07/16/2020
Yesterday, the administration sent out this statement to parents of students at CCS Schools.
They begin the message by stating the following:
"Clinton Community Schools is an inclusive environment. It is and will always be our commitment to provide a safe and healthy environment for all students and to inspire endless opportunities in every person. "
Inclusivity is an admirable goal. However, they cannot claim to promote inclusivity while promoting a mascot that makes marginalized students feel unwelcome and scrutinized. This mascot has actively pushed away potential students by making them feel unwelcome; how is that inclusive?
The administration references a vote the community took in 2010, defending their choice to retain the mascot by reminding us that the community voted 93% in favor of retaining the mascot. That number is a decade old, and we can all agree that our community has changed immensely in the past decade. Additionally, the figure goes to support our argument that this community is deeply desensitized to the usage of racist slurs. The reference to this decade-old vote begs another question: does all school policy pass a community vote, or just the policies that the board does not want to be held responsible for?
The statement goes on to acknowledge that the Native American imagery was replaced in an effort to be more responsive to the demands of the community. That small rebranding effort raises two issues:
1.) If the district believes that the usage of Native American imagery promotes racism, how can they defend that the usage of the slur is not racist?
2.) One of the biggest arguments against changing the mascot is that the rebranding effort will be too expensive. If that is the case, how were they able to do it so effortlessly in the past?
