7 questions to consider before changing the WWU mascot

People don't like change. Even if it is positive (getting married, moving to a new state for your dream job, and so on), you have to trust that the benefits will outweigh the costs of making the change.

While I was in DC for the  2015 International Drug Policy Reform Conference, I found a Western Front article that talked about changing the Western Washington University mascot. According to a communications professor and some student leaders, there are certain problematic features of Victor E. Viking:

1) Hyper-masculine

2) Not representative of students of color

3) Problematic racial character

"Don't get rid of me, mothafucka"

WWU President Bruce Shepard lays out his opinion (and call for discussion) about this matter on his blog. I agree with him on several points. I am also of the opinion that while we may not change it (at least for a while), that it warrants discussion, like many other topics.

1) Do students actually want this change?

Personally, I feel that most people don't want a mascot change because of...change. This is not to dismiss the validity of these sentiments, but being resistant to change is not a reason to completely block off a dialogue. Of what I've seen on Facebook and Yik Yak, an attachment to being a Viking is what most students cite as a reason to not change the mascot. If the majority of students want to keep the Viking mascot, then why force a change? It may be a different story if the school had the name of a Native American group without their permission.

2) Is there an urgent need to change it?

Last time I checked, vikings don't exist anymore and Norwegians don't have a claim on their historic predecessor. If this had been a debate raging for years, I may be more inclined to say that we should look into a change. However, this is not the case. Is this controversy the beginning of a multiple-year debate? Maybe, but we can't be so sure. Time will tell.

3) Will the school spend over $100,000 for a new mascot logo design as they did with the Western logo?

Like it? You better - it cost over $100,000

4) Are our efforts better placed somewhere else?

Western would have to spend money to come up with logos for a new mascot. That would also mean departments, sports teams, etc. would have to use up resources to accommodate the new mascot. (Anyone want these old Viking sweatshirts?) I have seen many people on Yik Yak say that the school could accomplish more useful things by allocating resources to other projects that actually make a difference, and, frankly, I agree.

5) Are there any other drawbacks to changing the mascot?

Would certain alumni stop donating to the school? Are more people going to hate the new mascot than the current viking? I'm not sure if any of these fears are legitimate, or if I could come up with any, but people who want to help shape the decision in any way should become aware of any potential drawbacks.

6) Could the mascot be slightly modified?

While the role of a woman in viking culture is disputed and not necessarily what we would hope for, the school could consider making multiple versions of the mascot, including women. (Those horned helmets weren't real, so why can't we have an evil-looking female viking?) If the mascot being "hyper-masculine" is a concern that resonates with a number of students, make it look more like Sokka.

7) How do we decide on whether or not to change the mascot?

Why is it that a mascot change gets its own poll while every other issue and concern of the students has to go through the AS Elections? Are polls reserved for very serious issues? Does the AS know that they will not get a response representative of the student body? (Hasn't stopped them before.) Most importantly, is a poll the best way to gather data to make the decision on whether or not to keep the mascot? (And who actually makes that decision?) At least in the AS Elections, students can pretend that their vote actually matters. My thoughts on this are that if the discussion of whether or not the viking is a worthy mascot continuously comes up throughout the years, it deserves the same treatment as the Greek system on campus. For those who don't know, Western does not have any fraternities or sororities, but every certain number of years, students get to vote on whether or not they feel that it's addition needs to happen. Needless to say, the students overwhelmingly feel there is no need for a Greek system. I, like Bruce Shepard, feel like it would have been a good idea to introduce a referendum for the Elections in the past to see how students would respond.

Whether your reading responses to the mascot controversy via Yik Yak or through other bloggers, at least consider the viewpoints of the other side. I don't think a mascot change is necessary, but I'm open to listening to those who feel like it's not representative of the school. As for if a mascot change is made, I think it'd be cool if Western got suggestions from the Lummi or another Native American tribe about potential mascots. It may not be representative of most students at Western, but it's a great tribute to the region.