RedskinsFan44 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I've been going to Redskins games for nearly 30 years and I've never seen anyone in a head dress other than Chief Zee and the marching band. Saw two at the Bengals game, guy sitting near 50 home side lower level was put up on the big screen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapnRedskins Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 So, let me get this straight. Mike Carey was an NFL official for 19 years and he refused to work Redskin games for the last 8. What about the first 11?! Was the name not "offensive" then? Did he just bump his head one day and then have some grand epiphany saying, "Gee, that name is offensive. I better not officiate any more of that team's games."?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I have no idea about my own opinion... Which is right about 98% of the time (ask my wife) Ok lol Naw I was dissing you or anything. I was agreeing with you. When I said, you have no idea, I was meaning you are barely scratching the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 So, let me get this straight. Mike Carey was an NFL official for 19 years and he refused to work Redskin games for the last 8. What about the first 11?! Was the name not "offensive" then? Did he just bump his head one day and then have some grand epiphany saying, "Gee, that name is offensive. I better not officiate any more of that team's games."?! Exactly, and the time in question is mid 2000's. Not nearly the hotbed of conversation it is now. So why did it take so long? If this was the future and he stated in 2014 he decided to stop redding these games, at least there's a bigger supporting theme. Fact that this guy was a NFL ref should be the bigger issue. The separate fact he's offended by the name, well, there's a minority of people who are and it's their right. lol Naw I was dissing you or anything. I was agreeing with you. When I said, you have no idea, I was meaning you are barely scratching the surface. My bad, context can be a batch. I didn't know your exact stand right away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 steven curtis @redskins221 53m If cowboys killed the Indians why is there no protest to change the Dallas cowboys name? #HTTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Mike Carey should've been fired on the spot. You're contracted to work NFL games and if your personal beliefs cloud your judgement go find another profession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I'm all for the good fight but the whole "how is there no outrage about such-and-such is so tiring" line is starting to bug me. It's like the old change the logo to a potato joke or the old change the name to Maryland Redskins bit. Those things make zero progress and give the impression to me that the people coming up with stuff like that are out of positive arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlj9999 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Mike Carey should've been fired on the spot. You're contracted to work NFL games and if your personal beliefs cloud your judgement go find another profession. Is Mike Carey the only referee who had a problem doing Redskins games? Are there other referees who have the same problem? Now when I watch this season, they’re all getting the stink eye from me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Section106 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I'm all for the good fight but the whole "how is there no outrage about such-and-such is so tiring" line is starting to bug me. It's like the old change the logo to a potato joke or the old change the name to Maryland Redskins bit. Those things make zero progress and give the impression to me that the people coming up with stuff like that are out of positive arguments. I agree. The problem is that with the ever growing list of media bringing attention to this "controversy" we have more and more un/under informed people joing the debate. I think we should try and be patient and present the facts as they are. Harjo, Blackhorse and Halbritter will continue to lie so we should continue to tell the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Show us this "vast majority" you speak of and maybe you'd get us to change the name. Until then, I hope Snyder holds on for dear life. *Disclaimer* I dont care for the right side of the aisle either. They can't do it, because the "vast majority" against the name doesn't exist...and I do believe they know that. I believe this Native American that I have spent several days debating on Facebook knows it. They are trying to do this thing "on the cheap" by enlisting like-minded media members to argue against the team name, and keep bringing it up until the team buckles under the pressure of negative press. If the name changes, it will never be because thousands of Natives marched down Pennsylvania Avenue, and had rallies on the mall. That is never going to happen with this issue. They post huge lists of "groups" of Native Americans against the name, and try to pass those off as the majority of 562 Federally recognized Native tribes, and 4.12 million Natives. I believe if Snyder continues to hold firm, the tide has definitely changed in our favor in recent months. I don't think the opposition has anything new to bring to the table, and I don't see how the Redskins don't win their trademark appeal for the second time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Yes, this issue is much bigger than a simple name change. I do agree with this statement, but I think the rest of your post politicizes this whole thing in a way that will be counterproductive. Although, in some aspects I do agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsGuy Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 steven curtis @redskins221 53m If cowboys killed the Indians why is there no protest to change the Dallas cowboys name? #HTTR I know he's kidding to make a point, but actually he is accidently correct. If a small group of folks claim the name "Redskins" has to go because it was used negatively at one time, then so should the word "cowboy". The word "cowboy" is not used today the way it was used in the 1800s. Then it was used to describe a criminal element. You were not thought of highly if you were called a "cowboy". Which does kind of fit the team in Dallas, so never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Also the Texas Rangers slaughtered more Indians than smallpox. The fact that they are honored is disgraceful. Change it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomniac67 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Mcsluggo- When you say you haven't seen halbritter, what are you referring to? As far as the slam dunk the name isn't offensive, I would say this- it's a slam dunk the name isn't offensive in certain contexts. (One being the the way it's used by the team). It's also a slam dunk that if a non NA said to a NA something like "dirty redskin", they are using a benign word in a disparaging way. That part of the issue is simple- context determines meaning. When someone wants to claim offense where obviously none is intended, that's when it gets murky. The other side of that slam dunk are people saying it "is" a slur no matter what. You agree that's unfair to say as well? What does it matter if it's intended or not? If I wanted to be honest with a woman and call her fat and then say "no offense," honestly not intending to offend her but just to tell the truth, would that really make it better? I think most people would agree I was a jerk no matter what my intentions were. I don't have strong feelings either way on this, but I agree with others that there's a certain irritation on this forum with people who don't like your team's name. And while it's understandable that you guys are distressed about the situation, you're not going to win any neutral people over like this. From what I've gathered from this forum, anybody who is offended is uninformed and doesn't know the "facts." Anybody who actually knows these "facts" couldn't possibly be offended. Therefore everyone against the name is ignorant, and everyone for it is more enlightened and intelligent. That BS nearly makes me want to see it changed, just to end the smugness. Your unlikable owner and bumbling PR department don't help matters either. Your best bet is to take a softer line on this and pray it goes away. You're in a finger trap. The more you struggle the tighter it's going to get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Oriskany School District defends Redskins team nickname http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=955796#.U_Vy3Auw8Z8.twitter … via @CNYCentral "When the name was initially chosen, it was done at a time period where the term redskin was a term of respect, endearment and admiration for the people that had such a positive impact on the early colonial settlers in this area," said Oriskany High School principal Eric Knuth. In Oriskany, the Oneida Nation joined with colonial settlers during the revolutionary war. They fought together at the Oriskany Battlefield, a site lass than a mile from the high school. Current Oriskany football player Ryan Lockwood says he has always considered the Redskins name a tribute to native Americans and hopes it isn't misunderstood. "You have the connection, you have the history and its obviously proven that it's a positive name, its not a derogatory name," said Lockwood. "We take pride in our name. It's who we are. It's our identity almost," said Lockwood. While Oriskany uses the Redskins nickname as a means of respect, the district says it is also willing to work with any Native American groups who are offended by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWFLSkins Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 What does it matter if it's intended or not? If I wanted to be honest with a woman and call her fat and then say "no offense," honestly not intending to offend her but just to tell the truth, would that really make it better? I think most people would agree I was a jerk no matter what my intentions were. I don't have strong feelings either way on this, , you're not going to win any neutral people over like this. From what I've gathered from this forum, anybody who is offended is uninformed and doesn't know the "facts." That BS nearly makes me want to see it changed, just to end the smugness. Your unlikable owner and bumbling PR department don't help matters either. Your best bet is to take a softer line on this and pray it goes away. You're in a finger trap. The more you struggle the tighter it's going to get. First I pray for a lot of things, this going away isn't one of them. I pray the truth comes out in the end, one way or the other. And I will live with it. You however are practicing pretzel logic at it's best, you have no strong opinion on this? But make the above statements, wow. You don't like the owner, you think the fans who love and cherish the name are smug. I think you have a twisted view of not only the name but your own ability to remain impartial. As for impartial, as always, and I asked and pay keen attention to the pulse of the NA group as an entity. Not just a few self serving or the mediots following attention seeking groups. If a mass protest by real NA's were assembled, I would be in line for a change. But because until then I feel this is Horse **** politics and media driven drivel I stand with the other fans who believe the name honors a tradition of fighting with pride. It matters greatly what the intention is, what if you were highly attracted to fat women? Those guys exist, what if I was one of them? You have now offended me and with intent from my perspective. (there is a disclaimer there, but I don't really care what anyone truly thinks, other than God almighty) Who is offended on this forum is on the wrong forum, this is a Redskins forum, did you expect the majority of people on a Redskins forum to not defend the name with passion. They believe in the historical and a completely healthy intent of the name. This is from 2007... What do you think these people feel about the name? Do you think they are like the KKK and are gathering to protest Native Americans with hate? Or are they gathered to root for a team in the NFL they believe is named for great historical warriors who will die fighting? ES tailgate in Tampa, aka FEDEX south. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 What does it matter if it's intended or not? If I wanted to be honest with a woman and call her fat and then say "no offense," honestly not intending to offend her but just to tell the truth, would that really make it better? I think most people would agree I was a jerk no matter what my intentions were. I don't have strong feelings either way on this, but I agree with others that there's a certain irritation on this forum with people who don't like your team's name. And while it's understandable that you guys are distressed about the situation, you're not going to win any neutral people over like this. From what I've gathered from this forum, anybody who is offended is uninformed and doesn't know the "facts." Anybody who actually knows these "facts" couldn't possibly be offended. Therefore everyone against the name is ignorant, and everyone for it is more enlightened and intelligent. That BS nearly makes me want to see it changed, just to end the smugness. Your unlikable owner and bumbling PR department don't help matters either. Your best bet is to take a softer line on this and pray it goes away. You're in a finger trap. The more you struggle the tighter it's going to get. I'm sorry, but I'm not 'defending' quietly what I feel, and has been overwhelmingly proven, to be non-derogatory.Yea, I get people are 'offended'. You can't please all the people all if the time. But, if the name does change, it won't be because I was passive about. KMA, the name was only ever used in reverence. There is no evidence it was EVER a slur. I win fighting or I lose fighting. I think it's a ridiculous enough movement not to 'be quiet and hope it goes away'. Further, of the minority that are offended, I would like to know the % that are offended by Indians, Braves, Chiefs, etc... Just a group of people I really don't care if they are offended. It would be different if these organizations were outwardly insulting the culture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve09ru Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 how about we just include 'no offense' before or after we say the name. "Let's go Redskins, no offense." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Curious your thoughts on Prohibition, I'm wondering if you feel that those opposed to Prohibition were scoundrels There were very, very, very good reasons presented for the banning of alcohol in this country. Namely that alcohol is a leading cause of death, family destruction, and emotional distress. Not that it was simply "offensive". Therefore, the argument to ban alcohol is clearly a better one than to ban the term Redskins. This cannot be argued, period. And of course, the only argument FOR alcohol was that many liked it. That's it. Similar to the arguments for the Redskins name That's a different comparison since Prohibition took place by passing a Constitutional amendment - which is pretty much the most difficult thing to do in our system of government. All laws are ultimately someone "forcing their beliefs" on someone. It was also a behavior versus a word. So it's a hard comparsion. Words falling out of favor is just a societal thing; it's not by the force of law. I don't think there is any pending legislation on the Redskins name. Prohibition is actually a pretty fascinating social movement. It was part a religious movement and part a woman's movement. And it had more than a a little anti-immigrant/anti-Catholic undertones to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 how about we just include 'no offense' before or after we say the name. "Let's go Redskins, no offense." "Let's go Redskins, no defense" would be more accurate. Thanks Haslett. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 That's a different comparison since Prohibition took place by passing a Constitutional amendment - which is pretty much the most difficult thing to do in our system of government. All laws are ultimately someone "forcing their beliefs" on someone. It was also a behavior versus a word. So it's a hard comparsion. Words falling out of favor is just a societal thing; it's not by the force of law. I don't think there is any pending legislation on the Redskins name. Prohibition is actually a pretty fascinating social movement. It was part a religious movement and part a woman's movement. And it had more than a a little anti-immigrant/anti-Catholic undertones to it. You brought up a bunch of examples that weren't words to prove your point. It is exactly the same and you know it. I suspect I've given you something to think about The reason your examples fail is because there is nothing positive associated with 'fag' or other slurs. There is a lot positive about Redskins. An OVERWHELMING amount of positive. Same thing with alcohol. Lots of very positive things with it. Same thing the Prohibitionists got wrong and it's the same thing that you have completely wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo#44 Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 "Let's go Redskins, no defense" would be more accurate. Thanks Haslett. With all due respect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 What does it matter if it's intended or not? If I wanted to be honest with a woman and call her fat and then say "no offense," honestly not intending to offend her but just to tell the truth, would that really make it better? I think most people would agree I was a jerk no matter what my intentions were. I don't have strong feelings either way on this, but I agree with others that there's a certain irritation on this forum with people who don't like your team's name. And while it's understandable that you guys are distressed about the situation, you're not going to win any neutral people over like this. From what I've gathered from this forum, anybody who is offended is uninformed and doesn't know the "facts." Anybody who actually knows these "facts" couldn't possibly be offended. Therefore everyone against the name is ignorant, and everyone for it is more enlightened and intelligent. That BS nearly makes me want to see it changed, just to end the smugness. Your unlikable owner and bumbling PR department don't help matters either. Your best bet is to take a softer line on this and pray it goes away. You're in a finger trap. The more you struggle the tighter it's going to get. first of all, even though many disagree with this, i think it actually does matter what ones intent is. i dont think for a moment that calling a woman 'fat' while saying 'no offense' is anywhere near an analogy of this situation. there are defenses ("tradition!") and defenders of the name that I dont particularly like, but that doesnt mean that the facts (theres that word again) surrounding the name have changed. they are what they are and are there for anyone to see. the problem is, very few are taking the time to look at them. the attitude you see in this forum is a result of years of being essentially bashed by the media. columnist after columnist writing day after day how the name is racist. its pretty freaking frustrating. but, the way we vent in here is not the way most of us would handle a public defense of the name in a different setting- its frustration. the same smugness you detest on the part of the name defenders is all over the name changers side, in case you havent noticed. do their attitudes bother you? or is it just the name defenders? you cant expect people to get beaten over the head, with the media telling one side of the story (a side that is rooted in a myth- that being the 'redskins means scalps' story) and there not be a reaction. while dan snyder hasnt done anything until recently to help matters, standing by and letting the BS fly is a large part of why these opposing voices spreading false information have had a voice and its why we've gotten to where we are today. there is nothing wrong with rational, factual discussion, of which there is plenty in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Your best bet is to take a softer line on this and pray it goes away. You're in a finger trap. The more you struggle the tighter it's going to get. lol, with all due respect **** that. I don't think you have been keeping up with current events. The tide has turned in our favor. They know it, and we know it. People are not keeping quiet on the issue anymore. You don't have to guess what people are really thinking anymore. I don't need to "Pray it goes away" because it's going to go away when the people have had enough. Sure, there will always be that element against the name, but who cares. The bottom line is Dan Snyder is not changing the name, and there is absolutely nothing anybody can do about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 A finger trap is an excellent analogy. If you pull it, it gets tight. But ultimately it's made of paper and can easily be ripped to shreds if you think about it. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.