NFL DC team's name

[bigsky]

Maybe if two thirds of the players were American Indian, we'd view the pejorative "Redskins" differently? We fly the flag of racism and genocide over our nations capital sports team, the press totally complicit, and yet go all indignant and then self congratulatory over some rich dinosaurs private comments to his scheming wife.

Yes I'm going there. Maybe I'm just a bit too cynical but it's all about the Benjamins from the entrapping recording, honey, sweetie, more juice? to not insisting we stop using the Indian equivalent of "blackskins" and yellowperils as sports team names.

Whaddaya think?

[Doc]

I don't get my panties in a wad over Braves, Blackhawks, Indians, Chiefs... however do think REDSKINS is over the line. Felt the same about ST Johns REDMEN. Both were/are offensive at face value because they are derogatory compared to say "Braves" or "Chiefs" which are not. One has to be concerned about the hypersensitivity which is how I see those who object to "Braves" or "Chiefs". Their objections are silly IMO. Next thing the O'Mally's and Shannahan's will picket Notre Dame games because "Fighting Irish" is offensive :533:

[PedroDaGr8]

It amazes me that to this day there is a team called the Redskins. I'm going to be vulgar here but it's to serve a point. If the team was the New York Niggers, the San Diego Spics or the San Fransisco Chinks (or Slant Eyes). The fact is, this name is HIGHLY offensive and should not be there in this day and age.

[Doc]

I found this page (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/offensive-mascots_n_4277317.html)..most offensive mascots:

1: Freeburg Midgets
2: Orofino Maniacs
3. Pekin Chinks
4. Centralia Orphans
5. Coachella Valley Arabs
6. Laurel Hill Hoboes
7. Butte Pirates
8. Wahpeton Wops
9. St. Bonaventure University Brown Squaws
10. Robstown Cottonpickers
11. Akron East Orientals
12. Cleveland Indians (I disagree, the logo offensive but not the name)
13. Frisco Coons
14. Rhode Island School of Design Nads-------------YEP----Go, Nads!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4c_PP0_DsJM--yes, that is a giant penis attacking a giant "clam"

[Lfbj00]

I found this page (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/18/offensive-mascots_n_4277317.html)..most offensive mascots:

14. Rhode Island School of Design Nads-------------YEP----Go, Nads!
"

Offensive??? I'm not sure. Hilarious??? I'm quite sure.

[TonyRay]

I never really thought of it as derogatory and even thought it was named that because of a coach and several players were native Americans. I wouldn't be against changing it. As for St Johns and Syracuse were named originally because of the color of their uniforms. Understood St Johns changing but not Syracuse. But in this politically correct era people get upset a lot.

[MTcatfan]

Redskins is most definitely racist and always has been and always will be and that has NOTHING do do with being PC. I am 41 years old and it has been a derogatory word for my race for as long as I have been aware.

Here is what I said in the Sterling thread about redskins when discussing the so called "slippery slope":

I mean come on, if the slippery slope actually existed we would not have an NFL team named for 1 of 2 phrases that would make me punch you in the face if you called me it, but you can't even get 10% of the outrage mustered that was mustered in the Sterling case, mustered to eliminate that blatantly racist phrase from the team name. Look folks "redskin" is the "n" word for Native Americans, and if you want to be beaten nearly to death or to death, please walk into any type of Indian Reservation establishment and holler "redskin" and see what Natives feel about that name. Despite what some want you to believe "redskin" is, was and always will be a completely 100% racist word, and while I think there are way more important issues for Natives today, it will be a happy day for me when and if that name is removed from the NFL.

btw, the other racist name that will get you punched by me is the phrase "prairie n word"..

[TonyRay]

You may be right, I just never heard it used other than as the team. As for the PC, I'm talking of changing names like Orangemen. Marquette changed theirs from Warriors, was that really offensive? Interesting learning some others views on things I never really thought much of. I don't think Washington named the team that to demean but rather honor and I see that it has both supporters and detractors in the Native American communities.

[jazyd]

Tony, same way I always thought of the name, a warrior and nothing mean. In all my years of watching sports I never once thought of the Redskins as something derogatory and I doubt the original owner of the team did either or they would not have used that name. And by the way, I am part Indian, around 20% but it goes back a ways.



You may be right, I just never heard it used other than as the team. As for the PC, I'm talking of changing names like Orangemen. Marquette changed theirs from Warriors, was that really offensive? Interesting learning some others views on things I never really thought much of. I don't think Washington named the team that to demean but rather honor and I see that it has both supporters and detractors in the Native American communities.

[MTcatfan]

Tony and Jazy, it is not surprising that you have never realized that this name is offensive, as you probably never grew up in or around Indian Country. Maybe the name for the Washington football team was never meant to be offensive, but the fact remains that the genesis of the name is offensive and has been offensive since the late 1800s. The story goes that the name was made Redskins because the coach at the time was an Indian, though that has been debunked somewhat due to some research that his parents were white, but as some know there are a lot of people that claim they are something like 1/16th Native. That said, the fact remains that even when the name was originated on 1937 it had been racial slur for around 25 years, and has remained a racial slur ever since, but of course in our country at that time the origins of the name didn't matter as we had plenty of institutional racism that didn't change for another 30 years.


Here is a letter that an elder of the Blackfeet tribe about his feeling on the Washington Redskins. For full disclosure I know Bob Burns, and have visited his house, as he is the step-father of my cousin that lives right next door to my mother in Browning, Montana. I will say that Bob is very well respected and someone that is above reproach in this or any matter of Blackfeet history or traditional Native ways. I will also say I knew 100% that Rick Reilly was lying or misquoting Bob, when he said in his article about this issue that Bob Burns supported or didn't care about the Redskins name as there was no way Bob would ever support using a racial slur. So here is the article, it is very informative if you take the time to read it:


http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/10/10/blackfeet-elder-says-rick-reilly-misquoted-him-wants-redskins-banned-151696


The name needs to be changed, there just isn't any other meaning to the word other than a racial slur, but I am not sure it is the most pressing issue out there for Natives.

[KeithKSR]

It isn't just Native American mascots that can be viewed as being offensive.

There is a need for Notre Dame to change their derogatory usage of the stereotypical Irish brawler as their mascot.

I also find the nickname Tar Heel offensive, as it stereotypes the people of Appalachia as being barefoot hillbillies.

[MTcatfan]

The difference is that neither one of those is considered the n-word of their race...redskins is the n-word for Indian...

(As an aside, I never really knew that is what a Tar Heel was, always wondered, never took the time to research it.)

[bigsky]

MTCATFAN is the definitive expert. I've been around Indian country enough now to understand a bit. And thanks to Pedro for just tellin it like it is.

[PedroDaGr8]

Just realized I never finished the offensive sentence. It should have ended: if the name was .... there would be no discussion it would have already been changed.

Just because some old bigots want to keep the name around doesn't make it right. This is a name used throughout history to demean Native Americans, to treat them as second class citizens. Much in the same way the variety of names for african-Americans were used.

[KeithKSR]

The difference is that neither one of those is considered the n-word of their race...redskins is the n-word for Indian...

(As an aside, I never really knew that is what a Tar Heel was, always wondered, never took the time to research it.)

I'm not saying that redskin is not derogatory, it is. I am saying that there are other mascots that are offensive in nature, but have not been identified as such.

[MTcatfan]

I'm not saying that redskin is not derogatory, it is. I am saying that there are other mascots that are offensive in nature, but have not been identified as such.


Therein lies the HUGE difference...redskins has been identified as the n-word for an entire race of people while I didn't even know Tar Heel could be offensive to anyone. If there are actually a group of people offended by Tar Heel I would support them now that I know, but something tells me that group probably doesn't exist. Indians do exist, and redskin is our n-word...

[MickintheHam]

I'm not saying that redskin is not derogatory, it is. I am saying that there are other mascots that are offensive in nature, but have not been identified as such.

This issue will burn until every team mascot is a toy poodle.

Nicknames at one time were intended to command respect. Show toughness. Demonstrate bravery. Today everyone has to be offended by something. I agree the term Redskin has no place in today's society. But, we can't let everyone who is offended by something rule the day.

Minority rule is chaos. And that is what is taking over our society. Education of the majority of the populace is the only way to ensure the rights of the minority are not trampled and respect is shown to everyone. Much of the anger and bitterness in this country seems to have its roots in minority rule where the courts, the Congress, the Executive Branch and the National Media lead the way for every special interest group.

I find it interesting that this controversy is centered on Washington DC. where many of the fans supporting the nickname are federal workers who are seemingly exempt from the rules everyone else must follow. If these were the Baltimore Redskins, the team nickname would have been changed years ago.

[MTcatfan]

This issue will burn until every team mascot is a toy poodle.

Nicknames at one time were intended to command respect. Show toughness. Demonstrate bravery. Today everyone has to be offended by something. I agree the term Redskin has no place in today's society. But, we can't let everyone who is offended by something rule the day.

Minority rule is chaos. And that is what is taking over our society. Education of the majority of the populace is the only way to ensure the rights of the minority are not trampled and respect is shown to everyone. Much of the anger and bitterness in this country seems to have its roots in minority rule where the courts, the Congress, the Executive Branch and the National Media lead the way for every special interest group.

I find it interesting that this controversy is centered on Washington DC. where many of the fans supporting the nickname are federal workers who are seemingly exempt from the rules everyone else must follow. If these were the Baltimore Redskins, the team nickname would have been changed years ago.


Really? I think someone is trying to make this a bigger issue than it really is and apply a political world view to something that is much simpler. In a world were we respect each other and love our fellow human being it is unbelievable that we have a team named after the n-word for a race of people. I know that I for one have no problem with Native nicknames that are respectful like Seminoles, Braves and Indians(caveat: The only Indian issue I have is Chief Wahoo, as he is a racist caricature of Natives, but have no issue with the name) but I have a huge issue with Redskins. This is not some sort of issue you can simply apply to the ole "today everyone has to be offended by something". This is not simply an overreaction by a group of people who have a tenuous hold on the item that they are "offended" by. This is a race of people who are protesting a word that since it started appearing in our vernacular in the 1860's was always the n-word for our people, and to have a team named after your n-word and to want it changed is not letting "everyone who is offended by something rule the day".


Plus I would say that you are exactly right about minority rule, but something tells me we would disagree about which minority is trying to rule this country...The thing I have is both sides that accuse the other side of trying to rule, are in fact BOTH minorities that do not have the majority in their world view. To me the silent majority is the real majority, and they only really over move one way or the other when they feel we have moved to far left or right. The thing I see right now is that the silent majority moves right and left based on specific issues, and that is why we are where we are. The silent majority wants a moderate country, and right now the extremes are so far both ways, the silent majority has to move by issues not by some over arching, all involving ideology.

[KeithKSR]

The silent majority wants a moderate country, and right now the extremes are so far both ways, the silent majority has to move by issues not by some over arching, all involving ideology.

I used to think that the majority want moderation, but have concluded that the majority are relatively clueless and have no concept of what is going on with most issues and are easily manipulated by spin.

[MTcatfan]

I used to think that the majority want moderation, but have concluded that the majority are relatively clueless and have no concept of what is going on with most issues and are easily manipulated by spin.

Probably true, which is why both sides play heavily in the spin mode...I guess when the silent majority moves, it is probably based on whose spin is working the best at that time...:confused0024:

[Doc]

I think most reasonable folks agree that Redskins is inappropriate and see the offensiveness of the term. But like many other issues where faux-rage barges in, it gets lost. We see outrage over the Cleveland Indians, the Chicago Blackhawks, the Atlanta Braves, the Kansas City Chiefs. None of those team monikers should be seen as offensive yet in the hypersensitive uber politically correct world we live in, these are the source of the occasional protest. And when that occurs it diminishes the impact when there is an actual issue such as we see with "Redskins"

[MickintheHam]

Really? Of course. I think someone is trying to make this a bigger issue than it really is and apply a political world view to something that is much simpler. Of course it is political. This is a political message board where it is being discussed. The issue is caught up in the main stream media. Political figures are taking sides. I didn't make it political. It was done for me. Sort of like the Federal Government works. In a world were we respect each other and love our fellow human being it is unbelievable that we have a team named after the n-word for a race of people. I know that I for one have no problem with Native nicknames that are respectful like Seminoles, Braves and Indians(caveat: The only Indian issue I have is Chief Wahoo, as he is a racist caricature of Natives, but have no issue with the name) but I have a huge issue with Redskins. This is not some sort of issue you can simply apply to the ole "today everyone has to be offended by something". This is not simply an overreaction by a group of people who have a tenuous hold on the item that they are "offended" by. This is a race of people who are protesting a word that since it started appearing in our vernacular in the 1860's was always the n-word for our people, and to have a team named after your n-word and to want it changed is not letting "everyone who is offended by something rule the day".


Plus I would say that you are exactly right about minority rule, but something tells me we would disagree about which minority is trying to rule this country...The thing I have is both sides that accuse the other side of trying to rule, are in fact BOTH minorities that do not have the majority in their world view. To me the silent majority is the real majority, and they only really over move one way or the other when they feel we have moved to far left or right. The thing I see right now is that the silent majority moves right and left based on specific issues, and that is why we are where we are. The silent majority wants a moderate country, and right now the extremes are so far both ways, the silent majority has to move by issues not by some over arching, all involving ideology.

I agree with you on the silent majority. So does Richard Nixon, albeit from the grave. But I would point out that majority seems to be getting more irritated by the day.

[MTcatfan]

I think most reasonable folks agree that Redskins is inappropriate and see the offensiveness of the term. But like many other issues where faux-rage barges in, it gets lost. We see outrage over the Cleveland Indians, the Chicago Blackhawks, the Atlanta Braves, the Kansas City Chiefs. None of those team monikers should be seen as offensive yet in the hypersensitive uber politically correct world we live in, these are the source of the occasional protest. And when that occurs it diminishes the impact when there is an actual issue such as we see with "Redskins"

I agree with you on this one, the faux-rage machine trying to end ALL Native names has completely belittled the movement to end the one true racist name, Redskins, and in turn has allowed those that think getting rid of Redskins is just a PC thing, and not a racism thing, a bush to hide behind in their wrong headed opposition to ridding the sports world of a name that is that races n-word.

[kingcat]

Let's not leave out the Kansas Krackers.

Would not be nearly as offensive as Redskins imho.

[CatinIL]

It amazes me that to this day there is a team called the Redskins. I'm going to be vulgar here but it's to serve a point. If the team was the New York Niggers, the San Diego Spics or the San Fransisco Chinks (or Slant Eyes). The fact is, this name is HIGHLY offensive and should not be there in this day and age.

Nail meet hammer...well put!

[suncat05]

Then why don't we do this: when changing the name, remove Washington(because a great man's name is being besmirched due to it having to be associated with this brazenly racist nickname!), and let's just call the team the D.C.(fill in the name here)............problem solved!

If only it was that easy, huh?

[Darrell KSR]

U.S. Patent Office cancels trademark for Redskins http://t.co/jP9eKiovHh

[blueboss]

Good move now everyone can use it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PedroDaGr8]

OK, this image made me laugh. Someone commented that this is the only way they can keep the redskins name:

3784

[blueboss]

It amazes me that to this day there is a team called the Redskins. I'm going to be vulgar here but it's to serve a point. If the team was the New York Niggers, the San Diego Spics or the San Fransisco Chinks (or Slant Eyes). The fact is, this name is HIGHLY offensive and should not be there in this day and age.

You left out Carolina Cotton Pickers, New England Micks

[TonyRay]

Good move now everyone can use it


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not from what I've heard with Washington having common law on their side.