I recently learned that “Illini” is the name of a federation of indigenous people in the Illinois area, and therefore “fighting Illini”, the UI mascot, is really no different from the Braves, Indians, or Redskins.
Has there been a movement to change the name? Have they escaped controversy because their fearsome warriors are of a specific tribe?
There had been quite a bit of controversy a few years ago over “Chief Illiniwek,” the school’s mascot (essentially, a male student in Native American garb, which was actually garb from the Sioux tribe). The school retired that mascot in 2007, and while they still use the Fighting Illini name for their sports teams, they no longer have a mascot.
My understanding is that the actual Illini tribe are OK with this, hence that hasn’t been an issue.
Until recently they would have some idiot dress up in traditional native garb and do a “war dance” during football games. That was controversial until they finally dumped it a few years back.
eta; ninja’ed!
There is also a group of U of I alumni and supporters, including some former Chief Illiniwek performers, who are unhappy about the retirement of the mascot, and are trying to keep the mascot alive – they continue to name new “chief performers,” who make unofficial appearances.
Also, it should be noted that the U of I retired Chief Illiniwek under pressure from the NCAA, which had, in 2005, identified 18 universities whose team names and/or mascots were seen as having “hostile or abusive Native American names;” schools which didn’t remove those would have been banned from participating in NCAA tournaments.
yes, I think the fact that the name refers to a specific tribal group, who also gave their name to the entire state, makes it a little more acceptable.
Similarly, I don’t think there is a big controversy around the Florida State Seminoles, or the Notre Dame Fighting Irish.
Florida State has the express permission of the Seminole Tribe of Florida to use their name, which helps a lot. (Technically, there is no longer an “Illini” group of Native Americans; their closest living descendants are, according to Wikipedia, the Peoria Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma.)
In recent years, there has, in fact, been some pushback on Notre Dame’s mascot, as well, from those who feel it perpetuates stereotypes about the Irish. In a recent survey, Notre Dame’s “Fighting Irish” mascot was ranked as the fourth most-offensive college mascot.
This has been going on for a long time (I and MANY family members are alums.). A quick google could turn up tons of info.
Most recently, a move was to change the name to Kingfishers.
I didn’t know there was still an “Illini” tribe - but I never really researched it.
Someone sent me this some time back about my high school - the Indians. Applies just as well to U of Ill. Sorry, I forget the source. I hope this does not exceed the quoted material allowance:
I suggest the new mascot be “the square root of negative 1”, known in mathematics simply as ‘i’. Reasons abound as to why ‘i’ best represents Illinois in 2020.
** ‘i’, being a mathematical constant and concept learned in higher mathematics, maintains a connection to U of Illinois’ heady days as a bastion of technical and scientific instruction.*
** ‘i’ can be a letter or a mathematical constant (technically, a number) so it can self-identify as to whatever it needs to be at any time*
** ‘i’ has no ethnicity, no sexual orientation or confusion, and has never oppressed nor been oppressed by other letters of the alphabet nor other mathematical constants.*
** ‘i’ was invented solely for the purpose of taking math problems that don’t work, and making them work even if we have to create something that doesn’t exist to make it so. -1 doesn’t have a square root - at least not in the real world. So someone made up ‘i’ to solve an unsolveable problem.*
** ‘i’ doesn’t really exist. In fact, it’s the basis of a whole system of numbers known as imaginary numbers. ‘i’ doesn’t belong to the world of real numbers, it is not rooted in reality…need I say more.*
** ‘i’ is not only a letter and a math constant, it is the most personal personal pronoun in its own right. (“I want…”, “I feel…”, “I don’t like…”) It needs no other letters in order to spell a complete word. And when it stands alone it is always capitalized - showing it’s pride, prominence, selfishness and hubris over all other letters.*
I do see problems however.
** ‘e’ (mathematical constant for 2.7182818284…) may object. After all, ‘e’ is also both a letter and a mathematical symbol. We’ll have to tell ‘e’ to be real, and stop being irrational.*
** pi will also likely object, since pi is also a letter and a mathematical constant. But dealing with pi is like going around in circles.*
Hur Hur Hur
I sort of liked Chief Illiniwek. Back when Illinois would visit Michigan State and brought their band, they had the bit where Chief Illiniwek magically appears. I’d be watching closely and damned if I knew where he came from. Good trick.
Does the OP seriously not understand the difference between Illini and Redskins?
No need to pick the most offensive of the 3 I listed. Do I not see the difference between Illini and Indians? Correct.
You posted Illini is really no different than Redskins. So you brought it into the conversation.
It’s not like there’s a line drawn where everything on one side is completely offensive and everything on the other side is completely non-offensive. The word Redskins is the most offensive and for that reason has generated the most controversy. Indians is less offensive and has generated less controversy. Illini is less offensive than that and has generated even less controversy.
Your premise that there is no real difference between these words is mistaken and the actual differences between them explain the different levels of controversy associated with them.
You’re right. I should have said “there’s little difference” instead of “there’s no difference”.
As I remember it, there was an objection to Chief Illiniwek dancing barefoot as he was wont to do.
I think you meant we have to tell e to rational; It is already real, but transcendental, which may violate religious freedom. And then there is the fact that e^{i\pi}=-1, which is staggering.
When I was at U. Illinois, I had a friend who had a sport jacket made with the words “Teaching Illini” printed on it.
I’m an alumnus of the University of Illinois and I’m baffled that this has never become an issue. I was positive that it would be the next battleground after the Chief was finally retired in 2007, but it’s 15 years later and the name is still a non-issue.
I think part of the reason is that lots of people don’t realize that Illini is an Indian name. They think it’s just a fancy word for “Illinoisans”. It isn’t.
The Illini, for the record, no longer exist as an organized Indian nation or confederation. Some of the sub-tribes that made up the confederation still exist and their descendants live mostly in Oklahoma. I’m not aware that any of them have given the university permission or approval to use the name, nor that they would even be in a position to do so since nobody can speak for the long-defunct confederation.
Early in the thread, @kenobi_65 linked to and quoted form Wikipedia, but perhaps a fuller quote would be helpful:
It looks like the argument is that “Illini,” rather than being derived directly from the name of the Illiniwek people, is derived from the name of the state (and/or the university), which is derived from the name of the Illiniwek people.
So far, I haven’t heard for any calls to change the name of the state of Illinois.