I JUST RETURNED from the newly-famous battlefield of the Fighting Whites, at the University of Northern Colorado. But there were no fighting whites. I’m afraid they’ve all been massacred. All that’s left is mascot-removal rubric posted over their silent graves.
Since early March the national media has fixated on the intramural basketball team called "Fighting Whites" and their T-shirt featuring the head and shoulders of a clean cut, conservative white man in a suit and tie.
The "Fighting Whites" T-shirt has sold by the tens of thousands all over the country, and I was sure I’d find ubiquitous evidence of great white warriors when I went to Greeley, Colorado’s newly celebrated university.
Instead, I found myself attending an ironic memorial service called "In Whose Honor? A Symposium On Ethnic Stereotypes and Mascots." The two-day service held April 26 and 27 was sponsored by fourteen different UNC clubs and departments.
But it didn’t honor any fighting whites. Instead, it honored the pains and protests of American Indians and, naturally, other minority ethnic groups anxious to get in the act.
It’s called "coalition," in the Jesse Jackson sense--Oppressed Groups United. When Solomon Little Owl (Crow), UNC Director of Native American Student Services, appeared on a panel with Fighting Whites team members, he was introduced by George Junne, a contemptuous. middle-aged black professor of UNC’s Africana Studies. Like the Indian story couldn’t be told except under the auspices of black activists. On the same panel was a white female, Sally McBeth, UNC professor of anthropology.
Poor Indians! We just couldn’t make it without these wonderful, superior black men and white women saviors.
In this demeaning atmosphere, the official mourners, mostly white, many nationally recognized professors, used hackneyed rhetoric to lamented white America’s treatment of Indians, and bemoaned the use of Indians as sports monikers and mascots.
Feminists were also there in force, adding their lugubrious denunciations of anything masculine, like strength or warrior traits. Lucy Ganje, University of North Dakota’s famed opponent of the Fighting Sioux mascot, was the main feature of the Greeley Tribune review (4/27). She’s also a homosexual advocate, though that fact was not a part of this particular plight-fest. (But there were many female homosexuals present.)
Well, I had to speak out, (especially since I was an invited lecturer.) As a Comanche man, I declared the symposium was nothing more than a left-wing fest of feminist man-hating—just the latest in a campaign to emasculate society’s last remaining symbols of strength, the Indian warrior mascots.
Needless to say, my lecture was a sour note in the symposium of mascot dirges. It was so offensive I was barred from the activist strategy sessions held the next day in Estes Park. No surprise.
But what was surprising is that I was ever invited in the first place. My support of Indian warrior mascots is well known. Mascots provide an opportunity to re-educate America, as well as Indians, on the virtues of being a man. Why would I be invited to lecture at a mascot-removal rally?
It was because Dan Ninham (Ojibwe) had the true idea of academic, intellectual discussion. Ninham, a doctoral student at UNC, put the symposium together in a month. He was first to include me, a pro-mascot Indian, in a university sponsored conference against Indian mascots.
Charlene Teters, the famed Indian activist of the documentary In Who’s Honor?, spoke last, and obviously had been deeply offended by my views. She said, "Indians who advocate Indian mascots are damaged people, and they will eventually have to answer to their own people."
But I don’t answer to tyrannical Leftists, whether male or female, black, white, or Indian. Now, I don’t enjoy offending people, especially Indians. But nobody tells me what I feel.
Yet that is exactly what Leftists try to do. At the beginning of the symposium, Dean of UNC’s College of Arts & Sciences Sandra Flake said, "Our role goes beyond the classroom," and emphasized the university’s "social responsibility."
And that’s the real doctrine of Leftist ‘educators.’ They push activist political positions on their students—instead of teaching them objective thinking skills.