams today that are allowed to perpetuate stereotypes for other races, so we should not be allowing it to happen to the Native American people who have already faced so much discrimination in the American society.

  130. @Asia Glass You do make some good points. One thing I am confused by is how could these things change. The NFL isn't owned by the government. They will only change the name if too many people stop going to there games because of the name, other than that there is no reason to.

  131. Is it offensive for sports teams and their fans to use Native American names, imagery and gestures? Do you think Chiefs’ fans should end their use of the tomahawk chop? I do not believe that it is offensive. Although many may not know the history, the fact is that these teams are representing history. People today keep trying to erase history because everything is "offensive." That is the problem, that people need to feel what they want to and if you do not agree it turns into hate or racist motives. If the Chief's fans are offensive by their use of the tomahawk, then I want the NYG to change because I am very tall and its offensive the use of the name giants. That is exactly my point, people are too sensitive and take offense when it is not derogatory in anyway.

  132. @Katie I think you gave a very excellent example of how people can become offended by these names. They really do need to toughen up and learn the intentions that are behind these names.

  133. @Katie What you said about being tall and wanting the Giants to change their name is a completely different point. People have not been attacked for hundreds of years because their height is above average. You haven't had to live in poverty or worry about your life because of your height. People don't need to "toughen up", because their ancestors have had to live through terrible conditions. They've already been tough. They've developed the thick skin you so desperately want them to have, so now they have the absolute right to be upset about the same people who look down on them because of their race make light of their traditions. They regard them as less than human for generations, then use their life to get publicity. It's not that hard not to be racist. It IS hard being degraded so that a sports team can make more money. They're not trying to erase history, they're trying to have a better future.

  134. @Katie I do not think that comparing you being tall to decades of oppression of someone's racial group and the previous genocide of their racial group is a very accurate comparison. Also, the term "Redskin" is a slur and definitely not "not derogatory in any way."

  135. Headline: What Names Should Be Allowed? In my the mascots, imagery, and gestures they use are just fine. They should have every right to these. Everyone knows the “chop and chants” are not real, it is used for fun. If these people keep teaching that were not historically true then we should go ahead and do them. To “Celebrate their team” is a more persuasive argument. The people do this for entertainment, not to falsely give a picture of what the Native Americans did. I have never personally partaken in these “chants” but it would be quite a sight to see. Teams should be able to get whatever name they want. Unless it is a copyrighted brand or name. The tomahawk chop will not affect whether I watch the Super Bowl or not. I don’t even think I will notice it while I watch it.

  136. Throughout the years, a major debate throughout sport history has been the use of Native American symbols as mascots, chants, and icons. The use of such things in regard to Native American culture is not only offensive but also detrimental to the psyche of the indigenous peoples. The First Peoples of this nation have suffered not only a ninety percent drop in population since the first European ship had landed in the new world, but also a definite loss of culture. If these actions were to happen with any other culture or ethnicity, there would be an outrage. If the same stereotyping happened with Asian culture, black culture, or any other minority, sport teams would not get away with it. Some sports fans say that they don’t mean to attribute prejudice against the Native Peoples, but their actions are part of the culture of their team. But if one was to look at this with an objective point of view, it would be clear that the only “culture” they have is their insensitivity. Native American Culture was taken from them. They have faced lifetimes of prejudice and oppression, and for a group of sports fans to objectify them to one symbol, action, or movement is grievously ignorant. Not only do they not know the culture or history of what their actions represent, but they also do not care. If the culture they are using to make their own “culture” finds their actions and symbols offensive, then the majority is at fault for not listening to the minority they marginalize.

  137. It is offensive for sports teams to use Native symbols, names, or pictures to try and represent a Native. The Chiefs and their fans should stop using the Tomahawk chop because it was used as a war symbol, to fight against the ancestors of some of the Chiefs. It was used in wars between Natives and Europeans and others during European settling, that later became homicidal. Gaylene Crouser is correct and more persuasive. 38% of the Chiefs are European, meaning a some of their ancestors killed Natives. That's kind of like saying: "Oh yeah, my great-great-great-great-great grandfather killed some of you but I can still use your symbol. I haven't, and will not do the Tomahawk chop. And yes it matters what a fan thinks they're are doing because I think some of them know the back story. The Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians and Kansas City Chiefs, should absolutely change their names. 50% of Baltimore Natives find those names offensive and almost like slurs. The Redskins shouldn't bring Natives into the problem, they should just straight up change it! I didn't watch the Super Bowl LIV because of the Colin Kaepernick situation. If I had I would have been disgusted by the chop and probably not cheer on the Chiefs.

  138. @Jayla As I do believe some of the gestures and names some teams use are offensive and should stop, I personally think the use of the Tomahawk Chop for the Cheifs use it for the same reason you named, to fight. And maybe that's not for war against ancestors, but the gesture of it is a careful tradition they have taken part in for a long time.Where I do understand your reasons of being upset with it, it also has it's place in history. As for the Colin Kaepernick situation, I do believe he was standing up for his truth, we have all been taught to do so, no matter what other people may think.

  139. Personally this kinda tore me, I do believe in some, or most, these teams may do, say, or stand for the wrong reasons that may be offensive. I think the Chiefs use the Tomahawk Chop to show strength and power before a fight of the game. Thinking this, I do know some people, maybe a lot, take offence to this, but it has been a tradition. Whereas I do see the side of Gaylene Crouser, I stand by it being a tradition. I don't believe that all fans do this to celebrate and fight for the team, and I think if they aren't doing it for that purpose they they shouldn't at all. I have never participated in the Tomahawk Chop, I've never really been into the Cheifs, let alone football in general since becoming a teenager. I believe there are a lot of teams out there that use, say, or do offensive things, but, it's not personally up to me who changes everything, if we all had it our way in this world, there would probably be an unsettling war. I did not watch Super Bowl LIV.

  140. I think that it is incredibly offensive to use those terms to even though its for a sports team i think it honestly as bad as calling white people crackers because you using a term that really offends many people i think that there can always be another word to use and people don't even think about how this is affecting other people and how those words can really hurt and offend some people

  141. Personally, I think that the use of Native American mascots is not okay. It's not "all in good fun" when there are Native American children in these schools being affected, and it's not just having these mascots that is the problem. Mascots like those normalize these stereotypes, and make it so that when children think of Native American people, these exaggerated, inaccurate, and sometimes harmful portrayals are what come to mind. If these things belonged to them, I would say that the people using the sport names, chants, and imagery should get to choose, but these things are not theirs. Native American culture isn't theirs to play with. It's not up to white people to decide that they're "honoring" Native Americans or that Native American people need to "stop being so sensitive." It IS up to white people to LISTEN. To stop telling Native American people whether or not their mascots are offensive and listen when Native American people tell them that they are offended because they HAVE.

  142. Being native myself I get to see how things like this effect the native part of my family and friends, and sometimes me, although I don't face a lot of these things first hand, because I'm a kid in a newer generation, and I don't have necessarily "dark" skin, nor fit in to many of the stereotypes. I DO see how every single insensitive action like just the naming of a sports team, effects my community. My mother works with the native community as part of her job, but not just locally, she works with native communities throughout the country, and even the rest of the world, and rarely comes home and tells me about how happy a tribe is about the way they are portrayed in mainstream culture. Just the cover photo for this article makes me so angry and hate full towards the "clueless" people standing in those stands yelling and chanting racist, unbelievably insensitive chants, but the truth is, like @Laurel said, things like this, are what these people were most likely raised up around and don't find it wrong to yell, maybe even at a native fan who already feels pressured or uncomfortable in the situation. My community tries its hardest to stop or change things like insensitively named groups, and tries to teach people about how to be more aware, and they are able to stop some of it but it is so ingrained in the "Western way of life" or culture that it will take our generation and the more radical people of previous generations to stop it before it effects our children.

  143. Some of these comments "I think it is all in fun, but I have never participated in the gesture. It is tradition." are part of the problem. When is it alright to demean and hurt someone else's culture? One that already has a history in this country with it's immigrants of bad faith and genocide. Now it's culture is being held hostage for profit and entertainment. It isn't a compliment or nod of acceptance to have sports teams named, referenced, or imaged at the expense of another's culture. My father was a sports fan. He would never attend games played by Washington, Kansas City, Atlanta, and Cleveland.

  144. Many sports teams have used Native American imagery for years and in some areas we are finally seeing some change. The issue itself is that cultural appropriation is sometimes accepted in society which is disrespectful to many groups of people. This year they finally were going to rename the Redskins but because of time had to go with just The Washington Football Team, hopefully they figure that out soon. This improvement will hopefully spread awareness to other teams with culturally incorrect names. Overall, this changes should be made because it’s offensive to these cultural groups.

  145. Throughout American history, the strained relationship between the Native-Americans and the Europeans has been very evident. The Europeans, now White Americans, have strived to exterminate, assimilate, segregate, and expell the Natives. The education system in the United States fails to educate its students properly. They like to portray themselves as guilty, but innocent at the same time. The subject of Native-Americans is only touched in history class when it comes to Manifest Destiny, Trail of Tears, and the "discovery" of the Americas. What they fail to mention is the countless number of acts or laws and attempts to end the Natives. An example of what is not taught in school is the boarding schools Native-American children were sent to in order to "kill the Indian, but save the man" as stated by Richard H. Pratt. In these boarding schools, children were psychically, mentally, and sexually abused by superiors. They were not allowed to see their family, speak their native language, or associate themselves with Anything Native-American. Many never came home because of the vast number of murders that happened in those boarding schools. These children were stripped from their identity by the United States government. These sports fans and sports teams are not celebrating the Native-American culture but celebrating the horrible past. What culture is there left to celebrate, when there are hardly any Native-Americans due to the unspoken about inter-group relations.

  146. Imagine thinking a team name like the chiefs is racist whilst perpetuating a false narrative created by Columbus that these people have anything at all to do with “Indians”. Stop labeling them Indians...listen I know many of them self identify as such, but they are not from the Indian subcontinent, nor do they get to appropriate an entire ethnicities name as there own only to turn around and flail out when someone appropriates a tomohawk dance move which isn’t likely cultural for more than 90% of tribes in North America smfh

  147. I think that the names are very offensive and should be changed as soon as possible. The derogatory names mislabel and are incredibly rude to the native American population. The excuse that it's just supporting their team isn't a valid excuse to support a name given by a group of racist colonizers that committed mass genocide.

  148. I believe that it is incredibly offensive for sports teams to use Native American and Indigenous names, imagery, and gestures because it is insensitive, and perpetuating a false image of Native American and Indigenous culture as something that it is not. For many many years, sports teams have used these names, imagery, and gestures for their teams, cheers, etc. but have they actually considered the offensiveness, and harmfulness that is spread using those stereotypes, derogatory names, and racial slurs? And not to mention, they are committing cultural theft towards Indigenous People and Native American's cultures. I believe it is unjust and disgusting how sports teams and schools are allowed to use certain things from a culture "for fun" and to represent them when using those names and such are creating false stereotypes, and it is flat-out disrespectful.

  149. I think that it is offensive because no matter what your intentions are it will ultimately be insulting to the Native American communities. Yes, I do believe that the Chiefs fans should stop the use of the tomahawk chop because it is seen to Native Americans as a mockery to their culture and if it is then the fans should stop. No, I have never taken part in a tomahawk chop. The sports teams should change their names because of the fact that it is offensive to the Native Americans and they should change their names right away because what happens if someone names a sports team something that you will be offended by what will you want them to do and so I believe that they should change it.

  150. It's offensive for sports teams and their fans to use derogatory terms. Because they never asked if they could use such terms to represent a fierce team. They use stereotypes for marketing their team, like their mascots or even their names. And even after they get called out for it, some sports team simply do nothing about. I find it disgusting. Even if they think it's not offensive then why are so many people offended by it? All sports teams in my opinion using these names should change them if they would like to be well respected.

  151. I think that it is very offensive to use Native American imagery and gestures. Because they claim that they are honoring the Native Americans, yet they do not ask them about their culture, or their thoughts on sports teams having names/imagery/gestures that supposedly relate to them. And these team names are based off of stereotypes made not by the Native Americans but the people outside their culture. The gestures/imagery/names used are racist, offensive, derogatory, inaccurate and stereotypes. I think that it is right for the Chiefs to stop using the tomahawk chop because it is offensive and culturally inaccurate.

  152. It is offensive for sports teams and their fans to use Native American names because the names that they are using and representing the teams with are very derogatory and stereotype Native Americans and who they are. I think that the chiefs' fans should end their use of the tomahawk chop because Tomahawk chop might not seem like a very harmful thing towards anyone but the idea it is representing native Americans is a harmful and disgusting way to represent Native American culture and should not be used by sports teams or fans of sports teams. I Have never witnessed or participated in a tomahawk chop at a sporting event. but even without doing it, or seeing it, i know, i would be very embarrassed by what i am doing and standing for. The article does not make me rethink the Tomahawk chop at all because even if they think it is a good representation it is not and honestly it should not be taken as lightly as it is being taken. Teams like the Washington Redskins, the Cleveland Indians and Kansas City Chiefs should change their names because they are representing very derogatory images and names, even if the team was of a large Native American population the terms and names that are being represented by the team are hurtful to the culture of the Native Americans. If a tribe approves of the name before they name the sports team then I guess it's not as bad because they got permission, but still I am a little uncomfortable with representing people as one thing and stereotyping.

  153. Firstly, people have got to stop labeling these people as "Indians". That name was one of the many things that came from Columbus's false narrative of these people. Secondly, stereotyping is what created these racist and derogatory names. I think that even this motion that was spoken about can be considered as both. It is offensive to Native Americans and is just one of the many stereotypes that white people spread.

  154. I would say that if a name is from a certain culture or race and they don't want you to use it to not. Because you are technically stealing their culture. And you should definitely change it is it's from a race/culture and it's offensive.

  155. Yes, it's very offensive to use these names. First off keeping the names even though they are blatantly racist feeds in to racial stereotypes. Even though people may think they are just cheering or trying to give support they never once asked indigenous people if it was ok to do so. I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to cheer for teams but everyone needs to make sure that the history of names and logos aren't buying in to racial slurs.

  156. using a name or logo has a native or something else makes other people mad and how they use it has well in schools.this is a bad look because some people might get offended about the name or the logo

  157. It is offensive for them to use these derogatory names because, even if they aren't used to degrade the Native American culture, it is still originated from an offensive stereotype that doesn't support the Native American culture despite being named after it.

  158. The use of Native American names and symbols comes from stereotypes spread by colonizers, making these symbols seem competitive or intimidating. The colonization and genocide of Native Americans shouldn't be in any way compared to a sports game. The use of these names, logos, and chants spreads a false message and can make people incredibly uncomfortable, so they shouldn't be used.

  159. I've personally never participated in the "tomahawk chop", truth be told I hadn't heard of it before this, I knew of the Kansas City Chiefs but I don't really follow much football. I think this is offensive, both the name and the whole culture that surrounds it. It mocks real Native American culture and appropriates it, turning it into a joke. People may not have racist implications when they do it but they are still reinforcing the idea that these stereotypes are okay and valid.

  160. Although the fans mean well, offensive terms that have roots deep in history should not be tolerated. When they practice these stereotypes, they are not celebrating the pride of Native Americans. Instead they are celebrating the long and painful history of genocide and death.

  161. Teams like the Washington Redskins should ABSOLUTELY change their names. Being in as big a seat of power as they are and continuing with the use of the name, while knowing it's history, is just morally wrong. The name redskins is a derogatory term from when indigenous peoples were being massacred in the United States during colonization. Continuing the use of this name shows complete disregard for the people it is referring to, as it displays them as a stereotype or a caricature.