Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Obviously he's not in red face, but was/is Chief Zee a problem? I've asked that and get a lot of fairly uncomfortable answers. Usually of the "His day has probably passed" variety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 ..ack...ignore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 So, once again, why are people uncomfortable with dudes in red faces with headdresses? the drive by one liner posts by the people on your side of the argument don't make you look as smart as you think they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 the drive by one liner posts by the people on your side of the argument don't make you look as smart as you think they do. I'm actually legitimately curious (and like the use of the Rush Limbaugh-ism there). I tried to ask this question with Chief Pigman a few pages back and everyone agreed that he was offensive probably because he was fat. The redfaced dude? Kind of handsome. So, is it still a problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I'm actually legitimately curious (and like the use of the Rush Limbaugh-ism there). I tried to ask this question with Chief Pigman a few pages back and everyone agreed that he was offensive probably because he was fat. The redfaced dude? Kind of handsome. So, is it still a problem? i'm not a dittohead, so i have no idea what the reference was. one of the perks of independent thinking is not having to feel obligated to one side of a debate 'just because'. putting political ideals aside and looking at this issue on its merits is a good thing, imo. and its really the only way to get to the truth (i know, its the liberal, romantic, idealistic part of me that has this notion about getting the truth of things, rather than making them what i want them to be. i need to work on that part of me, because it cant be healthy). in this case, there are some 'truths'. i just posted some in the pictures above. the name changers are marching because they believe the name refers to scalps. well, no ****, then, that they want the name changed, if thats where they think it came from. but people who know better. like the guy who represented harjo in the trademark case. he was a linguist who said he knew that the story was false, but was ok with it being repeated cuz he didnt like the name. it'd be nice to not hear crickets from the anti name crowd when 'truths' like this get posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve09ru Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 So, I was curious as to how Native American Schools name mascots. I looked up 10 random ones and 6 or 7 had Native American mascot themes (Braves/Warriors/Indians/etc.). So does they say that they want all imagery removed, is it from all schools? http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/public/documents/text/idc002637.pdf Don't have time now but will dig through the list here and see how many. Quick! Everyone pick a letter and research the schools that start with that letter If only things were that simple haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 So, I was curious as to how Native American Schools name mascots. So does they say that they want all imagery removed, is it from all schools? According to Amanda Blackhorse, 'The R word is our word'. from her appearance on ESPN's Outside the Lines last summer. Personally, I'd be honored if Native institutions kept the name and imagery to celebrate forever. But I won't hold it against anybody if they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 putting political ideals aside and looking at this issue on its merits is a good thing, imo. and its really the only way to get to the truth (i know, its the liberal, romantic, idealistic part of me that has this notion about getting the truth of things, rather than making them what i want them to be. i need to work on that part of me, because it cant be healthy). You and I have the same disease. When I started seriously researching the topic months ago I was willing to be persuaded either way based on whatever I was able to find out. As I wrote to Bang the other day, when it became apparent to me that certain Indian leaders have no interest in the truth I kind of lost patience with the whole lot of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I'm actually legitimately curious (and like the use of the Rush Limbaugh-ism there). I tried to ask this question with Chief Pigman a few pages back and everyone agreed that he was offensive probably because he was fat. The redfaced dude? Kind of handsome. So, is it still a problem? I'll bite. I find the painted chicken feather head dresses off-putting because they are crappy imitations of the real thing. I also question the motivations of hog man and red faced dude, I suspect both of them are motivated by the controversy and trying to send a big screw you to the protestors by intentionally being provocative/offensive. Others do similar things out of just being crazed football fans, but as you know if you go to games they are less than one in a thousand. I have seen a lady at Redskins games who has a rather beautiful outfit that looks like it is made of deer hide and real feathers, I do not find that distasteful or offensive. YMMV, some apparently believe that any reference to NA culture is off limits due to the sins of our fathers. How do you feel? Is it OK for a girl to dress up like Pocahontas for Halloween? Aren't football games more like carnivals than museum? Add: Painting your face to simulate another race's skin color is highly suspect. The use of red gives a rather bizarre appearance as it becomes a caricature, like Chief Wahoo. A research paper I linked before on how NAs came to self identify as red is interesting, it points out that early white settlers never described their skin tone that way. And now we are into territory that really applies to all NA themed teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoulSkin Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Entirely edited: Apologies for what might have been seen as a trolling post. I don't post in here much, because I don't have any very unique points to make. I do read this thread daily to keep up, and learn a little more along the way. I appreciate and respect the insight and opinions from the regulars on both sides. The point of my edited post, which was needlessly snarky and not really decipherable, was that for every couple of ding dongs wearing face paint and headdresses at games, there are tens of thousands of people not being cluelessly disrespectful. It drives me a little bonkers when I see a picture like that and it gets used as an example of the behavior of 'Redskins fans'. How such a minute fraction of a percentage of a giant group of people is a valid example of anything, other than two clowns being two clowns, is beyond me. I should have just said that instead of trying to be clever. Carry on. Back to the shadows with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 According to Amanda Blackhorse, 'The R word is our word'. from her appearance on ESPN's Outside the Lines last summer. Personally, I'd be honored if Native institutions kept the name and imagery to celebrate forever. But I won't hold it against anybody if they don't. She has had to back off that stance as people have called her on it. When you put the name on your jersey and travel to other schools it is for public consumption, not just internal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 According to Amanda Blackhorse, 'The R word is our word'. from her appearance on ESPN's Outside the Lines last summer. thats one of several explanations shes given for native high schools using the name. whether they conflict or not is anyones guess. shes also said that she will work to get the name changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 She has had to back off that stance as people have called her on it. When you put the name on your jersey and travel to other schools it is for public consumption, not just internal. correct. so, if a white person went to a majority native high school, they couldnt use the term? or be on a sports team? what if i want to wear a red mesa or willipinit high school redskins hoodie? i cant, because its not 'my' word? ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGoodBits Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 By the way if anyone ever uses the ridiculously stupid one line argument, "Well you wouldn't be ok with Washington Blackskins or Washington (n-word)s," just point out the Red Mesa example and ask if a majority black school would name their team the Blackskins or (n-words). And as they look confused and search for a rebuttal, calmly say, "Well maybe it isn't really the same thing." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 By the way if anyone ever uses the ridiculously stupid one line argument, "Well you wouldn't be ok with Washington Blackskins or Washington (n-word)s," just point out the Red Mesa example and ask if a majority black school would name their team the Blackskins or (n-words). And as they look confused and search for a rebuttal, calmly say, "Well maybe it isn't really the same thing." Usually folks that bring up that ridiculous argument are folks who buy into the dictionary definition of redskin because they are not capable of thinking for themselves. So I point out that neither of the words blackskins or whiteskins are in their precious dictionaries, and why would any team pick a name that wasn't even a word? Other fun questions for dictionary jihadists: How is it that "white man" is defined as "a man who is white", and "black man" is defined as "a man who is black", but "red man" is defined as "a derogatory term for native Americans"?? The credibility/consistency of the people who write the dictionaries is sketchy at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 I just want to point out that I am not offended by white guys in headdresses and "red face". My opinion doesn't matter on the subject but I don't want people thinking that white guys dressed up like natives offends everyone. It doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 The dictionaries are in on the conspiracy. This was actually the theme to one of the chapters in The Autobiography of Malcolm X. (That's actually true). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Quite frankly I wouldn't be shocked if those guys in that headdress/paint get up were sent by some anti-n.and goofs to try and make a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Quite frankly I wouldn't be shocked if those guys in that headdress/paint get up were sent by some anti-n.and goofs to try and make a point. While the name changers certainly appear to be, shall I say, "honesty challenged", on many points, I don't think we need to be jumping to conspiracy theories, here. I think we all agree that there HAVE been at least a FEW people doing similar things, at pretty much every one of our games. Not ALL of our fans. Not even a high percentage. But I bet there's been at least one at every game, for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Is Chief Zee on Harjo's payroll? We are through the looking glass, people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celticsalmon Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 i'm not a dittohead, so i have no idea what the reference was. one of the perks of independent thinking is not having to feel obligated to one side of a debate 'just because'. putting political ideals aside and looking at this issue on its merits is a good thing, imo. and its really the only way to get to the truth (i know, its the liberal, romantic, idealistic part of me that has this notion about getting the truth of things, rather than making them what i want them to be. i need to work on that part of me, because it cant be healthy). in this case, there are some 'truths'. i just posted some in the pictures above. the name changers are marching because they believe the name refers to scalps. well, no ****, then, that they want the name changed, if thats where they think it came from. but people who know better. like the guy who represented harjo in the trademark case. he was a linguist who said he knew that the story was false, but was ok with it being repeated cuz he didnt like the name. it'd be nice to not hear crickets from the anti name crowd when 'truths' like this get posted. Perhaps it is time for you sir, to stop posting and listen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Perhaps it is time for you sir, to stop posting and listen? i'm all ears, celtic. what ya got? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wskin44 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 The dictionaries are in on the conspiracy. I assume that you know that there is no dictionary conspiracy. They do a good job of serving some basic functions but quickly get out of their element when they try to make judgments, especially regarding social issues. If the dictionaries were trying to be informative they might try: Redskins: A reference to skin dyes used by Native Americans. Sometimes used as a derogatory term. This informs the reader that the association of red skin with Native Americans has it's source in rituals related to dyeing their skin red. With a little research the reader then at least has a chance of understanding that the only time that Native Americans have red skin is when they paint it red, or they have been out in the sun too long just like anyone else. They may also, if they are paying attention and stick with it, come to realize that referring to a group of people based on a ritual that they shared with people and cultures from all over the planet going back thousands of years in human history could not possibly be a racist or derogatory term, unless the speaker intended it to be. In usage the meaning of the term then is based on each speaker's level of knowledge and intent. The last speaker's knowledge and intent doesn't determine what the next speaker means when he uses the term. Unless dictionary folks who are in over their heads try to change the definition of a term based on their social opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spjunkies Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 While the name changers certainly appear to be, shall I say, "honesty challenged", on many points, I don't think we need to be jumping to conspiracy theories, here. I think we all agree that there HAVE been at least a FEW people doing similar things, at pretty much every one of our games. Not ALL of our fans. Not even a high percentage. But I bet there's been at least one at every game, for a long time. Look fella, don't bring reality into my dream scenario of UnWise Mike and John Feinstein in some alley giving some poor schmuck his marching orders prior to the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planter Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 And now we get Glenn Beck in the Owner's box? Good to have an ally with such unimpeachable character. Another boneheaded PR play... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.