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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-28-2014, 04:51 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,462 posts, read 5,930,681 times
Reputation: 16156

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post
No, it's not offensive to me and shouldn't be offensive to anyone. It honors native Americans. Corporations pay millions to have stadiums named after them. Our city was named after the man who platted the railroad to come through our area. The main street that I pull onto every morning was named after our local U.S. senator. This is an honor to these men. Having an NFL team named after a race is an honor to that entire race. It's saying we are a proud team, strong, fearless, warriors. If it had meant anything else, it never would have been picked for a name.
Again it was picked 80 years ago, at a time with segregated water fountains, non-apologetic racism, minstrel shows and no thought to minority's feelings what so ever. Really struggling to buy into the logic of your last sentence. I mean it's not like the owner does not have a history of racism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-28-2014, 10:55 AM
 
Location: Wyoming
9,421 posts, read 17,398,135 times
Reputation: 14094
I don't know about the owner's history of racism, but he did not name the team, so forget that.

If you suddenly found yourself the owner of a new football franchise, would you call your new team the Sissies, Dummies, Jerks, Weaklings, or any other name that might infer such tendencies? Of course not. You'd give the team a name that they and their fans could be proud of -- something to denote just the opposite of those names: Tigers, Lions, Bears, Panthers, etc. YOU might not name them after a group of people, but others might call them Vikings, Raiders, Cowboys, or Indians -- all peoples with a proud heritage of strength and courage. To do otherwise would make no sense. There are no teams named the Mice, the Rats, the Snakes nor the Skunks, because the majority of people don't think highly of those animals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-28-2014, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,462 posts, read 5,930,681 times
Reputation: 16156
I was talking about the owner of the team at the time, sorry should have used past tense in the description
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-29-2014, 10:13 PM
 
462 posts, read 582,857 times
Reputation: 396
From Slate.com:
Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-30-2014, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,756 posts, read 4,233,177 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamtonfordbury View Post
Thanks for posting this. I really wish more people would take time to read Ives Goddard's findings on the term "redskin" before arguing either way on the subject.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 04:36 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,462 posts, read 5,930,681 times
Reputation: 16156
You guys still going at this?

I really do not see how the origins of the name matters. It's how it is perceived today that is important. The phrase "Girl Friday" was very popular in the 50's. It was derived from the phrase "Man Friday" and meant "An efficient and devoted aide or employee; a right-hand man". Nothing offensive at all in its origin. So what? You try to use it today and you will **** someone off and sound like an idiot. In fact calling a woman a girl, perfectly acceptable 40 years ago with no negative origin, would be totally offensive today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 10:59 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,756 posts, read 4,233,177 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
You guys still going at this?
Yeah.... until it's resolved it's an ongoing debate. Or at least until the season starts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
I really do not see how the origins of the name matters. It's how it is perceived today that is important. The phrase "Girl Friday" was very popular in the 50's. It was derived from the phrase "Man Friday" and meant "An efficient and devoted aide or employee; a right-hand man". Nothing offensive at all in its origin. So what? You try to use it today and you will **** someone off and sound like an idiot. In fact calling a woman a girl, perfectly acceptable 40 years ago with no negative origin, would be totally offensive today.
Both the origin of the name and of the word mean a great deal to the argument, because the facts drawn from evidence of its benign origin can make or break the whole argument against the name. And one doesn't have to go much further to search for said facts than to simply read "I Am Red-Skin" by Ives Goddard, to better understand why there are those of us who think the whole argument against the name is pretty silly.

As far as your analogy - really don't know what you're trying to convey? I have never heard the term "Girl Friday" in my life. If I've ever tried to insult somebody, I've never once thought about saying you're a low-life, good for nothing, "Girl Friday". And your last sentence is absolutely untrue based on my experience. Maybe you happen to live in a hyper-sensitive world? I've called plenty women girls in my time, and all realize I was being affectionate with them. I think you're trying to argue the point that simple words can be offensive on their own, without context. That is simply untrue unless those words were created for the sole purpose to offend someone. And again, this is why origin is such an important part of this argument - something you dismiss.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2014, 01:15 PM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,462 posts, read 5,930,681 times
Reputation: 16156
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
Yeah.... until it's resolved it's an ongoing debate. Or at least until the season starts.




Both the origin of the name and of the word mean a great deal to the argument, because the facts drawn from evidence of its benign origin can make or break the whole argument against the name. And one doesn't have to go much further to search for said facts than to simply read "I Am Red-Skin" by Ives Goddard, to better understand why there are those of us who think the whole argument against the name is pretty silly.

As far as your analogy - really don't know what you're trying to convey? I have never heard the term "Girl Friday" in my life. If I've ever tried to insult somebody, I've never once thought about saying you're a low-life, good for nothing, "Girl Friday". And your last sentence is absolutely untrue based on my experience. Maybe you happen to live in a hyper-sensitive world? I've called plenty women girls in my time, and all realize I was being affectionate with them. I think you're trying to argue the point that simple words can be offensive on their own, without context. That is simply untrue unless those words were created for the sole purpose to offend someone. And again, this is why origin is such an important part of this argument - something you dismiss.
As I said Girl Friday was a popular term in the 50's, that's why you are unfamiliar with it. But old guys know it and understand that it is dated and downright offensive to be used today. Still does not change the fact that it's origin was a compliment, as I posted. Another example is a very common phrase from back then: "have your girl call my girl to set up the meeting". Now even though most admins are in fact women this would be inappropriate to say today even though the origins were harmless.

Are you really saying that you are unaware that "girl" is inappropriate today? I suggest you ask a few women at work if they would be OK with being referred to as "girl" and get back with us.

Last edited by DaveinMtAiry; 07-01-2014 at 01:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-02-2014, 06:36 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,756 posts, read 4,233,177 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveinMtAiry View Post
As I said Girl Friday was a popular term in the 50's, that's why you are unfamiliar with it. But old guys know it and understand that it is dated and downright offensive to be used today. Still does not change the fact that it's origin was a compliment, as I posted. Another example is a very common phrase from back then: "have your girl call my girl to set up the meeting". Now even though most admins are in fact women this would be inappropriate to say today even though the origins were harmless.

Are you really saying that you are unaware that "girl" is inappropriate today? I suggest you ask a few women at work if they would be OK with being referred to as "girl" and get back with us.
LOL! So you're telling me that simply using the word "girl" is offensive? So when my wife and I announce the sex of our unborn baby, we'll have to say, "We are having a female baby" if it turns out to be....close your ears....a girl?

Oh, and TV shows like "The Golden Girls" and "Gilmore Girls" were being offensive when they named their show that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2014, 04:25 AM
 
Location: Mount Airy, Maryland
10,462 posts, read 5,930,681 times
Reputation: 16156
That whizzing sound you just heard was my point flying over your head.

I said the term girls is inappropriate in the workplace. This is true now, it was not true 40 years ago as the term was used commonly. If you don't believe me ask around.
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