rv581 Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 http://www.laststory.com/Redskins%20Indians%20Native%20Americans%20and%20Names.htm “Redskins, Indians, Native Americans, and Names” Like Axl Rose’s album getting delayed, sexually-explicit video tapes of ditzy celebrities emerging, and Scott Weiland getting busted for drugs, certain things always pop up in the news that most of us don’t really care about—and you can include the lingering controversy over the name “Redskins” in that category. Every year like clockwork, some out-of-work Native American with a strained tribal affiliation proclaims his deep disgust with the name of a certain football team located in Washington (well, actually it’s located in Maryland, but that’s neither here nor there) and the P.C.-sensitive drones in the media provide Chief Needs-a-Life with a platform for his diatribes. “Why, the name ‘Redskins’ is offensive to my people!” he declares to an empty room, sans the reporters. “Why, the name Washington Redskins is no different than naming a team the New York ******s. I ask—nay, I demand—for the name of the Washington Redskins to be changed!” And in today’s increasingly intolerant society, his demands might soon carry legal weight. It’s prima facia impossible to copyright a slur—and if the Redskins’ name loses copyright protection, team owner Dan Snyder stands to lose millions of dollars in revenue. Previous attempts to strip the Redskins name of copyright protection have failed, but in a society that’s moving to penalize McDonald’s and Burger King for national obesity, who knows how much longer the Redskins name will be protected? It doesn’t end with the Redskins, of course; Native Americans have also complained about the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and the use of the passé “tomahawk-chop.” Two observations: The first is that teams don’t select names and images to denigrate. They do so to honor. No team will intentionally select a name with an unsavory image. If you notice, no professional team is named after weasels, maggots, head lice, pubic crabs, or the French military. The names “Redskins,” “Indians,” and “Braves” were selected because the owners hoped to advance a correlation between their teams’ level of play and the best attributes of Native Americans. Because of this, any reference to “New York ******s” is unfair and inaccurate. If the Dutch, Irish, and those of Nordic descent aren’t threatened by the Hofstra Flying Dutchman, the Fighting Irish of Notre Dame, and the Minnesota Vikings, why on earth should a Native American find anything wrong with the franchises located in Washington, Atlanta, or Cleveland? No Native American has ever proven that a majority of Indians finds these names offensive and merchandise from the teams in Washington, Atlanta, and Cleveland sell extraordinarily well. In fact, according to one report, the Washington Redskins are the single most valuable franchise in all of American sports. But Chief Thin-Skin still believes that his personal likes and dislikes should dictate christening policy for athletic teams. The second observation speaks to the selective outrage by these Indian spokesmen. Why is naming a sports team after Native Americans taboo… and not, for instance, naming automobiles? I’ve never heard an Indian chief complain about the Jeep Grand Cherokee. And if you think about it, the reason why Jeep names its cars after Native Americans is eerily similar to the reason why the Redskins’ helmet is adorned with an Indian’s face: The owners hoped to advance a correlation between their product and the best attributes of Native Americans. But at least teams consist of human beings. You’d think a hyper-sensitive Indian would be more offended by a pile of metal, plastic, and rubber bearing a Native American name than he would be with a group of people on a sports team with an Indian logo. Additionally, why aren’t these Native Americans upset about geographic regions carrying tribal names? If you examine history, groups of European settlers slaughtered these tribes, raped their women, took over their land, moved the survivors to disease-infested reservations—and then named the land after the Native Americans they defeated! Sioux City, Tallahassee, Manhattan, Henrico—all of these lands used to be governed by Indian tribes. Now they’re largely owned and governed by descendents of white Europeans. It would be akin to the Palestinians conquering Israel and renaming Tel Aviv “Jew City.” Why is it acceptable to name land masses and automobiles after Native Americans and not sports franchises? At the very worst, the name “Redskins” is antiqued—but so are many other names. According to our touchy-feely Politically Correct sensitivity trainers, the name “Indian” is no longer acceptable. It’s been replaced with the term “Native American.” But couldn’t someone find offense with this as well? America was named after Amerigo Vespucci, an Italian explorer who set foot on this continent in 1499. How perverse is it to conquer a people, destroy their way of life—and then name the people after one of your own?! “I am a Manhattan Indian.” “No you’re not. You’re a Native American.” The name “Redskins” was selected to honor the indigenous people of this continent; the term “Native American,” it can be argued, linguistically strips the indigenous people of their unique history. “I am Amerigo Vespucci of Italy! You over there—poof! You are now a Native American!” So, if the name “Redskins” is antiqued—as is the name “Indians”—and it’s argued that antiqued names ought to be changed… what do we do about the state of Indiana? Change the name of the whole state? In fact, the Indianapolis 500 combines all the offensive characteristics we’ve discussed earlier: It uses an antiqued name; it named itself after a conquered and displaced people; and it’s used in conjunction with a sporting event. That’s far beyond the name and logo of Washington’s football team. All this naming and renaming of teams, cars, cities, towns, counties, states, and sporting events seems like a giant waste of time. Wouldn’t it be better if we just smoked the peace pipe and forgot about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stratoman Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 I live in Colorado and have lived in New Mexico. I have visited Wyoming, Montana, Utah and all the Native Americans I have talked thing the REDSKINS are all right and have not the slietest problem with the name.In fact they feel a sence of pride. If Danny Boy changes the name for 1% of the Native American population, I will cease to be a fan of some team that use to be the REDSKINS, just like the Bullets changing their name!!!:2cents: H^ll I have Black Foote blood in me!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitman56 Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 As long as he changes it to the Savages (while keeping the same logo). Lets see if they like that better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Let's change it to the "'Lil Dannys"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmythehair Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Some member in the past (I wish I could recll who said it) said in a thread on the same subject to keep the name and change the logo to a sack of redskin potatoes. I thoght that would be a funny alternative. I also wonder what kind of lawsuit would come of that. In my true opinion I don't think the name should change and I still think it was stupid to change the name of the Bullets to the wizards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurman Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 “Redskins, Indians, Native Americans, and Names” Oh My. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 If you notice, no professional team is named after weasels, maggots, head lice, pubic crabs, or the French military. Acutally, that's not entirely accurate. The term "Blue Devil" as in the mascot of Duke University, refers to a unit of WW1 French Soldiers. No joke. I know this, ironically, because I recently heard a debate on the radio between a Duke representative and a religious leader over whether or not the Mascot should be changed ... as it was supposedly offensive to Christians. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Well, at least that explains the success level of Duke football. Can't handle the blitz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCS Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Sigh. :doh: ouch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heavy Jumbo Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Originally posted by Hitman56 As long as he changes it to the Savages (while keeping the same logo). Lets see if they like that better. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfanjoe Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 I'd like to see us change our uniform colors. Keep the Burgundy, replace the gold with black. That would look so cool! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidPennSkin Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 If Dano caves and drops the Redskin name, the only appropriate replacement name would be WASHINGTON WIMPS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heavy Jumbo Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Originally posted by skinsfanjoe I'd like to see us change our uniform colors. Keep the Burgundy, replace the gold with black. That would look so cool! You can't change the colors! I think our uni's should look more like the retro ones we had last season. I like the dark maroon and the more gold-color rather than the yellow we have now. I think we should revamp our logo somehow too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RF4L Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 Originally posted by SkinsThug Let's change it to the "'Lil Dannys"! :laugh: What would be our logo? A belt buckle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted November 25, 2003 Share Posted November 25, 2003 What about the Washington Natives. NAH! REDSKINS REDSKINS REDSKINS. But I would settle for the natives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.