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.
Uh; what about the Fighting Irish? That's def a stereotype of "Irish" people and not always good. Mn Vikings or even the Boston Celtics? Oh; that's right: they're usually "white" groups so it's Ok for a dark skin dude to be associated with with them but NOT the other way.
"Fighting Irish" is a play on an Irish stereotype, so I can see why people may find that off-putting, but it's far from a racial slur. The two aren't equitably offensive though.
I'm going to have to disagree on the Viking/Celtic analogy. Those two names are celebratory; we don't celebrate racial slurs. We never have, and George Marshall (the well-known racist and founder of the Washington Redskins) certainly didn't... he used them like most racists do.
Uh; what about the Fighting Irish? That's def a stereotype of "Irish" people and not always good. Mn Vikings or even the Boston Celtics? Oh; that's right: they're usually "white" groups so it's Ok for a dark skin dude to be associated with with them but NOT the other way.
OK, you have a point with the "Irish" connection. But not with anything else because white groups are different because History is only one story. There aren't two separate parallel histories in which each race has been oppressed to the same degree. It's not parallel. IN fact, oppression has been very one-sided since the Enlightenment. So that's why it's different.
But that's what's always missing from the Leftist agenda: perspective and context.
So your justification for an NFL team plastering a racial slur on millions of television screens every Sunday afternoon during the football season is that someone else did it, too? So now it's acceptable?
I'm not buying that anymore than I'm buying that a person has to identify as democrat to be offended by racial slurs.
"Fighting Irish" is a play on an Irish stereotype, so I can see why people may find that off-putting, but it's far from a racial slur. The two aren't equitably offensive though.
I'm going to have to disagree on the Viking/Celtic analogy. Those two names are celebratory; we don't celebrate racial slurs. We never have, and George Marshall (the well-known racist and founder of the Washington Redskins) certainly didn't... he used them like most racists do.
Baloney! I can't speak to the Celts name, but Vikings are known for raping and pillaging. (DH said he's always wanted to pillage!) And have you never heard the term "dumb Swede"?
Baloney! I can't speak to the Celts name, but Vikings are known for raping and pillaging. (DH said he's always wanted to pillage!) And have you never heard the term "dumb Swede"?
Alright, fine. But, "redskin" is still as racial slur.
Since we're talking about a DC team...how about they choose the name "useless twatwaffles"?
I'm OK with a name change; there is no reason to keep gloryfing American indians.
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.
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.
