Rosenthal: Mayor wants to discuss changing Redskins nickname

[JMUSkins]

Yeah, ok then.

I linked to a video by a native american who opposes the name, and he explains why in detail. Did you listen to it?

Here's another link if you missed it.

So because one person doesn't like it we have to call for change? What a joke. Give me a study that shows it's offensive and then explain why Native American schools use the mascot themselves. Apparently they think it's okay for their kids to wear on their uniforms.

[Predicto]

Wow,..just wow.

So, you're passionate about the name "Redskins". Not a potential winning football team that represents the city of Washington D.C.?

Good ****ing god,...

Yeah, that was weird.

Someone said that people wanting to change the name were the main thing wrong with today's society. I think one of the major things wrong with today's society is that someone is willing to fight to the death to keep an borderline nickname. Why?

[JMUSkins]

Yeah, ok then.

I linked to a video by a native american who opposes the name, and he explains why in detail. Did you listen to it?

Here's another link if you missed it.

Additionally, why do you care so damn much? You have NO REASON to be offended by it. You have no dog in this fight yet come on this board calling for change. The name is used as a symbol of pride... if the Skins hated Native Americans why would they use the mascot?!?! You are making ZERO sense.

[Patrick Evidente]

The only thing that I'm glad we have Dan Snyder as owner is that he will fight and defend the name Redskins at all cost. Any other owner would have surrendered to the PC elitists.

[JMUSkins]

Agree, people need to sack up. The people that are easily offended by this crap have their own personal problems and confidence issues. Words don't harm or bother people of confidence, because they know better. I have never seen a word physically or mentally harm someone unless they themselves let it harm them.

Exactly! It is idiotic to be offended by something that isn't targeted at you. It's called being conditioned to be an alarmist pansy.

[Jacoah]

If you're Native American and you're offended, who am I to tell you to get over it? I don't have a problem with the name, but the name is offensive.

Fixed the egregious racial epithet for you.

[Predicto]

So because one person doesn't like it we have to call for change? What a joke. Give me a study that shows it's offensive and then explain why Native American schools use the mascot themselves. Apparently they think it's okay for their kids to wear on their uniforms.

Did you listen to it or not? I thought it was pretty well reasoned.

The word is an anachronism. Even if it wasn't originally intended to be offensive, even if we fans don't intend to use it in a negative fashion today, it still is what it is. Borderline at best.

Not the logo. Not the idea of Native American imagery. Just the word: Redskin.

[NewCliche21]

Exactly! It is idiotic to be offended by something that isn't targeted at you. It's called being conditioned to be an alarmist pansy.

I think that changing the name is ridiculous.

I think that your views, however, are incredibly dangerous. Are you the guy that would see a black man being harassed for being black and just walk away? Do you see the Latino who is being called a fence-jumper and think that's okay?

Just because it's not aimed at you in no way makes you an alarmist pansy to want to stop it.

[JMUSkins]

Did you listen to it or not? I thought it was pretty well reasoned.

The word is an anachronism. Even if it wasn't originally intended to be offensive, even if we fans don't intend to use it in a negative fashion today, it still is what it is. Borderline at best.

Not the logo. Not the idea of Native American imagery. Just the word: Redskin.

I'll watch the video when you tell me why you care so much... and when you show me a study proving it is offensive to the majority if Native Americans... and when you explain why they use the mascot themselves. You are simply ridiculous when you can't even back up the reason you are taking offense FOR SOMEONE ELSE!!!

[nemocystem]

This guy presents the opposite view pretty well, I think.

this argument is asinine & more ignorant than any use of either term. i wasn't going to get into the educational portion of this argument but it seems i have no choice.

a) as said before, REDskins is not in reference to skin color...PERIOD. if you believe that, you're being ignorant & uninformed & are making up reasons to be upset for people LIKE MYSELF who are of Native American descent & are not displeased with this moniker in any way, shape, or form.

in proper context, the use of Viking, or Fighting Irish is just as...if not MORE offensive.

c) the Indians logo to a man amongst all other i have spoken to of my nationality is the most offensive moniker & logo of any in sport....this is inarguable. you may speak on it, it will be ignored.

here are the reasons...dare i try to educate someone who seems uninterested in understanding that which they speak about.

the use of RED in the term REDskins as said many times over has 2 points of reference. first & foremost it is in reference to the warpaint that most Natives of the area would utilize when going into battle. to me this is a show of respect to a people of how formidable & intimidating they were to those they battled against. that they would RESPECTFULLY use their imagery & history in order to represent their team when going into battle is an HONOR. any of my relatives & friends from the reservation agree on this 1000%.

secondly...the term also references the revolutionaries in BOSTON where the team originated who were defending D.C. & the independence of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by donning the SAME WARPAINT as the local Natives & whom famously tossed out boxes of tea from incoming ships in a party of historic significance. now, before you try to claim that history states that this was also a slight to the Natives by trying to pin the events upon the Natives & so relieving blame from the Colonists...YOU ARE WRONG. everyone knew it was going to happen, everyone knew who did it, to the point of names being listed on the ships. they donned the WARPAINT of the Natives as another point of reference in saying to the English: "this is our nation that we have worked, bled, & fought over & you have no right governing from your castles across the sea." perhaps this reference is a bit disingenuous as the many atrocities that occurred against the Natives...however it could just as easily be said that at that time, during those intense moments of history, the Colonists felt a wee bit relative to the oppression that the Natives were dealt when they arrived.

these are points of fact onto the history of the REDSKINS. whereas the Indians moniker doesn't even properly reference the Natives whereby people continue to ignorantly reference them by the misinterpretation that Colombus believed he landed in East India & thus was actually meeting indigenous Indian people. nevermind the fact that they have a mockingly happy Indian "Brave" or something that seems all too ecstatic to a part of a hilariously irrelevant baseball team.

the Vikings represent the exact same portends as the aforementioned REDSKINS reasonings & thusly would NECESSARILY require the EXACT same restrictions or angst as the REDSKINS moniker however, since Vikings are white...nobody seems to care. that, or perhaps the Minnesotans who were largely colonized by Nordic people feel exactly the same way as most Native Americans do about this topic.

i hate to say it, but why is it always guilty white people or some race-mongering ethnic group that feels the need to "stand up" for other people's rights whether they ask for it or not?

when this issue was represented & brought to the NCAA's attention to where they finally OVERREACTED to the issue at hand...the main complaint came towards the disingenuous monikers, the ones that had no reason being, the ones that were ignorant in nature, & the mascot & team celebrations that had a) nothing to do with Native American history, & were entirely offensive misrepresentations of Native American activities.

the Seminoles kept their moniker because the Seminole Nation had to step in & petition. most other Native Americans simply don't care either way & couldn't be bothered to give 2 BROWNS what any Colonist American franchise wants to call themselves.

then of course, there are specific tribes that refer to their skin-color in their namesakes because most NATIVE AMERICANS UNDERSTAND THAT COLOR IS A FUNCTION & NOT A STATE OF BEING!!!

people really NEED to get off their high-horse on this subject because they have NO IDEA of what they are speaking about. but alas...much like there have & will continue to be laws passed that tell people how they should think/feel/act...i am almost certain that self-hating, guilty, white, & race-mongering racists (you know...the ones that hate the races that they feel hate them as much as they don't want to be hated) will somehow bully their moronic, bass-ackwards sense of correctness into the minds of other sensationalist issue harbingers. like the vegans, PETA fanatics, & the like.

at the end of the day, there is a middle-ground to be had here........but don't try to tell me, a proud member of the Chiracawa Apachee Nation, how the eff i should feel about this issue. go bark at a Berkley homeless rally & stay out of my logic.

fyi: if we're to continue this logical roller-coaster....just think about Apachee helicopters, Tomahawk missiles...etc. should we change the names of those weapons too? after all, their intent is purely offensive...

[JMUSkins]

I think that changing the name is ridiculous.

I think that your views, however, are incredibly dangerous. Are you the guy that would see a black man being harassed for being black and just walk away? Do you see the Latino who is being called a fence-jumper and think that's okay?

Just because it's not aimed at you in no way makes you an alarmist pansy to want to stop it.

Those things are clearly offensive because they are being used in disparaging ways. Please tell me how, in any way, the name Redskin is even coming close to being used in a disparaging way when a team is using it as a symbol of pride. If a study shows that the majority of Native Americans find it offensive then I would agree that we are in the wrong to use it. It still makes no sense why we would need to change it when Native American high schools use it themselves.

[Predicto]

Additionally, why do you care so damn much? You have NO REASON to be offended by it. You have no dog in this fight yet come on this board calling for change. The name is used as a symbol of pride... if the Skins hated Native Americans why would they use the mascot?!?! You are making ZERO sense.

Huh? Look in the mirror. One of us is ranting about this, and it's not me. Why do you care so much about this that you are capitalizing every other word, and saying things like "disgusting" and "people need to shut their traps" and "alarmist pansy" and so on?

I'm not sure about changing the name. But I do feel it necessary to present the other side to the argument (we don't usually see it on here), and I don't like getting shouted down. You guys act like changing the nickname of a football team would be the end of the world. It has happened many times in the past and it will happen again in the future.

---------- Post added January-9th-2013 at 04:37 PM ----------

I'll watch the video when you tell me why you care so much... and when you show me a study proving it is offensive to the majority if Native Americans... and when you explain why they use the mascot themselves. You are simply ridiculous when you can't even back up the reason you are taking offense FOR SOMEONE ELSE!!!

So you won't take 4 minutes out of your life to listen to a Native American talk about it the issue, but you will spend a half hour yelling at me on a message board in apoplectic outrage about how important the name is to you?

Well, ok then.

[DjTj]

I think we should change the name to the Washington Bullets.

[JMUSkins]

Huh? Look in the mirror. One of us is ranting about this, and it's not me. Why do you care so much about this that you are capitalizing every other word, and saying things like "disgusting" and "people need to shut their traps" and "alarmist pansy" and so on?

I'm not sure about changing the name. But I do feel it necessary to present the other side to the argument (we don't usually see it on here), and I don't like getting shouted down. You guys act like changing the nickname of a football team would be the end of the world. It has happened many times in the past and it will happen again in the future.

It's because the name isn't offensive (as proven by multiple studies and the use by Native American high schools) yet people want to act like it is. It's simply ridiculous to want to re-brand this team without thinking it through. When the name is proven offensive by a call from the majority of Native Americans, not white apologists, I will concede that it needs to change.

I do have a dog in this fight... It's the team my family has liked for decades and one I live and breathe.

[Patrick Evidente]

What about Washington Football Bullets

[JMUSkins]

So you won't take 4 minutes out of your life to listen to a Native American talk about it the issue, but you will spend a half hour yelling at me on a message board in apoplectic outrage about how important the name is to you?

Well, ok then.

A singular person's point of view does not make or break the issue. When you can show real, scientific evidence that this name needs to change I'll happily read it or listen to it.

[Mr. Sinister]

One thing that's always astonishing to me is when people decide to get into discussions (pretaining to other races) determining for themselves (openly) what is or isn't racist, or offensive.

Pointing out statistics on a survey and making an argument as to why the name shouldn't be changed, or using other examples is one thing. Outright saying it isn't offensive when there may be a fair amount of people in said race who think otherwise, is completely different.

[panel]

What about Washington Football Bullets

HA!, I would actually like that name.

[#98QBKiller]

Instead of Washington "Natives," how about Washington "Nation"?

My reasoning is in my above post, but mostly I just like the way that sounds.

I wouldn't mind that either. I think I like Natives the best but the most important thing to me would be to keep our team colors and logo. I would also like it to be a two-syllable word so it fits into "Hail to the Redskins."

[Sizzla3000]

I am surprised Wellington Mara and Roger Goodell haven't threatened us with draft picks yet.

[Predicto]

this argument is asinine & more ignorant than any use of either term. i wasn't going to get into the educational portion of this argument but it seems i have no choice.

a) as said before, REDskins is not in reference to skin color...PERIOD. if you believe that, you're being ignorant & uninformed & are making up reasons to be upset for people LIKE MYSELF who are of Native American descent & are not displeased with this moniker in any way, shape, or form.

Let me guess. You are 1/32nd Cherokee. Every young Republican I know says that.

But seriously, you are claiming something definitive that is not even close to definite, as far as I know.

in proper context, the use of Viking, or Fighting Irish is just as...if not MORE offensive.

Very few people who are not Redskins fans would agree with you on that. :whoknows:

c) the Indians logo to a man amongst all other i have spoken to of my nationality is the most offensive moniker & logo of any in sport....this is inarguable. you may speak on it, it will be ignored.

I agree. The Cleveland Indians logo is horrific. But that isn't what we are talking about.

here are the reasons...dare i try to educate someone who seems uninterested in understanding that which they speak about.

the use of RED in the term REDskins as said many times over has 2 points of reference. first & foremost it is in reference to the warpaint that most Natives of the area would utilize when going into battle. to me this is a show of respect to a people of how formidable & intimidating they were to those they battled against. that they would RESPECTFULLY use their imagery & history in order to represent their team when going into battle is an HONOR. any of my relatives & friends from the reservation agree on this 1000%.

secondly...the term also references the revolutionaries in BOSTON where the team originated who were defending D.C. & the independence of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA by donning the SAME WARPAINT as the local Natives & whom famously tossed out boxes of tea from incoming ships in a party of historic significance. now, before you try to claim that history states that this was also a slight to the Natives by trying to pin the events upon the Natives & so relieving blame from the Colonists...YOU ARE WRONG. everyone knew it was going to happen, everyone knew who did it, to the point of names being listed on the ships. they donned the WARPAINT of the Natives as another point of reference in saying to the English: "this is our nation that we have worked, bled, & fought over & you have no right governing from your castles across the sea." perhaps this reference is a bit disingenuous as the many atrocities that occurred against the Natives...however it could just as easily be said that at that time, during those intense moments of history, the Colonists felt a wee bit relative to the oppression that the Natives were dealt when they arrived.

these are points of fact onto the history of the REDSKINS.

No they aren't. They are points of belief, strongly held by you. Don't mistake them for absolute truth.

i hate to say it, but why is it always guilty white people or some race-mongering ethnic group that feel

s the need to "stand up" for other people's rights whether they ask for it or not?

I suspect that you don't hate to say that. I suspect that you actually love to say that, as often as you can. But that's just MY belief.

i am almost certain that self-hating, guilty, white, & race-mongering racists (you know...the ones that hate the races that they feel hate them as much as they don't want to be hated) will somehow bully their moronic, bass-ackwards sense of correctness into the minds of other sensationalist issue harbingers. like the vegans, PETA fanatics, & the like.

at the end of the day, there is a middle-ground to be had here........but don't try to tell me, a proud member of the Chiracawa Apachee Nation, how the eff i should feel about this issue. go bark at a Berkley homeless rally & stay out of my logic.

I would never tell you what to think about anything. You are aware, however, that you don't have a monopoly on opinions, and when you call people racists for thinking that the word Redskin may be an anachronism whose useful time has passed, well, you aren't really trying to have a back and forth discussion, are you?

[JMUSkins]

One thing that's always astonishing to me is when people decide to get into discussions (pretaining to other races) determining for themselves (openly) what is or isn't racist, or offensive.

Pointing out statistics on a survey and making an argument as to why the name shouldn't be changed, or using other examples is one thing. Outright saying it isn't offensive when there may be a fair amount of people in said race who think otherwise, is completely different.

I can appreciate that, Sinister. But, where do we draw the line? 1,000 people? 100 people? 1 person? At what point does something become offensive and need change? I can't think of any other way to find out besides polling the people themselves...

[Predicto]

It's because the name isn't offensive (as proven by multiple studies and the use by Native American high schools) yet people want to act like it is. It's simply ridiculous to want to re-brand this team without thinking it through. When the name is proven offensive by a call from the majority of Native Americans, not white apologists, I will concede that it needs to change.

I do have a dog in this fight... It's the team my family has liked for decades and one I live and breathe.

Well, I have been a fan of this team for half a century. Hell, I went to RFK with my dad and watched Sonny Jurgensen beat the St Louis Cardinals when Vince Freaking Lombardi was the coach. My Aunt went up Broadway with the Redskins Marching Band in 1937.

Doesn't mean I can't think that the word "redskin" may have outlived its usefulness.

---------- Post added January-9th-2013 at 05:07 PM ----------

A singular person's point of view does not make or break the issue. When you can show real, scientific evidence that this name needs to change I'll happily read it or listen to it.

It's not a "scientific" question, is it?

[mentallyinept]

Well, I have been a fan of this team for half a century. Hell, I went to RFK with my dad and watched Sonny Jurgensen beat the St Louis Cardinals when Vince Freaking Lombardi was the coach. My Aunt went up Broadway with the Redskins Marching Band in 1937.

First off, that is cool as hell.

Doesn't mean I can't think that the word "redskin" may have outlived its usefulness

IMO, saying "Redskin" is an anachronism and has "outlived it's usefulness" is a far cry from "universally offensive racial epithet".

[JMUSkins]

It's not a "scientific" question, is it?

Sure it is... you poll the group. If it shows a majority think it needs to change then it needs to change. It's just that over and over again we have seen that Native Americans don't think it is offensive, so why would it need to change now?

I apologize if I came off as an *******. I am just very passionate about this issue and I do respect your opinion.