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

[Bang]

Besides,, the confederate flag isn't being banned..   companies are distancing themselves from it because they are in the business of making money, not social statements. All of the stores that have stopped carrying it have done so voluntarily.

 

the fact the right seems to have it's panties all in a bunch that for-profit businesses make decisions based on their bottom line is hilarious.

Cutting people.. all well and good because of a responsibility to stockholders. Cutting salary, cutting healthcare, suppressing your employees... smart business.
 

Cutting an item that the public is largely rebelling against and will likely boycott or at least not buy your stock...this is censorship and PC gone wild.

 

Get enough people to stop buying Redskins gear, you might see a similar retail reaction.

 

But probably not,, because there will not be anywhere near enough groundswell to force such a move.

People would have to stop buying ALL NFL gear... good luck with that.
besides,, the Redskins gear is only sold around here and maybe a few other locations nationwide.
Get Redskins fans to stop buying Redskins gear in any numbers to matter,, again,, good luck.

More will do it to send a message to Snyder than any Name change concern.

 

~Bang

[skins2victory]

The world is a magical place full of people waiting to be offended by something. 

 

-Hail To the Redskins!

[Renegade7]

 

I welcome the ignorant, lazy connections of the Confederate flag and real racism being focused on right now, to our team name. It will show many just how lame this manufactured controversy is when compared to real racism we are seeing with church arson, murder, shootings, police brutality, and an old symbol connected to slavery, especially when it is pointed out, as always, that NA schools use the name.

 

Ya, well a lot of people younger then me that might want to be Redskins fans don't, and I've already seen this (as if our W-L record over the last 20 years makes it any better). These select individuals who can decide where we can't put our stadium based on big picture public perception don't either.

We can still honor Native Americans without being a punchline, target practice for the national media, and further deterring future generations of fans. And I don't agree with waiting for this to cost us money, because it won't be proportionate given we're a billion dollar franchise.

I get the thick-skin aspect of it, because I've had to defend the name as well, but this comment comes across as borderline arrogance, and big reason why I don't come in this thread very often.

[Jumbo]

How aboot "The Washington Sensitives" ?

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

The Washington Indigenous Amerindians Exhibiting Haplogroup Q-M242 And Other mtDNA And atDNA Mutations

[@DCGoldPants]

 

KIDDING on the Federals

 

 

 

[elkabong82]

   

Ya, well a lot of people younger then me that might want to be Redskins fans don't, and I've already seen this (as if our W-L record over the last 20 years makes it any better). These select individuals who can decide where we can't put our stadium based on big picture public perception don't either.

We can still honor Native Americans without being a punchline, target practice for the national media, and further deterring future generations of fans. And I don't agree with waiting for this to cost us money, because it won't be proportionate given we're a billion dollar franchise.

I get the thick-skin aspect of it, because I've had to defend the name as well, but this comment comes across as borderline arrogance, and big reason why I don't come in this thread very often.

 

Really? Because most young Redskins fans I know also view the controversy as manufactured, and those who aren't fans it's either because they are bandwagon jumpers or their family are from a different area and they were raised on a different team. 

 

But it's good concerns over the team name and honoring NAs has only to do with the perception of the team by the media and nothing to do with the actual effect on NAs if it truly were racist. Sorry, but wavering on the name should only be because of the believed negative slant it has on NAs, NOT because some PCers in the media are overzealous. I've seen a group of fans with such misguided takes, that are giving up not because of NAS, but because people in the media are saying mean things. That's ridiculous and manages to be disinegenuous to both sides of this. I can respect someone wanting a change because of NAs,though evidence doesn't support a majority backing, but I do not respect, at all, the opinion that change should happen because some people are saying mean things.

 

Oh, and btw, public opinion is on OUR side, and again I'll point out that the REAL racism going on and the associated violence shows even more how trivial,non-racist, and how much of a non-issue the team name is. That's why save for a few local trolls the name issue is quiet most of the year.

 

No matter if we did it now or later, changing the name would be an admission of guilt, which there is none, and those against would forever demonize the team over its name and it would stain our team's legacy, that would forever be a punchline. But yeah, let's go ahead and change a non-racist name so others believe their claims are true, all because the media is being mean to us. Bull. Only way it would be right to change the name would be if new polling showed majority NAs viewed it as racist. But that hasn't happened, because activists know a new poll would get same results and pretty much kill their cause.

[Renegade7]

 

Really? Because most young Redskins fans I know also view the controversy as manufactured, and those who aren't fans it's either because they are bandwagon jumpers or their family are from a different area and they were raised on a different team. 

 

But it's good concerns over the team name and honoring NAs has only to do with the perception of the team by the media and nothing to do with the actual effect on NAs if it truly were racist. Sorry, but wavering on the name should only be because of the believed negative slant it has on NAs, NOT because some PCers in the media are overzealous. I've seen a group of fans with such misguided takes, that are giving up not because of NAS, but because people in the media are saying mean things. That's ridiculous and manages to be disinegenuous to both sides of this. I can respect someone wanting a change because of NAs,though evidence doesn't support a majority backing, but I do not respect, at all, the opinion that change should happen because some people are saying mean things.

 

Oh, and btw, public opinion is on OUR side, and again I'll point out that the REAL racism going on and the associated violence shows even more how trivial,non-racist, and how much of a non-issue the team name is. That's why save for a few local trolls the name issue is quiet most of the year.

 

No matter if we did it now or later, changing the name would be an admission of guilt, which there is none, and those against would forever demonize the team over its name and it would stain our team's legacy, that would forever be a punchline. But yeah, let's go ahead and change a non-racist name so others believe their claims are true, all because the media is being mean to us. Bull. Only way it would be right to change the name would be if new polling showed majority NAs viewed it as racist. But that hasn't happened, because activists know a new poll would get same results and pretty much kill their cause.

There recently was a thread in the stadium about fans and their kids asking to be fans of other teams, and this was part of the reason. Perception is reality, and there's no doubt we know different people. For me, this isn't about what's manufactured, its more about what is legit and certain people agreeing with them affecting us in the short and long run.

Changing the name doesn't have to be an admission of guilt, and this doesn't need to be a game of chicken. The leader of the free world has come out against our name not just with words, but policy as well. We've had home and away games picketed and television ads run against us during major sporting events. Even if we're right, is it really worth it? Is the name our history, or merely a part of it?

[SkinsGuy]

Renegade writes:

The leader of the free world has come out against our name not just worth with words, but policy as well.

'Leader of the free world'. LOL

To put it blunty..... **** Obama.

I don't give two shakes of a tomahawk WHAT he thinks about our name. Just another whiny PC liberal talking about something he knows nothing about just because he thinks it makes him look "sensitive". LOL

The Redskins have eighty plus years of tradition on their side.

Obama needs to shut up and worry about running the country, which is going to hell in a hand basket under his watch, and let the private sector work out the name issue without government interference.

As I said before, the Redskins can function just fine outside of Washington D.C. We here in Virginia would love to have them and we won't whine about their name either.

(NOTE: I want to make clear calling Obama a 'whiny, PC liberal' doesn't mean I think all liberals are whiny, PC types... most aren't. However, he apparently is).

[Bonez3]

I also don't care what Obama says, and yes, it is predictable from him. 

 

Further, he also wouldn't want his boys (if he had them) playing football. So, The leader of the free world doesn't share a lot of the similar thoughts I have.

 

Judging by the way he throws a baseball, I wouldn't want his boys playing contact sports either.

[elkabong82]

 

There recently was a thread in the stadium about fans and their kids asking to be fans of other teams, and this was part of the reason. Perception is reality, and there's no doubt we know different people. For me, this isn't about what's manufactured, its more about what is legit and certain people agreeing with them affecting us in the short and long run.

Changing the name doesn't have to be an admission of guilt, and this doesn't need to be a game of chicken. The leader of the free world has come out against our name not just with words, but policy as well. We've had home and away games picketed and television ads run against us during major sporting events. Even if we're right, is it really worth it? Is the name our history, or merely a part of it?

 

Yes, clearly a few colloquial examples are better evidence than the fact that Redskins football dominates DC. In fact, there is a whiny article from Boswell in the Stadium about that very fact. Redskins can keep on losing, and it's offseason, and they still garner more attention than 3 other local sports teams that are playoff teams. 

 

And that thread you are referencing, the biggest reason was the team record. You mention the team name as if it was a significant reason kids are turning away when no, it's not, and the kids that are turning away is still a small number. Yes the team needs to start doing better, but the town is dominated by the Redskins. The fanbase isn't shrinking.

 

You could have fooled me that you think this is about what is legit, because your posts in here are all about what the media is saying about us rather than what NAs think about the name. That's not legit at all.

 

Changing the name is going to be viewed as an admission of guilt. And yes, it would be, why else change the name? You're so worried about perception, you're willing to cave on the name so easily, yet have no consideration of the actual ramifications. What, you think the local media and others who have been hounding the team are going to see a name change and go "oh, great, we love you guys now, no harm no foul, you all are awesome, let's hug it out!" Nope.

 

It will be "too little too late, should've been done a long time ago, team is still bad, but hey, now every team in the NFL has something to mock you for, here's something every other team fan will bring up when trash talking, oh, and the past history of your team will forever be associated with racism, and we won't let you forget that either, same as we never do about Marshall."

 

The leader of the free world is pandering to his party. What if a Republican wins the next Presidency and, likely, supports our name? Will the opinion of the leader still be relevant to you then? 

 

Me, I prefer to look at the evidence, as has been done throughout this thread, rather than just look at the perception of a small percentage. The majority of NAs and Americans in general, don't see the name as offensive.

 

The Chiefs have had their games protested too, you going to go tell them to change their name too? The Packers were protested by PETA, guess it's time for a name change.

 

We are right and yes, it is worth it. Caving to a few noisemakers, throwing away our history so easily, is wrong. Is the name our history or a part of it? Seriously? It's our name, what we go by. Again you have zero consideration of what's going to happen if we change it, just like you have zero consideration for the NAs themselves. Instead you're wanting a name change because some people are saying mean things. If our team played with such wimpyness and cowardice they'd never win a damn game. 

 

Like I said in my previous post, I can at least respect the opinion that some NAs are offended and that's enough to warrant a change, though I disagree completely. Your basis for wanting a change I can't respect at all, because it has nothing to do with the group in question and is simply based on fear, and irrational fear at that. This issue is a non-issue most of the year and the majority are on our side. Heck, the current stuff going on with real, actual racism shows how silly this "controversy" is. The only thing continuing it is lies about the origin.

 

But yeah, let's just give in even though we're right, let's just cave like a bunch of wimps who let others push us around and let our team be forever branded as racist, our jerseys we wear as fans be looked at as racist, our past games and videos be censored with a beep every time the team name is mentioned, have every fan of every other team throw it in our face, have Joe Gibbs, John Riggins, Art Monk, the Hogs all be looked at as players on a racist team, have Sean Taylor be looked at as having played for a racist team, and all because we legitimized the accusations of racism by caving and changing the name, because "fans" like you had as much backbone as amoeba. The last 2 questions of your post: get out of here with that garbage.

[Renegade7]

Yes, clearly a few colloquial examples are better evidence than the fact that Redskins football dominates DC. In fact, there is a whiny article from Boswell in the Stadium about that very fact. Redskins can keep on losing, and it's offseason, and they still garner more attention than 3 other local sports teams that are playoff teams. 

 

And that thread you are referencing, the biggest reason was the team record. You mention the team name as if it was a significant reason kids are turning away when no, it's not, and the kids that are turning away is still a small number. Yes the team needs to start doing better, but the town is dominated by the Redskins. The fanbase isn't shrinking.

 

You could have fooled me that you think this is about what is legit, because your posts in here are all about what the media is saying about us rather than what NAs think about the name. That's not legit at all.

 

Changing the name is going to be viewed as an admission of guilt. And yes, it would be, why else change the name? You're so worried about perception, you're willing to cave on the name so easily, yet have no consideration of the actual ramifications. What, you think the local media and others who have been hounding the team are going to see a name change and go "oh, great, we love you guys now, no harm no foul, you all are awesome, let's hug it out!" Nope.

 

It will be "too little too late, should've been done a long time ago, team is still bad, but hey, now every team in the NFL has something to mock you for, here's something every other team fan will bring up when trash talking, oh, and the past history of your team will forever be associated with racism, and we won't let you forget that either, same as we never do about Marshall."

 

The leader of the free world is pandering to his party. What if a Republican wins the next Presidency and, likely, supports our name? Will the opinion of the leader still be relevant to you then? 

 

Me, I prefer to look at the evidence, as has been done throughout this thread, rather than just look at the perception of a small percentage. The majority of NAs and Americans in general, don't see the name as offensive.

 

The Chiefs have had their games protested too, you going to go tell them to change their name too? The Packers were protested by PETA, guess it's time for a name change.

 

We are right and yes, it is worth it. Caving to a few noisemakers, throwing away our history so easily, is wrong. Is the name our history or a part of it? Seriously? It's our name, what we go by. Again you have zero consideration of what's going to happen if we change it, just like you have zero consideration for the NAs themselves. Instead you're wanting a name change because some people are saying mean things. If our team played with such wimpyness and cowardice they'd never win a damn game. 

 

Like I said in my previous post, I can at least respect the opinion that some NAs are offended and that's enough to warrant a change, though I disagree completely. Your basis for wanting a change I can't respect at all, because it has nothing to do with the group in question and is simply based on fear, and irrational fear at that. This issue is a non-issue most of the year and the majority are on our side. Heck, the current stuff going on with real, actual racism shows how silly this "controversy" is. The only thing continuing it is lies about the origin.

 

But yeah, let's just give in even though we're right, let's just cave like a bunch of wimps who let others push us around and let our team be forever branded as racist, our jerseys we wear as fans be looked at as racist, our past games and videos be censored with a beep every time the team name is mentioned, have every fan of every other team throw it in our face, have Joe Gibbs, John Riggins, Art Monk, the Hogs all be looked at as players on a racist team, have Sean Taylor be looked at as having played for a racist team, and all because we legitimized the accusations of racism by caving and changing the name, because "fans" like you had as much backbone as amoeba. The last 2 questions of your post: get out of here with that garbage.

 

That's an extreme opinion on what will happen if we "cave".  Those were actual Native Americans protesting the games I mentioned in my post, not media members. I find it interesting you jump to the conclusion I don't care about Native Americans, and the opinion of the most powerful person in the country should matter if they're enacting policy against us (don't want this to get political, but I wouldn't be shocked if Hillary continued this stance to the point it really does matter, when we're ready to move).

 

You don't know me well enough to say I don't have a backbone.  And you know PETA protesting the Packers is off-base from this conversation and why we're having it. Chiefs have a much better case for keeping their logo then we do or the Cleveland Indians (I want the arrow on our helmet, which I feel is more then fair). I've mentioned multiple times about Native Americans who don't support this, yet you continue to insist all I care about is people's opinions that don't matter, which seems to include this "minority" of next generation fans who don't want to have to defend keeping this name to the death like you do.  

 

The reality is this name is going to change, and the question is whether we want it to be on our terms or not.

[Mr. Sinister]

That's an extreme opinion on what will happen if we "cave". Those were actual Native Americans protesting the games I mentioned in my post, not media members. I find it interesting you jump to the conclusion I don't care about Native Americans, and the opinion of the most powerful person in the country should matter if they're enacting policy against us (don't want this to get political, but I wouldn't be shocked if Hillary continued this stance to the point it really does matter, when we're ready to move).

You don't know me well enough to say I don't have a backbone. And you know PETA protesting the Packers is off-base from this conversation and why we're having it. Chiefs have a much better case for keeping their logo then we do or the Cleveland Indians (I want the arrow on our helmet, which I feel is more then fair). I've mentioned multiple times about Native Americans who don't support this, yet you continue to insist all I care about is people's opinions that don't matter, which seems to include this "minority" of next generation fans who don't want to have to defend keeping this name to the death like you do.

The reality is this name is going to change, and the question is whether we want it to be on our terms or not.

I agree. And dont sweat any gumps that give you a hard time. You're just as entitled to your opinions as anyone else. Doesn't say a damn thing about you as a fan.

[Zazzaro703]

That's an extreme opinion on what will happen if we "cave". Those were actual Native Americans protesting the games I mentioned in my post, not media members. The reality is this name is going to change, and the question is whether we want it to be on our terms or not.

My question to you is how many NA were outside protesting? Now how many NAs were inside supporting, or rather wearing jerseys and supporting the team all across the nation because the experience and current product at FedEx sucks. Obviously I don't have exact numbers and i dont expect you to either but it has been reported numerous times that the NA protesters are a small minority compared to the NAs that support the name so I can take a solid educated guess which side outweighs the other. I refuse to bend the knee to house political correctness because 15 or so percent of NAs and a handful of liberals with a microphone and a platform to be heard have an issue with our name. That's not how this country works and never has it worked that way. Majority rules especially when it's a landslide majority. Unless you are Al Gore and get railroaded because apparently some states and their people are more important than others. I live in Nevada and Harry Reid is a complete blowhard clown car so it's no surprise to me he is one of the main people leading the charge on this issue. In fact, just knowing Harry Reid is on the opposite side of this issue with a strong opinion just further confirms to me team name supporters are in the right. Why do you think it is that the small minority group of people that want us to change our name NEVER back up their arguments with polls of the NA community? We all know if they had numbers in their favor or even close they would be parading it around in front of us and I'm sure it's not like they haven't tried to get those poll numbers. The support isn't there.

Does it suck there is a small minority of people that find offense in our football teams name? Absolutely, but people are offended by and the victims of waaaaaay worse things these days and the attention should be on those issues, not the name of our football team which has been proven time after time the vast majority of NAs either support the team or couldn't care less about the issue.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

What, you think the local media and others who have been hounding the team are going to see a name change and go "oh, great, we love you guys now, no harm no foul, you all are awesome, let's hug it out!" Nope.

 

It will be "too little too late, should've been done a long time ago, team is still bad, but hey, now every team in the NFL has something to mock you for, here's something every other team fan will bring up when trash talking, oh, and the past history of your team will forever be associated with racism, and we won't let you forget that either, same as we never do about Marshall."

 

The leader of the free world is pandering to his party. What if a Republican wins the next Presidency and, likely, supports our name? Will the opinion of the leader still be relevant to you then? 

 

This whole part deserves to be repeated...

[elkabong82]

That's an extreme opinion on what will happen if we "cave".  Those were actual Native Americans protesting the games I mentioned in my post, not media members. I find it interesting you jump to the conclusion I don't care about Native Americans, and the opinion of the most powerful person in the country should matter if they're enacting policy against us (don't want this to get political, but I wouldn't be shocked if Hillary continued this stance to the point it really does matter, when we're ready to move).

 

You don't know me well enough to say I don't have a backbone.  And you know PETA protesting the Packers is off-base from this conversation and why we're having it. Chiefs have a much better case for keeping their logo then we do or the Cleveland Indians (I want the arrow on our helmet, which I feel is more then fair). I've mentioned multiple times about Native Americans who don't support this, yet you continue to insist all I care about is people's opinions that don't matter, which seems to include this "minority" of next generation fans who don't want to have to defend keeping this name to the death like you do.  

 

The reality is this name is going to change, and the question is whether we want it to be on our terms or not.

 

Sadly, it's not an extreme opinion, it's a very likely outcome. Of the very few who did protest, some were NAs. Nowhere near enough to outweigh the 90% who are not offended. I didn't jump to the conclusion you don't care about NAs when it comes to this "cause," but rather it was provided by you unbeknownst or not, because every post was you being afraid of what the media was saying and wanting us to cave out of fear. Nowhere did you actually address the actual issue, whether the name is or isn't offensive to NAs.

 

I honestly don't care what an uniformed pandering politician thinks about the name, nor do 90% of NAs.

 

I know your position well enough to say that, when it comes to the name, you have no backbone. PETA is not off base for this convo, their reasons for protesting are misguided, same with NAs reason for protesting our name, which the evidence is there in this thread to substantially support that. Chiefs, anyone using that name who isn't an actual Chief is offensive to most NAs actually, but in their case it too is recognized that it is just a football team name.

 

You just said it all with your sentence about wanting the arrow on our helmet. Our head logo was designed by NAs, approved by them, yet you want to get rid of it? Ridiculous. What's "more than fair" is us keeping a name and it not being changed because 10% and the PC brigade don't know their history.

 

You have never, not once, in stating that we should change the name, cited any reasons why it is offensive to NAs or justified why they are right. You may have had a brief mention of some protesting, but the bulk of your posts has been concerned about the perception of some of this team and it has been very easy to conclude from that the main basis for your opinion, for your wanting us to cave even though we are right, is because some people are saying mean things. You don't want us to change because you think it's the "right" thing to do, as I haven't seen that once in your posts, just a bunch of ninny hand-wringing and fretting about baseless accusations. No fan will have to keep defending the name to the level you suggest. It's a non-issue most of the time. Heck, the last time someone even brought it up was almost a year ago and they just wanted to know more about it all. Even my more liberal friends, who are fans of other teams, have said this is a stupid issue and pointed out the name has been around forever and has no negative associations. 

 

The reality is your position is wimpy and the name won't change because fans don't support a change, those protesting have no factual ground to stand on and their arguments are getting worn out, each year there is less national focus on it, and now we have a lot of real racism and violence going on which makes this look even more trivial, plus the PC patrol is going overboard and it's starting to turn people off (like some of the backlash that's starting to brew about Dukes of Hazzard being pulled).

 

But please, tell me, if you really do care about this issue because you really do feel the name is offensive to NAs and on that basis it should be changed, then why are you still here and still rooting for the team? Why are you still supporting racism? Seems like a major conflict of interest for someone who cares that NAs are offended and believes the name is racist to be cheering for that same team each Sunday.

[s0crates]

Sadly, it's not an extreme opinion, it's a very likely outcome. Of the very few who did protest, some were NAs. Nowhere near enough to outweigh the 90% who are not offended.

I wouldn't advance this 90% statistic with such bravado. I seriously doubt that number is accurate, but even granting it, what about the 10% who are offended?

You have never, not once, in stating that we should change the name, cited any reasons why it is offensive to NAs or justified why they are right.

The reasons have been stated repeatedly, it seems to me you're the one ignoring the other side of the case here.

Suppose we were called the "Blackskins" or the "Jews". What then?

Most dictionaries describe the term "redskin" as "dated," "offensive," "contemptuous," "disparaging," etc. Like it or not, the word has come to have racist connotations (unless you would contend that the makers of dictionaries don't know what words mean).

No fan will have to keep defending the name to the level you suggest. It's a non-issue most of the time.

That's just false. The President just commented on this recently.

I suppose you think this thread, with all its entries, media articles, and ongoing debate, is just a flash in the pan.

The reality is your position is wimpy . . .

It seems to me the case is just the opposite. It takes a good bit of courage to come in here and express the opinion he is expressing, given that he is clearly in the minority on this board, and he surely faces the type of vitriol that has been directed at people of his opinion repeatedly in this thread.

But please, tell me, if you really do care about this issue because you really do feel the name is offensive to NAs and on that basis it should be changed, then why are you still here and still rooting for the team? Why are you still supporting racism? Seems like a major conflict of interest for someone who cares that NAs are offended and believes the name is racist to be cheering for that same team each Sunday.

This argument is just nonsense. It is basically the same as telling people "love it or leave it" when they object to something about America, as if criticizing ones country is unpatriotic. You can love the team and want the name to change, just as you can love your country without loving everything about it.

Perhaps he even wants us to change the name because he loves the team so much. I'm in that camp myself.

[Kosher Ham]

I would wager seriously, that I could get 10% of the entire nation to be offended by the word Oreo...If I broke it down.

 

Does that mean that Nabisco (or maybe it's Cadbury) is being racist by using the name ?

 

I have made this point before...seems rather an easy thing to understand.

 

And again, as a NA, thusly my family (most extended family are as well) more offended by non-NA's trying to tell the majority of us what is offensive.

 

I am more offended by racial profiling. More offended by some things that some political figures say or stand for. People that are given power...etc..

[Burgold]

Suppose we were called the "Blackskins" or the "Jews". What then?

 

Trying to think if I would be offended if we called the team the Washington Hebrews. I don't think I would be. In fact, I think it'd be kinda cool. I guess the mascot would be David with his sling or something like that.

 

As for the Washington Blacks (or for that matter the Cleveland Browns) I'm less sanguine. The difference in what you are getting at though is easily refuted by this though. There are several Native American teams that decided of their own volition to have "Redskins" as their mascots. I don't think it's possible nor do I think it is has ever occured that any black school, college or university has chosen to call itself the "N-words" and therein lies a noteable difference. There were many Black Colleges, private schools, and professional sports leagues. If none of them chose that word there is a reason. That word is too vile to be used.

 

Clearly, based on history alone, the R word is less vile by many magnitudes to Native Americans than the N word is to Blacks.

[skinsmarydu]

Trying to think if I would be offended if we called the team the Washington Hebrews. I don't think I would be. In fact, I think it'd be kinda cool. I guess the mascot would be David with his sling or something like that.

 David was a straight-up badass.    I could be convinced.

[RFKFedEx]

Once you meet an actual Native American who tells you they're unhappy with what we do as football fans, the conversation becomes uncomfortable, quickly. Engaging with a live human being is a lot different than tellin 'em how it is through a key board. 

[Larry]

It seems to me the case is just the opposite. It takes a good bit of courage to come in here and express the opinion he is expressing, given that he is clearly in the minority on this board, and he surely faces the type of vitriol that has been directed at people of his opinion repeatedly in this thread.

Actually, most of the "vitriol" in this thread seems to be directed at people making the same idiotic claims that have been posted for years.

Like the blanket assertion that there must be something wrong with Annenberg, and that therefore no one should mention it. (Without any recognition that there is no chance in Dallas that it could possibly be off by enough to make a difference).

Or the even lamer "lets ignore the word we're actually talking about, and pretend we're talking about this other word I just made up".

Or the slightly less lame "well, dictionaries claim that the word is offensive, when it's used in a different way. (Which they also say, nobody does)".

In short, people who make the same moronic arguments that you keep making.

Once you meet an actual Native American who tells you they're unhappy with what we do as football fans, the conversation becomes uncomfortable, quickly. Engaging with a live human being is a lot different than tellin 'em how it is through a key board.

How do you feel about the actual Native Americans who say it's NOT offensive?

Or do they not count as "live human beings"?

[Bang]

How do you feel about the actual Native Americans who say it's NOT offensive?

Or do they not count as "live human beings"?

engaging them is not done. Listening to them is completely out of the question. 

Their opinion and feelings are not wanted, so they are ignored.

When the offended is cornered and MUST answer for them, then they are "mistaken" and need to be "educated", as in the words of the founder of this movement. She keeps insisting that those Red Mesa Apaches are incorrect in embracing the word for their own high school, and they must be shown why they must be hateful, resentful, and angry.

Their thoughts must be corrected.

 

But, given the numbers of NAs who do not find the word offensive, i would think it inevitably leads to them going away saying "you ever talk to one of those live people who try to tell you how you should feel?

It gets very uncomfortable real fast, especially when you tell them you don't feel that way and they keep insisting that you HAVE to feel that way, because they have decided that is how you must feel"

 

Nothing stinks quite so much as sanctimony.

 

~Bang

[@DCGoldPants]

engaging them is not done. Listening to them is completely out of the question. 

Their opinion and feelings are not wanted, so they are ignored.

When the offended is cornered and MUST answer for them, then they are "mistaken" and need to be "educated", as in the words of the founder of this movement. She keeps insisting that those Red Mesa Apaches are incorrect in embracing the word for their own high school, and they must be shown why they must be hateful, resentful, and angry.

Their thoughts must be corrected.

 

But, given the numbers of NAs who do not find the word offensive, i would think it inevitably leads to them going away saying "you ever talk to one of those live people who try to tell you how you should feel?

It gets very uncomfortable real fast, especially when you tell them you don't feel that way and they keep insisting that you HAVE to feel that way, because they have decided that is how you must feel"

 

Nothing stinks quite so much as sanctimony.

 

~Bang

 

 

I do wonder about this. You'd think if they thought they could convince every Native American school that used the name Braves or Chiefs or Redskins to change. They would. 

 

End of the day, doesn't matter. I think the plan is already in place and will be executed at some point. The league/owners will tell the Skins and maybe KC that the names can't be used anymore. But behind closed doors, they already have a plan to help pay for all the changes while making Snyder look like the good guy to the DC fans. How he fought till the end to support the name and the fans.

 

Still would just prefer no nickname as the alternative. 

[Xameil]

Once you meet an actual Native American who tells you they're unhappy with what we do as football fans, the conversation becomes uncomfortable, quickly. Engaging with a live human being is a lot different than tellin 'em how it is through a key board.

Hell, reading through this board, I'm not happy with what alot of us do as fans. What does that have to do with the name? I have met more NAs that support the name then don't.