Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 1 of 40 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 590
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,602
    vCash
    1500

    Legitimate Argument Defending the Redskins Name

    From Rick Reilly at ESPN:

    I guess this is where I'm supposed to fall in line and do what every other American sports writer is doing. I'm supposed to swear I won't ever write the words "Washington Redskins" anymore because it's racist and offensive and a slap in the face to all Native Americans who ever lived. Maybe it is.

    I just don't quite know how to tell my father-in-law, a Blackfeet Indian. He owns a steak restaurant on the reservation near Browning, Mont. He has a hard time seeing the slap-in-the-face part.

    "The whole issue is so silly to me," says Bob Burns, my wife's father and a bundle holder in the Blackfeet tribe. "The name just doesn't bother me much. It's an issue that shouldn't be an issue, not with all the problems we've got in this country."

    And I definitely don't know how I'll tell the athletes at Wellpinit (Wash.) High School -- where the student body is 91.2 percent Native American -- that the "Redskins" name they wear proudly across their chests is insulting them. Because they have no idea.

    "I've talked to our students, our parents and our community about this and nobody finds any offense at all in it," says Tim Ames, the superintendent of Wellpinit schools. "'Redskins' is not an insult to our kids. 'Wagon burners' is an insult. 'Prairie n-----s' is an insult. Those are very upsetting to our kids. But 'Redskins' is an honorable name we wear with pride. In fact, I'd like to see somebody come up here and try to change it."

    Boy, you try to help some people

    And it's not going to be easy telling the Kingston (Okla.) High School (57.7 percent Native American) Redskins that the name they've worn on their uniforms for 104 years has been a joke on them this whole time. Because they wear it with honor.

    "We have two great tribes here," says Kingston assistant school superintendent Ron Whipkey, "the Chicasaw and the Choctaw. And not one member of those tribes has ever come to me or our school with a complaint. It is a prideful thing to them."

    "It's a name that honors the people," says Kingston English teacher Brett Hayes, who is Choctaw. "The word 'Oklahoma' itself is Choctaw for 'red people.' The students here don't want it changed. To them, it seems like it's just people who have no connection with the Native American culture, people out there trying to draw attention to themselves.

    "My kids are really afraid we're going to lose the Redskin name. They say to me, 'They're not going to take it from us, are they, Dad?'"

    Too late. White America has spoken. You aren't offended, so we'll be offended for you.

    Same story with the Red Mesa (Ariz.) High School Redskins. They wear the name with fierce pride. They absolutely don't see it as an insult. But what do they know? The student body is only 99.3 percent Native American.

    And even though an Annenberg Public Policy Center poll found that 90 percent of Native Americans were not offended by the Redskins name, and even though linguists say the "redskins" word was first used by Native Americans themselves, and even though nobody on the Blackfeet side of my wife's family has ever had someone insult them with the word "redskin," it doesn't matter. There's no stopping a wave of PC-ness when it gets rolling.

    I mean, when media stars like USA Today's Christine Brennan, a white woman from Ohio, and Peter King, a white man from Massachusetts, have jumped on a people's cause, there's no going back.

    Besides, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell said last week that if "even one person is offended" on this issue, we need to "listen."

    One person?

    Got it. Guess we need to listen to people who are offended by the Kansas City Chiefs' name, too. That's one that offends my father-in-law. "You see some little guy wearing a headdress made of chicken feathers," he says, "painting his face up, making a mockery of us. I hate that. Those are things you earn."

    One person? I know an atheist who is offended by religious names like the New Orleans Saints and Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. There are people who who don't think Ole Miss should be the Rebels. People who lost family to Hurricanes. There are people who think Wizards promotes paganism. Shall we listen to all of them?

    I guess so.

    Edmundo Macedo, vice president of ESPN's Stats & Information group, told ESPN ombudsman Robert Lipsyte that the term Redskins is abhorrent. "We would not accept anything similar as a team nickname if it were associated with any other ethnicity or any other race," Macedo said.

    Oh, yes, we would.

    In fact, ESPN and many other media companies cover the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, the Cleveland Indians and the Atlanta Braves without a single searing search of their social conscience.

    Doesn't matter. The 81-year-old Washington Redskins name is falling, and everybody better get out of the way. For the majority of Native Americans who don't care, we'll care for them. For the Native Americans who haven't asked for help, we're glad to give it to them.

    Trust us. We know what's best. We'll take this away for your own good, and put up barriers that protect you from ever being harmed again.

    Kind of like a reservation.
    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/96...ot-easy-sounds

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    8,619
    vCash
    1000
    The Washington Wagon Burners or Prairie ______ are way worse than redskins.

    I don't think the name should be changed.
    How do you say magic in Russian?



    Don't forget about the Gustav


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    5,352
    vCash
    1500
    … sigh … can’t believe this is still going on. It’s like the arguments over the N word in all its iterations… luckily most people are coming to their senses on that issue. As America struggles to deal with its racist past these issues are bound to happen.

    Look, Vikings, Chiefs, Braves, Indians etc. are either proper names or complimentary titles = no offense.

    Red skins, black shins or yellow skins are derogatory expressions that offend a lot of people. Totally predictable as all of them are left over racially insulting slurs/ slang left over from the turn of the century and should go the way of the dinosaur.

    I suppose for many, you’d actually have to be a minority to feel the sting or demeaning nature of these expressions but even reasoning white people like me can admit these slurs are out of their time and should go.

    Besides, most of Washington D.C. claims to support Washington so I’d rename them the Washington Senators… that way their name can truly represent their performance.

    G/L

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    california
    Posts
    1,304
    vCash
    1500
    Indians is pretty bad IMO. That logo is worse the redskins name.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    2,769
    vCash
    1500
    If the name changes I will no longer support the team.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    31,540
    vCash
    500
    I love Rick Reilly.




  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Southside Chicago
    Posts
    319
    vCash
    1500
    My father's side is partially Lakota/Sioux Indian from the Great Plaines and I would change the name because there are no cons to changing the name AT ALL. NO ONE who has argued for keeping the name has ever presented an argument for why it would be a CON or BAD THING to change it. NOBODY! And to be completely honest, sighting the opinion of some Highschool Indian kids who don't have a problem with the name doesn't change my stance, because I spent the majority of my life not even knowing about the implications and origins of the term "Redskins".

    When I was 14-18 I never thought about the name either, I was literally indoctrinated to accept that there is a team called the "Redskins". I never analyzed it until as I got older. And a lot of people don't take a step back and look at these things until well in adulthood. It's not even fair to be talking about high school Indian teens playing for "Redskin" teams. People got to remember that football fans are literally indoctrinated into accepting the existence of a "Redskins" team because you've heard the name all your life and now it sounds no different from any other team name despite being a racial slur.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Auburn/B'ham, WA
    Posts
    13,794
    vCash
    1500
    Whether they change it or not, I can see both sides of the argument.

    Changing the name of an NFL team has no effect on all of these high schools mentioned, so....
    Super Bowl XLVIII Champs


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    9,326
    vCash
    1500
    Keep the name, change the mascot. Problem solved.
    "The United States military doesn't DO pin pricks." ~ President Barack Obama.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    168
    vCash
    1500
    I agree with you one million. It amazing to me what people actually do to get attention or whatever they are seeking for this name change. I mean my god, they been the redskins forever get over it



    Quote Originally Posted by chargerSD View Post
    … sigh … can’t believe this is still going on. It’s like the arguments over the N word in all its iterations… luckily most people are coming to their senses on that issue. As America struggles to deal with its racist past these issues are bound to happen.

    Look, Vikings, Chiefs, Braves, Indians etc. are either proper names or complimentary titles = no offense.

    Red skins, black shins or yellow skins are derogatory expressions that offend a lot of people. Totally predictable as all of them are left over racially insulting slurs/ slang left over from the turn of the century and should go the way of the dinosaur.

    I suppose for many, you’d actually have to be a minority to feel the sting or demeaning nature of these expressions but even reasoning white people like me can admit these slurs are out of their time and should go.

    Besides, most of Washington D.C. claims to support Washington so I’d rename them the Washington Senators… that way their name can truly represent their performance.

    G/L

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,471
    vCash
    1500
    I don't care all that much one way or another, but when the argument for defending it is, "hey look, I found some Native Americans that aren't offended by it", that's pretty weak. As a Jew, the word kike doesn't offend me or any of my Jewish friends, but I'm pretty sure that's not an argument for kike being an acceptable team name.

    Furthermore, what's the legitimate argument for not changing the name. I mean, what does it hurt if they change the name? Is it just "... But we've always been the Redskins, and change scares and confuses me!". If they wanted to change the name of the Bears, I wouldn't even bat an eye. Hell, maybe we should go back to the Staleys. It's tradition!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    1,979
    vCash
    1500
    Good read. I totally agree.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,471
    vCash
    1500
    Also in regards to the poll he cited, this is from ABC news.

    There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans. In the only recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive, although many question the cultural credentials of the respondents.
    This whole article seems sketchy.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    155
    vCash
    1500
    Let me explain why...
    Back not so long ago, when there was a bounty on the heads of the Indian people...the trappers would bring in Indian scalps along with the other skins that they had managed to trap or shoot. These scalps brought varying prices as did the skins of the animals. The trappers would tell the trading post owner or whoever it was that he was dealing with, that he had 2 bearskins, a couple of beaver skins...and a few scalps. Well, the term "scalp" offended the good Christian women of the community and they asked that another term be found to describe these things. So, the trappers and hunters began using the term "redskin"...they would tell the owner that they had bearskin, deer skins....and "redskins." The term came from the bloody mess that one saw when looking at the scalp...thus the term "red"...skin because it was the "skin" of an "animal" just like the others that they had...so, it became "redskins". So, you see when NA's see or hear that term...they don't see a football team...they don't see a game being played...they don't see any "honor"...they see the bloody pieces of scalps that were hacked off of their men, women and even their children...they hear the screams as their people were killed...and "skinned" just like animals. So, yes, you can safely say that the term is considered extremely offensive.
    Last edited by Punk of Funk; 10-09-2013 at 08:53 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ja-Blam
    Posts
    7,133
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiTownPacerFan View Post
    I don't care all that much one way or another, but when the argument for defending it is, "hey look, I found some Native Americans that aren't offended by it", that's pretty weak. As a Jew, the word kike doesn't offend me or any of my Jewish friends, but I'm pretty sure that's not an argument for kike being an acceptable team name.

    Furthermore, what's the legitimate argument for not changing the name. I mean, what does it hurt if they change the name? Is it just "... But we've always been the Redskins, and change scares and confuses me!". If they wanted to change the name of the Bears, I wouldn't even bat an eye. Hell, maybe we should go back to the Staleys. It's tradition!
    2 counterpoints

    1) The article is not alleging that some Native Americans aren't offended, it is alleging the overwhleming majority is not offended.

    2) Anyone who says there is no legitimate argument to not changing it is completely ignorant of economics. Simply put, the people who feel strongly that the name is racist (and therefore want it changed) are mostly not Redskins fans and thus don't generate ANY income for the team. Those that strongly want to keep the team name the same are lifelong Redskins fans and are the primary source of income for the team. If they changed their name they are likely looking at millions of dollars lost.

    Or put another way, people are not going to suddenly flock to Redskins games because they changed their name, because a racist name isn't what is keeping most people from being Redskins fans. A name change might, however, make people stop supporting the team.

    I'm not taking sides I'm just pointing out the stupidity in saying there's no logical reason not to change it, because there is; money.
    Quote Originally Posted by AmsterNat View Post
    How unsurprising. Dude, give up trying to argue with valade. He cut you into little pieces, had you for breakfast, and shat you out.
    Quote Originally Posted by mariner4life View Post
    Valade you have totally owned this thread. Well done
    My fanbase is growing.

Page 1 of 40 12311 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •