Robert Rush says he is disgusted by seeing the Indian mascot name on
the front of Burroughs High and what a terrible wrong it is to the Native
Americans in his May 5 letter.
And, just as did Leader editors, he gives no specifics as to why
Native Americans should feel bad about such mascots. Instead, Mr. Rush
mentions, three times, a PBS documentary film "In Whose Honor?" that
somehow persuaded him to apologize to Native Americans while never
bothering to give us any particulars about what the film says.
Being the media center that Burbank is, it seems likely that Mr. Rush
may be more interested in free publicity than he is to feelings of Native
Americans.
As we might expect, the Leader, in the same issue, tracks down a
Native American family in Burbank (with kids at Burroughs) and attempts
to make their case for removal of the mascot name.
Again, they can provide no evidence of prejudice actually experienced
by the family as a result of the mascot name and can only come up with
comments such as, "Using the mascot is invalidating us a human beings"
and "You're putting Native Americans in the same category as bulldogs and
other mascots."
If these are valid concerns, then we need to eliminate other mascots
that also invalidate human beings, such as Spartans, Romans, Vikings,
Yankees, Rangers, Warriors, etc, etc.
Apparently the winning warrior theme of many school and team mascots
is lost upon William Lightning who chooses (probably with some coaching
from activists with a cause) to restrict his school's mascot comparison
to that of Burbank High's bulldog.
Burbank High will next be the target of political correctness as
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and the Society for the
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals seek to eliminate animals as mascots
because it demeans them.
Will we have the Burroughs Red Sox and the Burbank Blues?
MEL WOLF
Burbank
