Blue Corn Comics -- Stereotype of the Month Entry

Stereotype of the Month Entry
(9/21/02)

Raoul Contreras
Commentary

Finally, the ultra-liberal left has been put in its place by San Diego State alumni who are tired of politically correct baloney.

Carlos Gutierrez showed up at the San Diego State University-Arizona State football game to root on the Aztecs. As Gutierrez entered the stadium dressed like an Aztec warrior, the crowd cheered.

As well they should have, despite the embarrassing display of political correctness by the University president when he bowed to pressure from a handful of Native Americans who objected to the Monty Montezuma who had cavorted at San Diego State games for years.

These complaints were illegitimate. They came from so few people that every vote or poll taken showed support for Monty in the 95 percent range.

A group of alumni declared, "No more!" They have formed a nonprofit foundation to boost support for the university and its football team, to raise money for scholarships for Hispanic students, to help preserve traditions of the university and to field a new symbol, the Aztec warrior.

To short-circuit potential complaints, the Aztec Warrior Foundation secured the services of Felipe Rangel, who has years of research experience in the United States and Mexico on pre-Columbian Meso-American dress. The Aztec warrior's uniform is as historically accurate as possible.

When rumors spread that Gutierrez would show up at the game in uniform, reporters asked SDSU President Steven Weber if the school would keep Gutierrez out, or throw him out if they caught him. Weber said there was nothing the school could do because there is no dress code for football games.

The Aztec warrior was a smash hit. With multiple admission tickets so he could move around the stadium, he circulated through all levels and made sure that most fans saw him in uniform and heard his conch-shell horn.

Gutierrez is not the Monty Montezuma portrayed by 300-pound plus Samoan-born Tuffi Avii of the Coryell years at Montezuma Mesa, but he looked good, he looked dignified and he looked like an Aztec warrior, albeit taller.

The radical student group MeCha didn't like it. They are students in the mythical Aztlan, a land supposedly the U.S. Southwest, including California, and a part of the historical Aztecs' history.

The real Aztecs were not very nice, certainly not touchy-feely. It is hard to feel warm and fuzzy about men who carved the hearts out of their living enemies and ate them.

Aztec warriors were one thing; Aztec dining habits another. The Aztec warrior is a good thing, probably better than the men he symbolizes. The Aztec Warrior Foundation is a good thing also.

North County Times columnist Raoul Lowery Contreras lives in Del Mar.

Rob's comment
A few problems here:

Contreras characterizes mascot opponents as "the ultra-liberal left." Based on what...polls of SDSU alumni? The opponents include students and faculty, not just alumni. More important, they include Native people across the country. Since the mascot portrays a Native warrior, not an SDSU alumnus, Native people have every right to be offended whether they're alumni or not.
Associating an Aztec warrior with a college football team—a generally lousy team, at that—does no honor to Aztecs or other Native people. See Smashing People: The "Honor" of Being an Athlete for more on this point.
The Aztecs were a nation of people ruled by an absolute monarch and priesthood. Few of them were members of the ruling or warrior class. To insinuate that the vast majority of Aztecs—merchants, farmers, peasants, etc.—were cannibals who munched on living hearts for dinner is false and malicious. It's akin to saying all Germans under Hitler were Nazis.

The author responds (2/18/03)
And a debate ensues:

>> Just ran across your comments about my column on the Aztec Warrior—too funny for words. <<

Apparently you were laughing too hard to address the points I made. So noted.

>> The Aztecs took as many as 50,000 prisoners of war at one time and killed each ritually and ate their body parts. <<

I addressed this point at length years ago. See Were the Aztecs Murdering "Animals"? for details. If you have more to add to the debate, please do. Documentation of the 50,000 figure would be a good place to start.

David Stannard, a well-known historian, says even the number 20,000 captives per year is a "gross exaggeration." But you think 50,000 people at one time is plausible? Okay, go ahead and document the number, if you think it's valid.

After that, explain how the Aztecs distributed the 50,000 person's worth of body parts. Did citizens stand in line for an arm or a leg to take home? Did they gather at picnic tables to receiving heapin' helpings of body parts from slaves? Did the priests distribute the parts to local shops where citizens could buy them? Or what, exactly?

Killing 50,000 people at one time would require disposing of 50,000 bodies at one time—a task never done in history, to my knowledge. Yet you think it was done routinely. Send me a list of all the archaeological sites containing 50,000, 5,000, 500, or even 50 Mesoamerican bodies in one location. I'd love to read the documented evidence of your fabulous claim.

As for your "political correctness" charge, see Political Correctness Defined for more on the subject.

>> Apparently, you don't know much about the Aztecas. <<

I've documented some of what I know on the aforementioned page and its subsidiaries. You haven't documented diddly-squat so far. Good luck proving your case. You'll need it.

Rob Schmidt
Publisher
PEACE PARTY

* More opinions *

. . .

Copyrighted material is posted under the Fair Use provision of the Copyright Act,
which allows copying for nonprofit educational uses including criticism and commentary.

Comments sent to the publisher become the property of Blue Corn Comics
and may be used in other postings without permission.