The Chicago Blackhawks crest is the most gorgeous team logo in sports, vibrant and proud.

Only the bullies and bureaucrats of grievance could possibly find stereotyping offence in the noble profile of an Indian chief. Originally designed to honour an American army unit, the Black Hawks Division, formed in the First World War, in turn commemorating a Sauk and Fox Indian leader who actually fought against the U.S. government during the War of 1812.

But of course the professional taste inquisitors have taken umbrage because that’s what they do, if primarily to justify their existence, endlessly striving to homogenize the language and the landscape. Colour your world beige, bland and banal.

Pejorative is in the eye of the beholder. Appropriation is up the nose of the stiff-necked.

That would be, in this instance, the Equity Summit Group, a censorious cabal of school board officials who want students in Ontario barred from wearing clothes with “offensive” logos, demanding the provincial government reach right into private closets and sift out the purportedly injurious garb via formal dress code: A no-go logo zone encompassing “the use of pejorative names, logos and mascots,” condemning the imagery and names as “exploitation of indigenous cultural, spiritual and intellectual identity, and in many cases, a racist misrepresentation of that identity,” as per a letter sent last week to Education Minister Liz Sandals and other educational stakeholders.

Not just the Blackhawks chief but all sports teams names and depictions which allude to First Nations communities. So shame on you, Brockville Braves, Lorne Park Ojibwa and Mississauga Mohawks — among the 40 clubs across the province that feature indigenous nomenclature and iconography, according to the Ontario Human Rights Commission. For heaven’s sake, Mississauga is an Anishnaabe word. Should the city be rebranded? How about Toronto, derived from an Iroquois term meaning “where there are trees in the water”?

This is the fallacious point where Truth and Reconciliation becomes mistruth and retribution; where a bunch of self-anointed censors appropriate historical injustice and squeeze it through the sanitizing wringer.

Racism is a term too easily thrown around, draining and diluting it of meaning. Since when has mere referencing of a tribe or an indigenous character constituted racism, particularly if the allusion is affectionate or — pardon the buzzword — empowering? Indian isn’t derogatory, not remotely comparable to the N-word; that’s preposterous. There’s no slur implied, contrary to the human rights complaint recently filed by a Mississauga father who, predictably, proclaims himself “outraged.” These are expressions of respect, a borrowing of prestige and significance. And we are all allowed to borrow because nobody owns history, nobody has a patent on cultural imagery.

The Cleveland Indians have endured withering criticism for clinging to their cartoonish Chief Wahoo (actually a brave, one feather) emblem, though he’s been downsized in recent years, with the club emphasizing a blocky “C” on away uniforms. Naysayers object to the big nose and the red pigmentation, but he’s a caricature, and caricatures are always exaggerations. I don’t see where red skin is inherently racist, any more than black or brown. Nor are big noses a feature exclusive to any ethnicity. Yet small groups of Native Americans have staged protests on Opening Day for the past two decades. And every year, polls show an overwhelming majority of Clevelanders opposed to ditching the grinning ’toon. Again, the alleged stereotype is in the eyes of the perceiver.

There’s much to be said for institutional tradition and heritage, which means as much to fans of a sports franchise as it does, from the reverse angle, to First Nations activists who object to the co-opting of their ancestral lore.

Some news organizations — including the Cleveland Plain Dealer, whose sports reporters came up with “Indians” when the club formally changed its name in 1914 — have called for the benching of Chief Wahoo. A few won’t even allow “Indians” — a word recently deleted from one of my own A2 columns, though both “Indians” and Chief Wahoo appeared in a piece by a sports columnist colleague on the same day.

No sports franchise has come under more intense condemnation for “racist” terminology than the Washington Redskins. I understand why the name would offend many First Nations people, taken on its surface merits or lack thereof. More than 100 groups, associations, human rights agencies, etc. have called for a switch, with even President Barack Obama urging a change. Owner Dan Snyder is adamant that he won’t.

In an emotional 2013 open letter, he wrote: “I respect the opinions of those who disagree. I want them to know that I do hear them, and I will continue to listen and learn. But we cannot ignore our 81 year history, or the strong feelings of most of our fans as well as Native Americans throughout the country. After 81 years, the team named ‘Redskins’ continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

If displeasure and derision translated to the turnstiles, no doubt Snyder would have a change of heart. But it hasn’t. He’s the owner, he can call the team whatever he damn well pleases.

That’s a right the Equity Summit Group would co-opt for itself, as it rummages through your kid’s closet.