After reading this I'm fine with the name. I never thought the name intended to be racist. Just thought it was a little outdated. Like using the word "negro" or something. But, this article really pokes holes even in some of the Native Americans arguments who are trying to get rid of the name.
Why did you start another thread on this same topic when you didn't even keep following the first one you started? If you had, you'd know that I already posted and discussed the info. from Goddard in the original thread, along with providing a link to a 2004 national survey conducted by a well-respected polling group from UPenn that concluded that only 9% of Native Americans found the term "redskins" offensive.
Not trying to bust your chops, but there are too many new threads started on here on topics for which a thread already exists and it's a lot better for the discussion when topics are confined to one thread. It's not like the original thread you started about this got bumped off the page. It's still there. InsaneBoost posted a link to a great piece in the original thread that gives an interesting perspective from a Native American that I think you'd enjoy reading. I think it probably represents the views of the 91% who aren't offended by the name.
You know what man, I've had a tough go of the internet lately and let's just say it was easier to make a new thread, of this discovery I made, instead of read through the thread I made. But, I apologize for my mistake. I was just so hyped about this article. One love.