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

[Boss_Hogg]

The Kansas City chiefs are feeling it too, we just don't hear about it because they're a small market team and the owner isn't a bumbling bombastic asshat.

The chiefs had over 70 protestors when they played the cardinals in Tempe last year. The skins had roughly 100 protestors.

Removing the logo and keeping redskins name was my weak proposal to calm things down for both parties. Obviously the team is a private business and dan can do whatever he wants; but if he wants to sit back and enjoy football he should consider a change of some sort.

I also don't agree with the love it or leave it approach. You can still love the team, players, and colors but also want a fresh start w/o native imagery.

And RFKFedex is a good dude, give him a break

Also **** UnWise Mike

[Dan T.]

This is as good a time as any to post this. 

 

http://deadspin.com/redskins-a-natives-guide-to-debating-an-inglorious-1445909360'> "Redskins": A Native's Guide To Debating An Inglorious Word

 

It's from a writer and an attorney who is a member of the Blackfeet Indian Nation, lives on a reservation, and who was born and raised on various reservations growing up "where there are decidedly different interests from those of the Native intelligentsia." 

 

It is still the single-most thoughtful piece I have seen written about the name controversy from someone with a vested interest.  He offers a slightly different take on the controversy.  Everyone should read this, especially those spouting with authority percentages of N/As who support/oppose the name.

[grego]

Removing the logo and keeping redskins name was my weak proposal to calm things down for both parties.

Also **** UnWise Mike

Ya I don't get that. As was said, it's the name people are up in arms about. Of course, harjo et al still want all native imagery removed, but if one were to compromise, ditching the name and keeping the dignified logo, designed by a native American and used at his request, would make more sense.

[Larry]

. . . especially those spouting with authority percentages of N/As who support/oppose the name.

Based on nothing more than "well, we asked hundreds of them, randomly selected, and that's what they said"

 

(But yes, I'm headed off to read the piece, now.) 

[Dan T.]

Based on nothing more than "well, we asked hundreds of them, randomly selected, and that's what they said"

 

(But yes, I'm headed off to read the piece, now.) 

 

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on it.  I found it to be an interesting perspective from a thoughtful Native American.

[ZRagone]

Your hypocrisy is astounding.

You don't support it, except by supporting it.

I'll say again what I've said much earlier in this thread.

 

Anyone crying about "not supporting" the name, and yet are posting on this message board or going to the games or buying the merchandise or watching the preseason games or shopping at their sponsors, are abject hypocrites.

 

This website is owned by the Washington REDSKINS. It's ad revenue, that is possible thanks to the membership base here, goes to support the Washington REDSKINS. I routinely have a good chuckle watching people get on their high horse about how they refuse to "support the name" while they're actively supporting the organization with said name in pseudo-financial fashion.

 

They want to have their cake and eat it too, as is so common in our faux-outrage society. They want to look like they "care" and are so much more intelligent and wise than us heathens, while at the same time don't want to alter their fandom in any fashion what so ever. Why? Because, it'd be way to inconvenient to actually DO anything beyond ****ing and moaning. So they clap themselves on the back thinking they're somehow better for "taking a stand", oblivious to the laughable ineptitude of it all.

 

If you truly find it "racist", if you truly find it "offensive", if you truly find it abhorrent, then why in the world are you still rooting for it, supporting it, and being a fanatic for it? Your WORDS may say you don't support it, but your actions say otherwise.

[grego]

I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on it. I found it to be an interesting perspective from a thoughtful Native American.

I agreed with much- if not most of it- for whatever that's worth, as a white guy.

I think the mistake so many make (not saying you, just in general) is hearing someone like harjo or blackhorse give their opinion (which is often accompanied by verifiably fake facts) and assume their opinion represents the majority.

It doesn't, any more than Louis Farrakhans opinion represents African Americans. His opinions are similarly extreme and racist in nature. But the squeekiest wheel gets the oil, or, in this case, the attention.

That leads me to the poll, which you appear to slam. It's, by far, the most accurate indicator of how the name is seen in the native American community.

[Larry]

He does at least have the decency to mention some of the facts. 
 
In the process of working real hard to dismiss them. 
 
There's a theme running through the piece, that I've seen elsewhere, too.  The notion that many Natives live in such abject poverty that they are simply too weak from hunger to protest the name. 
 
Yes, I'm absolutely certain that many Natives, at least on the reservations, have a whole lot of things on their minds that are vastly more important than the name of a football team. 
 
 

I will note that the number of Natives who actually live on a reservation is very small.  I looked up the stats for another post in this thread, probably 6 months ago.  I think it's a bit less than 20%.
 
But I would not be surprised at all if the "reservation Natives" had a vastly different feeling towards that word, compared to the non-reservation ones. 

 

There have been articles posted in here, from Natives, and comments from ES members, who do live on or near reservations, who have had the word "Redskins" used as a racial epitaph.  I recall one article written by a white guy who lives on a reservation (I forget why), in Wyoming, I think  He mentions that in Wyoming, the first two digits of your license plate identifies the county where it was issued.  He owns two vehicles, one of which has the "63" license plate that identifies it as being from some county that's 95% reservation.  And he's been driving down the interstate, and had state troopers pull u-turns on the interstate so they could pull him over.  And then, when the trooper gets close enough to see a white guy driving, smiles, waves at him, and gets back in his car. 

 

I think we've had posts from an ES member who's been thrown out of a roadside diner because he had some Redskins in his group. 

 

And I could see the argument that the ones on the reservation should have their vote "count more". 

 

For myself, yes, I'm a registered member of a tribe. But I certainly don't feel like I'm entitled to speak for "real Natives".  I don't look like one.  And I haven't spent my life being treated like one.
 
I'm 1/8 Potawatomie.  Maybe my opinion should count as 1/8 of a vote.

 
 
And yet, said hypothetical, poverty-stricken, Native, who's offended by the name, but can't afford gas money to go to a protest?  When he's called and asked whether the name offends him, doesn't say "No".  If said Native's opinion of the name is "I'm offended, but I'm more offended by the fact that my house doesn't have indoor plumbing", then when he's surveyed whether he's offended by the name, his answer is "Yes". 
 
I'm also admiring what seems to be the standard method used to dismiss polling data, now days:  Refer to both the offended and the non-offended as "some".  Thus trying to create the impression that the two groups are roughly equal in size, as opposed to one group outnumbering the other by 10 to 1. 
 
And I just love the "oh, this argument is just like the argument about whether to use the n-word" claim. 
 
No.  It isn't.  Show me the black high schools calling themselves the n-word.  Show me the polling data saying that the professional football team that's been calling themselves that, for 80 years, doesn't offend them.  By a 10 to 1 ratio. 
 
----------
 
And I love the continued claim that this debate consists of white folks telling Natives that they aren't allowed to be offended. 
 
It's white folks telling Natives that they should be offended.  The Natives have said that they're not.

[Kosher Ham]

 Your WORDS may say you don't support it, but your actions say otherwise.

 

And as we all know... Actions speak...

 

Nice post man.

[Xameil]

More power to em Larry. The R word can be their word, it doesn't need to be mine anymore. I'm a football fan, not an Indian.

Lol you won't say Redskins but you'll say Indian over Native American?!?

[Larry]

Lol you won't say Redskins but you'll say Indian over Native American?!?

 

That's the term I prefer.  It's the term I grew up using. 

 

(Mentally, I have even gone to the trouble of forcing myself to use the word "Hindu" to refer to "someone from India", even though I know that they aren't all one religion.  Just to distinguish them from "Indians" as in "Cowboys and".) 

 

I try to force myself to use the term "Native", when the words travel from my brain to my lips/keyboard. 

 

Edit: 

 

Also pointing out:  The author of Dan T's piece mentions that he's just published a book:  How To Say I Love You In Indian. 

----------

 

So, if a fan of the Redskins who thinks they should change the name uses an ad blocker, then are they allowed to post their opinions on this forum? 

 

Or have y'all decreed that that's not good enough, and they have to completely leave the board? 

[Dan T.]

I'll say again what I've said much earlier in this thread.

 

Anyone crying about "not supporting" the name, and yet are posting on this message board or going to the games or buying the merchandise or watching the preseason games or shopping at their sponsors, are abject hypocrites.

 

This website is owned by the Washington REDSKINS. It's ad revenue, that is possible thanks to the membership base here, goes to support the Washington REDSKINS. I routinely have a good chuckle watching people get on their high horse about how they refuse to "support the name" while they're actively supporting the organization with said name in pseudo-financial fashion.

 

They want to have their cake and eat it too, as is so common in our faux-outrage society. They want to look like they "care" and are so much more intelligent and wise than us heathens, while at the same time don't want to alter their fandom in any fashion what so ever. Why? Because, it'd be way to inconvenient to actually DO anything beyond ****ing and moaning. So they clap themselves on the back thinking they're somehow better for "taking a stand", oblivious to the laughable ineptitude of it all.

 

If you truly find it "racist", if you truly find it "offensive", if you truly find it abhorrent, then why in the world are you still rooting for it, supporting it, and being a fanatic for it? Your WORDS may say you don't support it, but your actions say otherwise.

 

I don't think the team's use of the name Redskins is meant to be offensive.  However, I do recognize - more and more these days - that there are Native Americans who do find it offensive.  And societal attitudes are quickly shifting in support of that view.

 

That's it basically... no offense is intended, even though the very name is offensive to some.   So as a fan of a football team, I'm caught in the middle.  If I put on a Nationals cap before heading out the door, I don't think twice about it.  But now, every time I put on a Redskins T-shirt before heading out the door into the multicultural DC area, I have to stop and consider the implication of that.

 

Blame the media.  Blame white liberals.  Blame a vocal minority of Native Americans.  But it is an issue now. And a growing one.

[Xameil]

That's the term I prefer. It's the term I grew up using.

(Mentally, I have even gone to the trouble of forcing myself to use the word "Hindu" to refer to "someone from India", even though I know that they aren't all one religion. Just to distinguish them from "Indians" as in "Cowboys and".)

I try to force myself to use the term "Native", when the words travel from my brain to my lips/keyboard.

----------

You missed the point. He is consciously not using Redskin, but using Indian which has been decreed by the PC police as being bad as well...

[Burgold]

 

 

 

And yet, said hypothetical, poverty-stricken, Native, who's offended by the name, but can't afford gas money to go to a protest?  When he's called and asked whether the name offends him, doesn't say "No".  If said Native's opinion of the name is "I'm offended, but I'm more offended by the fact that my house doesn't have indoor plumbing", then when he's surveyed whether he's offended by the name, his answer is "Yes". 

On the other side, I can see the other side thinking it's offensive, but so low on my immediate priorities that I think... "Why are you bothering me with this crap! I have real issues to deal with!"

 

Mostly though, I go back to the point that no one's asking them (as a group) They're just making declarations on their behalf. Seems a bit ridiculous. If you want to find out the answer it's not that hard to ask it, tally up the results, analyze and confirm what your weaknesses you had in methodology, what your standard error and confidence in the results are, etc.

 

Much better than not asking and declaring you know how they're feeling. Even if you are a Native American it's a bit presumptuous to speak for every individual and every tribe.

[Major Harris]

Just observing that me, personally, I'm getting really tired of seeing people ordering other people to either agree with them, or get out.

This isn't a Philly message board.

Nor is it a George carlin fan board

[RFKFedEx]

I'm not Indian (there are several on this board that you could talk to though), I am a Native American. My blood lines lead back to the very start.

 

Would you like to take it down that road ?

 

We've already been down that road Kosher, both in this thread and in PMs. I asked you about your Native status earlier this year, but you wouldn't share anything. You can't say I didn't try. 

 

And to others asking about my use of the term "Indian"... from my experience working with Native people over the past year, most seem to prefer to identify as Indigenous, rather than Native American or American Indian. I've asked many NA people about this and of course their opinions vary, it's tough to get a consensus. Sound familiar? The context of whom, what, when, or where the ethnic ID tag is applied matters quite a bit, needless to say. Many of my NA acquaintances continue to employ the word "Indian" in most situations, simply bc it's the easiest. When it comes to more serious biz, 'Indigenous' or 'Native' tends to be preferred over Indian. 

[Bang]

I don't care about you using the word indian.

the Sammy Baugh avatar and Redskins fanhood while on this crusade of shame is much more offensive.

To Redskins fans, to honor the only Redskin who had his number retired while telling us all that our name is horrible is offensive. 

 

You won't even type the word of your favorite team. Your FAVORITE team..   and yet you support them in every way.

 

If it was so offensive, you'd have no part of it.

 

Plastic outrage,, lip service.

These are pretty offensive.

 

to use the Hollywood vernacular,, you speak with forked tongue.

 

~Bang

[Xameil]

We've already been down that road Kosher, both in this thread and in PMs. I asked you about your Native status earlier this year, but you wouldn't share anything. You can't say I didn't try.

And to others asking about my use of the term "Indian"... from my experience working with Native people over the past year, most seem to prefer to identify as Indigenous, rather than Native American or American Indian. I've asked many NA people about this and of course their opinions vary, it's tough to get a consensus. Sound familiar? The context of whom, what, when, or where the ethnic ID tag is applied matters quite a bit, needless to say. Many of my NA acquaintances continue to employ the word "Indian" in most situations, simply bc it's the easiest. When it comes to more serious biz, 'Indigenous' or 'Native' tends to be preferred over Indian.

I can vouch for Kosher. He is a Native American. We have talked about it.

And funny you say that about the word Indian...all my friends who are Native American have no issue at all with Redskins, and don't see it as an offensive thing at all...in fact it's th reason a couple of them root for them.

Soooo...yeah...you don't want to use the word Redskin, then don't. But don't do it in the name of protecting the feelings of the Native Americans. Do it in the name of your own ignorance

[Kosher Ham]

Yeah, ok.

 

I've shared plenty. You want my insurance information, my address ?

Through this and many other threads over the years, I have shared. 

 

So it is not serious to you ? Therefore Indian is just peachy keen ?

That being the case why take it so personal (as I have stated to you before), as someone who is not a Native American ?

 

You are being completely insincere with your intentions it seems and it is rather disturbing. Others that talk about the topic at least seem genuine and informed. You simply seem to just want to stir the pot when there is nothing in it.

[RFKFedEx]

Yeah, ok.

 

I've shared plenty. You want my insurance information, my address ?

No, but some simple answers to some very basic questions would be nice.

 

What is the name of your nation? Are you an enrolled member of that nation or tribe?

[Larry]

Yeah, ok.

 

I've shared plenty. You want my insurance information, my address ?

I just this last month, sent off to get my tribal photo identification card. So now I have a piece of plastic that says I'm a member.  (It gets me a discount on health insurance through Obamacare, if you believe that.) 

 

It's funny.  I noticed some time ago that it also apparently serves as identification on an I-9 form.  The form you have to fill out, to be employed?  There's three kinds of documents you can provide. 

 

1) Some documents (passport) are considered proof of who you are, and that you are eligible to work. 

2) Some documents (State driver's license) are considered proof of who you are, but don't prove it's legal for you to work.

3) Some documents (SS card) are proof that you can work, but not who you are. 

 

You have to provide either a category 1, or a category 2 and a category 3. 

 

Apparently, a tribal identification card counts as category 2 and category 3, but not category 1. 

 

Government.

[Kosher Ham]

No, but some simple answers to some very basic questions would be nice.

 

What is the name of your nation? Are you an enrolled member of that nation or tribe?

 

Why is that information relevant to the topic ?

 

I am indeed an enrolled member of a major tribe/nation. One that has real casinos. Not just bingo halls. One that has tons of property.

 

My personal information has been told about that. Simply because I don't trust you with that information, doesn't mean that I am being insincere like you seem to be. As well as you dodging my other questions.

 

I don't even think you understand the corner that you have painted yourself in in my eyes. Not that my opinions matter more. Just that I think you have zero credibility.

[Kosher Ham]

I just this last month, sent off to get my tribal photo identification card. So now I have a piece of plastic that says I'm a member.  (It gets me a discount on health insurance through Obamacare, if you believe that.) 

 

I don't pay for health insurance. I have deductibles like everyone else though.

I have a guy that does my taxes.

 

To the rest of it...geez. Getting a drivers license from NC is harder than getting a passport.

[Larry]

To the rest of it...geez. Getting a drivers license from NC is harder than getting a passport.

Yeah, the Feds actually passed some laws, a while back, that mandate a whole lot of difficult-to-obtain paperwork.  It can be complicated.  (I learned about it when I needed photo ID, for mom.) 

Something to do with the 9/11 hijackers all having state-issued ID, or something.

 

Oh, and so far, that's the only thing I've used my passport for:  Getting ID. 

[Kosher Ham]

Something to do with the 9/11 hijackers all having state-issued ID, or something.

 

Oh, and so far, that's the only thing I've used my passport for:  Getting ID. 

 

Mostly from which state ?  I'm sure you already know the answer.

 

The last part though is one of those mind games. It makes no sense at all.