Big Weirdo Posted October 22, 2013 Share Posted October 22, 2013 Corso is one of those guys who really doesn't know when to quit. Guy is such an asshat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundyrush Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ Thanks for posting that article. I've never heard of Terrell Star or his rag, but I think he sounds correct. I can well relate to the 'romantic' and 'empowerment' feeling people get from playing Indian. I disagree w/ your assessment of our fan's increasing resentment toward Natives if we change. I didn't live through integration in the 60s, but I get the impression that it ended up being far less traumatic than opponents had feared, anticipated, or hoped. IMO the same will ring true when things change here. Tolerance, understanding, and respect will increase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ Football is a game. The Redskins are my favorite team but the entire sport is still just a game. I'm never going to hate a people over something that happens in the NFL. Perspective in life is important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ No, fans won't feel resentful towards Native Americans because the fans have heavily acknowledged that 90% of Native Americans aren't offended and that it is just a small group pushing for change. My question is what makes you think you know anything about the other side of this argument given the complete ignorance you've displayed toward it in most of your posts on the subject? Given the post in here that got you banned you are not qualified in any way at all. The article you post completely ignores that people view the name in reverence and pride and hold Native Americans in high esteem, and that many Native Americans are proud to have teams representing them. Are the Cowboys a caricature? Are the Patriots? That POV that team names are caricatures show a stunning lack of understanding the context and usage of sports team names and if that can't be understood then that person's perspective isn't coming from a place based in reality. The article completely ignores the other side of the debate and you call it "pretty good," obviously because it agrees with your POV, but to actually qualify as "pretty good" one needs to actually address the other side of the argument. Most don't because the fact most Native Americans aren't offended is very inconvenient to the tale they are trying to spin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ I think if you read through this thread and came away with the feeling that those of us who don't support changing the name are already resenting Native Americans, than you have projected that on this yourself, and would like to see some examples of the racism you're implying. It's odd, because the vitriol, hatred, anger and downright nastiness have come largely from the other side with their screams of racism and ignorance, and frankly, given the poison that UnWise Mike has spewed in support of the "enlightened" side, i think that your entire statement can be directly applied in the reverse. i sure do enjoy being called a racist for liking a football team. I enjoy being a fan of a team since i was a kid, and having some sanctimonious asshole tell me i'm rooting for a name no better than the "Niggers" or the "Kikes." Please. Show me this resentment. Show me examples of this that you've found in this thread that lead you to fear that all of us will resent native Americans. be sure you don't confuse it with resentment toward 'journalists' who use things like this to boost their popularity, and don't confuse it with resentment towards dip****s who are not native, deciding for natives how they should feel, and make sure it's not resentment toward people who push a lie and ignore anything that does not conform to their preconceived notion of what the name is, and ignore the people who they supposedly feel for. Show me this resentment towards natives that you're reading here. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ Without question, I believe the name needs to change and the NFL team should distance itself from the antiqued, factually-baseless narrative that its use of the term ”Redskin” and its mascot honor American Indian traditions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- factually baseless? really? funny how he doesnt mention the facts that dont support his argument. except for the fact that the actual facts of the term 'redskins' are overwhelmingly favorable for the other side, its a great point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Has anyone actually called anyone who cheers for this team a racist? I would like to see that example. This discussion has now largely devolved into each side building up strawmen and knocking them down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ My resentment will be reserved for middle-aged white guys with with names like UnWise Mike, Bob Costas, Mike Florio, and Peter King. They are the ones pushing this "issue". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrypticVillain Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I think once the name is changed Redskin fans will feel resentful towards Native Americans and begin to despise them. Hell judging by this thread that has already begun. Think how racist white Americans felt when they were forced to integrate with African Americans. I think the deadspin article from the Native American journalist is the best piece of journalism and the most authentic literary work posted in this thread. This one is pretty good as well... http://newsone.com/2743075/redskins-name-change/ What? Do you really think people would really hate Native Americans because they change the name of a football team? If you really have read this thread you would have realized that most of us aren't even mad at Native Americans, we are mad at the people who are trying to put words in their mouths. I have read multiple posters, myself included, saying that they would support a name change if more Native Americans had a porblem with it. Then you try to compare it to how White racist had to "intergrate" with African Americans??? Come on now. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManleyMann7271 Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 As you all know there is a new vigorous assault on our name led by a small minority of American Indians and picked up by the majority of the national media. We have united in the hopes that maybe our voices will be heard as well. Will you please come join us in our fight? Hail to the Redskins!!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/savetheRedskins/ There is now a petition on the group page as well, please sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 As you all know there is a new vigorous assault on our name led by a small minority of American Indians and picked up by the majority of the national media. We have united in the hopes that maybe our voices will be heard as well. Will you please come join us in our fight? Hail to the Redskins!!!https://www.facebook.com/groups/savetheRedskins/ There is now a petition on the group page as well, please sign. Here is the deal. The media doesn't matter on this issue. Indivisuals pro / con arguments don't matter. All that matters are the copy right issues. You can't copyright a derogatory name no mater how well intentioned you are or how respectful and loving you feel about that name. Facts are reffering to a people by the color of their skin is pretty much in any other case we can think off...... racist. The only relivent facts are.. (1) How will the USPTO's Trademark Trial and Appeal Board find, given they've already found once againsgt the skins on this issue a few years back only to be overturned on a technicality by a federal judge. A technicality which the folks who brought the new case have side stepped... Does the Redskins Trademark violates Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act, which bars any mark that [c]onsists of or comprises immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter; or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt, or disrepute I think the act now before congress represents a lesser threat to the trademark because congress is having a hard time passing anything currently.. "The Non-Disparagement of Native American Persons or Peoples in Trademark Registration Act of 2013"; If either of these things happen Danny won't be able to enforce his trademarks and the economics of the issue will force him to change the name. Snyder has said he won't change the name even then, but it really will be almost impossible for him not too. The Redskins Logo is valued by Forbes Magazine at more than 100 million dollars. I think the copyright issues are where this thing is going to be decided and ultimately that is going to revolve solely on how many native Americans are offended....... If it is only the handful who have pursued this issue in the courts for decades, (who certianly are offended) then the Redskin logo is safe.... If it's more the name and logo are gone.. As for the Redskins not seeking to hurt or insult native Americans... You are right of coarse... The Redskins of coarse are in business to make money. The issue is whether they are making money by hurting native Americans. That's what the copyright case will decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 is the Native's "red skin" what is being referred to by the term "Redskins?" Their actual biological skin? I have yet to see that proven, in fact there is evidence to the contrary. In addition, I have yet to see any proof or substantial evidence that "Redskins" is a slur. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 is the Native's "red skin" what is being referred to by the term "Redskins?" Their actual biological skin? I have yet to see that proven, in fact there is evidence to the contrary. In addition, I have yet to see any proof or substantial evidence that "Redskins" is a slur. You haven't looked then because a quick visit to the dictionary would have provided you with the evidence which has elluded you... http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/redskin?s=t red·skin/ˈrɛdˌskɪn/ Show Spelled [red-skin] Show IPA noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive. a North American Indian. Origin: 1690–1700, Americanism; red1 + skin Dictionary.com Unabridged Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2013 World English Dictionary redskin (ˈrɛdˌskɪn) — n an old-fashioned informal name, now considered taboo, for a Native American [C17: so called because one particular tribe, the now extinct Beothuks of Newfoundland, painted themselves with red ochre] Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition2009 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1979, 1986 © HarperCollins Publishers 1998, 2000, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009 Word Origin & History redskin "American Indian," 1699. Red as the skin color of Native Americans is from 1587; red man is from 1587. Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper It's not whether the term was invented as a slur, and have existed down through time as a slur. These are undeniable facts. It's also not whether the NFL team doesn't use it as a slur. From what I can determine the only thing that matter is whether enough native Americans are offended by the teams use of this once offensive term. You can't make money by trademarking offensive terms.... Do enough native Americans find the use of this term offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 and where is the evidence for the "often disparaging and offensive" part? How did they come to that conclusion? and who gets to decide? I'm sure they asked Native Americans how they felt about the term when they arrived at their conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I see you have added more info to your post since I responded. What I want to know, is what has changed that the definition of the term has now changed? What evidence or research did they do that confirmed the term is disparaging? Who did they talk to? What documents did they find? What research was done to arrive at these conclusions? Did they talk to Native Americans since Native Americans themselves invented the term, and they themselves should decide how best it should be defined? Several of us find the name "Cowboys" to be offensive. Should they change the definition of Cowboy also? http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Cowboy?s=t cow·boy [kou-boi] Show IPA noun 1.a man who herds and tends cattle on a ranch, especially in the western U.S., and who traditionallygoes about most of his work on horseback. 2.a man who exhibits the skills attributed to such cowboys, especially in rodeos. 3. Chiefly Northeastern U.S. a reckless or speedy automobile driver. 4.Informal. a reckless or irresponsible person, especially a show-off or one who undertakes a dangerous or sensitive task heedlessly: They put foreign policy in the hands of cowboys. 5.(during the American Revolution) a member of a pro-British guerrilla band that operated between the American and British lines near New York City. Oh, I see....so Cowboys are by definition...anti-American? Boy is this going to piss some people off. All this time they thought they were America's Team, but little did they know about definition number 5! LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 and where is the evidence for the "often disparaging and offensive" part? How did they come to that conclusion? and who gets to decide? I'm sure they asked Native Americans how they felt about the term when they arrived at their conclusion. I'm sure they just made it up.... as you did your alternative definition...... So which do you find more creditable..... Random House Dictionary, Collins English Dictionary, Douglas Harper Online Etymology Dictionary... or your own thoujghts on the definition of the word? If the antagonist was anybody else going against those sources would you find his case creditable? You shouldn't I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 and lest we forget this gem. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Cowboy?s=t World English Dictionary cowboy (ˈkaʊˌbɔɪ) — n 1. Also called: cowhand a hired man who herds and tends cattle, usually on horseback, esp in thewestern US 2. a conventional character of Wild West folklore, films, etc, esp one involved in fighting Indians 3. informal a. a person who is an irresponsible or unscrupulous operator in business b. ( as modifier ): cowboy contractors ; cowboy shop steward 4. ( Austral ) a man or boy who tends cattle Actually, the correct term is Native American. Indians are people from India, so I guess even the dictionary can be wrong sometimes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Troy Fakeman Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Another interesting perspective from the Boston Globe: http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2013/10/22/redskins-foes-take-offense-where-none-intended/OTWgf5fCMUYPktGXcwzdQP/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Actually, the correct term is Native American. Indians are people from India, so I guess even the dictionary can be wrong sometimes? Maybe you could look that up in the dictionary to strengthen your argument.... That's the first thing I did..... It didn't strengthen your arguement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 I'm sure they just made it up.... as you did your alternative definition...... So which do you find more creditable..... Random House Dictionary, Collins English Dictionary, Douglas Harper Online Etymology Dictionary... or your own thoujghts on the definition of the word? If the antagonist was anybody else going against those sources would you find his case creditable? You shouldn't I think. I'm not defining anything. I'm simply pointing out that if you listen to enough Native Americans on the term, the origin, intent, and meaning of the term "Redskin" is definitely not without a doubt a slur. For some it is offensive, for what seems to be a larger majority the term is a sense of pride. All existing evidence points to the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
War Paint Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 You haven't looked then because a quick visit to the dictionary would have provided you with the evidence which has elluded you... It's not whether the term was invented as a slur, and have existed down through time as a slur. These are undeniable facts. It's also not whether the NFL team doesn't use it as a slur. From what I can determine the only thing that matter is whether enough native Americans are offended by the teams use of this once offensive term. You can't make money by trademarking offensive terms.... Do enough native Americans find the use of this term offensive. Please quit with the dictionary definitions. It wasn't until recently when dictionaries added "offensive" to the term. I think it has more to do with idiot bleeding hearts who are currently in charge of producing these dictionaries than the origin of the term. I had an older dictionary from several years ago that didn't identify the term as offensive. I have no respect for those who try to rewrite history. Another flawed example I see is when those quote some old western movie as proof that Redskin is offensive, where a cowboy in the movie says "We're passing through Indian territory. Look out for those dirty Redskins." This is a flawed argument because the adjective in the sentence is what reflects the negative or demeaning tone, not the word Redskins. It's like the word "person". Is the word "person" offensive if someone says "that is a disgusting and horrible person"? Now look at another sentence using more positive adjectives like "that is a wonderful and beautiful person." It's all about the adjectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 JMS, your dictionary doesnt reference 'washingtons football team', which is BY FAR the most common usage of the term, which is extremely relevant to the discussion. it also doesnt go into detail regarding the origin or the word- not detail that explains that its a word made up by native americans. while i agree with you that it matters how many native americans are offended (and i would add that it matters 'why' they are offended, though many others dont feel that part matters), its important to know the words origin and actual usage. the fact that the word may have once been used by someone as a slur - despite its original meaning and current obvious usage- , imo, does not mean dan snyder should change it. nor should it make it the main definition found in the dictionary. it just doesnt make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 The dictionary is nowhere near the be all end all. I mean, theres a particular word that the filters will absolutely not let me type, and I guarantee it has MANY more uses than what it is defined as. Some can be good, and some can be bad. Since the dictionary defines "redskin" as "often offensive".. if you walk into a place and say "What about the Redskins", everyone in the place will think you want to talk football. Is there any doubt to that? the dictionary defines the N word the same way. no one will argue. But then there's those millions and millions of record sales.. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted October 23, 2013 Share Posted October 23, 2013 Maybe you could look that up in the dictionary to strengthen your argument.... That's the first thing I did..... It didn't strengthen your argument. fair enough. I did, and I'll retract that much. but I ask again. What evidence and historical data did they use to arrive at the conclusion that a large enough number of Native Americans find the term "Redskin" to be "disparaging and offensive" Was it the 10% from the Annenberg Poll? If they asked people of any other race how they felt about the term...kind of pointless isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.