"Fighting Sioux" gets a fighting chance

[AndrewPF]

The University of North Dakota has been trying to retire the nickname and logo deemed offensive to Native Americans, but the name's supporters say they have gathered enough signatures to force a statewide referendum on the issue in June...

Source

I personally think this is a good thing. It's a beautiful identity that was executed tastefully, and I'd love to see it back.

What say you, gentlemen?

[CS85]

Personally I feel that the team would be so much better if they changed their name to "warriors," or "wildcats," or a generic bird of prey.

As a white person, the exploitation of the American Indian greatly offends my hypersensitive and irrational sensibilities.

[CrazyAnna]

The University of North Dakota has been trying to retire the nickname and logo deemed offensive to Native Americans, but the name's supporters say they have gathered enough signatures to force a statewide referendum on the issue in June...

Source

I personally think this is a good thing. It's a beautiful identity that was executed tastefully, and I'd love to see it back.

What say you, gentlemen?

I'm proud of them. The Fighting Sioux is a great name for that region and I can't find a single offensive thing about it. It's no more offensive than names like Buccaneers, Raiders, Gladiators, Spartans, Fighting Illini, Pirates, Cowboys, and etc.

[texfischer]

Good to hear, I've always liked classic native american team identities.

[Gothamite]

A statewide referendum means nothing.

The citizens can vote as often as they like, but it will be meaningless every time.

They. Don't. Own. The. Name.

Even worse is the silly notion that North Dakota would enshrine intellectual property theft in its constitution.

The only opinion that counts is the ruling council of the Standing Rock tribe. Unless and until they agree to license the name, North Dakota can stomp its feet and whinge all it likes, for all the good it will do.

Look, at the risk of rehashing this all again, I would have preferred that they license the name to the University. But it's not up to me. It's up to the Standing Rock tribe. All this political posturing is as pointless as it is silly.

[BBTV]

So isn't it an NCAA rule that you need a license to use a Native American nickname? If that's so, and they don't have said license, then what would any referendum or petition accomplish? The only referendum that would matter is one that decides whether they should end their affiliation with any NCAA sanctioned conference.

[Gothamite]

Exactly. That's a vote that would be meaningful.

But a statewide referendum to "allow" the University to use a name somebody else owns? Pathetic.

I understand that North Dakotans are frustrated. But while empty political posturing might make them feel better, it certainly won't help the University secure a license to use the name.

[aci]

I don't think they own their name any less than the Fighting Irish. Did Notre Dame have to petition the government of Ireland for permission to use their name?

The whole thing is stupid, and it starts with the NCAA overstepping their bounds by banning Native American names. It's just not offensive. It's not racist, it doesn't demean the Sioux one bit, and if anything, it's one of the more tasteful and respectful logo packages in college sports. If there's any problem with University of North Dakota sports, it's that their arena is named after a Nazi...

[matthew823]

I don't think they own their name any less than the Fighting Irish. Did Notre Dame have to petition the government of Ireland for permission to use their name?

The whole thing is stupid, and it starts with the NCAA overstepping their bounds by banning Native American names. It's just not offensive. It's not racist, it doesn't demean the Sioux one bit, and if anything, it's one of the more tasteful and respectful logo packages in college sports. If there's any problem with University of North Dakota sports, it's that their arena is named after a Nazi...

Several people in this thread (none of whom, so far as I can tell, are from any Native American ethnic group, let alone the group whose identity is being used here) making the case that this nickname isn't offensive or racist, blah blah blah. Look, maybe it's not. I don't have a huge problem with it.

But if it's not a big deal to the tribe then they shouldn't have any problem licensing the name to the school.

[omnivore]

This school is taking this entirely too far trying to paint the issue as one of state's rights when it's not. They could leave the NCAA, but they won't because it'd destroy their athletic programs. Or find some pro league to goof around it and pay their players. But otherwise, they need to follow the NCAA edict as much as I hate the NCAA and their overreach, other schools altered their names with a fight or paid off the tribes to continue using the names (see also Utes, Seminoles) and so, UND needs to quit trying to drag this out.

[gosioux76]

Honestly, I don't understand what they're thinking.

It's as if they think an overwhelming victory in a statewide referendum will be all it takes to sway the NCAA -- will of the people, etc. As an alum and devoted Sioux fan, I hope that's the case, but it seems pretty short sighted and politically naive.

They just don't seem to fully grasp the consequences of the university losing its standing with the NCAA. And for a state that holds its national championship hockey banners as a badge of honor, that's both surprising and disappointing.

EDIT:

OK, now I see something that makes sense.

A statewide referendum is being viewed it seems as a workaround to the Standing Rock tribe's unwillingness to hold its own election on the issue. In other words, casting the vote statewide would include Standing Rock, allowing the tribe's voice to finally be heard.

I can see a convincing argument made for that, though it still remains a question as to whether the NCAA considers it the official word of the tribe or not.

There's a bit more on that in this Grand Forks Herald report today.

[chuckymack]

I don't see how North Dakota has any legal right to the name 'Sioux'.

It seems to me it's not an issue with whether or not the name is offensive -- it's an issue not having the rights to the name. If a restaraunt owner named Wendy McDonald tried to name her diner 'Wendy's' or 'McDonald's', she'd have a lawsuit in her mailbox within a week. And most of us would agree that she should've named it something original in the first place.

[Mingjai]

They. Don't. Own. The. Name.

Even worse is the silly notion that North Dakota would enshrine intellectual property theft in its constitution.

The only opinion that counts is the ruling council of the Standing Rock tribe. Unless and until they agree to license the name, North Dakota can stomp its feet and whinge all it likes, for all the good it will do.

I may be wrong, but I believe the tribe does not have any Federally- or state-recognizable right to exclude use of the Sioux name in commerce. This is not an intellectual property issue--this is a contracts issue. As part of UND's membership contract with the NCAA, the school has agreed to abide by NCAA rules and regulations. The NCAA has made the rule that universities wishing to use Native American imagery in their identity must have permission from the relevant tribe first. UND has not secured that permission and therefore the NCAA can prevent the school from using the Sioux nickname. If UND wants to continue to take part in NCAA sanctioned events, they must change their nickname or find a way to change the rule.

I personally don't mind Native American identities that are done in good taste, but I agree with you--a referendum is ridiculous. It just shows that the majority is willing to impose its beliefs on an insular minority. No surprise there.

[pcgd]

The only thing that could possibly come from this is Standing Rock changing their mind because "the people" spoke. But I doubt it because I'm sure they are already aware that most the population in North Dakota wants the name and they don't want to allow a vote for a variety of legitimate reasons.

This shouldn't cost a taxpayer a dime but I'm sure it will. And that's the crime.

[aci]

I don't think they own their name any less than the Fighting Irish. Did Notre Dame have to petition the government of Ireland for permission to use their name?

The whole thing is stupid, and it starts with the NCAA overstepping their bounds by banning Native American names. It's just not offensive. It's not racist, it doesn't demean the Sioux one bit, and if anything, it's one of the more tasteful and respectful logo packages in college sports. If there's any problem with University of North Dakota sports, it's that their arena is named after a Nazi...

Several people in this thread (none of whom, so far as I can tell, are from any Native American ethnic group, let alone the group whose identity is being used here) making the case that this nickname isn't offensive or racist, blah blah blah. Look, maybe it's not. I don't have a huge problem with it.

But if it's not a big deal to the tribe then they shouldn't have any problem licensing the name to the school.

<--- Native American (though not Sioux)

There is a world of difference between race and racism. As far as I'm concerned, there really isn't much difference between "Braves" or "Sioux" and "Spartans" or "Trojans".

Before the NCAA stepped in to cause trouble, I don't recall ever hearing of either of the Sioux bands asking for the university to stop using their name, or requesting payment for it. The NCAA made UND (among many others) ask permission to keep their name, and one of the bands decided to be jerks about it. The issue wouldn't have come up if the NCAA didn't go all PC in the first place.

[CrazyAnna]

I don't think they own their name any less than the Fighting Irish. Did Notre Dame have to petition the government of Ireland for permission to use their name?

The whole thing is stupid, and it starts with the NCAA overstepping their bounds by banning Native American names. It's just not offensive. It's not racist, it doesn't demean the Sioux one bit, and if anything, it's one of the more tasteful and respectful logo packages in college sports. If there's any problem with University of North Dakota sports, it's that their arena is named after a Nazi...

Several people in this thread (none of whom, so far as I can tell, are from any Native American ethnic group, let alone the group whose identity is being used here) making the case that this nickname isn't offensive or racist, blah blah blah. Look, maybe it's not. I don't have a huge problem with it.

But if it's not a big deal to the tribe then they shouldn't have any problem licensing the name to the school.

<--- Native American (though not Sioux)

There is a world of difference between race and racism. As far as I'm concerned, there really isn't much difference between "Braves" or "Sioux" and "Spartans" or "Trojans".

Before the NCAA stepped in to cause trouble, I don't recall ever hearing of either of the Sioux bands asking for the university to stop using their name, or requesting payment for it. The NCAA made UND (among many others) ask permission to keep their name, and one of the bands decided to be jerks about it. The issue wouldn't have come up if the NCAA didn't go all PC in the first place.

<--- partial Native American (though not Sioux either)

Well said, aci.

[Chawls]

To the members of Native American ancestry, what are your tribes? Just curious. BTW, I'm also part Native American, though I'm not sure how much. My guess is roughly 1% Choctaw.

[CrazyAnna]

To the members of Native American ancestry, what are your tribes? Just curious. BTW, I'm also part Native American, though I'm not sure how much. My guess is roughly 1% Choctaw.

That's actually a convo of much debate growing up. My roots are from my late grandmother. We beleive Lummi.

[STL FANATIC]

A few quick thoughts.

I don't believe the Standing Rock Tribe or any other tribe owns the rights to the name Fighting Sioux. Perhaps they should, but that's another court case itself. They'd have to argue in court that they deserve ownership. Presently, I don't believe they have it.

The NCAA, and not the US government is the ones who are anointing them as owners of the name. And in this instance, that means almost as much. But when someone (Gothamite in this case) says they can't believe the state would put intellectual property theft in its constitution, that's not accurate. By law, this is not theft.

Now it does violate NCAA rules. Even then, I don't believe the rule REQUIRES the UND to drop the nickname. They just face penalties if they keep it. The University has made a decision that keeping the name isn't worth facing the penalties. The voters may be deciding it is. And because of that, I'm not sure this is as meaningless as people think.

As for my personal opinion, I remain happy to see this fight continue. I certainly have my views on American Indian nicknames and imagery (and specific instances of its usage), but this has very little to do with that. My support for this has everything to do with the NCAA far, far overstepping and violating its intended purpose and mission. There's nothing illegal about it... it's an entity that has the right to make decisions like this so long as its member institutions allow it. The NCAA's constitution doesn't bind the NCAA to much of anything. And I get that. But you'd think that constitution and mission was put in place for a reason, and a darn good one. And this rule (and probably many others) violates that constitution and that mission. I like to see that at least one member is willing to call them on it.

[Fjm]

How about they drop the "Fighting" and the Indian head logo? Neither are necessary, and the compromise might appease those with issues. I think students and fans would be happy enough in keeping the "North Dakota Sioux" name.