Alaskins

The Official ES All Things Redskins Name Change Thread (Reboot Edition---Read New OP)

Recommended Posts

To all the posters on here that think that the name Redskins is racist and think we should change the name.  I have two questions for you:

 

1.  Do you own any Redskins merchandise (jerseys, hats, car flags, car magnets, stickers, t-shirts, etc.)?

2.  Do you wear/show any Redskins merchandise out in public or at all for that matter (wear a tshirt/hat, have a car plate, etc.)?

 

If the answer is yes to any of the above questions, then you are all hypocrites.  Because by your own logic, you are supporting a racist term by purchasing merchandise with a "racial slur" on it.  If you wear or flaunt any of said merchandise, then you don't care about the feelings of Native Americans that you are claiming to defend, because if you did, you wouldn't take the chance that one might find it offensive if you crossed paths in public.

 

You either think its a racist term or you don't, no in-between.  You can't claim that its offensive and racist but think it's ok to wear a jersey on game day because you are "supporting the team/players" and not the team name.  There isn't a switch.

im confused by this statement

what if a person has gotten educated on the name and learned that it offends people? There was a time when it was perfectly fine for us to have 2 separate bathrooms for each race. Does a person who entered a whites only bathroom as a younger person, but now is bothered by it and wants it changed, does that make them a hypocrite?

You're right. If it was 50-50, of course a name change would be warranted. But most, if not all, factual documentation says it's not.

we dont really have any factual evidence either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why do people keep saying that Redskins is just as bad as the N-word, darkie, etc,?

 

People that do that are either speaking from ignorance, or being intentionally misleading.

 

I would say most people using that argument fall in the former.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're right. If it was 50-50, of course a name change would be warranted. But most, if not all, factual documentation says it's not. 

Please change your post. Rod Gardner is offended.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Our identity and heritage"

what about Native American peoples identity and heritage?

Look at this image, for goodness sake

qvspmz0lenqpyq4hhon5.jpg

its a joke.

 

Now, I don't know what that Native American gentleman is thinking, but in that moment, I'd bet money he's not thinking "Well, this is respectful of my heritage."  

 

What team is that dude even trying to represent?  

Edited by justice98

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A warrior is good at war (read: killing people). Nope, not offensive at all!

We owe our freedom to warriors. Our warriors go to war ONLY when ordered to by elected officials.

Edited by planter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe someone knowledgeable with law can help me understand this. If we lost the trademark before in 1999, then appealing it, having it overturned by the courts, why aren't there any protections for the team that prevents this again?  Why can they keep on doing this if we won the appeal the first time?

Edited by War Paint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At one point (2000) they did.

 

But you completely missed my point. I said if a team was called the Alabama Darkies you will NEVER see a poll with 90% of African Americans finding it offensive. Not in 2000, not in 2014, NEVER.

 

Actually it was more recent than that. That poll was done in 2004 (unless I'm reading wrong).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from overseas makes not a lick of difference to preserving our identity as I see it. Unintentionally, that is an insulting line.

 

You know what else might be unintentionally insulting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 If they go with "The Americans" they could technically keep the native american logo. That might actually be kindof fun.  

 

I love this idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your wife wakes up one day and decides to change her name, hair color, colored contacts, how she dresses. She is still your wife. Same memories, same personality, same mannerisms. Does your love for her change in any way at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually it was more recent than that. That poll was done in 2004 (unless I'm reading wrong).

I saw 2004 on the pdf and still put 2000 smh...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a big "F YOU", I think we should change our name to Red Men, and throw up this as our mascott: RF-Graphic-from-DrawShop-Indian-chief-sm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, I don't know what that Native American gentleman is thinking, but in that moment, I'd bet money he's not thinking "Well, this is respectful of my heritage."  

 

What team is that dude even trying to represent?  

Based on the names, the Cleveland Indians

 

CHANGE THE NAME!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you, by any chance, talk about football with any of them? If so, do you use the term, "Redskins?"

 

Though not directed towards me,I'll answer this question as well. Yes. Yes I do. Hard not to do so with some members of the local branch of the Washoe considering they're Washington Redskins fans as well.  Or in a few cases getting ribbed because they're Niners fans. In my 31 years outside of the Washington D.C. area,only once have I ever had someone say something about the Redskins name. It was 3 years ago in Park City and it was a 30ish white guy who said it. Hell I lived South Florida for 4 years and 25 in Utah and never had an issue. Few members of the UTE population in Utah had their Washington Redskins hats was about as much play as I got out of the name there. Well there was the one time the one very much activist member of the Utah Ute population gave me some crap about the Redskins back in like 94. Worked for my brother at the time. He was a Raiders fan and man he just loved giving my brother and **** about THAT Superbowl. Sigh.....oh.... He could care less about the name. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your wife wakes up one day and decides to change her name, hair color, colored contacts, how she dresses. She is still your wife. Same memories, same personality, same mannerisms. Does your love for her change in any way at all?

It shouldn't, but I can't be mad at anybody if they did...

 

But if you (not you, just in general) love your wife as much as you love your football team, that is a whole different level of problems right there lol

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as a big "F YOU", I think we should change our name to Red Men, and throw up this as our mascott:

 

//removed picture

 

That's the last thing we should do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your wife wakes up one day and decides to change her name, hair color, colored contacts, how she dresses. She is still your wife. Same memories, same personality, same mannerisms. Does your love for her change in any way at all?

Horrible analogy.  Those changes are simply superficial and can be altered at any time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't, but I can't be mad at anybody if they did...

But if you (not you, just in general) love your wife as much as you love your football team, that is a whole different level of problems right there lol

I have been married to the redskins longer ;)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe someone knowledgeable with law can help me understand this. If we lost the trademark before in 1999, then appealing it, having it overturned by the courts, why aren't their any protections for the team that prevents this again?  Why can they keep on doing this if we won the appeal the first time?

It was overruled by a technicallity based on the time it took the plaintiff to file the suit.   The judge ruled the plaintiff waited to long after becoming a consenting adult.      These new plaintiffs have since closed that loophole by involving young adults close to the age of 18,

 

What worked in the 90s won't work again.  Snyder would need to find new loopholes to exploit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same people show up dressed like that to Chiefs games, Seminoles games, blackhawks games.... should we change them as well?

i would. I actually find what the Chiefs and Braves do very offensive. The "tomahawk chop" and head dress all that. Its terrible.

Just crazy how that guy could sit there, in that gear and tell a Native American that he doesnt get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what else might be unintentionally insulting...

The agenda driven PC brigade who are as bigoted and racist as the organisation their protesting about?

And I include the minority section of Native Americans in that who have an agenda the majority of Native Americans do not.

Hail.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.