WP:Drop ‘Redskins’ name? Time to take a stand. (By Robert McCartney)

[Larry]

You joined the numbers game by running around with a 90% figure. Elkabong requires a simple majority, what's your threshold for when it's offensive?

Ah, got it.

Dozens of people make the completely unsupported claim that he name is offensive.

I point out that the vast majority disagree with them, and support that statement of fact with actual fact.

"Larry is playing the numbers game. How dare he point at numbers? Doesn't he know that I've got an opinion?"

Me? I don't have a simple numerical threshold for how many people it takes, to "make the cut" between "offensive" and "some people are offended".

I don't think that a majority is REQUIRED.

OTOH, I'm pretty sure that "90% say it ISN'T" DOESN'T qualify.

To me, 90% agreement on something is a pretty firm consensus. That kind of unanimity is really rare, at least on topics which are trying to make the claim of "controversy".

Heck, I'm not sure that you'd get 90% agreement among ES on whether drafting Alfred Morris was a good move.

Now that I've answered your question, though, how about you answer your own?

What's YOUR threshold?

How many people have to disagree with your almighty opinion, for you to admit that maybe your opinion isn't universal truth?

If 95% of natives say its not offensive, then will people grudgingly back down from their blanket declaration of "it's offensive"? Or will those people's opinions STILL not count (for one excuse or another)?

Or is it a case where there has to be UNANIMOUS non offense, before you'll consider that maybe THEIR opinion matters more than yours?

---------- Post added February-8th-2013 at 07:13 AM ----------

Not that I expect it to change, and I personally don't find it offensive but some food for thought...

The N word was not generally considered offensive for a long time. Gook/Oriental wasn't considered offensive when they were first used either.

If we do another poll and the trend is that more and more people, particularly educated folks, find it offensive... Well then....

I agree. Meanings (including a word's offensive-ness) change over time.

"The N word" didn't start out offensive. It became that way after being sneeringly hurled at people, for a generation. To the point where he word came to be associated with the sneer.

That works both ways, though.

[elkabong82]

You joined the numbers game by running around with a 90% figure. Elkabong requires a simple majority, what's your threshold for when it's offensive?

.

I was referring to the 90% figure. A simple majority would not qualify as a clear majority and would be up for debate. 90% is a clear majority and not up for debate.

Is right for you to be offended FOR Native Americans when polls show most of them are not offended? What's your threshold for when something is or isn't offensive?

[rictus58]

Now that this thread has run its usual course, I'm off to start a thread on abortion now!

[JimboDaMan]

Go up to Herman Cain and say, "Hi Blackskin" and see what happens.

So the response is to change the word, change the context in which it is said, and then say "See! It's offensive!"

I'm going to bow out. As others have said, we're just talking past each other.

[nonniey]

Interesting statistics.

Over 90% (Many report over 95%) of Native Americans/American Indians (Apparently the politicaly correct term seems to be shifting back to the later) are not offended by Redskins. Over 97% of those that espouse a name change on behalf of American Indians are not American Indians.

[Larry]

So the response is to change the word, change the context in which it is said, and then say "See! It's offensive!"

I'm going to bow out. As others have said, we're just talking past each other.

Oh, while I agree with you that argument by "let's make up a word, make up a situation, claim that the word I made up would be offensive when used in the situation I made up, therefore the word I didn't make up is offensive when used in the situation I didn't make up" is, shall I say, a bit of a stretch.

(Insert witticism: Analogies are like farts. If you have to force it, it's probably crap.)

However, the point that "The term 'redskin' can be used as a racial epitaph" is at least a true statement.

Unfortunately, the subject of the thread is not

Is the phrase "How, Redskin!" offensive?

it's

Is the phrase "The Redskins swept the Cowboys this year" offensive?

The term "boy" can be used as a racial epitaph. (And, unlike "Redskins", has been used that way, numerous times, for a generation).

Anybody feel like starting a protest movement to demand that The Boy Scouts change their name, because it's racially offensive?

No? You mean, the word "boy" can be offensive, or not, depending on how and where and in what context it is used?

Inconceivable!

(Yes, intentional reference to a humorous line which is actually on-topic for this thread.)

[-9-]

Would anyone walk up to a Native American and call him a Redskin to his face?

[MattFancy]

And you know he's Native American how?

[The Evil Genius]

And you know he's Native American how?

Duh. He's drunk.

[-9-]

And you know he's Native American how?

red skin. :point2sky

[pjfootballer]

I don't support the name change.

But if they did change to The Washington Warriors, it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'd probably still call them the 'Skins just like I call the Bullets the Bullets.

I'm still pissed to this day that Pollin changed the Bullets to Wizards. He couldn't have pick a more piss-poor name if he tried. Horrendous name. Horrendous image and changing back to Red White and Blue doesn't do anything either. I have 2 authentic Bullets uniforms in my jersey collection and not one Wheezers uniform.

[MattFancy]

red skin. :point2sky

Good one. Thanks for contributing to this debate.

[S.T.real,lights,out]

Oh, look. It's time for our annual "it's the offseason, lets try to manufacture a controversy" article.

Pretty much. Every year same story. Its not gonna change people so deal with it. If they aren't changing HS names why would they change one of the biggest sports teams in the world? Not gonna happen.

[JimboDaMan]

Duh. He's drunk.

Doesn't that make him Fighting Irish?

[The Evil Genius]

Pretty much. Every year same story. Its not gonna change people so deal with it. If they aren't changing HS names why would they change one of the biggest sports teams in the world? Not gonna happen.

But they are changing hs names in some states...and they've changed nearly every college nickname that wasn't officially tied to a tribe (Stanford, Syracuse etc).

[-9-]

Good one. Thanks for contributing to this debate.

thank you....you may go in peace....

[The Evil Genius]

Doesn't that make him Fighting Irish?

No, he wasn't carrying a shilelagh.

[pjfootballer]

Well, that's mighty white of you, Lieutenant. (That's a Dirty Harry reference. )

Considering that I haven't made such an "absurd argument", either.

I do, however, appreciate your simple, unsupported, claim that, if someone were to argue that, in order for a term to be considered offensive, people have to consider it offensive, then such an argument would be an "absurd argument".

Ranks right up there with spending several pages flipping back and forth between claiming that the term's only use is pejorative, and admitting that well, of course we all know that it's actually used almost exclusively as a reference to a pretty good football team, and nobody uses it as a pejorative any more, and then going right back to announcing that the term is purely offensive, and that that is it's current usage.

I hate the comparison to the N word and Redskin, because the N word is still in use today, still used with frequency and is still used pejoritively today, while I've been alive for 45 years and I don't think one time I've heard the term Redskin used pejoritivly. And I've lived South Florida for several years where there are alot of tribes (Miccosukee to name one close to where I lived) and now in South Carolina I live in York County right outside of Charlotte and we have the Waxhaw, Cheraw, Sugaree and Catawba (the largest in the area) and not once have I heard any of them even broach the suject. My grandparents were pretty racist in their thinking and I heard all kinds of things from them growing up and not once did they ever say Redskin, except when referring to the football team. I heard my grandfather call them "Blanket Asses" on more than one occasion, but never Redskins.

[DC9]

My best friend married a full-blooded member of the Yakima Tribe from the Oregon/Washington State area. When I first met her I NEVER said "Redskins" around her... I would only say "Washington" and that's it. It was weird for me but I didn't want to say anything to offend her or him (he is white, FWIW). One day, we were watching a game at his/her house and she looked at me and just out of nowhere asked "Why do you never say Redskins? You only say Washington?" I honestly didn't know what to say to her... so I went with the ole' "Because I don't want to offend you." She busted out laughing at me and said that it's one of "the dumbest misconceptions out there and it doesn't offend anyone." Then she proceeded to open up her lap top and told me to come sit by her. She showed me pics of all of her Uncles and cousins wearing Redskins gear and at games in Seattle and San Fran. I asked her why they were fans of the Redskins if they were from the Seattle area and she said "They just always have been. I don't know. I guess because of the name."

I never would've thought a million years, that I was the ignorant one and that I was the one making things awkward because I didn't bring it up as a topic and see what her actual feelings were.

Her and I became very close friends and to this day she is my closest female friend (besides the wifey of course). We still talk every day either over the phone or via text.

EDIT: I am also god father to two out of their three children and their happiness, safety, and self-esteem mean more to me than anything Redskins. If they were offended by it, I would be on the other side of this argument. End of discussion for me.

[pjfootballer]

Go up to Herman Cain and say, "Hi Blackskin" and see what happens.

Why would anyone do that? Do you go up to white people and say Hi Whiteskin? To Asians and say Hi Yellowskin? Or to Hispanics and say Hi Brownskin? You keep saying this as if people actually do this.

[Bang]

Just because.

~Bang

[Larry]

Why would anyone do that? Do you go up to white people and say Hi Whiteskin? To Asians and say Hi Yellowskin? Or to Hispanics and say Hi Brownskin? You keep saying this as if people actually do this.

I assume that what he's trying (badly) to do, is to point out that the term 'redskin' can be used offensively.

And I agree. It can.

The fact that it can be offensive isn't relevant, IMO. But it is a true statement.

[CrypticVillain]

Just because.

~Bang

:whoknows:

She busted out laughing at me and said that it's one of "the dumbest misconceptions out there and it doesn't offend anyone."

This is what is pissing me off. I can see if Native Americans are clamoring for the name to be changed, but I have yet to see any come out. I know there are some that exist, but the ones that keep on talking about it are not Natives. :2cents:

[JimboDaMan]

No, he wasn't carrying a shilelagh.

Ah. So he's Polish, then.

[skinsmarydu]

I assume that what he's trying (badly) to do, is to point out that the term 'redskin' can be used offensively.

And I agree. It can.

The fact that it can be offensive isn't relevant, IMO. But it is a true statement.

But I thought that's what the debate was about. That because some people think it can be offensive, it should be changed...a stupid argument to me, but I'm an ES and biased.

I believe that men wearing tank tops in a restaurant can be offensive and should be banned. That doesn't mean I think that there's any way the rest of the country is gonna let me have my way. (even though this is one of my more reasonable requests for a better society, lol):cool: