The Name of the Game

Three perspectives regarding the ongoing debate over the role of cultural appropriation in the Chiefs football team, and whether or not the name should be changed.

By Caroline Clarke

Chiefs 101

The story behind the team’s name, mascot and recent changes in the status quo.

The Name:

According to an article by Native journalist Vincent Shilling, the Chiefs’ name comes from Harold Roe Bartle, former mayor of Kansas City, Missouri, for two terms from 1956 to 1963. He claimed “Chief” or “Chief Lone Bear” as his nickname, a reference to the Tribe of Mic-O-Say honor society that he founded in affiliation with the Boy Scouts of America, Heart of America organization. The Tribe of MicO-Say organization was a predominantly White group that was known to imitate Native culture, including a ceremony where new members would have an eagle claw placed around their neck and would be given a “Native name” by Bartle. During his time as mayor, Bartle convinced Lamar Hunt to move his AFL team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City in 1963. Hunt renamed the team as the Chiefs as a tribute to Bartle’s influence on the move.

The Mascot:

The original mascot of the Chiefs football team was a man dressed in stereotypical Native clothing, jewelry and a headdress, riding a horse named “Warpaint.” In 1989, this mascot was changed to the KC Wolf, in light of claims that the original mascot was offensive and appropriated Native culture. Warpaint was originally discontinued, but returned to Arrowhead stadium in 2009 and is accompanied by a new rider, Susie.

The Status Quo:

Recently, the Chiefs have been making some changes to traditions within the crowd. According to an article by ESPN, the Chiefs opted to ban headdresses and face paint that imitates Native culture in August 2020. This came after much scrutiny about blatant displays of racism and stereotyping of Native culture by fans. There have been ongoing efforts to adapt the “Tomahawk Chop,” a hand motion used by fans and cheerleaders during the games. However, it remains prevalent among the crowds, including the team’s appearance in the 2020 and 2021 Super Bowl games.

Q & A with ANGELICA HENSON: Senior, Member of the Comanche nation

Do you find the Chiefs’ name offensive?

“I personally do find it offensive, but whenever I talk about this with other people I like non-Natives to keep in mind that not every Native American will find it offensive. I know people that don’t find it a very big deal, while there are other very strong-minded Native activists that are completely against the Chiefs, the Redskins, any sort of imagery or symbolism that kind of alludes to Native American stuff, because not only is the history behind it not okay, but also the intentions. Because whenever there are names like the Chiefs or the Redskins and such, it gives people the idea that those are OK words to refer to these people, and it really draws back the humanity of Native Americans and pushes forward that they’re more of a caricature rather than actual people, you know? That’s just my stance on it, though. My stance doesn’t speak on every Native American.”

Do you think they should change the name?

I do think that they should change it... Personally, I’m just not really into football...I’m glad that they stopped permitting Native American headdresses... I’m gonna be honest, I really don’t care more or less. Just as long as people aren’t so racist.”

How does the prevalence of Chiefs branding in the Kansas City area affect you and your family?

“We notice that, at least whenever it comes to the Super Bowl season, that Chiefs fans can be very aggressive, and we see that very often in sports areas... so we kind of avoid it because people will wear the bright red attire and then headdresses, or do the whole Tomahawk Chop thing. Seeing racism has a really big effect on Native Americans’ mental health, because it’s really harmful. It’s just always been tolerated, even since my mom was a kid, and she grew up in the ’80s, it just hasn’t ever changed. So, it is really harmful, and I think people can do more to just really not do that kind of stuff.”

Disclaimer: Angelica Henson is a member of The North Star Staff

Dr. ERIC ANDERSON: Member of Citizen band Potawatomi Nation, Professor of Indigenous Studies, Haskell University

Do you find the Chiefs’ name offensive?

“Personally, [the name] Chiefs, I don’t find that offensive. But, be aware I am not speaking for everyone. I’m speaking only for myself. Some people may find it very offensive... I think there are a lot worse names out there... I understand that some people may find it offensive just because it’s inaccurate. Not every tribe or tribal nation has or had that designation of leadership called a Chief, that’s really kind of an imposition from an outsider’s perspective... But for me, the name itself, I don’t find as offensive as some others [team names], certainly.”

Do you find the rest of the branding, such as the logo (arrowhead) or fan behaviors (the “Tomahawk Chop”) offensive?

“That is sort of the other side of the coin. The name itself might sound fairly innocuous, but the imagery and the fan behavior that has gone along with the Chiefs’ name might be something else... The image of the Chiefs is most famously now, an arrowhead, which may not seem so bad, but it’s hard to boil a group of people down to one single thing... I think that’s problematic, and especially with Indians. You have 573 different tribal nations that are recognized by the federal government. They’re not all the same, obviously. So, the imagery could be more problematic [than the name]. If you have a mascot, like a horse, that references war, that builds into old stereotypes about Indians being bloodthirsty or warlike or things of that nature. Obviously, things like the Tomahawk Chop build into that sort of popular consciousness about Native people being aggressive or on the warpath.”

Does the Chiefs’ name contribute to cultural appropriation? When does this become harmful?

“That larger historical picture, when you think about sports teams’ names, what are they generally? ... Many times they are animals, and many times they are fictional creatures ... If we start to lump Indians in with animals and mythical creatures, then I think that’s a really important point to consider ... because there was a time in this country’s history when Indians were considered to be obstacles to overcome. Warfare and removal and genocidal practices greatly reduced our numbers, and there was a time 100 years ago or so, where it was pretty much the dominant thinking that Indians were gonna disappear, and vanish. Therefore, there’s still a train of thought out there that Indians aren’t really contemporary. The images that get conjured up about Indians are of the past, of teepees and Indians always on horseback. Something that’s far removed, that isn’t real anymore... If sports mascots are generally either animals and not human, or they are mythical or legendary... I think you can begin to see how that unpacks in terms of being offensive.” Warpaint, original Chiefs mascot until 1989

JEREMY CHUGG: Lifelong Chiefs fan

What does the Chiefs branding mean to you, as a longtime fan of the team?

“The hometown part of it for me is more important than the branding. I know the story of the mascot, and I know the different ways that people kind of try and explain it away. I think we can do better. And I don’t think it would really be that big of a shift. I don’t think it ruins any memories of Derek Thomas when I was a kid, or Neil Smith with the Band-Aid over his nose... I don’t think any of that really gets ruined because you change the name of the team ... We’re always gonna know that that was the name of the team. Like, it’s gonna be obvious, you know? You can acknowledge that, and acknowledge the hurt that it’s caused for people.”

How do the Chiefs impact Kansas City?

“In the last decade, the pride in Kansas City, in being from here, has exploded... All of that pride though, comes from a generation who’s more proud of hometowns, but also because the Royals had success in 2014 and 2015, so people got really excited about that, and it builds community. It builds a sense of pride in where you’re from... It’s the same thing currently with the Chiefs. It’s a lot of pride, having the best player in the history of football, arguably, on your team... Whatever it is, in the end, what people get excited about is community, and fields like sports can really bring communities together. It happens all over the world all the time. So, that’s what we’re cheering for... You’re not cheering for the stadium to be named Arrowhead... If you could get rid of that stuff, it might free you up to be more excited. You might be able to have everyone actually participate in the chant together, because people don’t participate in the Tomahawk Chop the way they used to anymore... People need to remember that they’re cheering for their hometown.”

What would you say to fans who are resistant to changing the name or the branding?

“What are you cheering for? Are you cheering for a caricature? Are you cheering for an appropriated image? Are you cheering for a mascot, or are you cheering for the players on the field? Are you cheering for your hometown? That’s what I would say... I’ve been a Chiefs fan for 35 years, and I’m totally fine if they change their name.”