As students at a progressive school, we should expect — in both the senses of expecting and demanding a certain degree of ethical coherence — that the University adopt stances that foster the right to free individual expression while, as an institution, honoring tolerance and respecting group and cultural traditions.
This expectation has become particularly germane in the realm of collegiate athletics in recent years, as many long-standing American Indian mascots have come under fire as politically incorrect, culturally insensitive or just downright offensive. But this particular issue transcends the usual ideological gobbledygook that is political correctness: Rather, many of these mascots present specific harmful caricatures of entire cultures that transcend the bounds of good taste.
This contentious issue, a dormant one at the University for most of the past year, has been rekindled by the recent announcement the Ducks would play the Big Ten Conference’s Illinois this December in Chicago. In exchange, Illinois will face off against Oregon in the 2005-06 Papé Jam.
The move has disappointed some locals, who contend the agreement is tantamount to sanctioning racist and demeaning caricaturing. And rightfully so.
For some, though, the University’s decision to schedule a game against a school that uses an American Indian mascot goes deeper than an implicit validation of a tasteless practice — it smacks of perfidy.
In summer 2002, law student Frank Silva and others presented University President Dave Frohnmayer with a resolution asking the University to not schedule games against such teams.
“(Frohnmayer) agreed to take it into consideration with a wink and a nod that it’s not going to be an issue,” Silva told the Emerald.
University Executive Assistant President Dave Hubin said there was no implicit consent to refraining from scheduling games, however, adding, “I think that there was a commitment that was retained to work with the NCAA (on the issue).”
Whatever was actually agreed to is beside this point: Crude stereotypes are bad not only for the groups they portray, but they reflect poorly a society that permits the perpetuation of the unfair characterization of some of its members.
The Emerald Editorial Board calls on the University administration to cancel, if possible, the upcoming games against Illinois, unless the school first changes its embattled mascot. Moreover, the University should commit to not scheduling any sports games against any teams who offensively use a name or mascot of any ethnic group. This includes not only teams with American Indian mascots like Illinois, but of other races, such as Notre Dame’s mascot — which crudely caricatures an ethnicity and exacerbates that stereotype, calling the Irish combative.
Hubin argues the University is not the appropriate place to address this issue, suggesting instead, “The proper forum is the NCAA.”
If this were purely an athletic issue, maybe. But this issue reflects, too, on the cultural sensitivity and social responsibility of the University itself — and that’s not an issue to export to distant athletic program bureaucrats.