Y! Sports: "Hail to the 'Pigskins'?" (Washington City Paper no longer to use the teams name)

[ZRagone]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/hail-pigskins-two-newspapers-now-refuse-washington-football-212138986--nfl.html

The Kansas City Star has long refused to use the "Redskins" nickname in its football coverage, and now, a newspaper closer to the team has followed suit. The Washington City Paper has decided to use the term "Pigskins" instead of "Redskins" when writing about the home team. The Washington City Paper is an alternative weekly with a circulation estimated in 2009 at 71,000. The new name was decided by a poll of the paper's readers.

I used the search function and looking around the first two pages and didn't see this listed, so hoping it's okay to start a thread on it.

Saw a picture and headline of this next to a story my wife was reading and I made her click it. I just kind of shook my head at the story. I know there are some who have strong issues with the name, and knew about the Kansas City Star (UnWise Mike must worship that guy), but I honestly never thought I'd see a source here in the DC area doing this kind of non-sense.

The Washington City Paper generated a fair bit of good will towards it from Redskins fans after the asinine lawsuit on the part of Dan Snyder towards the paper. I have a feeling that this will lose them a fair bit of that goodwill.

Speaking simply for myself, I don't care how many polls of their readers they do...this team, until such point as they officially change it, is that this team has been and is the Redskins since they've been in this region. If you don't want to say the name of the team, then refer to it as the Washington Football team or don't cover it....but to be a DC based paper and to specifically refer to the team as something that it is not the way to go imho.

[skinsfan07]

Saw this crap article earlier. It's childish. They'd have to start referring to every "indian based" team differently. The FSU Seminoles, ATL Braves, Cleveland Indians, everyone.

[jwpanic]

this reeks of a dying newspaper trying to remain relevant. maybe try reporting the news instead of creating it.

[44aDieselGirl]

That is some glass house. What do they call the KC Chiefs?

I've grown tired of the media. Don't report actual news- trying to make headlines about your own organization is much more fun. If that does not work, spin some stuff and try to sway public opinions.

If all else fails... there must be celebrity "news" breaking somewhere!!

[USS Redskins]

Man, the three readers they have are going to be missing out on so much!

[Mr. Nostril]

Saw this crap article earlier. It's childish. They'd have to start referring to every "indian based" team differently. The FSU Seminoles, ATL Braves, Cleveland Indians, everyone.

That's not exactly true. Redskin is differentiated from other team names based on the indigenous people of the Americas because it is actually viewed as a slur by a large number of people. Seminole, Brave and (at least usually) Indian are not.

[Burgold]

Y'know if you wanted to take this issue you could easily call them the 'skins, you could say Washington's pro football team, or you could find something else... Going with the "pigskins" is clearly trying to be insulting to the team to get some pub.

In other words, booooooooooooooooo

[Mr. Nostril]

In light of what I wrote above, I thought I should make clear that I don't support the newspaper's decision. You're calling something the wrong name. That's a factual inaccuracy. A newspaper is supposed report, not comment. If someone wanted to call the Redskins by a different name in the editorial section that's fine, but you lose journalistic integrity if you call them by a name they aren't.

[bowhunter]

In light of what I wrote above, I thought I should make clear that I don't support the newspaper's decision. You're calling something the wrong name. That's a factual inaccuracy. A newspaper is supposed report, not comment. If someone wanted to call the Redskins by a different name in the editorial section that's fine, but you lose journalistic integrity if you call them by a name they aren't.

100% agree. Who would advertise with such a paper? Perhaps our native fans should make the advertisers aware that agenda is being put above readership

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

A paper more anti-Redskins than the Post decides to run with this. Shocked. NOT.

I still can't believe folk on here took this rags side when that low life piss poor excuse for a creditable journalist McKenna thought it would be great fun to slander lil' Danny.

Hail.

[jnhay]

71,000 readers is pretty pathetic for a newspaper. Maybe there should be a vote here on how we should refer to them? "Washington City toilet paper" seems like it'd be less offensive to the professional writers out there.

[Destino]

If a major paper or media channel does then there is something to worry about. The city paper is tiny and because of the infamous article and Dans reaction to it, there is no doubt that the two organizations aren't on friendly terms.

[OSUfan45]

That's not exactly true. Redskin is differentiated from other team names based on the indigenous people of the Americas because it is actually viewed as a slur by a large number of people. Seminole, Brave and (at least usually) Indian are not.

Have you seen the Indians mascot? Chief Wahoo is definitely more offensive than the name Redskins.

[HBnotBlades]

First off, I think the City Paper's decision reeks of immaturity.

But hey, if we were one day legally forced to change the name of the team, I'd want the new name to be the Pigskins. It references the old name, it references football, they could still be called the skins, it references the hogs and our history, and it even fits nicely into our fight song. It's also the kind of quirky name that I think people could get behind and call their own. A name like the Warriors is so generic that it would feel like we were starting over and losing our history.

[pjfootballer]

The Washington ****** Paper. Rhymes with City.

[Dukes and Skins]

The Washington ****** Paper. Rhymes with City.

Biddie right? That has to be it!

[Ghost of]

The KC paper was the subject of an Around the Horn. I emailed them (don't watch enough to see if Plascke responded) and I posted on the FB page for the show. My post was DELETED. The segment on ATN had Plashke detailing how Redskins originated from mutilation and that it was a slur. In spite of my attempts to educate him, he has persisted in this myth.

Here is a link to the work done by a linguist who knows ALgonquin, one of the first languages the whites would have encountered. The facts speak to a term that (translated, of course) ORIGINATES WITH NATIVE AMERICANS And the use of it as a slur seems to come so much later that it is disputable that outside a few contexts it ever was one. People use lots of proper names as slurs, that doesn't make the word worth banning.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/02/AR2005100201139.html

Spread the word

I love how they deleted my post though and that coward Plaschke never (as far as I know) has backed off his story. All the stupid jerk had to do was search google for like 30 seconds. Even Harjo cant actually locate "redskin" as a use for any kind of mutilation, she just insists that whites using the term was derogatory even in contexts where it clearly ws not, or where the Native Americans were referring to themselves as "red" or "redskin"

---------- Post added October-19th-2012 at 08:05 PM ----------

Have you seen the Indians mascot? Chief Wahoo is definitely more offensive than the name Redskins.

And as goofy as it is, I don't know Chief Wahoo is "racial" in any sense. I just mean the depiction is similar to other ridiculous characters of the era, including the old Brownie and the old Celtic mascots.

[MustangSteve]

We are what we are! Some white, some black, some mexican, 5 billion chinese, and some are Indians. It is not any disrespect to name a team after someone's nationality or color, it actually a great honor. My dad was part Cherokee and he was very proud of our team, of it's name and of it's players. We are lovers of a team named after a nationality. Its sure a much better and much more attractive name than the Pigskins.

I sure don't hear any other person or their occupation crying because their city named their team after them, as the Texans, old Oilers, Packers, Vikings and so on, you get the point. These pathetic writers and critics need to get over themselves and find a real life.

[mike42]

Even if it was used as a racial slur in 1800s...it isn't used as that today. It's out of respect for the Native Indians and not forgetting who was here before. That's the way i see it. If i was native, i would be happy that schools were using Indian mascots.

Wish people would stop making issues where there is no problem.

[Mr. Nostril]

Have you seen the Indians mascot? Chief Wahoo is definitely more offensive than the name Redskins.

Chief Wahoo is arguably more offensive than the name Redskins. But I never said anything in support of Chief Wahoo, or even in support of other team names that reference the indigenous peoples of the Americas. I'm only saying that there is a significant differentiation between the name "Redskins" and the other team names referenced. This means that targeting the Redskins as a team that needs to change their name, while excluding these other teams is not necessarily illogical.

Also, as a side note, I wouldn't hang my hat on the, "My team's name is not the most offensive thing in professional sports argument."

[grego]

That's not exactly true. Redskin is differentiated from other team names based on the indigenous people of the Americas because it is actually viewed as a slur by a large number of people. Seminole, Brave and (at least usually) Indian are not.

define "large number", nostril.

then tell me how a group chooses the name 'redskin' as its mascot when a 'large number' of that group see the name as a slur'

its a mystery to me.

if it were true, that is.

[zoony]

I'm half surprised the city paper didn't decide on "the Jew's team"

But McKenna is no longer there, so pigskin makes sense

Edit, forgot the smiley.

[Mr. Nostril]

define "large number", nostril.

then tell me how a group chooses the name 'redskin' as its mascot when a 'large number' of that group see the name as a slur'

its a mystery to me.

if it were true, that is.

I define "large number" as "confirmed by the American Heritage Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, and Dictionary.com, all of which use the word 'offensive' in the entry for Redskin. And also confirmed by Wikipedia, which has the term Redskin named in its list of ethnic slurs."

As to the second part of the question...I don't really know. All I can say is the 1930s were a different time.

http://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=redskin

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/redskin

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redskin?s=t

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs

[grego]

I

As to the second part of the question, all I can say is the 1930s were a different time.

i take it youre not aware that there are native american high schools that use 'redskin' as their mascot? and i'm not talking about 'white' high schools from the 1930's.

btw, i almost didnt realize that your proof of the definition of 'large number' of native americans who are offended was not proof.

[PaintballX3.com]

I wonder how some of us would feel if someone wanted to name an NFL team the "Blackskins" or the "Yellowskins." And then put a good old dude with an afro or slanted eyes on the helmet.

When you think about this from the other person's perspective and not your own, you might actually see how insulting "Redskins" might be to someone.

Just my 2 cents.