|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
The "Chief"-A Macho Man |
Current rating: 0 |
by Mike Lehman
(No verified email address) |
20 Aug 2001
|
|
Just in time for the start of school, what appeared in my mailbox but a slick, "Honor the Chief" brochure. No stamp or bulk mail permit, someone just stuck it in my mailbox, so I guess some traditions are best honored by breaking the law, never mind the abuse of another people’s traditions that is implicit in the appropriation of the image of Native Americans. |
Promoted like any other commodity for profit, the brochure illustrates the clueless nature of the Chief’s supporters as they try to differentiate him from the athletic mascots that he most closely resembles. Taking pains to state that he is far more than a mascot, the brochure finally explained to me what the basis for this differentiation actually is, and it might (or might not) surprise you.
On the third page into the advertisement, we come to "Illiniwek". Here we find the emphasis is on the Chief as a man. That’s right, the thing that makes the Chief more than a mascot is the fact that he is anatomically correct, that he has a penis swinging between his legs. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. The writer has the same equipment, but he has never styled himself as an Native American chief and wonders about the insecurity complexes that must plague those who are so arrested in their development that they can think of little except the Chief and his all-important penis.
I am unsure exactly why the Chief’s penis is so important. It certainly isn’t explained in the article. My feminist friends say it is simply another example of patriarchy. They may be right, for there is no explanation about the Princesses of the Illini used to cheer on the teams during WWII when all of our manhood was off fighting a war. These women most likely had no penis, so it is hard to see how the student body even "got up" for a game in that time frame, yet it is known that UI teams won at least some of those games. Still, women are not totally ignored by this fellow with a penis, as they are advised to "honor" him, just as they are often chided to honor their husbands in primitive forms of marriage vows.
Gay friends contend that the whole penis ideation reflects the suppressed homosexuality of the entire football milieu. Having quit the team after two days back in ninth grade, I have no personal knowledge of this scene, so I have to believe they might be onto something, considering the penis thing is so important to the Chief.
As a student at the University of Illinois in the Twenty-first Century, I am deeply troubled that certain alumni feel it is so important to cling to this racist mascot. We have mostly put such "traditions" as the Ku Klux Klan, minstrel shows, public hangings, and vigilantes behind us in the last century, but some people just can’t let go of the Chief and his penis.
I, too, hope our athletes display the Right Stuff so that they have a successful season that satisfies their aspirations. I can’t help but believe that our female athletes have no need for a penis to help them win. I assume that our male athletes already come equipped with whatever penis God meant them to need, barring any unfortunate accidents or diseases. Let’s let them compete as they are and not burden them with the regrettable, racist legacy of the "Chief" any longer. The Chief should go, maybe with a statue to memorialize his history. It’s OK with me if the statue is anatomically correct, as long as he is retired to rest in one place.
Mike Lehman
Junior, LAS, University of Illinois |
