Give me a break. Everyone's culture gets shit on in this country. There are TV commercials poking fun at just about every race/color/ethnic group there is. TV shows constantly exploit racial stereotypes for humorous effect. Besides all that, the NFL is a private entity and as long ticket sales aren't affected, it's a complete waste of breath to try and change it.
The cost to the owner is a non-issue.
Players choose to put themselves at risk.
SeaChickens ....team has no honor.
And fans choose to cheer and spectate humans sacrificing their short and long-term physical and mental health for the sake of entertainment. I don't see there being a big enough uproar to make Snyder change the name. All he cares about is making money.
Snyder is a man that bought out all of the radio stations and newspapers in Washington to control the message about his football team. He is a ruthless owner. The Redskins brand and the tradition associated with that has made the Redskins the 2nd most valuable team in the NFL and the top 5 in all of professional sports. I can't see them giving in on this.
I don't believe "native" is really a preferred term anymore. American Indian as far as I know.
The players are putting their physical and future mental wellbeing on the line under their own free will, I'm not sure what that has to do with the racist football team name.
I personally didn't realize that Redskins was an actual racial slur. I always thought it was similar to calling folks black, white, etc.
When it first appeared as an English expression in the early 1800s, "it came in the most respectful context and at the highest level," Goddard said in an interview. "These are white people and Indians talking together, with the white people trying to ingratiate themselves."
I'm saying that nothing with move Snyder's finger or the NFL's without there being a financial incentive to the move. There is not a big enough uproar, the majority of Native Americans don't find it offensive based on the poll, and the Redskins are a team that has built their brand around traditions and rivalries.
Snyder is an asshole for saying "never," because it seems to be an arrogant choice and one that seems like he didn't consider anything, but it's his choice.
The NFL was and still is slow to give health benefits to players suffering early onset dementia and debilitating drug addiction as a result of sacrificing their bodies due to pressure from coaches to play or from themselves. Changing the name of a team when the owner doesn't want it will take an extraordinary effort.
Stephen Dodson Inuit Chief said:We dont have a problem with [the name] at all," Dodson told the website."In fact were honored. Were quite honored.
Its actually a term of endearment that we would refer to each other as," Dodson said. "Its not degrading in one bit and thats why I sent you guys an email."
However, an exact parellel to that would be having a logo of George Washington and calling the team the Washington White-skins. In both cases I think native Americans / white people are being celebrated rather than the opposite, but from a politically correct standpoint both are awkward.
I think the name itself is fine, but the logo and imagery being used to suggest that Redskins stand for Indians should be changed. Redskins can also stand for pigskins or virtually anything else, and Redskins lore has actually been more about hogs and pigskins than anything Indian related anyway.
There you have it folks. But I doubt this will actually end the debate. Some people just love to be offended.And here's the flip-side of the coin from an full-blooded American Chief... Someone who's opinion actually matters, just like other American Indians who disagree with him.
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwo...t-chief-who-supports-use-redskins-name-149206
There you have it folks. But I doubt this will actually end the debate. Some people just love to be offended.
Like there isn't an article in this thread about a group of native Americans protesting these names.
I'd like to link you to the website of the black man who is against laws allowing interracial marriage but I'm on my phone at the moment.
Yeah or Washington Reds.Why not just change it to the Washington Red and be over with it? It worked well for Syracuse (Orangemen -> Orange).
There's a link saying they are. And I just posted a link of a full-blooded American Indian Chief who represents a group of folks who aren't. And that's the issue at hand, how many of the offended are truly offended.
I don't care if white/black/brown people feel like they want to champion for these people. I don't care if you or anyone else wants to be offended for American Indians. I want to know who of that 1% of our population are truly offended. What is their stance on the issue.
Seeing as there's a high chance of me being of Indian ancestry does that make you take my opinion more seriously, or should we just stick to the fact that its a racial slur?
There you have it folks. But I doubt this will actually end the debate. Some people just love to be offended.
oops
A high chance? lol you either know or you don't.
- Seeing as though, my fathers side of the family runs rich with American Indian heritage I'd say that our opinions are equal.
- Unless you identify as an American Indian, your opinion matters no more than mine. But the wording if your post doesn't make it seem as though you do.
- If you do identify as an American Indian, your opinion is no greater than those who take the term as a badge of honor.
Again, I'd much rather focus on those who are truly offended. And not the usual suspects who like to be offended for the sake of being so.
The issue is, is it a slur or not and is the imagery racist or not. It is. My or your race doesn't give us more authority.
If there were a hockey team called the San Jose Vatos, you don't need to be Hispanic to understand that the name and racist imagery would be offensive.
Seeing as there's a high chance of me being of Indian ancestry does that make you take my opinion more seriously, or should we just stick to the fact that its a racial slur?
It appears as though it's not that clear cut with this term. At least according to a true blooded American Indian. How about you email him and tell him that he should be offended.
I think there are people in here telling you there there is evidence that it may not be perceived as a racial slur universally. Personally, I have always thought it was insensitive, but not a slur outright. You seem to be saying it's a slur per se. It might be silly to describe racial groups by color, but it's done. People from Europe are described as "White" and people from Africa as "Black", and that's not perceived as racist. I don't really see how "Red" to describe Native Americans is any different. Maybe it's the use of the phrase "Skins" afterwards? Maybe it seems like a slur to you, but for me, and a lot of other people, it just sounds antiquated (and I'll grant silly and insensitive).
I don't think there's an "oops" to it. Both sides need to continue to speak up.
I don't think the description of "red" really bothers anyone. I mean, Oklahoma is literally Choctaw for "red people" and was proposed before statehood by the Choctaw. So I do think its more of the use "skins" on the end of it like you said.I don't really see how "Red" to describe Native Americans is any different. Maybe it's the use of the phrase "Skins" afterwards?
sure
i was referring to the poster saying "i doubt this will end the debate", as though it should
I don't think the description of "red" really bothers anyone. I mean, Oklahoma is literally Choctaw for "red people" and was proposed before statehood by the Choctaw. So I do think its more of the use "skins" on the end of it like you said.
Again, I'm Chickasaw, and I can understand how people might find it offensive, but its so minor in the grand scheme of things. I'd much rather the leadership of the Chickasaw Nation focus on combating language extinction and cultural education than worry about a team name.
As a Redskins fan I think that the proposed Redtails name in honor of the Tuskegee Airman is pretty cool.
That sounds pretty awesome.
That sounds pretty awesome.
I don't think the description of "red" really bothers anyone. I mean, Oklahoma is literally Choctaw for "red people" and was proposed before statehood by the Choctaw. So I do think its more of the use "skins" on the end of it like you said.
Again, I'm Chickasaw, and I can understand how people might find it offensive, but its so minor in the grand scheme of things. I'd much rather the leadership of the Chickasaw Nation focus on combating language extinction, cultural education, and in general helping everyone rather than worry about a team name.
Amazing, THIS is the perspective that we need to hear more often in regards to this issue.
Well yeah, I'm sure it was fine to call Native Americans "red skins" back then. But today? Not so much.
It's pretty obvious that this isn't a debate. Their minds have been made up, and that is that.As you gloss over the thoughts and opinion of someone (Butane123) who actually has the right to be offended. Thus proving my point.
Good, they shouldn't. Not only is it nice to see a stand against political correctness, my personal take (not that it matters in this situation) is that it honors positive aspects of Native Americans. I find it difficult to believe anyone's a fan of the name because they think it's racist and enjoy that aspect of it.
You mean the kind that backs you up?
![]()
Im Irish, so this is offensive and must be changed at once!!sarcasm
Fuck off with this PC garbage.
Not at all... The perspective of someone who actually has a right to be offended. Not some keyboard jockey who's picked his offense of the week to get butt-hurt over.
The name? Fair enough I think it should be changed. Its clearly a slur.
But are People are really offended by the indian chief logo?
![]()
Im Irish, so this is offensive and must be changed at once!!sarcasm
Fuck off with this PC garbage.