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 01-16-2013, 12:52 AM
 
518 posts, read 341,559 times
Reputation: 215

Advertisements

I would acknowledge that there are people who claim to be speaking on behalf of certain causes and who then go out to find outrage wherever they perceive it to exist, but when you really look at this issue objectively, it's pretty obvious that the name Redskins is patently offensive. I admit, I would feel weird and, though I feel a bit hypocritical for admitting it, I might even feel nostalgic for the name Redskins if they were to remove it. But there's just no way around it: it's an offensive term. It really does need to be phased out somehow. They could keep the logo and call them the Warriors or something like that, but "Redskin" is just unacceptable in this day and age. Would the Asian population accept the San Francisco Yellow Menace or would we expect Latinos to be cool with the Houston Wetbacks? The New Orleans Negroes? It's not about being p.c.; it's about being sensitive and having respect for other people. I don't think the Cleveland Indians or the Atlanta Braves is necessarily a problem, but Redskin is a very derogatory term that goes well back into the 19th Century conflicts with Natives. It's just wrong to keep rubbing that into those old wounds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2013, 12:58 AM
 
518 posts, read 341,559 times
Reputation: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaypee View Post
That's not true. The n-word, just like redskins, never started out as a pejorative (as another poster indicated that redskins was used by Native Americans ... kind of like how black_Americans use the n-word with each other).
No, you're wrong. You read that crap on the internet or heard it on talk radio so it must be true, except that it isn't. The n-word has almost always been offensive, and blacks using it among each other has to do with group identity - you don't get it. It's kinda like the understanding that your close friends and family can tease you about certain things but strangers can't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 01:03 AM
 
518 posts, read 341,559 times
Reputation: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldawg82 View Post
Is it any worse than the "Fighting Irish" of Notre Dame? Maybe. If the Redskins changed their name, I would understand - but I would draw the line there. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Braves or the Indians. We already have the Vikings, the Cowboys, the Buccaneers . . . etc. These people groups/occupations/crimes were picked because they were either tough, honorable, or just mean. This is what football looks for in their moniker/mascot. Nothing derogatory about the Braves or Indians. And it doesn't matter what the NA's have to say about it as I'm sure no one consulted the Scandinavian population about using The Vikings or the cowboys about using Cowboys. I think most NA's find it acceptable to use names like the Braves.
This is pretty balanced, I think.

I guess part of the issue here is that when we're talking about the Irish, the name really doesn't mean that much - we're Americans after all. And the Irish - the real ones living across the Pond - probably find it nothing more than an amusing curiosity. Similarly, the Vikings are nowhere in existence. There are Danes, but they're a far cry from their marauding, seafaring ancestors. Again, it's nothing more than an amusing name to someone in Scandinavia who might actually take an interest in American football.

By contrast, there are Native American cultures still in existence, and the ones that are clinging to their survival don't want to be trivialized. Once free to roam the plains of this vast territory, they've long since been enveloped by the American nation. Every day they're surrounded by reminders of what they've lost. They've already been forced onto reservations and overrun. The least they can expect is a little preservation of their dignity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 05:38 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,628 posts, read 4,227,315 times
Reputation: 4582
Everything you say has been said before by others.. but nothing you say gains any traction... Because, not enough people care and because not enough people find the term Redskin offensive. They just don't! I have NEVER heard or read the term used in a derogatory way and in fact, I have never heard or read the term in any context that did not involve the NFL team or from someone like yourself explaining why the term is offensive.

I am NOT disagreeing with you that the term is offensive to a few. What I am saying is term is has lost its derogatory culture and I don't think there is anything you can do about it. That ship has sailed. Isn't that a good thing? I mean, words that used to hurt, no longer do. No one, and and I mean NO ONE uses the word REDSKIN in an attempt to degrade the Native American race.. they just don't!!! To me that's evolving. Eventually, there will be only 1 color, 1 culture, 1 race.. the human race and there will be NO OFFENSIVE CULTURAL WORDS! That sounds good to me!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,339 posts, read 21,917,974 times
Reputation: 33561
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
Everything you say has been said before by others.. but nothing you say gains any traction... Because, not enough people care and because not enough people find the term Redskin offensive. They just don't! I have NEVER heard or read the term used in a derogatory way and in fact, I have never heard or read the term in any context that did not involve the NFL team or from someone like yourself explaining why the term is offensive.

I am NOT disagreeing with you that the term is offensive to a few. What I am saying is term is has lost its derogatory culture and I don't think there is anything you can do about it. That ship has sailed. Isn't that a good thing? I mean, words that used to hurt, no longer do. No one, and and I mean NO ONE uses the word REDSKIN in an attempt to degrade the Native American race.. they just don't!!! To me that's evolving. Eventually, there will be only 1 color, 1 culture, 1 race.. the human race and there will be NO OFFENSIVE CULTURAL WORDS! That sounds good to me!
OK if you say so, nice of you to speak for everyone else
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 07:52 AM
 
518 posts, read 341,559 times
Reputation: 215
Quote:
Originally Posted by mco65 View Post
I am NOT disagreeing with you that the term is offensive to a few. What I am saying is term is has lost its derogatory culture and I don't think there is anything you can do about it. That ship has sailed. Isn't that a good thing? I mean, words that used to hurt, no longer do. No one, and and I mean NO ONE uses the word REDSKIN in an attempt to degrade the Native American race.. they just don't!!!
There may be nothing that Native Americans can do about it, but that's pretty weak justification for keeping the name. And you're wrong -- it's offensive to Native Americans who still exist. You don't hear about it because few Native Americans ever appear on television. There's no Native American Congressional Caucus in Congress. There's no National Association for the Advancement of Natives. Just because they don't have the numbers or the political clout to make noise about it doesn't change the fact that the name offends a lot of people. Even if you accept that people don't use the term as an epithet today, the fact lays bare that it was once used in that way, or at the very least, as a crude way to refer to this non-White population. Again, this is not to compare the use of the word Redskin to the use of the word n***er. Let's just say it has the same effect as 'coloreds' or 'Negroes' or 'darkies.' It's no better.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 09:03 AM
 
882 posts, read 1,782,089 times
Reputation: 592
"it's offensive to Native Americans who still exist"

You really want to stand w/that statement? Seriously?

Here's a free tip: why don't you give me a heads up before you post on the topic again & gather some insight as to what a real "native american" thinks before pretending to speak for me again, ok?
That's the real p*sser. People who speak publicly about what I'm supposed to "feel" and "think" does bother me. Names of sports teams doesn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,628 posts, read 4,227,315 times
Reputation: 4582
Quote:
Originally Posted by e_coli View Post
There may be nothing that Native Americans can do about it, but that's pretty weak justification for keeping the name. And you're wrong -- it's offensive to Native Americans who still exist. You don't hear about it because few Native Americans ever appear on television. There's no Native American Congressional Caucus in Congress. There's no National Association for the Advancement of Natives. Just because they don't have the numbers or the political clout to make noise about it doesn't change the fact that the name offends a lot of people. Even if you accept that people don't use the term as an epithet today, the fact lays bare that it was once used in that way, or at the very least, as a crude way to refer to this non-White population. Again, this is not to compare the use of the word Redskin to the use of the word n***er. Let's just say it has the same effect as 'coloreds' or 'Negroes' or 'darkies.' It's no better.

Its obviously NOT offensive enough for the Native American's to protest at NFL games.. its not offensive enough for them to protest on the steps of the Capital. WHERE ARE ALL THE OFFENDED NATIVE AMERICANS??? I am NOT saying they don't exist but they obviously have bigger fish to fry.. perhaps they have given up the cause, perhaps they feel its a battle they can't win but either way...this is one of those cases where the majority of the folks don't have a dog in the fight and are content. They are not gonna fight the cause for the Native Americans if the Native American's are not offended enough to fight for themselves.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 12:57 PM
 
2,946 posts, read 4,879,624 times
Reputation: 1610
I find it ironic that a lot of black people think it`s ok, considering the way the term racist gets thrown around at every turn. But what if they were called the Washington Blackskins? Would that offend anybody?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2013, 02:15 PM
 
2,478 posts, read 4,872,413 times
Reputation: 4489
My grandmother who was half Choctaw was not only "not" offended by the name, she actually pulled for the team as she would always say to me as a boy that I should always pull for them as they represented my families heritage. I've never met a Native American who was offended by the name (not saying there aren't some but I've noticed that anyone offended by their name tends to be the non-native american "I'm offended by everything" crowd.
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