Over the last twenty years there have been a lot of pushes for name changes in the interest of sensitivity to Native Americans, even when the Native Americans in question hadn’t even realized that they ought to be feeling sensitive. There’s the Redskins, the Seminoles, the Chiefs, etc. If we’re really concerned with doing the right thing here, we can’t stop with sports teams. Naming a team after an Indian tribe or archetype is supposed to be something of a complement. (Why won’t anyone stand up for all those poor North Carolina Renos and Dumonts suffering under the oppression of Duke University and their Blue Devils!?)What about all those names that were derived from such mundane considerations as proximity? What about those horribly insensitive names derived from the conquest of one tribe or another by Europeans? A few names I think we should seriously consider changing:
- Alabama
- Mississippi
- Missouri
- Illinois
- Sioux City
- Iowa
- North and South Dakota
- Utah
- Saskatchewan
- Minnesota
- Indiana (!!!)
- Cheyenne
There are countless more! Think of all those poor people whose names were taken and mutilated so callously. What about the descendants of the Cherokee? How can they go on living, knowing there’s a Cherokee, Alabama, just mocking them from their former homeland?
Technorati Tags: political correctness, indians, team names, native americans, sensitivity
[...] P.S. On the use of masculine pronouns, I refer you to “In the Interest of Sensitivity.” [...]