rictus58 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'm actually writing a paper on this and I'd like to interview one of you for it. Side note: through my research the term redskins was used to describe their red paint on the bodies when they would fight. Prior to the 1960s dictionaries didn't define the term as a racial slur. It didn't get labeled as a "racial slur" Til the 1970s. There was a survey taken and 90 percent of the Indians surveyed didn't find the name offensive. You might want to check the history of the word with the OED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 The controversy isn't going anywhere folks. How much longer do want to keep fighting for this?http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/drop-redskins-name-time-to-take-a-stand/2013/02/06/f87462d2-709f-11e2-a050-b83a7b35c4b5_story.html?hpid=z3 Forever!!! ---------- Post added February-7th-2013 at 01:04 PM ---------- This won't go away until all Native references are dropped. Compromises will not work bc names like Warriors, Braves, etc. will forever be linked to Redskins. Images like the spears, feathers, arrows, headdresses, all have to go as well if we ever want this to end. You always have an ax to grind in these conversations like you personally want them to change it and change it now. As a Redskins fan, what is your angle? I'm curious because while I see some in here say,"maybe it's time to change it" you seem 10 times more agenda driven then anyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I refuse to click on the link... but did Robert McCartney write the article? If so, I suspect that the post now knows that anything with this topic written by UnWise Mike will get the proverbial eye roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Can anyone even remember the last time they honestly heard the term "redskin" used as a pejorative directed at a native American?At this point "Redskins" means nothing more than "an American professional football team". I agree with you but I'm not Native American. I think the logo is flattering but what do I know. :whoknows: I wouldn't mind a name change either. Perhaps when the team moves to LA, they can become the LA Warriors! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Didn't you just say you weren't playing? Yep. I was using your post as a perfect example of why I'm not playing. You don't want to consider the issue objectively. You want to fight against the "PC elitists" because we can't let "them" win. I'm completely torn on the issue myself, but I always find myself arguing the other side on here because it doesn't get a fair hearing unless some of us do that. And as a result, I end up with everyone screaming at me. So that's why I'm not going to play. And yes, I realize that I could have just kept quiet from the start. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HogNose Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'm surprised descendents of French monarchs haven't come forward to say the New Orleans Saints use of the Fleur-de-lis is offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
757SeanTaylor21 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 You might want to check the history of the word with the OED. Considering that the earliest text that had the term redskin was used in that manner, why don't you enlighten me to the history of the word? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor703 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 So basically we are at the point now where a bunch of non-Native Americans are trying to tell Native Americans what they should be offended by? I can picture UnWise Mike in my head "shut up silly Native American, I know what is best for you and by golly you should be offended by this"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 But here is what I have realized....Its a racist name. Should be changed, UNLESS, Indian tribes tell us they are ok with it. Like Florida state. Redskins was a Racist Term. No matter if you or I associate it with one now or not, it was created as a Racist term. Don't give me that crap about "It was designed to honor". George Preston Marshall was a known and documented Racist Pig. He made the name Redskins to match Red Sox and kept it. I am 100% sure he didnt honor anyone or any group that wasn't white. Both red highlights: Not that this is gospel, but most polls of true NAs have said they don't have a problem with the name. There is a select group that seems to lobby congress every year and it's the same people who I think really want attention from the government and use the Redskins name as an excuse to get their attention. You just said, "WAS" as in past tense. It's meaning has changed over the years. ---------- Post added February-7th-2013 at 01:23 PM ---------- If there is one thing I have learned over the years, it is that it is completely impossible to have a reasonable discussion on this particular issue on this particular message board. Everyone here is too emotionally invested in the team. People who ordinarily are willing to discuss both sides of any issue, no matter how politically charged, suddenly become completely dogmatic and hostile. What's more, they feed off of each other's posts like it is a contest to shout down any possible consideration of the question before it becomes too dangerous. Not worth the effort anymore. I'm not playing. I'm almost there and I do skip over certain subjects in the tailgate because it seems to just spin and spin and spin and you aren't going to change anyone's mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 If the logo was just changed to a sunburnt white guy would this make everything ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Sadly, this issue is much like discussing the cause(s) of the Civil War. It depends on who you talk to, when you talk to them, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sideshow24 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 There is nothing to "fight" for, The name isn't going anywhere. The articles will be ongoing though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Evidente Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Yep. I was using your post as a perfect example of why I'm not playing. You don't want to consider the issue objectively. You want to fight against the "PC elitists" because we can't let "them" win. I'm completely torn on the issue myself, but I always find myself arguing the other side on here because it doesn't get a fair hearing unless some of us do that. And as a result, I end up with everyone screaming at me. So that's why I'm not going to play. And yes, I realize that I could have just kept quiet from the start. Sorry. I just find it hilarious that some Native Americans don't care or not offended by the name and some are offended by it. If some are not offended then why is it such a problem to the PC crowd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Considering that the earliest text that had the term redskin was used in that manner, why don't you enlighten me to the history of the word? No. It doesn't. And I'm not doing your research paper for you. But you are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 This is where I make my Chris Rock analogy. CR can drop N bombs and we love it, but if Jay Leno tried the same we'd be outraged. n bomb is, was and always will be a derogatory term. no way in hell any high school, black or otherwise, is adopting that as its name. 'redskins' is not that. its a very shallow analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 No. It doesn't. And I'm not doing your research paper for you. But you are wrong. He cited a source and you are telling him he is wrong while bringing nothing to the table. Absurdly weak stuff here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted February 7, 2013 Author Share Posted February 7, 2013 You always have an ax to grind in these conversations like you personally want them to change it and change it now. As a Redskins fan, what is your angle? I'm curious because while I see some in here say,"maybe it's time to change it" you seem 10 times more agenda driven then anyone else. I'm fortunate to attend a few road games every year. On road weekends I'll befriend dozens of fans at bars, tailgates, stadiums etc. Somebody always seems to bring up the name issue, and its not me. People seek my opinion, or they'll express their own. This is not just drunk fools who are in S talking mode, I'm much thicker skinned than that. It's usually friendly conversation. I've known many Dallas fans, especially on the East side of DC who love to bring up George Preston Marshall's ills. I'm tired of dealing with that issue too. I can't change the past, but I feel like the franchise I love needs a karmic cleansing going forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 While I agree with Destino that as fans we can't be dispassionate about this, it doesn't mean we can't talk about it. There is nothing to "fight" for, The name isn't going anywhere. The articles will be ongoing though. True enough. Really it is the other way around. Those who think it is offensive are the ones who need to make the argument that it causes racial disharmony and promotes negative stereotypes. Really, the only thing remotely offensive that is associated with the team is Chief Zee, and he's a fan. As others have mentioned, words can change their meaning. For example, I doubt when someone says "decimate" that they mean that 1 out of every 10 people were killed. The same that common usage of Redskins seem to be the name of a NFL team. Whether or not it was actually an offensive term is immaterial if the power of that word has been taken away through alternative uses. Personally, I think there is more to be offended by with the tomahawk chop or Chief Wahoo, but that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rictus58 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 He cited a source and you are telling him he is wrong while bringing nothing to the table. Absurdly weak stuff here. Bs he didn't cite anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
757SeanTaylor21 Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Bs he didn't cite anything I am not in class to reference my paper but I have a source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'm fortunate to attend a few road games every year. On road weekends I'll befriend dozens of fans at the bars, tailgates, stadiums etc. Somebody always seems to bring up the name issue, and its not me. People seek my opinion, or they'll express their own. This is not just drunk people who are in S talking mode, I'm much thicker skinned than that. It's usually friendly conversation. I've known many Dallas fans, especially on the East side of DC who love to bring up George Preston Marshall's ills. I'm tired of dealing with that issue too. I can't change the past, but I feel like the franchise I love needs a karmic cleansing going forward. Why are they seeking "your" advice? Do you have a sign that says ask me about my teams name? I've been a fan of this team for 37 years and lived in southern MD most of my life, and not once has anyone ever asked my advice on what I thought of the name. Dallass fans? Seriously, you give two rats assess what our biggest rivals think? Of course they're going to ask you about it. It's like Redskins fans ragging on Romo sits to pee choking. You have to do it. So do they. In one sentence you say you have thick skin and in another sentence you say you're tired of dealing with the issue. Outside of this forum, I've never had to deal with this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattFancy Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 In one sentence you say you have thick skin and in another sentence you say you're tired of dealing with the issue. Outside of this forum, I've never had to deal with this issue. Yeah I have friends that are fans of many different teams. Can't say I've ever had this brought up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 Apparently since the team doesn't suck anymore the best way for The Post to annoy Dan Snyder is to go after the name.I say we keep the name and just ditch the logo. Make the helmet plain Burgundy. Then we can say the name doesn't mean anything. Like the Browns or the Reds. Don't think that's going to fool anyone. Personally, I think the name is mildly offensive. It'd be messed up to call a team the black skins or the white skins. Our country has a long, ugly history of slavery, persecution, violence, discrimination, and degradation based on differences in skin color. The name is a literal delineation based upon skin color. At the very least, the name is an explicit link to a racist past. At worst, it's a slur. How harmful it is, I don't know. I think the reason we've probably gotten away with keeping it so long is because our society is not sensitive to the issues of the Native American minority like they are to other minorities. There are too few Native Americans left and they are not loud enough to make a big enough stink about this. I don't usually care about sanitizing history. But the history will always be there. I don't think changing the name would be that bad and it could probably do some good. Personally, I'd probably vote for them to change the name back to the Braves. I don't really buy that team nicknames like Braves and Seminole's are offensive, any more so than Spartans or Trojans are. If anything, I think they honor and preserve the things about Native American culture that our society admired and keep them from becoming wholly forgotten and irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted February 7, 2013 Author Share Posted February 7, 2013 Why are they seeking "your" advice? Do you have a sign that says ask me about my teams name? It's called conversation. I said opinion, you said "advice". I'm not Dr. Phil. I've been a fan of this team for 37 years and lived in southern MD most of my life, and not once has anyone ever asked my advice on what I thought of the name. Outside of this forum, I've never had to deal with this issue. Do you visit other NFL forums? Have you mixed with other fansbases where the B&G wasn't the majority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted February 7, 2013 Share Posted February 7, 2013 From what I understand, there have been several surveys (including those posted in this thread) of American Indians that state the name is only offensive to a small group. By and large, the people it's supposed to offend aren't offended. Please remind me: what's the problem? If the people the name is supposed to offend aren't offended, then what's the problem? Same with the logo. I've always thought it was stoic and proud, not cartoonish like Chief Wahoo (Cleveland Indian's logo). As a matter of fact, I think it's based off of the reverse side of the buffalo head nickel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.