• Blog Entries

    • By TK in ES Coverage
         0
      The Redskins have opened their 2019 season with two losses. Both against Divisional foes. Now they get to close out Week 3 at home on Monday Night against the visiting 1-1 Chicago Bears. The Bears don't have much of an offense but seem to have what may be an elite defense.
       
      On the flip side, the Redskins have a developing passing attack and a disastrous defense. The Redskins haven't had a Defense this vanilla since Mike Nolan received his ice cream. Oh, and the Redskins already have more guys on IR then any other team this season. 
       
      Will the Redskins finally put one in the win column? 
       
      As usual, poll closes at kickoff. Go vote!
Alaskins

The Official ES Redskins Name Change Thread---All Things Related to Changing the Team's Name Go Here

Recommended Posts

Guess what? The owner you all hate so much is NOT changing the name. We will all be rooting for the REDSKINS next year. And the year after. Ect.

Hate Dan all you want, but he agrees with all of us here. He ain't changing the name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the word "retard" offensive when directed at a person with downs syndrome. Whether they find it offensive or not is irrelevant to me. The argument that the name is "offensive" IF and only IF Native Americans think so is horse hockey.  I seriously doubt if over 2% of Americans have ever heard or used the term outside of a reference to our football team. Every GD bleeding heart liberal out there can find a reason to be offended by something, and probably put a bumper sticker about it on their Suburu. Please make this stop.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why aren't you asking that to the people who are telling Native Americans that they should be offended by the term, "Redskins?"

Are you saying Native Americans can't think.for themselves? I do believe all these politicians and talking heads are jumping on the bandwagon, but to say that Native Americans ate just doing this because they're being told that the term Redskins is offense is wrong. I think you should give them more credit than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That's history. So again, tell me how in the hell is a tomahawk chop offensive?

It reduces the vast and diverse use of the tomahawk to a simplistic caricature which does not correctly identify the use or meaning of the tool in Native American culture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How in the hell is the tomahawk chop offensive? Indians/Braves, Native American warriors, if you will, fought with tomahawks. How is that even remotely offensive?

I gotta part ways with you on this one.

The tomohawk chop is not a good look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, first of all I am a Chiefs fan but that is beside the point. I certainly hope the Redskins get to keep their name and I believe they will. However if someday they do decide to change their name I have a suggestion; The Washington Cavalry. After all if those who are trying to force the name change don't like the Redskin name then I wonder how they would feel about the name Cavalry since it was the U.S. Cavalry who was put together in 1833 to fight against the hostile Native Americans who were massacring innocent people in the middle of the night. Maybe that would make them feel better every time they saw the Washington Cavalry take the football field knowing the Cavalry defeated the Native Americans during the 1800's and early 1900's.

 

On another note if I was the Redskins and did change the name I would no longer be donating money or helping all the Native American organizations that they currently do no matter what the name was changed to. After all if the team wasn't good enough to carry the Redskin name then I would be sure those organizations wouldn't want money from those who used the Redskin name either.

 

Just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the word "retard" offensive when directed at a person with downs syndrome. Whether they find it offensive or not is irrelevant to me. The argument that the name is "offensive" IF and only IF Native Americans think so is horse hockey

So you're okay with it being labeled offensive if more than just Native Americans spoke out about it? Just want to make sure I parsed this right.

Because it seems there's a fair bit of that going around.

Edited by EvilMonkeyBoy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta part ways with you on this one.

The tomohawk chop is not a good look.

 

What about the Vikings "Skol!" stuff and the dude wearing horns on his head and with fur around his shoulders?  And the big horn after every first down?

 

I mean, if it's not a good look there (and I do understand what you mean, but now I'm taking my argument even further) why is it OK to do these "VIking" things.  And make no mistake, Scandinavians still look at themselves as Vikings or descendants of...Presumably, many Vikings fans are not Scandinavian in origin but still get behind the ethno-historical imagery.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying Native Americans can't think.for themselves? I do believe all these politicians and talking heads are jumping on the bandwagon, but to say that Native Americans ate just doing this because they're being told that the term Redskins is offense is wrong. I think you should give them more credit than that.

That is the point the vast majority of Native Americans aren't pushing for this and it's the change the name group that doesn't care about what those Native Americans think on this issue. Essentially they're the ones who think Native-Americans can't think for themselves. 

Edited by nonniey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the question I keep asking people... And I ask randoms... and yes its because I'm genuinely curious...

 

"When you think of the word Redskins, what's the first thing you think of?"

 

I actually tallied the results. Still a small sample size. I've asked ten people.

 

Do you know what their answer was?

 

"A football team" (7 times)

"football" (3 times)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guess what? The owner you all hate so much is NOT changing the name. We will all be rooting for the REDSKINS next year. And the year after. Ect.

Hate Dan all you want, but he agrees with all of us here. He ain't changing the name.

I don't hate Dan Snyder.  I actually like the fact that he also has passion for the team.  I'd rather have Snyder than some owner who views the Redskins as simply a business.  It's more than a business for Dan Snyder.  He truly loves the team like we do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all, first of all I am a Chiefs fan but that is beside the point. I certainly hope the Redskins get to keep their name and I believe they will. However if someday they do decide to change their name I have a suggestion; The Washington Cavalry. After all if those who are trying to force the name change don't like the Redskin name then I wonder how they would feel about the name Cavalry since it was the U.S. Cavalry who was put together in 1833 to fight against the hostile Native Americans who were massacring innocent people in the middle of the night. Maybe that would make them feel better every time they saw the Washington Cavalry take the football field knowing the Cavalry defeated the Native Americans during the 1800's and early 1900's.

 

 

I'll go one better.

 

Buffalo Soldiers.  Black Union troops who fought the American Indians in the Plains wars.

 

Part of this, too, is this rewriting of history to where AIs were only viewed as savages and never with sympathy or compassion or respect.  That is just not true.  People would not name their teams after peoples they didn't respect in most cases.  But part of that revision is also about what the AIs actually were, instead of the myth of the noble savage (interestingly, also applied to Vikings and Germanic peoples, as well at various points.)  No, some tribes were very civilized and peaceful, others like the Comanche were vicious and as close to justifying extermination as some.  Some tribes allied with the US against others, some hated Mexicans more (Apache, I think.)  Many practiced brutal forms of genocide and slavery.  If anything, the mascots preserve only the most honorable characteristics and overlook how the exchange between settler and indigenous people was not one way but was often bidirectional in brutality, savagery and evil.  AMerican political culture though, is all about hte underdog and of the "white man's" inexpiable original sin. (nevermind world history or how it has been European culture which has invented tolerance, diversity, multiculturalism, etc and on ad nauseum.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This will be the end of the current name. It will not be up to just Danny Boy. The NFLs revenue sharing agreement will have baring on the matter now. All the other teams with the exception of the Cowboys share in the $$$ that the "Skins" name generates. When you cannot stop the unlicensed RG3, Jackson, Rak & Garcon merchandise from flooding the market place the other owners will loose $$$$$. Smaller market teams will not want to loose their piece of the "Skins" merchandise.

 

I think it is long over due.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah you and I don't see eye to eye on anything.

BTW Hail(As in Hail Victory) is the English version of "Sieg Heil"

Hopefully we can ditch that one too. I've always been far more creeped out by the fanbase using that as a rallying cry than worried about the logo

It makes for an embarassing google results page as well.

Bqbr5ERCQAASPWn.png

 

That's got to be one of the worst arguements I've ever seen, as well as a really strained attempt at linking two unrelated usages.  I 'hail' a cab from time to time.  Does that mean I'm a Nazi?  Are severe thunderstoms Nazi as well, when they produce 'hail'?  Nathan 'Hale' was a well-known Nazi hero of the American Revolution, I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying Native Americans can't think.for themselves? I do believe all these politicians and talking heads are jumping on the bandwagon, but to say that Native Americans ate just doing this because they're being told that the term Redskins is offense is wrong. I think you should give them more credit than that.

No, that's not what I said, but you're clearly thinking it. After all, you brought it up in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the question I keep asking people... And I ask randoms... and yes its because I'm genuinely curious...

 

"When you think of the word Redskins, what's the first thing you think of?"

 

I actually tallied the results. Still a small sample size. I've asked ten people.

 

Do you know what their answer was?

 

"A football team" (7 times)

"football" (3 times)

 

I think the reality is no one actually associated with "Slurs" because no one (or hardly anyone) even used it as a slur, and probably it was only rarely employed as such.  Then the football team (partly because American Indians are not nearly as numerous or vocal as other groups in the US) became the de facto meaning of the term.  

 

The irony of this is that the opponents of the name will end up resuscitating the derogatory meaning of the name.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the question I keep asking people... And I ask randoms... and yes its because I'm genuinely curious...

 

"When you think of the word Redskins, what's the first thing you think of?"

 

I actually tallied the results. Still a small sample size. I've asked ten people.

 

Do you know what their answer was?

 

"A football team" (7 times)

"football" (3 times)

But what does that prove? Ask.the same people when you hear the term 49er, what do you think of? I guarantee you they're not going to say anything about the 1849 California gold rush.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's striking that "Flying Dutchmen," "Knickerbockers," "Yankee" and "VIkings" are not under attack.  But you have to understand the current climate is such that sensitivity is demanded of whites (or straights) because of perceived power differential.  That's simply a justification post hoc, though.  Vikings has gone through a number of meanings (or connotative) changes, some derogatory and others positive. There's a legitimate argument to be made that the reputation of Vikings today is of that of a far more savage group of conquerors than anything ascribed to AMerican Indians.

 

Even the words Native American and American Indian are disputed.  Many activists prefer American Indian for a variety of reasons, it was the (mostly white and whitewashed) academic left that started to use that term to the exclusion of American Indian.  They never actually consulted AIs, though I do see some acknowledgment of this in the last decade or so.   The point is that this never ends because it's born from the same psychosocial processes as the Cultural Revolution and the idea that by totalizing and politicizing all life, we can generate a "new man" with which to build a more utopian realm.  Ultimately, if whites or black people started using Native AMerican disparagingly, we'd have to move on from that, even if most people didn't.  It's the same with Orient(al) there's nothing inherently offensive in the name and the justifications for the move away from it are all post hoc nonsense.  Asian is no better than Orient, other than slightly more precise.  

 

You know, I'm half-Norwegian (and half-Nigerian).  I am offended by the use of Norse imagery by the Minnesota Football Team. Not all Norse descendents wear horns on their heads, and we don't have beards like 'Ragnar', that offensive mascot that calls to mind the minstrel shows of the Jim Crow era.  I've not once pillaged a village, or sailed a longboat across the North Sea to sack a monastery.  I think I will work to get that racist, insensitive name changed. 

 

Who's with me???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's got to be one of the worst arguements I've ever seen.

I was messing with GHH, trust me. I empathize with people on the name issue but no I don't believe there's ANY link between the use of Hail Victory in the fight song with its German usage in WWII.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's got to be one of the worst arguements I've ever seen, as well as a really strained attempt at linking two unrelated usages.  I 'hail' a cab from time to time.  Does that mean I'm a Nazi?  Are severe thunderstoms Nazi as well, when they produce 'hail'?  Nathan 'Hale' was a well-known Nazi hero of the American Revolution, I guess.

 

Ah, but the Nazis have basically made it verboten to use the swastika, an ancient symbol I've seen in person on artifacts.  They also made it impolite to use the "salute" which is essentially the Roman salute (as far as we understand it, at least)  In fact, if you watch Glory or civil war movies, you'll see that salute more or less in use, just less upward.  But no one uses it anymore because of one warring faction's use of it.  Now, you can argue that non of this is off limits and nothing should stop you from dressing up for Halloween as a samurai, a Mongol warrior or a Wehmacht soldier.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the exact numbers but we know for a fact that Native Americans fought with Bow/Arrows, spears, tomahawks, knives, etc. before gun powder was discovered/presented to them.  Also, nowhere in my post did I say "most", I said they fought with tomahawks.  

 

That's history.  So again, tell me how in the hell is a tomahawk chop offensive?

What does a tomahawk chop represent? War? What about the actual chant? Wearing headdresses? Native Americans just see this as a way to keep them in the past. They are against all NA mascots. Not just the Redskins. And no, not every NA cares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, decided to explore the issue on the radio today. Got a top patent lawyer and a Native American to discuss the trademark decision. Mind you, the NA I chose is an NFL HOFer and our very own Huly. She seemed like a good choice and she represented well.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go one better.

 

Buffalo Soldiers.  Black Union troops who fought the American Indians in the Plains wars.

 

Part of this, too, is this rewriting of history to where AIs were only viewed as savages and never with sympathy or compassion or respect.  That is just not true.  People would not name their teams after peoples they didn't respect in most cases.  But part of that revision is also about what the AIs actually were, instead of the myth of the noble savage (interestingly, also applied to Vikings and Germanic peoples, as well at various points.)  No, some tribes were very civilized and peaceful, others like the Comanche were vicious and as close to justifying extermination as some.  Some tribes allied with the US against others, some hated Mexicans more (Apache, I think.)  Many practiced brutal forms of genocide and slavery.  If anything, the mascots preserve only the most honorable characteristics and overlook how the exchange between settler and indigenous people was not one way but was often bidirectional in brutality, savagery and evil.  AMerican political culture though, is all about hte underdog and of the "white man's" inexpiable original sin. (nevermind world history or how it has been European culture which has invented tolerance, diversity, multiculturalism, etc and on ad nauseum.)

I understand the name Buffalo Soldiers but do the fans really want to lose the Washington name too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michigan better start looking for another fight song...

 

 

I mean those kids might as well be goose stepping and booing Jesse Owens before every game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.