U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-23-2014, 07:15 AM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,318 posts, read 21,881,811 times
Reputation: 33476

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by skins_fan82 View Post
Geez Louise, don't you have a smart mouth? Relax buddy, its the internet.

How Many High Schools Still Use Redskins Name? Here's A Map | SportsGrid

Forgive me, it was 62, not 72.

I am relaxed buddy.

Thing is, that's not what you said. In a lame attempt at trying to spin this as the NAs acceptance of the term Redskins, you said there were 72 native American schools with the name Redskins.

I'm just calling you out on the BS you constantly throw out as fact.



Quote:
Originally Posted by skins_fan82 View Post
that's just it though....of the native americans in this country, only a few were offended by the Redskins name. And polls have shown that there are still 72? Native American schools across the west that have a school name "Redskins"

Politicians and radio/tv personalities are taking advantage of this latest trending issue to make themselves appear "open minded, progressive, and deep thinking," but behind closed doors probably dont' care either way about the name. Just using it for political points. Disgusting really.

Look you guys.....at the end of the day, we are talking about the name of a sports team. Seriously?! Why is Obama speaking about this in front of the press?! Isn't Iraq falling aparat?! who cares about the name of a football team?

If the Redskins were to change the name, how will the United States be a better place the next day?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-23-2014, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,754 posts, read 4,229,410 times
Reputation: 3817
Quote:
Originally Posted by beautifulblueskies View Post
I'm not native american and I do find it offensive. If you called a team "cracker" "honky" "Peckerwood" or "whity" and had a white person as the logo, everyone here would say that's offensive. I mean it's one thing to have the team called "crackers" and have a logo as food, sure it's ok to be the food cracker team, or have "Peckerwood" as your team name and have your logo be a bird, but once you associate as race of people with that name, it is offensive and having that as your logo isn't cool. It's so lame that it's even a discussion because the owner won't change the name. For me, it would be less offensive if they kept the name "redskins" but removed the native american logo from their uniforms, etc. Associate redskins with anything else for all I care, just make the logo red or put red potato skins as the logo, but not a race of people. Like the aforementioned derogatory names, "redskins" is also derogatory, so it's offensive.

So not cool.
That logo was created and given to the Redskins by the Native Americans. So, your argument against the logo is an invalid one.

In terms of your other examples, well I suppose the only ones that should be offensive would be "cracker" or "peckerwood". But then again, you're talking about words that were supposed to be created to be derogatory toward whites in the first place (although term "cracker" has other definitions - other than food descriptions - that are not of a derogatory nature.) Where as "redskin" does not have such a documented history of origin.

And the same question I pose to all non Native Americans who have decided the name "Redskins" is racist, who are you to decide for the Native Americans?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2014, 04:10 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,460 posts, read 5,924,770 times
Reputation: 16151
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
That logo was created and given to the Redskins by the Native Americans. So, your argument against the logo is an invalid one.

In terms of your other examples, well I suppose the only ones that should be offensive would be "cracker" or "peckerwood". But then again, you're talking about words that were supposed to be created to be derogatory toward whites in the first place (although term "cracker" has other definitions - other than food descriptions - that are not of a derogatory nature.) Where as "redskin" does not have such a documented history of origin.

And the same question I pose to all non Native Americans who have decided the name "Redskins" is racist, who are you to decide for the Native Americans?
As I countered in the other thread there has always been a group of NA who embraced the name. Clearly the person or persons in that group created the logo. So what? Does that group represent the feelings of every NAs? Of course not.

Regarding your last paragraph I'm not AA, does this mean I do not have the right to an opinion on racism and civil rights? Nobody is "deciding for NAs", we are stating our opinion. The name Redskins describes an ethnic group by their skin color. An opinion that thinks this is racist is not totally off the wall IMO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2014, 07:58 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,754 posts, read 4,229,410 times
Reputation: 3817
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
As I countered in the other thread there has always been a group of NA who embraced the name. Clearly the person or persons in that group created the logo. So what? Does that group represent the feelings of every NAs? Of course not.
Of course they don't. However, that Ray guy from the Oneida tribe sure thinks he does, so that argument can go either way. But the case in point, everyone who said the logo is offensive, never gives a reason why? At least Ms. Blackhorse said that it didn't properly reflect the 21st century Native American. OK, I can understand that. Most 21st century Indians probably don't wear feathers in their hair and moccasins on their feet. But what she doesn't realize is that many mascot logos in the NFL do not represent 21st century figures. The NFL is much a representation of past history as it is a sport. And as I stated in another forum, progressive thinking doesn't mean throwing out history as if it was an old shoe. The NFL can be likened to going to one of those reenacted battle scenes. Most of the mascot names reflect some type of warrior or solider, whether human or animal (i.e. Patriots/Bears). War is bloody. Our history is bloody. So is football, and I think many mascot names reflect that fact (certain exceptions to the rule.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
Regarding your last paragraph I'm not AA, does this mean I do not have the right to an opinion on racism and civil rights? Nobody is "deciding for NAs", we are stating our opinion. The name Redskins describes an ethnic group by their skin color. An opinion that thinks this is racist is not totally off the wall IMO.
I have a feeling you're trying to start the whole argument all over again. Sure, everybody has a right to his or her opinion. Does that mean I don't have a right to my opinion? I'm merely trying to uncover any logic associated to differing opinions from mine. Such as, if one considers describing an ethnic group by their skin color is considered racist, then why is it that races are often classified on official government documents and health records by their skin color? Why does it have to be only ethnic groups? It's OK to classify me as white, but someone of color being classified as black is racist? Doesn't make any sense. I work very closely with our health records department at my agency, and I can tell for fact that this is how races are classified, and these classifications are handed down from the state department - which is made up of several different races.

IN MY OPINION, from all the arguments I've gathered, it seems to me that people are more offended by the possibility that something could be considered offensive. Meanwhile, those same people continue to ignore the possibility that the very same thing could also be considered an honor. And IN MY OPINION, the very WRONG thing for Mr. Snyder to do is to change the name because of special interest pressure. If this were to happen, it would forever be a reflection of how the franchise was bullied into changing the name, because the special interest group who decided to target them had enough power and money to make it happen. I promise you this will have absolutely no effect on civil rights and racism, but it will open the flood gates to see massive change in several mascot names - not just ones associated with Indians.

Dan Snyder should change the name based on his free will to do so. Doing so would reflect a much more positive outcome to all of this than being pressured into it. I realize we're probably past that point and it ain't going to happen on his free will, but it sure shouldn't happen based on what handful of liberals think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2014, 08:04 AM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,638,724 times
Reputation: 6514
Stop feeding the troll, he's obviously delusional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2014, 02:55 PM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,460 posts, read 5,924,770 times
Reputation: 16151
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7 View Post
Stop feeding the troll, he's obviously delusional.
I posted a new RECENT poll that now shows that 67% of NAs feel that the name is racist. That's not delusional, that's a fact. A fact that the name defenders here continue to ignore because it does not fit their argument.

Does a poll of 400 NAs prove anything? Of course not. But given the name supporters have clung to the 10% figure from a decade ago as their main argument it certainly changes the discussion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2014, 07:34 AM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,638,724 times
Reputation: 6514
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
I posted a new RECENT poll that now shows that 67% of NAs feel that the name is racist. That's not delusional, that's a fact. A fact that the name defenders here continue to ignore because it does not fit their argument.

Does a poll of 400 NAs prove anything? Of course not. But given the name supporters have clung to the 10% figure from a decade ago as their main argument it certainly changes the discussion.
I wasn't necessarily speaking of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2014, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,754 posts, read 4,229,410 times
Reputation: 3817
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7 View Post
I wasn't necessarily speaking of you.
Well if you weren't speaking of Dave (and as much as I disagree with him, he's not acting like a troll), you surely can't be speaking about me, so that leaves you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2014, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,483 posts, read 10,464,129 times
Reputation: 5401
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
Well if you weren't speaking of Dave (and as much as I disagree with him, he's not acting like a troll), you surely can't be speaking about me, so that leaves you.
People throw the "troll card" out way too easy nowadays.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2014, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Sioux Falls, SD area
3,174 posts, read 4,637,341 times
Reputation: 5343
I'm from South Dakota and can tell you that the Redskins logo as it stands now is a much more flattering representation of native americans than what would be replicated for a 21st century NA logo.

As was posted on here before, if you want something that's damned offensive and ridiculing to the NA's, it's the tomahawk chop matched with the chanting that goes on at FS Seminoles and Atlanta Braves games. To me that's insulting to Indians and absolutely annoying to most anyone else just wanting to enjoy the game. I can't stand either team primarily because of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top