Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Recommended Posts

The thread was started in the Stadium and got moved to the Tailgate and merged with this one

a-ha

Since we don't have the thread title on top of every post like we used to, I sometimes have to go all the way to the top of now 40 posts to remember what the heck was going on, especially in the Stadium after 2 opening losses, ugh...

Edited by skinsmarydu
Link to post
Share on other sites

How dare those Native musicians refer to themselves as "Red". If they're allowed to do that then we should be too!



You realize Canuck is thought by some to be a derisive term, right?

 

~Bang

Get the media on board and you'll have a movement. Look out Vacouver and the NHL

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the media IS all that matters.

 

I bet i could find seven canadians who don't like it.

Wouldn't that be enough to force you to change?

 

do you think the odds are in favor of being able to find seven Canadians out of all of them who don't like the term?

 

How about one? One is the threshold the Redskins complainers have set for societal change. One person offended is enough.

 

You took a hell of a risk typing that C word.

 

~Bang

Edited by Bang
Link to post
Share on other sites

Get the media on board and you'll have a movement. Look out Vacouver and the NHL

 

And, if 50 people a day, I mean, can you imagine 50 people a day walking into the shrink's office, singin a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walking out? Well, then they might think it's a movement.

And most of em be too young to know what a movement was.

But that's what it was, and that's what it is. The Alice's Restaurant Anti-Masacree Movement. And all you got to do to join, is to sing it with me the next time it comes around on the guitar.

With feelin.

----------

Sorry. This thread seriously needs some humor.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

He can't be forced to change it no, but there could come a point where it starts affecting his bottom line. In which case, he'd be left with no other choice.

Read recently that at the next owners meeting this topic will likely be discussed. Article stated that there will provably come a point where the other owners put pressure on him to change it.

Well, he better bring the pressure for the Chiefs, Raiders, & Buccaneers then.  No way he does it without filing suit that other "offensive" NFL names be changed...he's got the money, he can bring that pressure.  And I would hope he'd consider it an honor to spend his money to defend just one thing he's loved his whole life.  I know if I had that money, I'd spend it all to keep our entire franchise, name, logo, and all sacred & proud. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

How dare those Native musicians refer to themselves as "Red". If they're allowed to do that then we should be too!

 

If they weren't doing it in a derogatory way, like these guys, and a majority did not find it offensive, then yeah, you're right:

 

" Three chiefs of the Piankashaws wrote (1769), "…You think that I am an orphan; but all the people of these rivers and all the redskins will learn of my death." In 1807 French Crow (Wahpekute, Santee Sioux) said, "I am a redskin…" "

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly those Canucks have ignored the facts. They're responding to a conspiring media who only seeks attention.

 

How can you not believe that this whole thing isn't media driven?

 

2003, we were 5-11.  Was the debate this strong then?  What about in 2006 when we were 5-11 again.  Well in 2007 and 2005 we made the playoffs but we didn't have one of the most dynamic quarterbacks in the game who lead the league in jersey sales and drove us to get a bunch of prime time scheduled games.

 

The Redskins has been the name of this football team for almost 80 years now, and it's disingenuous that all of a sudden there's a push to change the name.  How many people gave a **** when we were in the basement and didn't have one of the most marketable players in the league at quarterback?  

 

It's not a racist name.  It's a racial name.  For those who don't bother to check the facts or do research on the history of the word and how it came to be, it's easy for someone to think it's racist.  These same people are also the ones who are afraid to stand up for what they believe in because they don't want to be lumped in as racist.  Apparently if a group of people yell something loud enough, it's fact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't know what percentage of Native Americans are offended by the name. We're talking about the most mariginalized group in the history of American society. I've seen polls all over the map on this subject.

 

The biggest problem with this is that every other person on the street thinks that they have a "Cherokee great grandmother" and they are nearly all wrong.

 

http://www.africanancestry.com/blog/2012/07/proudly-african-and-native-american-really/

 

http://genealogy.about.com/od/family_legends/p/cherokee.htm

 

There are less than 3 million Native Americans in the US and they are a poor, disorganized group.

 

Regardless, I find the idea that we can write off slurs, marginalization, etc via popular vote to be problematic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OED definition:

 

Definition of redskin in English

 

redskin
Syllabification: (red·skin)
Pronunciation: /ˈredˌskin/
noun dated offensive
  • an American Indian.

Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. In time, however, through a process that in linguistics is called pejoration, by which a neutral term acquires an unfavorable connotation or denotation, redskin lost its neutral, accurate descriptive sense and became a term of disparagement. Red man is first recorded in the early 17th century and was originally neutral in tone. Red Indian is first recorded in the early 19th century and was used by the British, far more than by Americans, to distinguish the Indians of the subcontinent from the Indians of the Americas. All three terms are dated or offensive. American Indian and Native American are now the standard umbrella terms. Of course, if it is possible or appropriate, one can also use specific tribal names (Cheyenne, Nez Percé, etc.).

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are on facebook and are against changing the name please join our group.

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/savetheRedskins/

 

 

"There is a small group of people with American Indian ancestry that have waged a war on sports teams with Indian mascots. The primary target of this group is the Washington Redskins. They use revisionist history and feigned outrage to advance their agenda. Though their numbers are small their voices are loud, it is now time that we make our voices heard as well."
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, LKB, do you believe our Redskins name to be a slur or marginalization of a culture?

 

I'm generally uncomfortable with all "Indian" sport names. I tend to call the Redskins "The Skins" (though I'm sure you can find examples of me not doing that) for similar reasons that Doc Walker calls them "The Burgandy and Gold."

 

Do I think it's a slur? No. A slur has to have intent. 99.9 percent of people aren't even thinking of Native Americans when they say it. This is not in the category of Chief Wahoo.

 

Do I think it is an offensive word? Absolutely. I mean, in every dictionary I've read it is listed as "offensive." I would never use it as a nickname for someone. I can't imagine a modern context where it is appropriate to use it outside of talking about the football team.

 

You can make the argument that the intent is not offensive. You can't win the argument on the word itself.

 

By the way, this isn't a brand new conversation. Deadspin found a decade-old column from Rick Reilly where he talked about the Native American nicknames and came to largely a different conclusion. When I was in college, nearly all the Native American nicknames vanished. Hell, Dartmouth - not exactly a bastion of political correctness - dropped the Indians monikier in 1974. I remember as a teenager, there was a company selling "Cleveland Darkies" and "New York N-----" pennants. This is a discussion that has been going on for 40 years.

 

Like any of these discussions, a tipping point is reached. I think we are in that zone now.

Edited by Lombardi's_kid_brother
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly don't know what percentage of Native Americans are offended by the name. We're talking about the most mariginalized group in the history of American society. I've seen polls all over the map on this subject.

The biggest problem with this is that every other person on the street thinks that they have a "Cherokee great grandmother" and they are nearly all wrong.

http://www.africanancestry.com/blog/2012/07/proudly-african-and-native-american-really/

http://genealogy.about.com/od/family_legends/p/cherokee.htm

There are less than 3 million Native Americans in the US and they are a poor, disorganized group.

Regardless, I find the idea that we can write off slurs, marginalization, etc via popular vote to be problematic.

You have not seen polls all over the map on this. The travest is every poll of Native Americans have found that those taking offense are a tiny minority and yet you still have non natives being offended for them because apparently to these people native-Americans must be too stupid to know what to be offended by. And as Reilly pointed out what that tiny minority wants is not just the Redskins to change their name but every use of Native American references to be banned which is why he was calling King and the other Media proponents a bit hypocritical in their just cherry picking which of those names require one person to be offended. Edited by nonniey
Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet Redskins has been definatively shown to not be a racial slur by the senior linguist of the Smithsonian no less.

 

I have never in my life heard anyone refer to Native Americans as "Redskins". I also don't consider "yellowskin" to be a slur against East Asian people because I for one have never heard it used that way at all. However, I think if one decides to call their pro football team "yellowskins" with a picture of Bruce Lee on the helmet, none of us would find that acceptable.

 

I love everything about our'Skins, but I have slowly come to the understanding that anything George Preston Marshall came up with should be looked at closely. 

 

I'm sure some of these media types out there mean well, but I also definitely know some just want the attention and the blog/web hits. My hope is that if they genuinely feel like the term "Redskins" is inappropriate, then they just won't use it when writing about our team, instead of announcing to everyone "hey, look at me! I'm not using Redskins name anymore".

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never in my life heard anyone refer to Native Americans as "Redskins". I also don't consider "yellowskin" to be a slur against East Asian people because I for one have never heard it used that way at all. However, I think if one decides to call their pro football team "yellowskins" with a picture of Bruce Lee on the helmet, none of us would find that acceptable.

 

The XFL should have a teamed called "The Yellow Fever" with Lucy Liu on the helmet.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm generally uncomfortable with all "Indian" sport names. I tend to call the Redskins "The Skins" (though I'm sure you can find examples of me not doing that) for similar reasons that Doc Walker calls them "The Burgandy and Gold."

 

Do I think it's a slur? No. A slur has to have intent. 99.9 percent of people aren't even thinking of Native Americans when they say it. This is not in the category of Chief Wahoo.

 

Do I think it is an offensive word? Absolutely. I mean, in every dictionary I've read it is listed as "offensive." I would never use it as a nickname for someone. I can't imagine a modern context where it is appropriate to use it outside of talking about the football team.

 

You can make the argument that the intent is not offensive. You can't win the argument on the word itself.

 

By the way, this isn't a brand new conversation. Deadspin found a decade-old column from Rick Reilly where he talked about the Native American nicknames and came to largely a different conclusion. When I was in college, nearly all the Native American nicknames vanished. Hell, Dartmouth - not exactly a bastion of political correctness - dropped the Indians monikier in 1974. I remember as a teenager, there was a company selling "Cleveland Darkies" and "New York N-----" pennants. This is a discussion that has been going on for 40 years.

 

Like any of these discussions, a tipping point is reached. I think we are in that zone now.

OK, I get where you're coming from. 

But I hope that "tipping point" doesn't come until my RGIII jersey is around the urn holding my ashes that gets lovingly thrown into the Potomac.sshhh  (My husband finds it absolutely hilarious that I was baptized in BnG & want to go out that way as well!)

Hail to the Redskins!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Jumbo changed the title to The Official ES All Things Redskins Name Change Thread (Reboot Edition---Read New OP)
  • Jumbo locked this topic
  • Jumbo unlocked this topic
  • Jumbo pinned this topic
  • Jumbo featured and unfeatured this topic
  • Jumbo locked and unlocked this topic
  • Jumbo locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...