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

[frostyj]

That's a lot of people.

Got my notice.

~Bang

 

I noticed a pterodactyl @ 2:20.

[Salistala]

Their lives suck again. 

Said with Respect I'm guessing. Is this the Honor to which some that support the name speak? If I supported the name, but not the disparagement, maybe I would speak up against those in my number that seem to stain my brand with ignorance and disrespect.

 

On another note, Minnesota has between 60,000-65,000 NA and between 3,000-5,000 showed up to protest. That's about 5%-7.5% of the regional NA population showed up. Then consider only those with the means (vehicle, gas money, time,etc.) could actually make it to the stadium, and those without means (which is a significant number of NAs) couldn't.

 

I'd say that is a pretty significant protest

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

ok.

 

while this appears to be, by far, the most protesters that have bothered to show up, this only stands out to me because its more than 60 or so people.

 

this is the mecca of native american advocacy we are talking about.

 

 

3.8 million people in the minny metro area. 

 

the number of protesters vs the amount of media coverage this issue has received the past couple of years is not remotely close, imo.

 

how large do you think the NA population is?

 

According to the 2010 census, 2.9 million people identified as Native American or Alaskan native alone. 5 million in some combination. But my suspicion is that the 5 million is vastly over-represented since the census relies on self-reporters and a lot of people either think or claim NA ancestry erroneously. 3 to 4 million seems like fair numbers.

[grego]

Said with Respect I'm guessing. Is this the Honor to which some that support the name speak? If I supported the name, but not the disparagement, maybe I would speak up against those in your number that seem to stain your brand with ignorance and disrespect.

 

On another note, Minnesota has between 60,000-65,000 NA and between 3,000-5,000 showed up to protest. That's about 5%-7.5% of the regional NA population showed up. Then consider only those with the means (vehicle, gas money, time,etc.) could actually make it to the stadium, and those without means (which is a significant number of NAs) couldn't.

 

I'd say that is a pretty significant protest

 

 

sal, 

 

glad to see you back, first of all. hope you are doing better than before.

 

i would say that it appears there were people protesting who were not native american, so i'm not talking about those numbers. i would say three to five thousand is generous based on the video, but, its not like i counted. 

 

when i look at the protests (along with the many other factors we've discussed), i see nothing to indicate that this issue is not a small percentage of native americans. there are 1,100 native american students at the university of minnesota where the game was played.

 

my issue is not that yours and their voice shouldnt count. its that the media coverage isnt close to matching what we see when the protesters have a chance to show themselves. to say people cant get there or dont have the time just reinforces this belief.

 

i think one thing we can agree on is this- that there are varying opinions among native americans about the name. 

According to the 2010 census, 2.9 million people identified as Native American or Alaskan native alone. 5 million in some combination. But my suspicion is that the 5 million is vastly over-represented since the census relies on self-reporters and a lot of people either think or claim NA ancestry erroneously. 3 to 4 million seems like fair numbers.

 

i think you may be right. but i havent seen anyone ask for 300,000 to 400,000 to show up in protest, unless i misunderstood or missed it?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

 

i think you may be right. but i havent seen anyone ask for 300,000 to 400,000 to show up in protest, unless i misunderstood or missed it?

 

Destino asked for 100K on the Mall. That's a long bus trip from Arizona.

[Salistala]

grego, on 03 Nov 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

my issue is not that yours and their voice shouldnt count. its that the media coverage isnt close to matching what we see when the protesters have a chance to show themselves. to say people cant get there or dont have the time just reinforces this belief.

 

i think one thing we can agree on is this- that there are varying opinions among native americans about the name.

 

Thank you for your words grego, you're one of the few that speak respectfully and civilly even at the height of disagreement. I appreciate that. The funny thing is I mistakenly believed your avatar was Sam Elliot, and when I read your words I heard his voice (all slow n cowboy serious); now that I know it's DDL in TWBB, it's kind of burst my bubble. Still an impressive voice, but with a sinister twist.

 

As for the media, they will fan the flames in any direction as long as it gets them mouse clicks or page views. Gotta pay the bills, and the media machine knows how to pay itself.

 

I know there are pro-Name Native Americans, intentionally and purposefully supportive of the Name; I also know there are NAs that feel the opposite with the same conviction. The people I am interested in are the middle group, the ones that do not take the time to voice how they feel because there are other more important issues that have their attention. I want to know where the middle is, does it tend to the name? or against it?

[grego]

 

grego, on 03 Nov 2014 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

my issue is not that yours and their voice shouldnt count. its that the media coverage isnt close to matching what we see when the protesters have a chance to show themselves. to say people cant get there or dont have the time just reinforces this belief.

 

i think one thing we can agree on is this- that there are varying opinions among native americans about the name.

 

Thank you for your words grego, you're one of the few that speak respectfully and civilly even at the height of disagreement. I appreciate that. The funny thing is I mistakenly believed your avatar was Sam Elliot, and when I read your words I heard his voice (all slow n cowboy serious); now that I know it's DDL in TWBB, it's kind of burst my bubble. Still an impressive voice, but with a sinister twist.

 

 

yep, thats daniel "i drink your milkshake" plainview, aka daniel day lewis. great character from a great movie.

 

As for the media, they will fan the flames in any direction as long as it gets them mouse clicks or page views. Gotta pay the bills, and the media machine knows how to pay itself.

 

 

agree. i was just reading this article from USA today about the protest sunday and thought the exact same thing. here are some points that caught my attention.

 

Yet Washington team owner Daniel Snyder is hell-bent on calling his team the Redskins, a name the majority of Native Americans find as offensive as any of those other racial epithets. 

 

--i dont know what study shes citing- the only one i can think of is the one by the california university professor- but i dont know how she can get away with printing that (she actually does cite poll results later in the article, but not here)

 

Politicians, including President Barack Obama, have called for the nickname to be dropped.

 

 

--he said he'd 'think about changing it', but i dont want to get nit picky. it does serve her articles purpose to slant the words a bit. 

 

By the time protesters completed their nearly mile-long march to the stadium's Tribal Nations Plaza, which honors the state's 11 tribes, the crowd had swelled from a few hundred to more than a thousand.

 

 

--i dont know if this was people jumping in for the sake of jumping in, or if they were people with an actual opinion arriving late, or what, but its interesting she mentions it.

 

One protester carried a sign reading, "Redskins refers to the scalps of MY grandfathers," while several others had signs saying, "I am not your mascot."...........If you read the history of it, it is really offensive to us Indian people," Bernard said."They used to call our scalps redskins."

 

 

--this statement is repeated several times in this article, and has been mentioned any time theres an article about a rally. this is the kind if thing that frustrates and annoys name defenders. there is no evidence of this. susan harjos own representative laughed about it. hes a linguist who was against the name, but knew this story was false.

 

i also hate how people cite the oneida indian nation without recognizing what they actually are. 

 

these are all just convenient talking points that get repeated because they go unchallenged, so they become 'fact'. the daily show did the same thing.

 

if the debate is going to be done, it should be done honestly.

 

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2014/11/02/protest-shows-displeasure-with-redskins-nickname/18381141/

 

I know there are pro-Name Native Americans, intentionally and purposefully supportive of the Name; I also know there are NAs that feel the opposite with the same conviction. The people I am interested in are the middle group, the ones that do not take the time to voice how they feel because there are other more important issues that have their attention. I want to know where the middle is, does it tend to the name? or against it?

 

 

 

i respect that, sal. i can sympathize with your story because, i believe, its honest. and i can say i dont know how i'd respond if i was called a name like that. 

 

anyway, glad, again, that youre back. hope you can continue to discuss this. 

[Salistala]

I'm an information junkie, throughout this whole process I've read accounts from both sides and looked into points I thought were up for debate. And while researching I've never come across a definitive link that says redskins=scalps, that's why I haven't bothered to belabor it. That doesn't mean I haven't experienced hatred or found use of the printed word that I find offensive, the Winona press clipping being one, Missoula Montana being another. And above and beyond that, the people that did use the word disparagingly would further characterize NAs in the most brutal and dismissive way as being beneath contempt. Not even worthy of the consideration given to the family dog. That is why I challenge the word, and the others that are still linking it to scalps probably do too. It's the malice and hatred of me and my kind by some that are otherwise reasonable, church going, family people.

 

There are those that tell me, nicely or not, that the name is separate from the slur; that the name is "honoring" me and my history by referring to a team and its great fans, and it is most definitely not connected to the racism NAs have experienced. To them I say prove it. Call out all the racists that are staining your brand, your name, your fans. Anyone uttering threats or disparaging NAs using the word should be publicly shamed by the omnipotent PR department of both the NFL and the team, since the word should only be thought of in a positive light reflecting only on the team and your fans. If the effort were sincere, NAs could easily link that to those that have disparaged us; twitter accounts, letters to the editors, even roadside restaurants where people felt safe enough in a crowded room to say it without thinking they would have to answer for it.

 

Why should it be my burden to separate the two? It is exhausting summoning the energy to debate/correct the opinions of people who  anonymously attack you and your history simply for kicks. And to then have to determine when the use is negative and correct that, while also arguing with those that feel they have done nothing wrong is a never ending battle.

 

"Getting over it, and moving on" only excuses bad behavior, gives it a free pass to do it again and again. If someone were publicly disparaging your grandmother, your wife or your daughter I would speak up about it, I would put myself in harms way to do the right thing. That's all I ask, do the right thing.

[steve09ru]

Do you think the name should be changed Sal?

 

How would you discuss the issue with a Native American who embraces the name? 

 

The way I look at it is all about context (just like any other word).  To you, when discussing a football team, is the term Washington Redskins offensive to you? 

 

I respect your opinion but I also feel that while one thing can be offensive, the context is not always offensive. 

[Salistala]

Do you think the name should be changed Sal?

 

How would you discuss the issue with a Native American who embraces the name? 

 

The way I look at it is all about context (just like any other word).  To you, when discussing a football team, is the term Washington Redskins offensive to you? 

 

I respect your opinion but I also feel that while one thing can be offensive, the context is not always offensive. 

 

I think it should be changed

 

First, I am Native Canadian. Second, a NA that embraces the name is free to do as he/she wishes

 

The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name.

 

And while context matters, I don't think the football team should get a free pass JUST because they say their version of the word is benign. If they truly care about the brand, that it should be seen as an honorific that praises NAs, the team and their fans, then they (not  the NAs who maintain the word is used negatively) should be doing everything in their considerable power to eradicate the negative connotations. Stamp out the slur with force and conviction, shame the bigots, uplift the name.

 

Lastly, enough with the cheap PR stunts by Snyder and his keystone kops. Do something meaningful with the Virginia/Delaware tribes, the team has allies there and there are plenty of opportunities to do so. Running off to Montana with some swings and a back hoe looks desperate.

[Patrick Evidente]

I think it should be changed

First, I am Native Canadian. Second, a NA that embraces the name is free to do as he/she wishes

The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name.

And while context matters, I don't think the football team should get a free pass JUST because they say their version of the word is benign. If they truly care about the brand, that it should be seen as an honorific that praises NAs, the team and their fans, then they (not the NAs who maintain the word is used negatively) should be doing everything in their considerable power to eradicate the negative connotations. Stamp out the slur with force and conviction, shame the bigots, uplift the name.

Lastly, enough with the cheap PR stunts by Snyder and his keystone kops. Do something meaningful with the Virginia/Delaware tribes, the team has allies there and there are plenty of opportunities to do so. Running off to Montana with some swings and a back hoe looks desperate.

Dude, are you even a fan of the Redskins?

[Bonez3]

Sal, you want me to call out the bigots that use the 'slur' (youre opinion). But, I've never once heard the word used as a slur and I'm about 99% sure I never will.

But that will get em

And associating GPM with Snyder is probably approaching slanderous because I can only suggest by the context that you feel Snydr is a racist.

[grego]

 

First, I am Native Canadian. Second, a NA that embraces the name is free to do as he/she wishes

 

The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name.

 Stamp out the slur with force and conviction, shame the bigots, uplift the name.

 

Lastly, enough with the cheap PR stunts by Snyder and his keystone kops. Do something meaningful with the Virginia/Delaware tribes, the team has allies there and there are plenty of opportunities to do so. Running off to Montana with some swings and a back hoe looks desperate.

 

i think i can get on board with all of that, sal.

 

you wont find many redskin fans who are fans of dan snyder, but i do applaud what hes done- so far- in the native american communities- even if its for PR purposes. but i believe this sort of thing should have been going on since the team has been the redskins. i believe a relationship with native americans, or a specific native american tribe, should be established. and theres a chance for that with the patawomack tribe, so i hope they make that happen. 

 

as for stamping out racial slurs, i cant imagine any fan condoning using 'redskin' as a slur. if anything, i would think any fan of the team would be that much more opposed to that kind of use of the word. but, in the case of any racist idiots when it comes to 'free speech', idiots will be idiots. 

 

as i've said before, racist people are at the top of my list of people i have little patience for. while i understand they exist, and have a right to their opinions in a free society, i choose to not associate with such people as much as possible. 

[Salistala]

Sal, you want me to call out the bigots that use the 'slur' (youre opinion). But, I've never once heard the word used as a slur and I'm about 99% sure I never will.

But that will get em

And associating GPM with Snyder is probably approaching slanderous because I can only suggest by the context that you feel Snydr is a racist.

No, I don't think Snyder is a racist. A fool, maybe, an astute businesslike fool. But an offensive fool nonetheless. I've said before, for a man that made his fortune in marketing he sure makes some bizarre PR decisions.

 

But maybe I'm the fool. Maybe Snyder has charted out the entire run on the "Change the Name" brouhaha, and in the end his franchise gains another few hundred million in value. Let's see how this plays out. I'm not going anywhere.

Dude, are you even a fan of the Redskins?

 

Dude, a mouse click could get you the answer. Is your mouse finger broken?

[Patrick Evidente]

No, I don't think Snyder is a racist. A fool, maybe, an astute businesslike fool. But an offensive fool nonetheless. I've said before, for a man that made his fortune in marketing he sure makes some bizarre PR decisions.

But maybe I'm the fool. Maybe Snyder has charted out the entire run on the "Change the Name" brouhaha, and in the end his franchise gains another few hundred million in value. Let's see how this plays out. I'm not going anywhere.

Dude, a mouse click could get you the answer. Is your mouse finger broken?

I guess you are not even a fan.

[RedskinsFan44]

Destino asked for 100K on the Mall. That's a long bus trip from Arizona.

Only 60 showed up in Phoenix. There is a definite regional component to people being offended.

Add: Or perhaps it is organizational, though Amanda Blackhorse was at the AZ protest.

[planter]

The protesters were just making themselves feel important for an afternoon. It's probably setting in now that their efforts were a waste. Their lives suck again.

Proud to have you representing Redskin fans.

[steve09ru]

I think it should be changed

 

First, I am Native Canadian. Second, a NA that embraces the name is free to do as he/she wishes

 

The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name.

 

And while context matters, I don't think the football team should get a free pass JUST because they say their version of the word is benign. If they truly care about the brand, that it should be seen as an honorific that praises NAs, the team and their fans, then they (not  the NAs who maintain the word is used negatively) should be doing everything in their considerable power to eradicate the negative connotations. Stamp out the slur with force and conviction, shame the bigots, uplift the name.

 

Lastly, enough with the cheap PR stunts by Snyder and his keystone kops. Do something meaningful with the Virginia/Delaware tribes, the team has allies there and there are plenty of opportunities to do so. Running off to Montana with some swings and a back hoe looks desperate.

So what you described are 'people' who are offensive and not an actual term - using this quote:

"The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name."  In other words Washington Redskins ok and not offensive (racially) in the 80's-90s when Snyder wasn't owner.  Snyder becomes owner and the word 'Redskins' becomes offensive (racially)?

 

A couple of those guys were still around with Snyder (and Taylor was around only when Snyder was owner). 

 

For your 2nd paragraph - isn't that what the Redskins are doing?  From what I have seen, they are reaching out to Native American communities to learn more and to help them out.  What you are saying is contradictory in that the leaders of the Washington Redskins should be doing more to help and that they are full of PR stunts.  In other words, these 'PR stunts' are what you are asking, to understand and help but since name changers have an opinion of Snyder and the team already, they are going to look at is as a 'stunt' vs. what it actually is.

[Salistala]

So what you described are 'people' who are offensive and not an actual term - using this quote:

"The football team, with John Riggins, Doug Williams, Sean Taylor, Dexter Manley, Joe Thiesman, Darrell Green, etc aren't offensive. However GPM and Snyder do seem to be offensive, on more fronts than just the name."  In other words Washington Redskins ok and not offensive (racially) in the 80's-90s when Snyder wasn't owner.  Snyder becomes owner and the word 'Redskins' becomes offensive (racially)?

 

No, actually I wasn't saying that I thought the Washington team name was ok in the 70's, 80's and 90's. I was saying I thought those football players, and some others that played in the Burgundy and Gold, were great athletes that played the game well and I followed them because I appreciate excellence in athletics. I just didn't say that with clarity. The name has always been a problem for me even in the 80's when I was just a teenager, and in the 90's when I experienced the word in an extremely malicious way my opposition to the Washington name was entrenched.

 

For your 2nd paragraph - isn't that what the Redskins are doing?  From what I have seen, they are reaching out to Native American communities to learn more and to help them out.  What you are saying is contradictory in that the leaders of the Washington Redskins should be doing more to help and that they are full of PR stunts.  In other words, these 'PR stunts' are what you are asking, to understand and help but since name changers have an opinion of Snyder and the team already, they are going to look at is as a 'stunt' vs. what it actually is.

 

The "stunt" shows a profound ignorance of Native American protocol by assuming that all tribes in the States are homogeneous. Snyder's crew were looking for Native American support of the name and thought, "any ol' Indian will do, why not go to where we already have allies?" But they're in Patawomeck/Powhatan territory, and they have allies in the Patawomeck, and the Patawomeck have needs that the Washington team can help with in terms of PR/lobbying might. By going to the Blackfoot and Navajo to seek support for the name instead is an egregious breach of protocol. And "swings and back hoes" are trinkets that in the bigger picture last as long as plastic toys, real support for the Patawomeck tribe that is seeking federal recognition would demonstrate true understanding and support for the Native American plight in America today.

[zoony]

So these protesters are screaming at children. That's a good look

[Salistala]

if the debate is going to be done, it should be done honestly.

 

I've been wanting to get back to this for a while, but had allowed myself to be distracted on other points.

 

I agree to honest debate, even if it means I have to swallow my pride to allow a well supported argument that contradicts my beliefs. That also extends to allies that repeat unsupported beliefs as fact, just to win a point or an argument. I'm not going to berate or belittle an individual, or group of individuals, that believe "redskins = scalps". Instead I would respectfully state that to my knowledge there has not been a definitive link between the two, neither the Winona press clipping nor the Phipps Proclamation have explicitly shown a connection. If, however, in the future the smoking gun is produced I will hold it high and proclaim through its existence the truth to the argument.

 

On another point, I do think that professional organizations or publications that have the resources and access to contradictory evidence should, in the name of balance, provide an equivocal account of the facts. "Fair and Balanced" has one fundamental flaw though, from the perspective of publishers, in that it does not excite outrage or fierce partisanship. Those examples of ugly human behavior translate directly to repeat visits from both sides of the coin, and drive advertising revenue. That is why someone, with no other means to fortune, fans the flames of public debate without actually achieving any meaningful agreement (light bulb goes on recognizing the vulgar genius of the demon Snyder).

 

Oh Lord, why hast thou forsaken me?

[Section106]

(light bulb goes on recognizing the vulgar genius of the demon Snyder).

 

 

So you're asking for respectful treatment from name supporters but feel it okay to characterize Dan Snyder as a demon? Nice.

 

I understand you think Snyder is benefiting from the debate, or at least that is what you just wrote, but I highly doubt Snyder's intention is to have this issue in the media nonstop. He gains nothing from his trademark being challenged every few years. He gains nothing from a hostile, feckless media. He gains nothing from the media pontificating on prime time that he is a racist.

 

He is one of the most vilified men in the country at this point. Why would anyone want to bring the amount of scrutiny and derision this issue has caused? Just for buying the team he loved as a child?

[Commander PK]

So these protesters are screaming at children. That's a good look

 

because they are desperate.  The American public does not care about this issue, which includes the large majority of Native Americans.  The debate and media saturation reached it's crescendo last year, and has been steadily declining since.   

[planter]

Phil Jackson jumps on board:

https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=http://nesn.com/2014/11/phil-jackson-supports-anti-redskins-movement-criticizes-daniel-snyder/&ct=ga&cd=CAEYAioUMTcyNjc0Mjc0NDI3NzAxMzk1NzUyGjRjMTM4YzMxMGYyOTExYjM6Y29tOmVuOlVT&usg=AFQjCNHUe-ovj0G4Q08xP3M_1Xf1rtMobA

[RedskinsFan44]

The "stunt" shows a profound ignorance of Native American protocol by assuming that all tribes in the States are homogeneous. Snyder's crew were looking for Native American support of the name and thought, "any ol' Indian will do, why not go to where we already have allies?" But they're in Patawomeck/Powhatan territory, and they have allies in the Patawomeck, and the Patawomeck have needs that the Washington team can help with in terms of PR/lobbying might. By going to the Blackfoot and Navajo to seek support for the name instead is an egregious breach of protocol. And "swings and back hoes" are trinkets that in the bigger picture last as long as plastic toys, real support for the Patawomeck tribe that is seeking federal recognition would demonstrate true understanding and support for the Native American plight in America today.

It is a national issue.  There is a lot of splitting of hairs on the fact that tribes are different, individuals within tribes are different too.  We organize ourselves into larger or smaller groups as we wish, there is an organization known as the NCAI.  As to Snyder's charity work, I think it is idiotic that they seem to insist on stuff being team colors, but it does not surprise me that a reservation would ask for a playground.  People tend to think of their children first.  Snyder supported the cause of saving a tribes language before this issue blew up again in recent years, the link has been posted here before.

I realize that "redskins" was coined by southeast tribes before contact with some of the western tribes, however the self - identification as "red" is widespread and the two high school teams with majority NA student bodies using the name are both in the west.

 

I find the concept that a tribe's sanction resolves the issue unlikely, see Florida State. It would just force the opposition to abandon that talking point - or perhaps the Patawomeck would be derided as not a "real" tribe.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Those examples of ugly human behavior translate directly to repeat visits from both sides of the coin, and drive advertising revenue. That is why someone, with no other means to fortune, fans the flames of public debate without actually achieving any meaningful agreement (light bulb goes on recognizing the vulgar genius of the demon Snyder).

 

Oh Lord, why hast thou forsaken me?

 

You were going for irony here, right?