Boss_Hogg Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Vikings Patriots Saints Packers 49ers Completely incorrect on your part Which one of those is a race of people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Which one of those is a race of people? You are absolutely determined to be offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Agreed. I've never wanted the name to change, but this isn't a battle worth fighting over anymore. Snyder does have deep pockets, but does he want to keep spending millions fighting this? Do we as fans want to keep having this debate over and over for the foreseeable future? Look at the response when Snyder started a charity for NAs, from those who have been pushing the name change. All that hate and vitriol, all the nasty assumptions and accusations. Yet, somehow, we expect a different response if the name is changed? All that will happen is the name changers will take it for granted, assume the worst reasons for the change, say it's too little too late, forever label the team as racist, our entire past will have that label of racism as well, and all because a few bought into the lies about the origins of the word and whined loud enough. Sad thing is, probably 90% of those pushing for a name change will never have single care about NAs and their real plights again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xameil Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Okay, let's say the word Redskins isn't racist. It's never been used as a slur. But what we cannot ignore is the fact that Native Americans are the only ethnic group used as as sports mascots. We're basically lumping a proud race of people with animals, pirates, and machines. Highly recommend reading this: http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/indian-mascots.aspx And watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lUF95ThI7s Dan T made one of the best posts in this thread about choosing between his Nationals hat and Skins hat. They're names for military helicopters too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Okay, let's say the word Redskins isn't racist. It's never been used as a slur. But what we cannot ignore is the fact that Native Americans are the only ethnic group used as as sports mascots. We're basically lumping a proud race of people with animals, pirates, and machines. boss, thats just not true. fighting irish being the obvious example. vikings is more similar to redskins as it refers to an ethnicity at a certain time in history. people dont refer to norse people (im one) as vikings anymore than they refer to native americans as redskins. most cultures dont live as they did a few hundred years ago. i would think. there are other examples, but ive gotta get back to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I agree the activists need more focus. Is this just about a racial slur or is it about using native Americans as a sports mascot? And not one of those teams you mentioned involve someone's race. Irish is a nationality, not a race. You said we were "lumping a proud people" in with "animals, pirates and machines"...I said we were also "lumping" them in with patriots, cowboys, Yankees, trailblazers, wizards, senators and kings, among others. Since I assumed you meant the former should be seen as demeaning, by that logic shouldn't the latter be seen as flattering? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braxford Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Whatever the name ends up being, they will always be the Redskins or Skins to me. I care about the team whatever the name may be. I know the name is a big deal to some people and I respect that. Hopefully, the passion around this issue will actually lead to some good progress on tough issues that Native Americans face in their lives. Probably not, because people are involved and people are fickle and only want to get involved in something easy like a name change instead of the more impactful issues. Still, I can hope. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 They're names for military helicopters too... And Jeeps Guess the legacy of being some of the fiercest and most effective warriors in the history of our country is super offensive Let's now apply that same standard to all symbols and words relating to the history of our country. Who is with me? Will be a fun exercise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I wish I could say that I don't doubt his ability to fully maximize and capitalize on this opportunity. Unfortunately, the past 16 years of Snyder's decision making won't allow me to do so. Maybe he'll have to sell and we can ALL celebrate Ah, one can dream... ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 The news will fade, the team will file appeals, the cycle will continue. Nothing good for the football we watch. Nothing bad for it, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 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. You don't know me or my personal position, but if its easier for you to hit your target once its put in a box, that's fine by me. This isn't my first time posting in this 260+ page thread, but as has been noted, there are too many people on both sides of this issue that are so emotionally and philosophically invested in their position that this doesn't even feel like a mutual goal for common ground anymore. Seriously, when I saw that you took time on the Fourth of July of all days to post another chapter book response attempting to assasinate my character(and you've never met me), I kinda just shook my head, bro, honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonez3 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 I agree the activists need more focus. Is this just about a racial slur or is it about using native Americans as a sports mascot? And not one of those teams you mentioned involve someone's race. Irish is a nationality, not a race. But if enough Irish people are offended, then the school should listen. This is hard for me too because I bleed burgundy and gold and I love this team, but I think it's time we re-brand and move on. keep the colors, keep the history, retire all native imagery. Why must you quibble... As a graduated sociology major I recognize the semantical flaws with the term 'race'. And frankly, can have loose interpretation. But for all intents and purposes, it exactly applies to your point. So, please, just accept that there are other races represented by pro sports mascots. And, while I'm not a random dictionary definition guy, I will volley some out there: Via the Free Dictionary: I had to put this in here because of the actual example of CELTIC 2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographicdistribution: the Celtic race. Via Websters Online racenoun Definition of RACE 1 : a breeding stock of animals 2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by shared interests, habits, or characteristics So yea, irish can be loosely considered a race Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Section106 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Change the name to "The Washington Warriors" and keep the colors, the logo, the history. Change HTTR to HTTW. Have Snyder say that in light of the trademark decision that he has now seen the light and doesn't want to offend. Have him highlight the work of the foundation. And then dare those PC ****ers to **** about the picture of the proud warrior on the helmet. He will win that PR battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenDavis Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Horrible reasons for changing the team's name. Mark my words. One day a top draft pick or a stud free agent will refuse to play for us because of the name. You can say all that matters is money, but that guy would be praised up and down by the media and he would still make bank somewhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Change the name to "The Washington Warriors" and keep the colors, the logo, the history. Change HTTR to HTTW. Have Snyder say that in light of the trademark decision that he has now seen the light and doesn't want to offend. Have him highlight the work of the foundation. And then dare those PC ****ers to **** about the picture of the proud warrior on the helmet. He will win that PR battle. This. Exactly this. + 1,000,000 interwebs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93 Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Mark my words. One day a top draft pick or a stud free agent will refuse to play for us because of the name. You can say all that matters is money, but that guy would be praised up and down by the media and he would still make bank somewhere else. Yeah that won't ever happen. What is a real thing is possibly having a big sponsor starting a fuss. When millions start flushing down the toilet, **** will get really real Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grego Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Change the name to "The Washington Warriors" and keep the colors, the logo, the history. Change HTTR to HTTW. Have Snyder say that in light of the trademark decision that he has now seen the light and doesn't want to offend. Have him highlight the work of the foundation. And then dare those PC ****ers to **** about the picture of the proud warrior on the helmet. He will win that PR battle. if it must change, i'm for the 'potomacs' from the local patawomack tribe- who actually endorses the name 'redskins', or some other actual tribe. of course, potomac redskins is my first actual choice, especially considering DC is trying to politically grandstand, which is funny, and wants nothing to do with the team. if the name is not offensive to -and is embraced by- the patawomacks, then there is nothing anyone can say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mike Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Personally, I feel like the Cowboys should be more offensive to native Americans as they were the ones who drove them from thier lands. But... At this point I say just change the name and be done with it. It won't change the team history one bit and we can all get back to talking about the game of football without distractions and hate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlwredskins Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 God I hope so, I'm so sick of this debate and watching us slowly lose the public dialogue. The name isn't a slur and never was. But if enough people now, including NAs, believe that it is.... Then we've lost and frankly the fight isn't worth it anymore. Bite the bullet, change it, and move on. Well I will ask this question...has anyone seen Ted 2 yet? Part of this made me think about the Redskins. Morgan Freeman has a line that says something to the effect that "decision (like these) are NOT based on facts, but emotion and public opinion"...As you know the movie is about Ted suing for his Civil Rights because "he's different" Same thing....this decision is based on emotion, more recently the flag debate in SC and to an extent everyone's loathing of Dan Snyder. That is just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosher Ham Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Change the name to "The Washington Warriors" and keep the colors, the logo, the history. Change HTTR to HTTW. Have Snyder say that in light of the trademark decision that he has now seen the light and doesn't want to offend. Have him highlight the work of the foundation. And then dare those PC ****ers to **** about the picture of the proud warrior on the helmet. He will win that PR battle. This scenario is like a criminal that confesses to something they didn't do. I completely understand your point. I even like your delivery of it. I simply don't agree with it. Mark my words. One day a top draft pick or a stud free agent will refuse to play for us because of the name. You can say all that matters is money, but that guy would be praised up and down by the media and he would still make bank somewhere else. So you have expectations of high draft picks ? If he wouldn't play over that...the Redskins would get an extra pick to trade, and who knows how many players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Why must you quibble... As a graduated sociology major I recognize the semantical flaws with the term 'race'. And frankly, can have loose interpretation. But for all intents and purposes, it exactly applies to your point. So, please, just accept that there are other races represented by pro sports mascots. And, while I'm not a random dictionary definition guy, I will volley some out there: Via the Free Dictionary: I had to put this in here because of the actual example of CELTIC 2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographicdistribution: the Celtic race. Via Websters Online racenoun Definition of RACE 1 : a breeding stock of animals 2 a : a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock b : a class or kind of people unified by shared interests, habits, or characteristics So yea, irish can be loosely considered a race Well yeah, the Vikings logo is a white dude with blonde hair. But do we have other teams named the Asians, African Americans, or Latinos? You said we were "lumping a proud people" in with "animals, pirates and machines"...I said we were also "lumping" them in with patriots, cowboys, Yankees, trailblazers, wizards, senators and kings, among others. Since I assumed you meant the former should be seen as demeaning, by that logic shouldn't the latter be seen as flattering? That's a good point however none of those mascots promote stereotypes, discrimination, or hostile environments for people of a particular race or creed. http://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/indian-mascots.aspx You are absolutely determined to be offended. I'm not offended by the team name. However I have no right to tell a native american to his or her face what they can and cannot be offended by. They're names for military helicopters too... and airplanes too. Piper uses Indian names for most of their GA aircraft. http://piperflightmuseum.org/index.php/history-of-piper-aviation boss, thats just not true. fighting irish being the obvious example. vikings is more similar to redskins as it refers to an ethnicity at a certain time in history. people dont refer to norse people (im one) as vikings anymore than they refer to native americans as redskins. most cultures dont live as they did a few hundred years ago. i would think. there are other examples, but ive gotta get back to work. But Vikings didn't represent all the white dudes in the 13th century, just some guys speaking Norse who raided Scandanivan homelands. Again, this has been a really hard thing for me. I've been wrestling with this issue for a while. I love this team so much but I understand things need to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Can we go after the Buffalo Bills now? ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Can we go after the Buffalo Bills now? ~Bang Texas Rangers might be worse. And anyone who lives in the city of Houston is a racist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Can we go after the Buffalo Bills now? ~Bang I think the Cleveland baseball team with the cartoonish logo is next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFKFedEx Posted July 8, 2015 Share Posted July 8, 2015 Despite being born white in a union state, this guy had an obsession with playing Indian and Dixie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.