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 06-19-2014, 07:38 AM
 
Location: South Hills
632 posts, read 695,172 times
Reputation: 431

Advertisements

how 'bout the Sniveling Beltway Bureaucrats?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2014, 07:44 AM
 
6,580 posts, read 2,807,294 times
Reputation: 7906
Maybe the Washington Wazoos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 08:14 AM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,658,953 times
Reputation: 6514
No one complains about the Chiefs, Warriors, Seminals, Indians, Chippawas, etc. namely because they aren't racist.

Redskin is a derogatory name, even players like Jim Thorpe remembers signs put up in shops that said no redskins allowed.

I do not care what they change it to, but they should change it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Greensboro, NC
5,756 posts, read 4,245,823 times
Reputation: 3829
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ7 View Post
No one complains about the Chiefs, Warriors, Seminals, Indians, Chippawas, etc. namely because they aren't racist.

Redskin is a derogatory name, even players like Jim Thorpe remembers signs put up in shops that said no redskins allowed.

I do not care what they change it to, but they should change it.
You're certainly welcome to your opinion on the name, but are you telling me that as long as a name isn't racist, then it doesn't matter if it's offensive in other ways? You say no one complains about the Chiefs name. On the contrary, and I think I posted this somewhere before, Indians tend to think of the title of "Chief" as something of high prestige - almost a sacred title to be bestowed upon a leader in a tribe. And because the Kansas City football team calls themselves "Chiefs", they feel it degrades that title - almost to the point of blasphemy. And there has been complaints against the Cleveland Indians - especially their mascot logo - it just hasn't been as loudly published as the issues with the Washington Redskins.

In regards to the Seminoles, they have a partnership with Florida State University. I believe they get some type of kickback while allowing the University to use their tribe name. Without that partnership, I can't say for sure if Seminole nation would still be happy with the college using their name. Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't?

I mean, if we're going to live in the United States of the Offended, whether or not a name is considered racist should not be the only concern of offense. People like to zero in on race, but the truth is, there are other reasons to be offended by something that doesn't have to do with race.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 09:45 AM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,908 posts, read 10,097,097 times
Reputation: 7456
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
You're certainly welcome to your opinion on the name, but are you telling me that as long as a name isn't racist, then it doesn't matter if it's offensive in other ways? You say no one complains about the Chiefs name. On the contrary, and I think I posted this somewhere before, Indians tend to think of the title of "Chief" as something of high prestige - almost a sacred title to be bestowed upon a leader in a tribe. And because the Kansas City football team calls themselves "Chiefs", they feel it degrades that title - almost to the point of blasphemy. And there has been complaints against the Cleveland Indians - especially their mascot logo - it just hasn't been as loudly published as the issues with the Washington Redskins.

In regards to the Seminoles, they have a partnership with Florida State University. I believe they get some type of kickback while allowing the University to use their tribe name. Without that partnership, I can't say for sure if Seminole nation would still be happy with the college using their name. Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't?

I mean, if we're going to live in the United States of the Offended, whether or not a name is considered racist should not be the only concern of offense. People like to zero in on race, but the truth is, there are other reasons to be offended by something that doesn't have to do with race.

Oh don't worry. It's coming. As it is they're already slowy doing away with the Chief Wahoo logo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 09:54 AM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,250 posts, read 19,209,535 times
Reputation: 7010
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
You're certainly welcome to your opinion on the name, but are you telling me that as long as a name isn't racist, then it doesn't matter if it's offensive in other ways? You say no one complains about the Chiefs name. On the contrary, and I think I posted this somewhere before, Indians tend to think of the title of "Chief" as something of high prestige - almost a sacred title to be bestowed upon a leader in a tribe. And because the Kansas City football team calls themselves "Chiefs", they feel it degrades that title - almost to the point of blasphemy. And there has been complaints against the Cleveland Indians - especially their mascot logo - it just hasn't been as loudly published as the issues with the Washington Redskins.
Honestly, people are more offended by the logo than the actual name.

That's why the Indians made their primary logo the block 'C' instead of Cheif Wahoo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 10:49 AM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,658,953 times
Reputation: 6514
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG View Post
Honestly, people are more offended by the logo than the actual name.

That's why the Indians made their primary logo the block 'C' instead of Cheif Wahoo.
Yup, exactly. Very few people do not care for the name, but there is a line that is crossed between Braves, warriors, chiefs, indians and REDSKIN.

I myself am Native and we don't even call each other redskin.

Washington Warriors actually doesn't sound too bad.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 04:19 PM
Status: "Fill the days." (set 6 hours ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg/Virginia Beach, VA
10,708 posts, read 11,119,481 times
Reputation: 14113
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsguy37 View Post
You're certainly welcome to your opinion on the name, but are you telling me that as long as a name isn't racist, then it doesn't matter if it's offensive in other ways? You say no one complains about the Chiefs name. On the contrary, and I think I posted this somewhere before, Indians tend to think of the title of "Chief" as something of high prestige - almost a sacred title to be bestowed upon a leader in a tribe. And because the Kansas City football team calls themselves "Chiefs", they feel it degrades that title - almost to the point of blasphemy. And there has been complaints against the Cleveland Indians - especially their mascot logo - it just hasn't been as loudly published as the issues with the Washington Redskins.

In regards to the Seminoles, they have a partnership with Florida State University. I believe they get some type of kickback while allowing the University to use their tribe name. Without that partnership, I can't say for sure if Seminole nation would still be happy with the college using their name. Maybe they would, maybe they wouldn't?

I mean, if we're going to live in the United States of the Offended, whether or not a name is considered racist should not be the only concern of offense. People like to zero in on race, but the truth is, there are other reasons to be offended by something that doesn't have to do with race.
This is why I am skeptical about how well it has worked out for FSU. Nobody chooses a mascot and namesake as a point of ridicule. Now this university is paying a tribute to the Seminole Tribe to honor the tribe's namesake. Offended until the checks start flowing. If it's offensive it's offensive. When your "offense" goes away because some money has started flowing it sort of makes me wonder if these people are really offended or looking for a payday. It's a fair and legitimate question. Of course, universities like to convey the appearance of tolerance and enlightenment even though few actually are. They probably don't mind paying the tribute. Oh, and don't ask the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma how they feel about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 04:55 PM
 
Location: Bel Air, California
21,375 posts, read 21,954,803 times
Reputation: 33625
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
This is why I am skeptical about how well it has worked out for FSU. Nobody chooses a mascot and namesake as a point of ridicule. Now this university is paying a tribute to the Seminole Tribe to honor the tribe's namesake. Offended until the checks start flowing. If it's offensive it's offensive. When your "offense" goes away because some money has started flowing it sort of makes me wonder if these people are really offended or looking for a payday. It's a fair and legitimate question. Of course, universities like to convey the appearance of tolerance and enlightenment even though few actually are. They probably don't mind paying the tribute. Oh, and don't ask the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma how they feel about it.
I know, how 'bout we just stop paying the Seminoles their tribute, what are they going to do sue us???!!!...how'd that work for you last time, huh Indians? succcccccccccckers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2014, 05:40 PM
MJ7
 
6,221 posts, read 8,658,953 times
Reputation: 6514
This is ridiculous, the notion that the Seminoles sell out their name for a non-referenced "kick back" is just absurd. It goes to show your thinking process on this topic.

The Seminoles enjoy FSU using the name, simple. The Utes of Utah do the same thing, so do the Chippawas in Michigan. No one is getting a kick back, they are allowing the school to use their tribal names, because the tribe is proud.

I like the idea of using tribal names as team names and so do many in the NA community. The problem is when you call a team Redskins. Does the team do it out of racism? No...that has been said time and time again. Should I just walk around and say the N-word and tell a black person that I'm not racist?
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
Similar Threads
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