Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-01-2014, 02:01 PM
 
5,913 posts, read 3,188,243 times
Reputation: 4397

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG View Post
lol. ALL these polls are inexact, dude. Still doesn't get rid of the fact that there's a historical implication to the name. Just like there's historical implications to blacks being seen as apes, which is why you might get some slack from a black person if you suddnely hand him a banana, even if it is "harmless". I think that's what some of you people are missing.

This is amazing. You're probably someone who's only met a Native American maybe once...twice in your entire life. Not very many of them around, you know, which I think makes it easier for people to "take up" for the name. Imagine if the team was named the "Yellows" and had an Asian guy on the helmet. Would it be ok then or... oh, why am I even asking? Either way, the answer would be "no" or "who cares", right?

Honestly, I find it more silly that you people act like they've ALWAYS been the "Redskins". (Boston Braves, 1932)


I'm willing to bet that if they didnt' change the name in 1932, this wouldn't nearly be an issue.
Exactly. Some people here are missing the context of this word. Your example of giving a banana to a black person is perfect. The response showed that the respondent did not understand what you were saying. Too bad.

 
Old 10-01-2014, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,667,797 times
Reputation: 7485
From your own link.

After failed appeals and legal logjams, UND was given three years to convince the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock tribes that their nickname was acceptable. Spirit Lake deemed the name acceptable with a 2/3 majority, but Standing Rock would not even bring the issue to a vote.

"The issue was more that they didn’t like the 'Fighting' Sioux part, and that’s why a lot of these jerseys just say 'Sioux' on them," explains South Dakota resident and UND fan Chad Alberson. "The 'Redskins,' is more offensive. The 'Sioux' isn’t a slang – that’s their tribe name. And I understand that they were a little upset about the 'Fighting' part."

It wasn't the Sioux part, they didn't like the word "Fighting" in front of it. So my words still stand.
 
Old 10-01-2014, 03:28 PM
JJG
 
Location: Fort Worth
13,612 posts, read 22,914,174 times
Reputation: 7643
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
From your own link.

After failed appeals and legal logjams, UND was given three years to convince the Spirit Lake and Standing Rock tribes that their nickname was acceptable. Spirit Lake deemed the name acceptable with a 2/3 majority, but Standing Rock would not even bring the issue to a vote.

"The issue was more that they didn’t like the 'Fighting' Sioux part, and that’s why a lot of these jerseys just say 'Sioux' on them," explains South Dakota resident and UND fan Chad Alberson. "The 'Redskins,' is more offensive. The 'Sioux' isn’t a slang – that’s their tribe name. And I understand that they were a little upset about the 'Fighting' part."

It wasn't the Sioux part, they didn't like the word "Fighting" in front of it. So my words still stand.
Kind of like people's issue with the Cleveland Indians, in that it's mostly the logo that those had a problem with than the actual name.

That's why it was "demoted" and replaced with a Block 'C'.
 
Old 10-01-2014, 03:32 PM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,667,797 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by JJG View Post
Kind of like people's issue with the Cleveland Indians, in that it's mostly the logo that those had a problem with than the actual name.

That's why it was "demoted" and replaced with a Block 'C'.
Yeah their logo was a throwback to the "Stepin Fetchit" era of race relations. More on the lines of "Little Black Sambo", stereotyping.
I'm really glad they got rid of it.

There's still a whole faction of reactionary white dudes who just don't get it though.
 
Old 10-01-2014, 03:40 PM
 
4,738 posts, read 4,436,809 times
Reputation: 2485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emigrations View Post
We've had much fuss in recent months that Redskins is an offensive term for the football team. I saw a black man at the gym wearing a soccer jersey that had "Darkskins" where the name would be. Obviously, this has racial connotations. If Redskins is so offensive, why would a black man so proudly display a Darkskins jersey?

in what world is one mans shirt and opinion somehow represented of a cultural belief?


nothing on google (when typing "darkskins") shows any significant evidence of this being used as a acceptable title of anything.

Most of the time it was "dark skin" as in "dark skin is best"


perhaps you should stop basing your belief and anger on a sample of 1
 
Old 10-01-2014, 04:26 PM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,912,063 times
Reputation: 5948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilt11 View Post
Red Mesa High School.....REDSKINS! GASP!
RMUSD #27 / Red Mesa High School
Made up of primarily Native Americans.

This "controversy" is bs. That is a damn fact. Time for you stupid, pathetic losers who have nothing better to do but fight for retarded things to make yourselves feel like you're making the world a better place, to get back down to reality. If this term was so damn offensive or widely used as an offensive term, you know damn well there would be ZERO schools, let alone a Native American school with the same damn mascot. No one uses this term as a slur except you PC police. Knock it off and find something that is actually beneficial to society and constructive. Friggin morons
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Obviously you never bothered to read the entire thread. Don't fret, nmnita, I'll bring you up to speed and burst all the uninformed statements in your post. Here is a cut and paste of post#21 in this thread to set the record straight. I have bolded the parts that directly contradict your post.
No problem, young lady. I'm always glad to help.

Post#21

The National Congress of American Indians which was formed in 1944 and represents over 400 Indian tribes in the US and Alaska has publicly declared the term Redskin offensive and has lobbied for decades to have the term declared offensive.
https://www.facebook.com/ncai1944

Scroll down and you'll see the Sept 16th "Change the Mascot" Press conference.


History of the Term Redskin

During the early days of the European expansion in North America, the Indian and their tribes were held in very high esteem by the Europeans. Perhaps because they needed us to help fight their wars between each other. Unfortunately, the Mohawks and the Iroquois confederacy split sides and part fought for the French and part for the English. The Indians were even sent to some of the best European schools for education by the Europeans. The Chiefs of the 6 nation Iroquois confederacy, which included Mohawks were invited by the US Continental Congress in 1775 to attend, as Benjamin Franklin had published a paper advising the Congress to adopt the Iroquois confederacy "Great Law of Peace". Mohawks are part of the Iroquois Confederacy and we call ourselves "Hadenosanee" when the white men are not around.

Subsequent to the Continental Congress of 1775, the majority of OUR native constitution was incorporated into your great document, the Constitution. Know that you have my ancestors to thank for that document. If you plan on defaming my race and culture at least have a look at these links before you continue with your smear of all things Indian.

Iroquois Confederacy is foundation of United States Constitution | FNX | First Nations Experience

Gazette | Gazetteer: News & Sports


Just for giggles and to put things in proper perspective, We of the Iroquois Confederacy or the Hadenosanee have the oldest democratic government on the planet.

The Six Nations: Oldest Living Participatory Democracy on Earth

And you want to call us Redskins.

The term Redskin came into use when Andrew Jackson became president of the United States around 1830 and Indians were seen to be "The Problem", due to AJ's Manifest Destiny Doctrine. We were in the way of that "Manifest Destiny. He ordered the immediate extermination of all Indian Tribes, including women and children, who did not immediately report to designated reservations. The term Redskin came into popular use during that period as a means to degrade and dehumanize the Indian and better proceed with the extermination.
Ever since, the white man has vehemently denied that Redskin is a derogatory term and has spent the last 100 years trying to rewrite the history of the European attempt to wipe the face of the earth clean of the Indian. Redskin is no different than "N!**er and connotes the same thing.
We Indians have been speaking against the term since 1944 as a group, through our organizations and through our spokespeople. The white man ignores all attempts to give credibility to our voice.
It is so to this day and it is so with people on this very board.


You......white man owe us a lot. You owe us the land you took, you owe us the Constitution you live by and you owe us the dignity and respect you took from us. You could at least speak of our race with dignity and respect.

As a footnote, the argument you make using examples of other Indian names being offensive, I will tell you now.......

We have no objections to Braves, Warriors, Redman, any Tribal name used in naming helicopters, football teams, tanks, airplanes, or other physical manifestations. Florada Seminoles is fine with us. The Oglala Sioux, handy slicer and dicer is fine with us. Cleveland Indians is fine with us. Mohawk Carpets is fine with us.


Redskin is not fine with us and it never......for a thousand years........ will ever be fine with us. One day we will win this fight and it will not be because of some wimpy PC liberals as you suggest. It will be face to face and head to head with the white power and we will prevail. You will not continue to shove the term down our throats.

End of story.
Does your anger go with 1 or more American Indian teams using the "Redskins" name too or, just "anglo white" people using it? Tho I def DON'T see much "people of color" attitude over the Fighting Irish, Minnesota Vikings or even the Boston Celtics.

Tho maybe because it's "Ok" for "people of color" to ID with "white person" team names but, the other way ain't Ok. Sure smells of white supremacy on the part with dark skin people.

Too: "we" DON'T "owe" the American Indians a thing; they lost their battles with the white man AND, I'm 100 percent sure the AI tribes like the Aztecs and Comanches that beat up other AI tribes that gotted taken over ain't, the 1st group, being told "they're owed" a thing. Sheesh!
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.


Closed Thread


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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top