Shi no Tenshi Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Some real ignorance in here, doesn't surprise me though. Because you love your sports team soooo much lol How many in here replying those native americans are overly sensitive, etc. have actually suffered or been oppressed by racism for the color of their skin in their lives?Don't begin to tell people how they should feel, or if they should or shouldn't be offended if you aren't that people/race/group. I agree that the name is being used in a positive light of reverence, and if the history holds true and it just isn't a convenient way to wiggle out of it(specific tribe red berries/warpaint) yet as gregpeck said if it offends one person of that race that is enough. We aren't speaking of some general offense here. I love the colors, and most of the history and have rooted for this team for years, yet I'd have no problem if the name were changed so long as the colors remained. Man some of the comments here, that "those people will never be happy types" You just don't get it. Trust me you don't. aweeee first they were mad because they never got to be on TV, now they are mad because of the way they are being depicted on TV, "you just can't win with those people." lol reading much of this is incredibly sad, as far as things have come...plenty have given their lives, efforts etc. and much has changed but still such a long way to go, and I doubt it will ever really be where it needs to be and should be. While I agree with some of your sentiment here, I disagree with the overall point. There are many ways that I have been insulted with racial slurs: Redskin has yet to be one of those. Trust me, people can get quite creative with their racial insults, and saying you are insulted for being referenced to as a redskin is about as silly as being insulted for being called white. Or black, for that matter. This whole idiocy of "if one is insulted, it should change" crap needs to stop as well. Seriously, if you start going by that rule, you can have any hypersensitive imbecile out there getting you to change all sorts of things, just based on their race. Is that any more fair? There were a great many things done wrong to the American Indian in the past, but this was far from one of them. The mascot of a team is it's symbol, it's source of pride. You are saying that having a Native American as that source is insulting. As a race that actually has papers showing how much blood of one type or another we have, we know exactly how to quantify these things. I have found a great many racist Native Americans, especially those that grew up exclusively on the reservation. Of course some of them will say that it's insulting if they think they can get something out of it. Ever seen what ignorance, poverty, and desperation do to a person? There are ways to help them...changing the name of a team does absolutely nothing in that regard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velocet Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Just make it all about this: ... because, still, no matter how you slice it, Spud Powah is greater than anything iggle, gint or cowpie. velocet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjpanzer Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 I completely agree. As a Redskin fan I love the history, but if it truly offends a great deal of people than I have no problem changing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjpanzer Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Some real ignorance in here, doesn't surprise me though. Because you love your sports team soooo much lol How many in here replying those native americans are overly sensitive, etc. have actually suffered or been oppressed by racism for the color of their skin in their lives?Don't begin to tell people how they should feel, or if they should or shouldn't be offended if you aren't that people/race/group. I agree that the name is being used in a positive light of reverence, and if the history holds true and it just isn't a convenient way to wiggle out of it(specific tribe red berries/warpaint) yet as gregpeck said if it offends one person of that race that is enough. We aren't speaking of some general offense here. I love the colors, and most of the history and have rooted for this team for years, yet I'd have no problem if the name were changed so long as the colors remained. Man some of the comments here, that "those people will never be happy types" You just don't get it. Trust me you don't. aweeee first they were mad because they never got to be on TV, now they are mad because of the way they are being depicted on TV, "you just can't win with those people." lol reading much of this is incredibly sad, as far as things have come...plenty have given their lives, efforts etc. and much has changed but still such a long way to go, and I doubt it will ever really be where it needs to be and should be. amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxjulian Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Owner George Preston Marshall renamed the Washington team "Redskins" after moving it from Boston, where the team were known as the "Braves". Marshall was a notorious racist; he was the instigator of the banning of black players in the NFL the game from the mid 1930's to mid 1940's. The Redskins, under Marshall, were the last team to have a black player on their roster - Bobby Mitchell integrated the team back in, I believe, 1961 or '62. I have loved this team since the mid 1960's, but they should change the name. And its not about being PC, its about doing what is right. The team was named by a man who hated people of color, who wouldn't hire one until he was threatened with not having a place for his team to play by the Federal Government. If that was the environment and the mentality of the person who "named" the company, it stands to reason he had little respect for Native Americans as human beings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 IMO the term "redskins" inherently is stereotypical and degrading especially when used together with a mascot depicting a person of that color. With so many innocuous designations available why continue using one that is even arguably inflammatory. If I were African American I would recoil at being called a "blackskin." The name continues to be an embarassment ... it should be changed sooner rather than later. Because sports teams aren't about innocuous. They are about honor and respect and meaning. A meaningless name that carries no weight adds nothing to an organization. No character or history. Names of teams are meant to respect the group or even thing you're named after based on some local area connection. The sad fact is, white men who were buying and owning sports teams never liked or respected black people enough to name a team after them. We did respect the Indian after long years of fighting, if for nothing else, than their fearsome defense of what they felt was theirs. It's probably a real shame in our society that teams are named after dozens of groups of traditional white men, Indians and not blacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 The ignorance is on your part and it's toward those who've actually suffered or been oppressed by racism for the color of their skin in their lives. 90,000 people singing Hail to the Redskins can not be defined, in any way, as oppressive or racist, as it does not occur to a single person singing that song that it's about anything other than a professional football team. Don't begin to tell people how they should feel? Disgusting. The sender of the message gets to define it. Don't you begin to suggest a listener can twist his message to pretend it is offensive when no offense is intended in the message. It's a disgusting practice today and you seem to buy into the notion that the listener gets to define the message for the sender. Again, disgusting. If it offends one person of that race, tough. It brings pride to one member of the race as well. Most Indians root for teams with Indian nicknames. The vast majority of Indians polled have never heard "Redskin" used as a slur against their people and it doesn't mean that to them. Indian is a more offensive word for example. It is never enough that one person say he's offended. He must actually have something to be offended about. Ninety K rooting on their sports team is never that. Some real ignorance in here, doesn't surprise me though. Because you love your sports team soooo much lol How many in here replying those native americans are overly sensitive, etc. have actually suffered or been oppressed by racism for the color of their skin in their lives?Don't begin to tell people how they should feel, or if they should or shouldn't be offended if you aren't that people/race/group. I agree that the name is being used in a positive light of reverence, and if the history holds true and it just isn't a convenient way to wiggle out of it(specific tribe red berries/warpaint) yet as gregpeck said if it offends one person of that race that is enough. We aren't speaking of some general offense here. I love the colors, and most of the history and have rooted for this team for years, yet I'd have no problem if the name were changed so long as the colors remained. Man some of the comments here, that "those people will never be happy types" You just don't get it. Trust me you don't. aweeee first they were mad because they never got to be on TV, now they are mad because of the way they are being depicted on TV, "you just can't win with those people." lol reading much of this is incredibly sad, as far as things have come...plenty have given their lives, efforts etc. and much has changed but still such a long way to go, and I doubt it will ever really be where it needs to be and should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PROSCOUT Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 By 2025 I can see it now.... The Washington injuns.....no wait..... The Washington early Americans who were here before the paleface".....or The Washington scalpers.....or even The Washington Buffalo Eaters....and then perhaps The Washington guys who massacred Custer Of course I can go on but these names have no relevance and neither does that silly lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
velocet Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Kidding about the taters idea. Mostly. But I don't think I'm alone in saying that IF the 'Skins changed nics, I'd get over it eventually. As long as we have an NFL team and keep the Lombardis in town, I'm good. velocet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighOnHendrix Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 The funny thing is that there are many people who are not offended at all until some White, Left-wing PC nut comes along and tells them they should be. Then, all of a sudden they are. That is not be offended;that is being a weak-minded puppet to someone else's political agenda. :applause: X a billion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HA1LV1CT0RY Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 We are the Washington Redskins. Give it up, it has nothing to do with racism. It has to do with with the greatest franchise on Earth. And for any of you who "wouldnt mind" if the name were changed....grow up, where the **** are your roots?. There are greater concerns to be addressed..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jujuskinsfan Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 We are the Washington Redskins.Give it up, it has nothing to do with racism. It has to do with with the greatest franchise on Earth. And for any of you who "wouldnt mind" if the name were changed....grow up, where the **** are your roots?. There are greater concerns to be addressed..... well said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighOnHendrix Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 We are the Washington Redskins.Give it up, it has nothing to do with racism. It has to do with with the greatest franchise on Earth. And for any of you who "wouldnt mind" if the name were changed....grow up, where the **** are your roots?. There are greater concerns to be addressed..... I'd be pissed as hell if they changed the name. But I'd be more upset if they moved. How do the rest of you feel on that one? If you had to choose, which one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedSunday Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 it still seems like this isn't over as the judges seem to rule on improper process and not the content itself. Either way, I don't think it will win anytime soon either. Bingo, there seem to be some very ignorant people on this board! The word Redskin to Indians has the same connotation to them as the N word does to Africain Americans................watch this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Bingo, there seem to be some very ignorant people on this board! The word Redskin to Indians has the same connotation to them as the N word does to Africain Americans Since when? When was the last time anybody called Indians "Redskins" while meaning something negative? Ever? Or are you in fact the ignorant one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bantu Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 As a side point, stop calling Native Americans "Indians", please. They are not from India. And don't give me that "they call themselves Indian" crap, either. The only reason people call Native Americans "Indians" is cuz Christopher Columbus is a dumbass and didn't realize he was in North America when he tried to go to India. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HARD_KNOCKS Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 For everyone who is a Skins fan who agrees the term is derogatory why do you wear your Skins sweatshirts? Are you not promoting what you say you are against? Just wanting some clarification on how you reconcile that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 As a side point, stop calling Native Americans "Indians", please. They are not from India. And don't give me that "they call themselves Indian" crap, either. The only reason people call Native Americans "Indians" is cuz Christopher Columbus is a dumbass and didn't realize he was in North America when he tried to go to India. Holy ****! You're seriously butthurt over the word "Indians"? :laugh: "Stop it, they are "Native Americans". :hysterical: Why is that? Shouldn't they be "Native North Americans? Can't disrespect those South Americans like that by lumping them in with the Northerners, right? What about people like me with ancestors from different areas? Am I an European/Native North/Scottish/British/Canadian/American? Let me know. I'd hate it to totally insult myself without even comprehending the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark The Homer Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Obviously, "Indians" is not PC, just as "Blacks" is not PC. I think Bantu has a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnhay Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 IMO the term "redskins" inherently is stereotypical and degrading especially when used together with a mascot depicting a person of that color. With so many innocuous designations available why continue using one that is even arguably inflammatory. If I were African American I would recoil at being called a "blackskin." The name continues to be an embarassment ... it should be changed sooner rather than later. So am I supposed to recoil if someone referred to my white skin? "Hail to the White Skins" sounds pretty cool to me! As a side point, stop calling Native Americans "Indians", please. They are not from India. And don't give me that "they call themselves Indian" crap, either. The only reason people call Native Americans "Indians" is cuz Christopher Columbus is a dumbass and didn't realize he was in North America when he tried to go to India. Is that really offensive? People only say Indian because it takes less time to say and write out. Maybe we should just call them Naricans. I also didn't realize calling a black person "black" was offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 So am I supposed to recoil if someone referred to my white skin? Apparently. Obviously, "Indians" is not PC, just as "Blacks" is not PC. I think Bantu has a point. Isn't the Cleveland baseball team still called the Indians? I never really got the Black thing either. It's not exactly the N word but I guess getting bent out of shape over a single word wasn't quite enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregpeck99 Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 I also didn't realize calling a black person "black" was offensive. You would benefit from some sensitivity training. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 Bingo, there seem to be some very ignorant people on this board! The word Redskin to Indians has the same connotation to them as the N word does to Africain Americans................watch this. Utter fiction and foolishness. No one has ever used that phrasing as a slur to define a people as ****** was used against blacks. Even your video describes a practice of skinning a defeated enemy and calling it redskin or redskinning, not as a way to lump an entire people into a single reference. It has always been the weakest position of people against the name to misuse the historical significance of ****** and claim redskin is similar, when, in fact, the word indian has always been far more THAT word than any other. It's similar to gays attempting to use the civil rights movement as their way to get their deviancy normalized as a weakness in that movement, because, no one considers there to be any real similarity between what blacks had to endure and what gays now subject themselves to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 You would benefit from some sensitivity training. Actually, you need less sensitivity training. Black is still a perfectly acceptable word and, among MOST blacks, the preferred word. Why? Very few are actually African American. Dikembe Mutombo is an African American black man. He's from Africa originally in HIS lifetime and has come to become an American. Guilty white liberals for some reason have tried to condition us that this phrasing should be used to replace black but blacks don't actually have any real draw to it by in large. Good for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted May 16, 2009 Share Posted May 16, 2009 When people call me white, it offends me. Since I'm one person of that entire race, you should all refrain from using the derogatory word, *****. It's so offensive I have to star it out from here on out. After all, if it offends one, it needs to be changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.