Should the Edmonton Eskimos have to change their name?

[Barrister]

Edmonton Eskimos must change offensive name, Inuit leader says
Derogatory term criticized as symbol of past colonial policies
CBC News Posted: Nov 27, 2015 8:45 PM MT Last Updated: Nov 29, 2015 10:21 AM MT


There are growing calls for the Edmonton Eskimos to change their name.

On Friday the Ottawa Citizen published an editorial calling the name offensive to Canada's indigenous community.

On Sunday the Eskimos play the Ottawa Redblacks in Winnipeg for the Grey Cup, the Canadian Football League championship.

"If I was called an Eskimo or introduced as an Eskimo by anyone else, I would be offended by that," he said. "It is something that was acceptable at one time but now just isn't.

"It's time for the team to change its name. And it's time also for all sports teams to change their names if they continue to use indigenous people as their mascots."

It doesn't appear that will happen soon, though. A spokesman for the Edmonton Eskimos said the organization has no plans to change the name.

CFL commissioner Jeffrey Orridge didn't appear eager to discuss the issue when approached by CBC News at a Grey Cup event in Winnipeg.

Relic from the past

"The team has focused on diversity its entire history," Orridge said.

"And they have a great relationship, as I understand it, with the native Canadian community. I don't know anything more about that [other] than the Eskimos organization and the incredibly progressive and incredibly substantial people there."

J.C. Sherritt
Eskimos linebacker J.C. Sherritt says the team name is an issue worth talking about. (CBC )

However, Eskimos linebacker J.C. Sherritt thinks the issue may be worth discussing, especially in light of the controversy over the name of Washington's team in the National Football League.

"I know the Redskins name back home is something that is constantly talked about and needed change," he said.

"When things like that happen, conversation is always a good thing and if we need to talk about it we'll talk about it."

Obed says it's a conversation that should happen. He played junior hockey and was a member of a hockey team in university, so he understands how fans can be passionate about a team name. But he hopes society can move beyond a term that is a relic from the past.

"I think we can have this discussion without having an uproar about being overly politically correct or trying to defame a proud organization," he said.

"I think we just have to talk about what is right in 2015 for the relationship between the indigenous people of Canada and the non-indigenous portions of our population."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/edmonton-eskimos-football-name-change-1.3341466

So, Edmonton's CFL franchise is called the Eskimos.  While there have been long controversies about using aboriginal names and symbols for sports franchises, Edmonton always had a ready response when asked about their name - "we've never had any complaints".

But that ended last week, with a major Inuit organization called on the Eskimos to change their name.

I'm not quite sure what to think, as the Eskimos situation is a bit different than other sports franchises.  For starters it's not a blatant slur like Redskins is.  For second the Eskimos do not rely on any Inuit or aboriginal characters or symbols.  Their logo is a simple Double E, and their mascot is a polar bear.

Even the word Eskimo has a curious history.  It's true that "eskimo" is not how the far northern aboriginal people call themselves.  Their own preferred term (at least in Canada) is "Inuit".  Supposedly, the term eskimo comes from the Cree word for "raw meat eater".  It's like calling a Hungarian a Hungarian, even though their own term is Magyar.

So what do you think Languish?

And for discussion purposes, here is the team mascot:



The team logo:

[crazy canuck]

I think the answer can be found in the Truth and Reconciliation report which expressly recommended that such names should not be used.

[Barrister]

I think the answer can be found in the Truth and Reconciliation report which expressly recommended that such names should not be used.

I just went through all 94 recommendations of the TRC and see no such recommendation.

http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf

Now Justice Sinclair, who headed up the TRC, did say on his own that they should change their name.  But that wasn't a recommendation of the commission.

[Grey Fox]

No, they shouldn't.

[crazy canuck]

From the Truth and Reconciliation Report:

92. We call upon the corporate sector in Canada to
adopt the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples as a reconciliation framework and to
apply its principles, norms, and standards to corporate
policy and core operational activities involving
Indigenous peoples and their lands and resources.

If you look at the United Nations Declaration it states, in part:

Article 15
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity
of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be
appropriately reflected in education and public information.
2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation
with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice
and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding
and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments
of society.

Article 31
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect
and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional
cultural expressions, as well as the manifestations of their
sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic
resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna
and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional
games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to
maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property
over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional
cultural expressions.

Article 43
The rights recognized herein constitute the minimum standards for
the survival, dignity and well-being of the indigenous peoples of the
world.

I am not sure how the Edmonton football team could, in good conscience, suggest they are following the recommendations in the Report if they keep the name.

[Barrister]

I think the answer can be found in the Truth and Reconciliation report which expressly recommended that such names should not be used.

Perhaps you have a different definition of "expressly recommended" than the rest of us. 

[crazy canuck]

I think the answer can be found in the Truth and Reconciliation report which expressly recommended that such names should not be used.

Perhaps you have a different definition of "expressly recommended" than the rest of us. 

Yes, it is not as simplistic as "The Edmonton Eskimos should mend their ways"

[Malthus]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional. 

[crazy canuck]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

[Grey Fox]

It's not their IP.

[Barrister]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

But it's not "their name" - it's a name that others gave to them.

[crazy canuck]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

But it's not "their name" - it's a name that others gave to them.

By that logic there is nothing wrong with the name Redskin. Are you really going to try to argue that point?

[Eddie Teach]

Of course not.

If those kind of names are too offensive for modern times, they should be able to convince people to boycott the team and make them voluntarily change it.

[crazy canuck]

Of course not.

If those kind of names are too offensive for modern times, they should be able to convince people to boycott the team and make them voluntarily change it.

I think that is what the Inuit will do next.  But for now they have made a request to the team to change the name.

[Grey Fox]

I read all that commentary, and it doesn't exactly leap out at me what in means to a team name. Though I do think that if the Innuit are of the opinion it's a slur, then to err on the side of politeness and change the name is proper. Probably in the modern world any name using an ethnicity really ought to be avoided, even if it is traditional.

Which is essentially the point of Article 15 of the UN declaration 

Added to the declaration about indigenous people's controlling their own IP - which includes their names...

But it's not "their name" - it's a name that others gave to them.

By that logic there is nothing wrong with the name Redskin. Are you really going to try to argue that point?

Ownership of the IP of the name is not the only criteria that we should examine this by.