Alaskins

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

Recommended Posts

I'll agree to a name change if it means that Collingsworthless will retire immediately and I'll never have to see his mug again.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Collinsworthless is a lousy color commentator. Funny how he never had an issue with the name before that midget Costas got on his extra high soap box.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brownskins does not necessarily = Redskins

Blackskins does not necessarily = Redskins

Whiteskins does not necessarily = Redskins

The "N-Word" definitely does not necessarily = Redskins

 

Racism and prejudice is not "one size fits all."  Context matters.

 

but first and foremost, the opinion of the Native's themselves matter more than anything, and there is no evidence that even a large percentage of them believe that the name is offensive in the same way those other four descriptors would be to those people.   

 

and NO you can't just change the name because of what people who are uneducated on the history of the name and the context of the name THINK it means.  

 

Well it's referring to people as "redskins," so taken strictly on face value it must be bad. 

 

Wrong, and that is a very lazy conclusion. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the Stephen A Smith comments this morning....  http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=9801499  I think it's today, but the date says Oct. 10, but still worth a listen, and there is Skip Cowboy gives his opinion.

It was last week on First Take. Skip made an utter fool of himself. He says, "the Washington Red-I can't even say the word." But during the very same segment, he has absolutely no problem saying the word Redskins multiple times.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was last week on First Take. Skip made an utter fool of himself. He says, "the Washington Red-I can't even say the word." But during the very same segment, he has absolutely no problem saying the word Redskins multiple times.

They probably played Rock Paper Scissors before the show to decide who would take what position. First Take is all about saying crap to draw attention to themselves.

Edited by Destino
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O'Reilly and Letterman just had a little debate on the issue. O'Reilly is on our side, Letterman not so much. Perhaps he was playing Devil's Advocate, or wants to come off as a bleeding heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article posted centered on Walt “Red Hawk” Brown posted earlier includes the following line:

 

 

 

While Brown acknowledges that the Redskins name could be considered offensive, particularly by Western and Canadian tribes, he says he considers the Redskins name  an honor- not a slur.

 

Does anyone know why he thinks Western and Canadian tribes would be more likely to consider the team name offensive?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article posted centered on Walt “Red Hawk” Brown posted earlier includes the following line:

 

 

Does anyone know why he thinks Western and Canadian tribes would be more likely to consider the team name offensive?  

They didn't ever use ocher war paint?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hornets was a sick name. Are they getting the colors back, too?

I remember kids in school just got the hats for the logo and the colors haha

They haven't officially said yet but I imagine they will get the colors too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brownskins does not necessarily = Redskins

Blackskins does not necessarily = Redskins

Whiteskins does not necessarily = Redskins

The "N-Word" definitely does not necessarily = Redskins

Racism and prejudice is not "one size fits all." Context matters.

but first and foremost, the opinion of the Native's themselves matter more than anything, and there is no evidence that even a large percentage of them believe that the name is offensive in the same way those other four descriptors would be to those people.

and NO you can't just change the name because of what people who are uneducated on the history of the name and the context of the name THINK it means.

Well it's referring to people as "redskins," so taken strictly on face value it must be bad.

Wrong, and that is a very lazy conclusion.

Brownskin, blackskin or whiteskin. Are they even real words?

If "colored" people isn't a word that is used anymore, why is it still in the NAACP title? Shouldn't it be changed to the NAAAA (National Association for the Advancement of African-Americans)?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brownskin, blackskin or whiteskin. Are they even real words?

If "colored" people isn't a word that is used anymore, why is it still in the NAACP title? Shouldn't it be changed to the NAAAA (National Association for the Advancement of African-Americans)?

 

I think that Deadspin article addresses that somewhat. The NAACP is an organization created and run by black people. It's their word: they fought for it and they can do with it what they want. If there was a baseball team called the Washington Coloreds, it would have been changed 30 years ago even if the NAACP never considered changing its name. It's basically an issue of cultural ownership at play.

 

It's the same reason that the argument about Native American schools using the nickname "Redskins" is rather pointless. A group can call themselves whatever they want but that does not give another group tacit permission to use that word.

The New York Daily News is taking it a little too far

http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/126709/

StiglT20131016_low.jpg

 

That's a bit much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that Deadspin article addresses that somewhat. The NAACP is an organization created and run by black people. It's their word: they fought for it and they can do with it what they want. If there was a baseball team called the Washington Coloreds, it would have been changed 30 years ago even if the NAACP never considered changing its name. It's basically an issue of cultural ownership at play.

So, your point (or, more accurately, your summation of their point) is that it's not offensive, if the affected people don't find it offensive in that context?

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing a football team's logo to a logo synonymous with mass murder or slavery is taking it too far.  I get that the native american people were also murdered on a mass scale, but we're a football team.  The Washington Redskins are not an organization that dabbles is mass murder or slavery.

 

People are just going bonkers now.  It's really, really crazy how far this is going so quickly.

Edited by Soup's Uncle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sirius XM's Chris Russo to that assbag Peter Queen:

 

“Peter, you’ve been a huge writer for the magazine SI, you have been around forever now,” Russo said to King. “You are not a young kid. You have been at the top of your profession for a long time. The Redskins have had that name since 1935 – when we all know their player/coach was a Native American and that’s why they got the name the Redskins – and now all of a sudden in 2014, or 2013, Peter King or Bob Costas has a problem with it. Where were you ten years ago? Or where we you fifteen years ago? Why now all of a sudden has it dawned on you that the name might be offensive?”

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/15/chris-mad-dog-russo-interrogated-peter-king-for-anti-redskins-stance/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to wonder if all of this is contributing to the team's poor performance.  Yes, our QB is coming back from injury and we obviously have cap penalty issues and such, but could this be a big distraction that is affecting the team?  Constantly having the media call your team racist, I wonder if it's affecting the morale of the team? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, your point (or, more accurately, your summation of their point) is that it's not offensive, if the affected people don't find it offensive in that context?

:)

 

Pretty much.

 

I think any analogies between "Redskins" and the "N-word" fail, because they just aren't the same thing. However - for good or for ill - black people can use the "N-word" if they choose to and white people cannot in any context. Period. You can scream about fairness and double standards to the heavens, but that's just what society has decided is the way it works with that word.

 

I think what the lawyer on Deadspin is saying is that Native Americans should own "Redskins" the way black people own the N-word (and to a lesser extent, gay people own "Queer"). If they want to use it for their teams, fine. But for it to be appropriated by the NFL is a problem unless there is some kind of explicit permission given.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, because i promised and i love to say how much i hate to shill even though i shill every chance i get..

Here's this week's Bang radio Hour with the full comments from Stephen A smith and Skip Bayless last week regarding Snyder's letter.

http://bangradiohour.com/

NOT safe for work. (Or adults, for that matter.)

Enjoy the show.

~Bang

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting to wonder if all of this is contributing to the team's poor performance.  Yes, our QB is coming back from injury and we obviously have cap penalty issues and such, but could this be a big distraction that is affecting the team?  Constantly having the media call your team racist, I wonder if it's affecting the morale of the team? 

No, not at all. They are doing their job, preparing for the Bears,I hope.

Edited by warskins65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, now the Redskins logo is the same as the Nazi Swastika and the Rebel Flag, eh? 

 

Could someone remind me how many millions of people died at the hands of the Washington Redskins organization? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Bang, you guys nailed it. Way too funny. You really made Skip out to be the idiot he really is .....two big thumbs up. :D

Edited by warskins65

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.