KK Writes| Mike Wise Asks RG3 About the Name "Redskins"

[redskins4ever28]

**** it, I'm going deep!!

LOL

hahaha

Seriously, that made me lol extremely loud at work. Now Im sure my boss knows I aint working after that one. But that was the funniest thing Ive read all week, lol, nice one!

[Diss]

Again, if you, Wise or anyone else has a problem, the best way to send a message is to not support and/or cover the Washington Redskins. I'm not saying that to be rude. I'm simply stating the obvious -- by letting your feet do the talking, you're making it clear that this is no longer acceptable to you. If enough people follow suit, change is possible. Otherwise, acts like what Wise did during Griffin's press conference yesterday simply come across as a pathetic "hey, look at me" stunt from a guy who just had his poorly-rated radio show cancelled.

I disagree with this strongly.

First, let me state that I don't have a problem with the name "Redskins," and I think the logo is majestic and powerful. I've studied Native American cultures and tribes since I was a kid (probably what led me to being such a big Redskins fan). I also am not a big UnWise Mike fan. I've occasionally found him funny, but more often than not I sit in my car and think, "Idiot."

But I fully support his right to ask that question, especially framed against the backdrop of the whole Rob Parker fiasco. The timing made complete sense, whether that made people uncomfortable or not. This is what makes America a great country, the ability to question publicly something you consider to be a societal injustice or wrong. I don't agree with him, but anyone who knows Wise obviously knows that he is passionate about this issue, and there ARE many others who find the name offensive. Just because a question makes you uncomfortable doesn't make the timing or the question itself wrong. It was totally legitimate.

The notion that his best way to protest the name would be to simply stop covering the team is just silly. He's a journalist. He feels that gives him a power others don't have to "educate" people about something he feels he can help change. And look - he's got the issue back in the public eye again. If he didn't take that opportunity when it presented himself, I would have LESS respect for him. Again, I don't agree with him, but I fully support his right to ask the question. Very few people are going to know or care about his "cause" if he simply disappears from Redskins coverage. Besides, you commented on what he said here in a public forum. By your logic, wouldn't your disapproval of Wise be more powerful and obvious if you just simply decided to stop talking about him and ignored anything about UnWise Mike? No, it wouldn't be. You felt passionate enough about a topic to express your opinion in a public forum. That's all Wise did.

The article in this post was indeed well-written, but the whole vibe comes off as, "Damn, that Wise question made me uncomfortable." If it was such a non-issue, it shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable. And to be honest, Griffin's politically correct response isn't going to help make the issue any less inflammatory for some.

[SkinsWarrior81]

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/002961.html

Not meaning to spam or anything, but I think it bares repeating. Just because some people decide it is offensive, does not mean it is, or was ever meant to be. If that were the case, we should be rallying against the affronts to the Irish (Fighting Irish), Catholics (Demon Deacons), and people with gigantism.(The NY Football Giants) to name a few. The concept remains the same. a team name like the Blackskins would have an immediate racist connotation to it, especially considering the history of slavery in this country. At no point in the formation were blacks from Africa treated as equals, bargained with, or respected in a way that the Natives were by anyone. This is not to say that Natives were universally treated well and with respect, obviously, but there were plenty of actually offensive terms used against them. Redskin was not one of them.

[RFKFedEx]

If it was such a non-issue, it shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable.

True dat. If recent history is any indication, the battle to keep the name and logo will grow increasingly uncomfortable with time.

Personally, I love the name and logo, but I understand the need to evolve as a society.

How much longer do we want to fight this battle?

[2cents]

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

Liberal think tanks in DC may not be the most unbiased source you can find. Remember, they get their money by keeping the controversy about our name alive. Something to consider.

---------- Post added December-20th-2012 at 08:43 AM ----------

Oh and for the record, I was an Equal Opportuinty Asvisor while I was in the Army, and I had a full blood Apache Indian invite me to the Native American month celebration on my post and he asked me to wear my Redskin gear to it because he was a fan of the team and the logo. As I said earlier, wanting one answer to this question and wanting to change everything because some people don't like something is just folly. A country is never going to have one hundred percent agreement on anything.

[Forehead]

I don't care either way to be honest. The "Redskins" part of the name has never been that important to me, it's the "Washington" part that I support. My city's team. They can call themselves whatever the hell they want, though if this name change ever gets legs, I think they'll eventually become the Washington Warriors. Just a gut feeling; you can keep the same indian head logo with that name.

On another note, I am glad that UnWise Mike was cancelled on the radio. His cadence was annoying and it seemed like he rarely had anything useful to say.

[RFKFedEx]

there were plenty of actually offensive terms used against them. Redskin was not one of them.

I formed my opinion on the views of NA scholars in Washington with whom I've spoken. They've universally disagreed with your view.

[Kindred]

Mike is a real life troll on a quest to actually MAKE "Redskins" as a team name offensive.

[PortisBetts]

Anything for a click. Nice article KK

**I meant Wise, not KK. Genuinely good article on a terrible writer.**

[Diss]

True dat. If recent history is any indication, the battle to keep the name and logo will grow increasingly uncomfortable with time.

Personally, I love the name and logo, but I understand the need to evolve as a society.

How much longer do we want to fight this battle?

I'm not fighting the battle at all. As I say, I don't find the name or logo offensive and it's part of my personal tradition.

HOWEVER ... I have to weigh the metaphorical scale. On one side is my love of the name, the logo, the jerseys, etc. because of how I grew up watching the team and what the team meant to me. On the other side of the scale are people who feel demeaned by the name and feel like it's an insult to their entire culture.

I don't know how many people constitute that group, but if it ever gets to the point where it's clearly a vast majority who DO feel that way, I would not stand in the way of the name being changed. I wouldn't actively campaign FOR it to be changed, but I would accept the fact that their grievance holds more weight than my personal love for all things Redskins. But I haven't seen that yet. I was at the opening of the Native American museum in Washington D.C., and I remember seeing a full-blooded Native American there with a Redskins shirt on, logo on full display. So I leave that for them to sort out. If they can grow their numbers big enough to effect the change, so be it. That's the way the country should work. If not, I'm happy to keep rooting for the team.

Btw, here's a great article everyone should read on the origins of the name "Redskin" and how Indians referred to THEMSELVES in this manner in colonial times.

http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf

[Riggo#44]

The public knows more today than we knew in the 1930s when the name was coined to be honorary to Natives. The NA scholars I've met here in DC do not fall in that 90% category you speak of. I place a little more credibility with their words than I do with a bunch of (mostly white) dudes on a football message board.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Although it's clear you ignored the article I posted, and tidbit about the predominantly Native American HS that changed it's name to Redskins.

And I love the "I talked to Native Amercans about this. And they are offended!" argument. Great. How many did you talk to, 4, 5? Did you talk to 768 over the course of a year? Because Annenberg did.

This whole argument drives me crazy. This whole debate is fueled by a bunch of thin-skinned cry-babies who need to grow a pair. There is NOTHING in this country that says you have the right to not be offended!

[RFKFedEx]

This whole argument drives me crazy. This whole debate is fueled by a bunch of thin-skinned cry-babies who need to grow a pair!

Glad to see your aware of the issue. People who pushed for integration with this franchise were probably insulted and called names.

[themurf]

He's a journalist. He feels that gives him a power others don't have to "beat a tired subject into the ground."

Glad you and I can both agree on this point.

[RakThatPunk]

Great read! Write more please! Great style!

[Diss]

Glad you and I can both agree on this point.

Lazy and irrelevant response. Rather pathetic that your only counter to an argument is to change the words of the person you're having a discussion with.

The subject is only "tired" to you, maybe even to me. It's not "tired" to Wise, and it's a legitimate issue for other people.

[Riggo#44]

Glad to see your aware of the issue. People who pushed for integration with this franchise were probably insulted and called names.

Please tell me you stretched before you reached like that. You could pull something. That might be the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard on this subject. This argument is ridiculous. The majority of the people who this supposedly denigrates do not find it offensive (except for the very small sample you supposedly talked to), yet it still gets beat to death by those who self-righteously want to prop themselves up as "tolerant." This is my last post on this subject, I refuse to attempt to argue with someone who uses the phrase "True dat."

[@DCGoldPants]

in the world of twitter, why not let @MikeWiseGuy know the timing was poor?.....just don't cuss him out. @SkinsGoldPants (me) just asked him about the timing and said the First Take stuff would be a stretch to connect the two. Don't be rude. Just point out the curious nature.

[themurf]

Lazy and irrelevant response. Rather pathetic that your only counter to an argument is to change the words of the person you're having a discussion with.

The subject is only "tired" to you, maybe even to me. It's not "tired" to Wise, and it's a legitimate issue for other people.

Actually, it's not really a legitimate issue for MOST people. There is a vocal minority who continue to beat their drum and try to make it into a big deal, but the general public doesn't care. The issue has been taken to court, but nothing ever came of it. Any time polls are conducted, the vast majority of native americans don't seem to have an issue with it. So yes, I consider it a tired issue because, while it might not work for you or Wise, the consensus among the rest of the general public seems to be this is a non issue.

Here's the funny thing: we live in an overly sensitive and overly politically correct world where a good chunk of people get offended by calling it a "Christmas party" instead of a "holiday party" and don't think we should keep score during little league games because we don't want to hurt a child's feelings when his (or her) team loses. And yet, there still isn't enough support to make the Redskins change their name. But hey, I'm not going to tell you how to live your life. I'm just going to tell you that it's probably a safe bet the Redskins aren't going to change their name during our lifetime.

[doghouse4x4]

Actually, it's not really a legitimate issue for MOST people. There is a vocal minority who continue to beat their drum and try to make it into a big deal, but the general public doesn't care. The issue has been taken to court, but nothing ever came of it. Any time polls are conducted, the vast majority of native americans don't seem to have an issue with it. So yes, I consider it a tired issue because, while it might not work for you or Wise, the consensus among the rest of the general public seems to be this is a non issue.

Here's the funny thing: we live in an overly sensitive and overly politically correct world where a good chunk of people get offended by calling it a "Christmas party" instead of a "holiday party" and don't think we should keep score during little league games because we don't want to hurt a child's feelings when his (or her) team loses. And yet, there still isn't enough support to make the Redskins change their name. But hey, I'm not going to tell you how to live your life. I'm just going to tell you that it's probably a safe bet the Redskins aren't going to change their name during our lifetime.

Well said.

[JMUSkins]

I am so tired of the race-baiting columnists in this country trying to stir up controversy to get hits on their articles. It isn't just about the company they work for, it's for personal advancement in their own careers. Does UnWise Mike actually care that much (being offended by proxy which is a complete joke) or is he just looking for recognition? Either way, it's a sham and I'm fed up with it.

[Riggo#44]

Actually, it's not really a legitimate issue for MOST people. There is a vocal minority who continue to beat their drum and try to make it into a big deal, but the general public doesn't care. The issue has been taken to court, but nothing ever came of it. Any time polls are conducted, the vast majority of native americans don't seem to have an issue with it. So yes, I consider it a tired issue because, while it might not work for you or Wise, the consensus among the rest of the general public seems to be this is a non issue.

Here's the funny thing: we live in an overly sensitive and overly politically correct world where a good chunk of people get offended by calling it a "Christmas party" instead of a "holiday party" and don't think we should keep score during little league games because we don't want to hurt a child's feelings when his (or her) team loses. And yet, there still isn't enough support to make the Redskins change their name. But hey, I'm not going to tell you how to live your life. I'm just going to tell you that it's probably a safe bet the Redskins aren't going to change their name during our lifetime.

Thank you Murf for posting a much more eloquent and exponentially less abrasive narrative of everything I have been thinking and ranting about this ridiculous argument...

[Bang]

Well, anyone who doesn't like the team name can make a choice.

they can try and change something no one but them wants to change, or they can go be a fan of another team.

I don't see why people feel that they have to

A/ be offended on behalf of someone else

B/ try to make sure things change because they're offended on behalf of someone else.. who isn't really bothered.

go be a fan of the Buffalo Bills.

nice clean non offensive name like that shouldn't bother anyone.

After all, ik never hear anyone saying they should change their names..

but in case th comparison is lost.. if I wanted to insult jews with a team name, i'd call myself the Hitlers. Oh, people would hate me! I'd be (correctly) run out of town on a rail.. tarred and feathered, and made to change the team name.

Buffalo names their team after a man who made his name doing the one thing that most historians agree was one of the largest factors in the destruction of native culture... and no one complains.

They go after a team who actually is using an honorific, and leave alone one of the TRULY offensive names in all of sports.

I think that says a lot about the level of thought that goes into these cries... and the motivation.

UnWise Mike is the poster boy for White Guilt.

~Bang

[JimboDaMan]

See, that depends on who you ask. Doc Walker speaks about why he refers to the team as the burgundy and gold. I used to defend the name and say that "Native Americans have no problem with it" until I made that argument to a Native American who educated me.

That person did not "educate" you, that person gave you an opinion. One that seems to have left you with less education than you began with. As others have pointed out repeatedly, the majority of Native Americans do not take offense and some even use the name for their own local teams. Sure, there is a minority who truly are offended, but I can't believe you didn't know that so I'm at a loss to see how you were educated. Changing the name to the "Seminoles", "Cherokees", or simply "Raiders" won't make that problem go away, some are offended by any reference to Native Americans.

I disagree with this, but its taking the thread in a different direction. I mean I was just saying that I think its a valid question to ask RG3. I don't want to get into Wise's opinions and credibility as a editorial writer.

It was a quintessential clown question. A pot-stirring "journalist" who was just fired from one of his gigs used the weekly press conference to push his own agenda (and by no accident his own name) into the public sphere. If this is a legitimate question why didn't he ask it back in training camp? Why now, did he think the name just changed to Redskins? Sounded to me that he used the "cornball" business as an extremely lame excuse to try making the presser about him and his agenda.

[grego]

I didn't know they were a monolithic group with one opinion.

i actually thought that may be a response when i typed it.

the problem is, how many have to be offended in order to necessitate a change? one? seven? 50?

i was speaking as a general term, and when a native american high school adopts the name 'redskins' as their mascot, i think i'm ok in saying 'they dont have a problem with it'.

[JimboDaMan]

The article in this post was indeed well-written, but the whole vibe comes off as, "Damn, that Wise question made me uncomfortable." If it was such a non-issue, it shouldn't make anyone uncomfortable. And to be honest, Griffin's politically correct response isn't going to help make the issue any less inflammatory for some.

"Uncomfortable"? Geez, I don't get that vibe at all. Maybe in the sense of "I'm a little embarrassed for Mike", sure. But many of us see this as a stupid and pointless rehashing of an off-topic issue that never, ever goes anywhere.