noles

If I had to take a guess, which here I am forced to, the author's research question was, "are Native Americans offended by tribe based mascots?", or something like that.  The purpose seems to be that making a big deal out of mascots like this now is silly, that if these tribes can survive being attacked by men wielding vastly superior technology, that seeing mascots that may not portray them in the greatest light is certainly not a big deal.  He focuses in on the Seminole tribe, which I think makes that point difficult to apply to Natives as a whole, but maybe I got the purpose wrong.  One thing he does that didn't thrill me is that he talked about the Seminoles' business ventures, acquiring Hard Rock International, and mentioning that the girl's father was a casino operator.  This gives to the stereotype of Natives currently as casino lords, rather than a proud people of strong tradition.  If somebody has given up their ancestral way of life for what many may consider a relatively "dirty" career running a casino, they are much less entitled to be irritated by any caricatures of their people.  He did not focus on the Illini or Sioux tribes, though that may have made for a totally different paper.  Nonetheless I agree with his point that anger over long used names is ridiculous.