grhqofb5 Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-i-support-the-name-redskins/2016/05/27/9268bec2-2111-11e6-8690-f14ca9de2972_story.html Why I support the name ‘Redskins’ Nice story, but to be fair his experiences with native tribes are largely irrelevant in the larger discussion. Anecdotes are nice. Properly performed surveys are objective and the results are indisputable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Nice story, but to be fair his experiences with native tribes are largely irrelevant in the larger discussion. Anecdotes are nice. Properly performed surveys are objective and the results are indisputable. Tell that to every single name changer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Tell that to every single name changer. Don't have the time, nor do I believe it would do any good. Never been one for trying to change other people's minds, particularly on stupid issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Amish file name-based against San Diego chargers. Jebidiah Smith declares that the name is offensive to his people since they are anti technology. Said "Charging with electricity" is sinful. He says protests are planned around the country and hundreds of Amish are already on route via horse and buggy to stage protests. Adds Smith, "We will only be satisfied when the name Charger is stricken from the Earth. Reparations must be made!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Every now and then I like to come in here and laugh that you all are still arguing this. Any other topic we all agree to disagree and go our separate ways after a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Harris Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Every now and then I like to come in here and laugh that you all are still arguing this. Any other topic we all agree to disagree and go our separate ways after a while. No we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Every now and then I like to come in here and laugh that you all are still arguing this. Any other topic we all agree to disagree and go our separate ways after a while. Less arguing now. More gloating. We win, they lose. Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted June 1, 2016 Share Posted June 1, 2016 Every now and then I like to come in here and laugh that you all are still arguing this. Any other topic we all agree to disagree and go our separate ways after a while. Whether most acknowledge (or even realize) it or not, there is a large element of whistling past the graveyard. I think a lot of people are very attached to the name, and very afraid they'll lose it, so they keep the thread alive here where it's safe because almost everybody agrees, and they can feel like they're winning. Even after the poll, I think that's true. People that truly feel like the issue is closed don't have to trumpet it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Whether most acknowledge (or even realize) it or not, there is a large element of whistling past the graveyard. I think a lot of people are very attached to the name, and very afraid they'll lose it, so they keep the thread alive here where it's safe because almost everybody agrees, and they can feel like they're winning. Even after the poll, I think that's true. People that truly feel like the issue is closed don't have to trumpet it. What the hell does that even mean? lol... 1) The issue isn't closed. Far, FAR from it. It's been an open issue for close to 40 years...what makes you think it's suddenly closed now? 2) The thread isn't kept alive so people can "feel like they're winning"...it gets bumped whenever anything of importance occurs concerning the name debate. The WP poll is damn significant, regardless of which side you are on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEANDWARF Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Not a big Trump guy by any means. But witnessing the American Flag being burned at Anti-Trump Rallies makes me want to vote for him just for spite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Got my threads mixed up. Deleted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Wrong thread guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Whoops! Sorry about that chief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 Whoops! Sorry about that chief are you sure it is the wrong thread...? or you didn't mean "dirty squaw scalping redskin chief"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 What the hell does that even mean? lol... 1) The issue isn't closed. Far, FAR from it. It's been an open issue for close to 40 years...what makes you think it's suddenly closed now? 2) The thread isn't kept alive so people can "feel like they're winning"...it gets bumped whenever anything of importance occurs concerning the name debate. The WP poll is damn significant, regardless of which side you are on. 1) Tell it to the people declaring victory. There's one right above my previous post. 2) If that were correct, this thread would not be nearly as long as it is. It may get bumped when something new happens (like the poll), but inevitably there follows plenty of preaching to the choir. As to the significance of the poll, it both is and is not significant. It's significant in the sense that it represents data that could be considered in a logical argument. It's not significant in the sense that research tells us that people don't make decisions based on logical arguments. They make decisions based on emotions, then seek out arguments and data that reinforce those positions. There's plenty of examples of that in this very thread, from both sides of the issue. That's likely part of what's scaring so many people, and why this thread is still going strong in a place where few if any actually disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I think it's also nice to talk about some good news for a change. Good news being that there's now new data reinforcing our strongly held belief that the name is not offensive, and that the name is safe for at least 10 years or so now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techboy Posted June 3, 2016 Share Posted June 3, 2016 I think it's also nice to talk about some good news for a change. Good news being that there's now new data reinforcing our strong held belief that the team name is safe for at least 10 years or so. There's definitely that aspect as well, no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Not so much on the 'name change' topic, but more on the offensive terms/logo angle... Given the recent tragedy at Disneyworld, I wondered if certain animal mascots could offend people. I thought of the Sharks as an example. Imagine all the shark attacks worldwide, including fatal or otherwise. Than I thought that if you polled all people and their immediate family about the name 'Sharks' and asked if they were offended what % (if any) do you think would be offended? I have to think some people are offended by the name. I'm not comparing a Redskins/racial mascots to animals, so please don't go there. I'm simply going on the 'I'm offended' angle. Do you think some people are offended by animal mascots. I mean, the gator chomp could be offensive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedBNG Posted June 18, 2016 Share Posted June 18, 2016 Not so much on the 'name change' topic, but more on the offensive terms/logo angle... As they say on Around the Horn... it just takes one person On recent stuff... https://www.washingtonian.com/2016/06/16/sidwell-friends-school-bans-redskins-merchandise/ If they'd only spend more time educating at that school... http://www.savethename.org/will-professionally-harassed-high-school-districts-surrender-or-educate-themselves-fight ... instead of mind melding with nut jobs as Gyassi Ross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Not so much on the 'name change' topic, but more on the offensive terms/logo angle... Given the recent tragedy at Disneyworld, I wondered if certain animal mascots could offend people. I thought of the Sharks as an example. Imagine all the shark attacks worldwide, including fatal or otherwise. Than I thought that if you polled all people and their immediate family about the name 'Sharks' and asked if they were offended what % (if any) do you think would be offended? I always thought the liberals would try to bring down the Miami Hurricanes, especially after hurricane Katrina had such a disparate impact on the African-American population in New Orleans.Edit: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 Sidwell Friends School bans clothing bearing Washington Redskins name and logo https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/06/17/sidwell-friends-school-bans-clothing-bearing-washington-redskins-name-and-logo/ Washington’s elite Sidwell Friends School has banned clothing featuring the name and logo of the Washington Redskins football team, school officials said Friday. Ellis Turner, an associate head of school at Sidwell, a private school founded on Quaker principles, said that the ban was conceived as part of a student-led revision of the school’s dress code this year. “This spring, students proposed to make the wearing of clothing with the name and logo of the Washington National Football League team a violation of the school’s dress code,” Turner told The Washington Post. “The school administration accepted the proposal in a show of support for student voice and unity on the issue.” Dictionary entries for “Redskin” generally define the word as a derogatory term for Native Americans. President Obama, whose eldest daughter, Malia, graduated from Sidwell this month, is one of a number of high-profile politicians and sports celebrities who have called on franchise owner Dan Snyder to reconsider the team’s moniker. But a decades-long effort by activists urging the football team to change its name has proven fruitless. A recent poll by The Washington Post found that 9 out of 10 Native Americans do not find the word to be offensive. I thought the kids at sidwell wore uniforms? Perhaps they do a casual Friday or something. Just for some kicks, I looks up the racial makeup of the school: 58% White 15% Multiracial 14% Black 7% Asian 4% Hispanic 0% Native American https://k12.niche.com/sidwell-friends-school-washington-dc/ Apparently it was Malia Obama who started the petition last fall to ban anything redskins related. One wonders if she did this on her own accord or if daddy dearest put her up to it. - NOT CONFIRMED Obama is a big opponent of our team name and logo yet proudly sports a blackhawks jersey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 1) Tell it to the people declaring victory. There's one right above my previous post. After years of having to listen to everyone with an opinion tell me my favorite sports team's name is based on racism, yes I'm being obnoxiously loud in telling them we have proof (again, because the first round of proof wasn't 'recent enough' for them) that they are wrong across the board. Not my fault that doesn't fit in your narrow view of what's going on. Sidwell Friends School bans clothing bearing Washington Redskins name and logo https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/education/wp/2016/06/17/sidwell-friends-school-bans-clothing-bearing-washington-redskins-name-and-logo/ Just my opinion but - who cares, they're a private school, they can do what they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I would tell my kid to keep wearing it until he/she got kicked out. Not to support the team but to help him/her learn that just because something offends you doesn't mean you shouldn't be exposed to it. A valuable lesson that I think isn't taught enough today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grhqofb5 Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I would tell my kid to keep wearing it until he/she got kicked out. Not to support the team but to help him/her learn that just because something offends you doesn't mean you shouldn't be exposed to it. A valuable lesson that I think isn't taught enough today. I'd tell my kid to stop wearing any Redskins related gear and to graduate. And if he wants to try to reverse the "proposal" before then with a "counter-proposal," go ahead and do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 20, 2016 Share Posted June 20, 2016 I always thought the liberals would try to bring down the Miami Hurricanes, especially after hurricane Katrina had such a disparate impact on the African-American population in New Orleans. Edit: Yes, but actual Hurricanes aren't offended by the name. Oh, wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.