SOW| Native Americans Speaking Out In Support of Redskins Name

[pjfootballer]

I still don't understand why people who aren't Native American think their voice matters at all.

As far as we know, most Native Americans aren't offended. *shrug*

My question is, how much of a fraction (1/4, 1/2, etc) should you really be able to have a voice. I see alot of 1/16, 1/8 and all, but what number do we put on it?

[Bacon]

Keep the imagery and switch the name back to Braves like we were back in the 30s. It's already in the fight song.

If there are still people screaming racism, they can take on the Atlanta Braves as well.

[DCchillin89]

I still don't understand why people who aren't Native American think their voice matters at all.

As far as we know, most Native Americans aren't offended. *shrug*

Just playing devil's advocate here, but I think you can be offended by the word no matter what your race is. You can be white and still detest the N-word

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 04:34 PM ----------

So, your point is that, if you want to know if someone is offended, and you ask him, and he says "no", that's not good enough?

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 09:52 AM ----------

One sixteenth Potawatomie.

No, it's just a ten year old poll, and shouldn't be used as the crux of an argument insinuating that today's native americans don't feel the word is racist, that's all.

[Hitman21ST]

Just playing devil's advocate here, but I think you can be offended by the word no matter what your race is. You can be white and still detest the N-word

Not liking it isn't the same as being offended by it.

If you take offense at something, that generally means that it affects you in some way. It's offensive because it has a negative connotation to something that you (either individually or as a people group) have experienced.

The term Redskin is in reference to Native Americans. Whitey can not like it all they want, but I'd be hard pressed to believe they were offended by it.

[DCchillin89]

The term Redskin is in reference to Native Americans. Whitey can not like it all they want, but I'd be hard pressed to believe they were offended by it.

I'm white and I'm offended by it. To me it keeps alive a shameful period of American History in which a group of people were systematically marginalized and eradicated by White Americans. You can call me ultra-sensitive, but I'm embarassed about how my ancestors treated the Native Americans and this land of theirs. To me, this shame and desire to apologize falls right below slavery. It's truly a black eye on our culture. I know that some white people get all worked up about it, but their motivations and intentions can be shallow. This embarassment and shame I feel has been with me for awhile, and the logo and name perpetuates that shame.

Just my 2cents

PS this feeling doesn't just end with redskins. I feel the same way about all teams that reference native americans

[Taylor 36]

I'm white and I'm offended by it. To me it keeps alive a shameful period of American History in which a group of people were systematically marginalized and eradicated by White Americans. You can call me ultra-sensitive, but I'm embarassed about how my ancestors treated the Native Americans and this land of theirs. To me, this shame and desire to apologize falls right below slavery. It's truly a black eye on our culture. I know that some white people get all worked up about it, but their motivations and intentions can be shallow. This embarassment and shame I feel has been with me for awhile, and the logo and name perpetuates that shame.

Just my 2cents

PS this feeling doesn't just end with redskins. I feel the same way about all teams that reference native americans

I'm not going to call you ultra-sensitive; I'm going to call you what you are: ignorant. The word/term Redskin has nothing to do with the actions of settlers and frontiersman centuries ago. It would be like someone being offended by the term Jew because it brings up the Holocaust in their mind. The term has nothing to do with the actions of the time. Native Americans called themselves Redskin, as Hebrews called themselves Jews, for centuries. Now, if you wanted to say Injun and Kraut were offensive, you'd have an argument. However, Redskins and Jews are not offensive to anyone who cares to know the facts.

[RFKFedEx]

Its been nearly a week since this thread began. We still haven't found a credible Native to speak out in support of the name. We can't even find a credible non Native to stick up for us.

I don't understand why this is happening if our Native theme is ok with 90% of the Native population. We live in a free press society, some journalist, somewhere, has got to take a stand on our behalf if we're the correct side here.

[DCchillin89]

I'm not going to call you ultra-sensitive; I'm going to call you what you are: ignorant. The word/term Redskin has nothing to do with the actions of settlers and frontiersman centuries ago. It would be like someone being offended by the term Jew because it brings up the Holocaust in their mind. The term has nothing to do with the actions of the time. Native Americans called themselves Redskin, as Hebrews called themselves Jews, for centuries. Now, if you wanted to say Injun and Kraut were offensive, you'd have an argument. However, Redskins and Jews are not offensive to anyone who cares to know the facts.

What if Bayern Munich called themselves, "The Bayern Munich Jews?" Is that the same as Washington Redskins? By your reasoning, those are comparable.

There's a difference between the term by itself, and associating the term with a city or culture that can make it ironic, and ultimately inappropriate. There's 'Redskin' and there's 'Washington Redskin.' my problem is with the latter

[Taylor 36]

What if Bayern Munich called themselves, "The Bayern Munich Jews?" Is that the same as Washington Redskins? By your reasoning, those are comparable.

There's a difference between the term by itself, and associating associating the term with a city or culture that can make it ironic, and ultimately inappropriate. There's 'Redskin' and there's 'Washington Redskin.' my problem is with the latter

Only if you want to make it inappropriate. The fact that there were/are many German Jews and that there were many different tribes from what is now the DMV area completely nullifies the point you were attempting to make. You are LOOKING for a reason to make the word offensive. That is what is offensive and inappropriate IMO!

[Destino]

I'm not going to call you ultra-sensitive; I'm going to call you what you are: ignorant. The word/term Redskin has nothing to do with the actions of settlers and frontiersman centuries ago. It would be like someone being offended by the term Jew because it brings up the Holocaust in their mind. The term has nothing to do with the actions of the time. Native Americans called themselves Redskin, as Hebrews called themselves Jews, for centuries. Now, if you wanted to say Injun and Kraut were offensive, you'd have an argument. However, Redskins and Jews are not offensive to anyone who cares to know the facts.

The question is not whether Redskin originally was a racial slur but is it a racial slur today. Neither the use of a term by a racial group nor the innocent origins of a word preclude it from being seen as a racial slur today. This is not to say redskin is a racial slur, simply that your argument isn't nearly as strong as you seem to think it is.

[Xero21]

No offense, but are you kidding me? You are totally ignoring all the facts that state high rates of poverty, suicide etc. on reservations, and don't think thats evidence there are bigger problems? Seriously? I'm sorry, but it really bothers me to hear someone claim that there isn't "evidence" that mascots and logos aren't bigger problems among Native Americans than high suicide rates, crime or poverty. You're coming off as if this issue is still important because theres plenty of room to debate all of the Native Americans other problems. ]

You misunderstood Destino. He wasn't saying that there aren't bigger problems in the Native community, he was saying that just because there are bigger issues, does not mean you should ignore the smaller ones. If you only focused on the "biggest" and most difficult to solve issues, you wouldn't get a lot done. Baby steps.

Also, a group of Native Americans is taking the issue to court.

http://www.wtop.com/363/3241909/Another-attempt-to-strip-Redskins-name

I wonder if they are true Natives, or "white" Natives (tongue planted firmly in cheek).

[grego]

Its been nearly a week since this thread began. We still haven't found a credible Native to speak out in support of the name. We can't even find a credible non Native to stick up for us.

I don't understand why this is happening if our Native theme is ok with 90% of the Native population. We live in a free press society, some journalist, somewhere, has got to take a stand on our behalf if we're the correct side here.

while i could rehash some arguments that have been beaten to death concerning native americans use of the name, i'm not sure it would make a difference. the native american high schools that use the name arent credible? walter wetzel isnt credible? the 91% that you and another poster apparently think is a myth arent credible?

if Geronimo came back from the dead and told you he approved, you wouldnt accept it.

[DCchillin89]

Only if you want to make it inappropriate. The fact that there were/are many German Jews and that there were many different tribes from what is now the DMV area completely nullifies the point you were attempting to make. You are LOOKING for a reason to make the word offensive. That is what is offensive and inappropriate IMO!

I'm not trying to find a way to make the word offensive. Sorry, it offends me. I can't change that. As I said before, my issue isn't with the Redskins, its the depiction of Native Americans on American Sports teams which I find Ironic and innappropriate. We have a group of people that White Americans basically decimated, and now their face is on our football helmet. It's a perverse glorification, and it bothers me, plain and simple.

But if you think the Bayern Munich 'Jews' would fly, then I'm just gonna stop this argument. You need to get out more.

[Boston Skins]

I'm white and I'm offended by it. To me it keeps alive a shameful period of American History in which a group of people were systematically marginalized and eradicated by White Americans. You can call me ultra-sensitive, but I'm embarassed about how my ancestors treated the Native Americans and this land of theirs. To me, this shame and desire to apologize falls right below slavery. It's truly a black eye on our culture. I know that some white people get all worked up about it, but their motivations and intentions can be shallow. This embarassment and shame I feel has been with me for awhile, and the logo and name perpetuates that shame.

Just my 2cents

PS this feeling doesn't just end with redskins. I feel the same way about all teams that reference native americans

Then why, OH WHY are you a fan of the REDSKINS?!? You support the name inadvertently. If you were so ashamed, so embarrassed, by the way you perceive the name affects Native Americans, then why do you have over a thousand posts on that team's message board? And please don't say it's because you're from the area and it's in your blood or whatever. If you were such an opposer to all things that are deemed offensive, you would turn your attention 30 minutes to the north and root for the Ravens. So spare me the self-righteousness. If you're not a Redskins fan, or at some point you renounced the team due to your "beliefs", fine. I'll listen. But you have zero credibility to me if you still support a team who, to you, displays hatred towards an entire race.

All Redskins "fans" who are opposed to the name change have one thing in common: they are Redskins FANS!!! They've bought jerseys, hats, tickets, cable tv to watch the team. The list goes on.

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 05:33 PM ----------

I'm not trying to find a way to make the word offensive. Sorry, it offends me. I can't change that. As I said before, my issue isn't with the Redskins, its the depiction of Native Americans on American Sports teams which I find Ironic and innappropriate. We have a group of people that White Americans basically decimated, and now their face is on our football helmet. It's a perverse glorification, and it bothers me, plain and simple.

But if you think the Bayern Munich 'Jews' would fly, then I'm just gonna stop this argument. You need to get out more.

The logo has been the one thing that has been left out of most conversations about this topic. To me, it represents a proud native american. It's not goofy looking like the Braves or Indians. The logo is a weak argument.

[DCchillin89]

Then why, OH WHY are you a fan of the REDSKINS?!? You support the name inadvertently. If you were so ashamed, so embarrassed, by the way you perceive the name affects Native Americans, then why do you have over a thousand posts on that team's message board? And please don't say it's because you're from the area and it's in your blood or whatever. If you were such an opposer to all things that are deemed offensive, you would turn your attention 30 minutes to the north and root for the Ravens. So spare me the self-righteousness. If you're not a Redskins fan, or at some point you renounced the team due to your "beliefs", fine. I'll listen. But you have zero credibility to me if you still support a team who, to you, displays hatred towards an entire race.

All Redskins "fans" who are opposed to the name change have one thing in common: they are Redskins FANS!!! They've bought jerseys, hats, tickets, cable tv to watch the team. The list goes on.

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 05:33 PM ----------

The logo has been the one thing that has been left out of most conversations about this topic. To me, it represents a proud native american. It's not goofy looking like the Braves or Indians. The logo is a weak argument.

If you took half a second to look at my argument, all logos, whether "proud" or not, irk me. Secondly, you have no idea who I am or what this team means to me. To come on the board, when I'm simply trying to show the other side of the coin, to promote discussion, and question my fanhood is ****ing sophomoric. I love this team, and will continue to support them. Whoever made the rule you have to ****ing like 100% of whatever it is you choose to like. So by your rule, I have to like FedexField, Dan Snyder, Vinny Cerrato (when he was here)? Guess what? I don't. You know why? Because those things interfere with the GREATNESS that is this franchise. I happen to feel like the name also interferes with this franchise's greatness. So by your stupid rules, I have to pledge unconditional support to everything Redskins. Is there some contract I have to sign?

I'm not going to even address other parts of your argument, I won't stoop to your level. You give those who support the Redskins name, and do so with a logical argument, a bad name.

[NOtoDC]

No matter what "true fans" think, the name is just too "politically" incorrect and offensive in 2013. Eventually there will have be some type of change.

[Boston Skins]

If you took half a second to look at my argument, all logos, whether "proud" or not, irk me. Secondly, you have no idea who I am or what this team means to me. To come on the board, when I'm simply trying to show the other side of the coin, to promote discussion, and question my fanhood is ****ing sophomoric. I love this team, and will continue to support them. Whoever made the rule you have to ****ing like 100% of whatever it is you choose to like. So by your rule, I have to like FedexField, Dan Snyder, Vinny Cerrato (when he was here)? Guess what? I don't. You know why? Because those things interfere with the GREATNESS that is this franchise. I happen to feel like the name also interferes with this franchise's greatness. So by your stupid rules, I have to pledge unconditional support to everything Redskins. Is there some contract I have to sign?

I'm not going to even address other parts of your argument, I won't stoop to your level. You give those who support the Redskins name, and do so with a logical argument, a bad name.

But, see, you missed my argument entirely. I cannot fathom supporting something that holds a name to which I deem offensive. I would feel like a hypocrite singing the fight song. How can you not see that? Singing "Hail to the Redskins" is essentially singing "Hail to the football team whom I love but holds a racist name, so my feelings are mixed" to you, is it not? I'm just trying to get inside the mind of a Skins fan who is offended by the name.

And by the way, I should have pointed out in my first post that I was speaking in terms of a larger group of fans that have displayed this tendency. But you just had to drag me through the mud, didn't you? Do you feel better?

EDIT: Once again, I gotta call hypocrisy here. Those of us that support the name are time and time again shot down because of the comparisons we make. "I'm offended by the Cowboys name because my grandfather was a cowboy!" I'm offended by the Bengals name because my brother was mauled by a tiger in Asia!". Both are weak arguments. But so are yours. By your logic, the Redskins name is offensive because it disparages an entire race of people. FedEx Field doesn't offend a race of people. Vinny Cerrato didn't force a group of people off their lands, on to a trail of tears that cost many their lives. So your argument is invalid. How's that for "promoting discussion"?

[Hitman21ST]

I'm not trying to find a way to make the word offensive. Sorry, it offends me. I can't change that. As I said before, my issue isn't with the Redskins, its the depiction of Native Americans on American Sports teams which I find Ironic and innappropriate. We have a group of people that White Americans basically decimated, and now their face is on our football helmet. It's a perverse glorification, and it bothers me, plain and simple.

But if you think the Bayern Munich 'Jews' would fly, then I'm just gonna stop this argument. You need to get out more.

Does Notre Dame's mascot offend you because of the atrocities the IRA does? Or any school/team with the mascot "Crusaders", because of the bad things that happened during the crusades? Would a team named the "Samurai" offend you because of how we treated the Japanese during WWII?

As per your response to my post, does just talking about Native Americans offend you, because that is keeping that period of history alive too? We picked a mascot and are depicting them honorably (not in a cartoonish manner or in a disrespectful way at all).

We're not the Washington "Americans who stole land from and killed" Redskins. It's Washington Redskins. In reference to and depicting a proud Native American warrior. Stop looking for ways to be offended.

[RFKFedEx]

while i could rehash some arguments that have been beaten to death concerning native americans use of the name, i'm not sure it would make a difference. the native american high schools that use the name arent credible? walter wetzel isnt credible? the 91% that you and another poster apparently think is a myth arent credible?

if Geronimo came back from the dead and told you he approved, you wouldnt accept it.

With that kind of credibility in the bank, how could a free press overlook all those relevant factors supporting our claim?

Credibility is unlikely to be gained around here until we have a national leader stand up to Harjo on our behalf. Until then, media will continue to crush us.

[Larry]

What if Bayern Munich called themselves, "The Bayern Munich Jews?" Is that the same as Washington Redskins? By your reasoning, those are comparable.

There's a difference between the term by itself, and associating the term with a city or culture that can make it ironic, and ultimately inappropriate. There's 'Redskin' and there's 'Washington Redskin.' my problem is with the latter

Well, that's certainly different, for this topic.

Most everybody I've seen on this topic, has been pushing the claim that calling somebody "redskin" is offensive, therefore "Washington Redskins" is offensive. (Whether native Americans think it is, or not).

---------- Post added March-6th-2013 at 06:26 PM ----------

The question is not whether Redskin originally was a racial slur but is it a racial slur today. Neither the use of a term by a racial group nor the innocent origins of a word preclude it from being seen as a racial slur today. This is not to say redskin is a racial slur, simply that your argument isn't nearly as strong as you seem to think it is.

Agreed. The usage, the offensive-ness of a word, the word's very definition, changes over time.

The word "redskin" has meant "a professional football team"(or "a kind of potato") for longer than any of us has been alive.

[Boston Skins]

Credibility is unlikely to be gained around here until we have a national leader stand up to Harjo on our behalf. Until then, media will continue to crush us.

Unless the team goes 6-10 next year. Then the media doesn't give a ****.

[RFKFedEx]

Unless the team goes 6-10 next year. Then the media doesn't give a ****.

The national hounds will be right back on us when the court holds the intro hearings for Harjo's current lawsuit.

[Boston Skins]

The national hounds will be right back on us when the court holds the intro hearings for Harjo's current lawsuit.

But would it be as loud as it is right now if the Redskins hadn't won the division last year? If they hadn't drafted RG3? Doubtful. It would be a 30 second sidebar on sportscenter, an "oh by the way" from WaPo, and this thread certainly wouldn't exist. The spotlight is back on this team. The price we pay for being relevant again.

[DCchillin89]

Does Notre Dame's mascot offend you because of the atrocities the IRA does? Or any school/team with the mascot "Crusaders", because of the bad things that happened during the crusades? Would a team named the "Samurai" offend you because of how we treated the Japanese during WWII?

As per your response to my post, does just talking about Native Americans offend you, because that is keeping that period of history alive too? We picked a mascot and are depicting them honorably (not in a cartoonish manner or in a disrespectful way at all).

We're not the Washington "Americans who stole land from and killed" Redskins. It's Washington Redskins. In reference to and depicting a proud Native American warrior. Stop looking for ways to be offended.

None of those events you mention occurred in this country or are directly tied to American culture, so I don't see how those relate to me.The Native American conflict is directly related to the ascension of this country. As to your second point, I love Native American culture and history. It's truly admirable how they lived. I am not offended by just talking about it. I just find it weird and ridiculous to "celebrate" a culture that has been historically been mistreated by White Americans but putting their image on a football helmet. If there was a term for renegade slave, that black people (today) didn't feel was racist, but instead "glorified" African-American culture and we picked that as the logo, I'd still have a problem with it.

[Boston Skins]

None of those events you mention occurred in this country or are directly tied to American culture, so I don't see how those relate to me.The Native American conflict is directly related to the ascension of this country. As to your second point, I love Native American culture and history. It's truly admirable how they lived. I am not offended by just talking about it. I just find it weird and ridiculous to "celebrate" a culture that has been historically been mistreated by White Americans but putting their image on a football helmet. If there was a term for renegade slave, that black people (today) didn't feel was racist, but instead "glorified" African-American culture and we picked that as the logo, I'd still have a problem with it.

Actually, the samurai example is tied directly to American history. Japanese people were kept in internment camps during WWII, here in the United States.

The logo and the term "Redskins" are barely associated with Native American culture anymore. As has been pointed out previosuly in the thread, the name and logo truly are synonymous with the football team, and nothing else. Look around at the actual games. There are no feathers hanging from rafters, no fans chopping their "tomahawk" hands, and only a select few fans don Indian apparel. The Redskins celebrate the history of the franchise and the pride its fans have in the team. That's the difference between our team and say the Atlanta Braves or the Cleveland Indians.