Poll: Should the "Redskins" name be changed?

[Rob's House]

.

 

I was kidding...I'm still not offended

 

You could call them the Metropolitan Malignant Malnourished Mexicans, for all I care!

 

(My wife is Mexican, and my kids are starving.)

 

Be careful what you "kid" about.

 

What is it with you people. Why do you take life so seriously?

Edited February 10, 2013 by Rob's House

[26CornerBlitz]

 

 

 

What is it with you people. Why do you take life so serious?

 

First of all it's seriously not serious.

 

Who says people are serious all of the time. Serious subject matters call for serious, well considered, meaningful discussion. I see lots of ignorant, inconsiderate, mental midgetry disguised as meaningful discourse.

 

Glad to see you have a comrade in sophomoric commentary. Continue to revel in the company of each other. I now disengage from you (collectively).

[ExiledInIllinois]

The bottom line and simple fact is the power should lie with the one's that the nickname is referring to. It doesn't matter what anybody else says. If they feel offended, then they are offended and the team shall cease to use the offensive nickname. There is no tradition and any history. The team is powerless w/this issue. Simple thing to do, just avoid nicknames that reference groups of people. It is never an "honor."

 

The one sticky team issue thing can be with regard to the Chicago Blackhawks. The name is actually referenced to the original owner's Army WWI Army Division. Notice that the team changed the nicknameto one word rather than the original Black Hawk, as in the Sauk Chief: Black Hawk. The funny thing is, the Blackhawks use natives and tomahawks more appropriate for the Lakota Sioux than the Sauk...

Edited February 10, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois

[The Senator]

First of all it's seriously not serious.

 

Who says people are serious all of the time. Serious subject matters call for serious, well considered, meaningful discussion. I see lots of ignorant, inconsiderate, mental midgetry disguised as meaningful discourse.

 

Glad to see you have a comrade in sophomoric commentary. Continue to revel in the company of each other. I now disengage from you (collectively).

.

Have I ever told you about the time I saved Andre Reed Jr.'s life?

[Rob's House]

First of all it's seriously not serious.

 

Who says people are serious all of the time. Serious subject matters call for serious, well considered, meaningful discussion. I see lots of ignorant, inconsiderate, mental midgetry disguised as meaningful discourse.

 

Glad to see you have a comrade in sophomoric commentary. Continue to revel in the company of each other. I now disengage from you (collectively).

All I see from you is heavy moralizing and holier-than-thou condescension with nothing to back it up. Do you have anything to refute my "sophomoric" commentary or just more empty rhetoric? Or maybe calling out a grammatical error after it's been corrected is all you got?

 

The bottom line and simple fact is the power should lie with the one's that the nickname is referring to. It doesn't matter what anybody else says. If they feel offended, then they are offended and the team shall cease to use the offensive nickname. There is no tradition and any history. The team is powerless w/this issue. Simple thing to do, just avoid nicknames that reference groups of people. It is never an "honor."

 

The one sticky team issue thing can be with regard to the Chicago Blackhawks. The name is actually referenced to the original owner's Army WWI Army Division. Notice that the team changed the nicknameto one word rather than the original Black Hawk, as in the Sauk Chief: Black Hawk. The funny thing is, the Blackhawks use natives and tomahawks more appropriate for the Lakota Sioux than the Sauk...

Those people are dead

[The Senator]

Those people are dead

.

Washington Deadskins???

 

(Certainly, dead people cannot claim to be offended )

.

Edited February 10, 2013 by The Senator

[San Jose Bills Fan]

God forbid anyone in this country ever be offended.

 

What the hell do you mean by that?

[Rob's House]

What the hell do you mean by that?

I could be wrong, but I think he's saying that people should buck up a bit and we shouldn't all **** our pants at the prospect of someone being offended over something that's not that big a deal in the first place.

[Numark]

I don't get this argument at all. Is the name racist, yeah it is. Is it a big deal, not even close. As far as issues go, including ones based in racism, this one doesn't matter. HOWEVER, the uniform, name, and logo look stupid. They should change the name and redesign their crap. It is a win-win for everyone. The team gets to rebrand their team and people have to buy new everything and it gives a positive buzz to the team. People that care about football will be happy with that. And for the people that are actually offended, they are happy too.

 

 

I mean look at this pos logo, http://cloudfront.inthecapital.com/files/2013/01/redskins-logo.jpg

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I could be wrong, but I think he's saying that people should buck up a bit and we shouldn't all **** our pants at the prospect of someone being offended over something that's not that big a deal in the first place.

 

I'm just playing Rob.

 

Sorry to be irreverant to the discussion.

[Rob's House]

I'm just playing Rob.

 

Sorry to be irreverant to the discussion.

 

I just read it again; I'm not sure how I missed the irony. Work must be giving me tunnel vision.

[NoSaint]

 

I could be wrong, but I think he's saying that people should buck up a bit and we shouldn't all **** our pants at the prospect of someone being offended over something that's not that big a deal in the first place.

 

You seem rather offended by the whole situation. Have you checked your own pants lately?

[Rob's House]

You seem rather offended by the whole situation. Have you checked your own pants lately?

I'm sure I responded to this. Not sure if it was deleted or lost into the nether regions of cyberspace. Basically, my commentary is simply a reaction to the insane fixation that the culture has taken in regards to racism. I'm not so much offended as I am throwing their b.s. back in their faces. What offends me are the real world consequences that flow from this irrational fanatacism (not necessarily the Redskins, but generally speaking).

 

I also get a kick out of pointing out how all the people who think they feel so strongly about this issue are really just emotionally programmed to feel the way they do. They think their values are deep seeded and meaningful, but they're really just a product of conditioning and association (associate feelings of atrocity with racism and voila) just like Pavlov's dogs, and have no rational basis for their feelings, yet they feel so passionately about it as though this bogus value is an integral part of their identities.

[KD in CA]

The bottom line and simple fact is the power should lie with the one's that the nickname is referring to...

 

Does that mean we can get rid of terms like 'Native American' that were created by arrogant white people who thought they knew best what American Indians like to be called?

[26CornerBlitz]

Does that mean we can get rid of terms like 'Native American' that were created by arrogant white people who thought they knew best what American Indians like to be called?

 

The people were called "Indians" because dumb azz Christopher Columbus was lost and the name stuck.

[NoSaint]

 

I'm sure I responded to this. Not sure if it was deleted or lost into the nether regions of cyberspace. Basically, my commentary is simply a reaction to the insane fixation that the culture has taken in regards to racism. I'm not so much offended as I am throwing their b.s. back in their faces. What offends me are the real world consequences that flow from this irrational fanatacism (not necessarily the Redskins, but generally speaking).

 

I also get a kick out of pointing out how all the people who think they feel so strongly about this issue are really just emotionally programmed to feel the way they do. They think their values are deep seeded and meaningful, but they're really just a product of conditioning and association (associate feelings of atrocity with racism and voila) just like Pavlov's dogs, and have no rational basis for their feelings, yet they feel so passionately about it as though this bogus value is an integral part of their identities.

 

It was there, so someone deleted it.

 

I was just noting that the anti-PC crowd can be just as overboard as the PC crowd. There's a happy middle where you can care about your fellow man without being a "kitty."

 

We often see people on this board rage against the "PC police" just for the sake of being anti-pc which is ridiculous in and of itself. There are places where society should say enough is enough. Is this one? Unlikely to rank anywhere in the list of worst offenses but also surprising its so accepted.

[Rob's House]

It was there, so someone deleted it.

 

I was just noting that the anti-PC crowd can be just as overboard as the PC crowd. There's a happy middle where you can care about your fellow man without being a "kitty."

 

We often see people on this board rage against the "PC police" just for the sake of being anti-pc which is ridiculous in and of itself. There are places where society should say enough is enough. Is this one? Unlikely to rank anywhere in the list of worst offenses but also surprising its so accepted.

No doubt. If someone actually is getting screwed over I'm all about righting the wrong. Despite my avatar line I'm actually very moved by a sense of justice. That's what's guiding my chosen career path.

 

A few places I part with the pop-culture mass is 1. if someone is treated wrongly I don't too much care if it was racially or ethnically motivated. If someone shot me to steal my car I'm not relieved to know it wasn't racially motivated, I'm just pissed I got shot. 2. I view people as individuals instead of groups.

[KD in CA]

The people were called "Indians" because dumb azz Christopher Columbus was lost and the name stuck.

 

So what? It "stuck" with the American Indians themselves and over FIVE HUNDRED YEARS they adopoted it as their own. If they don't have a problem with it half a millenium later, why do you? Do you think calling AI something else is going to somehow change their sad history since the European arrival?

 

Every name has its origin somewhere, and I'm sure a lot of them where named by errors or misunderstandings. Maybe we should rename Earth too since the thinkers of the day thought it was flat when they christened it such.

[26CornerBlitz]

So what? It "stuck" with the American Indians themselves and over FIVE HUNDRED YEARS they adopoted it as their own. If they don't have a problem with it half a millenium later, why do you? Do you think calling AI something else is going to somehow change their sad history since the European arrival?

 

Every name has its origin somewhere, and I'm sure a lot of them where named by errors or misunderstandings. Maybe we should rename Earth too since the thinkers of the day thought it was flat when they christened it such.

 

Where exactly did I say I had a problem with it? You will not find it, because I didn't say I did and I don't.

 

Walk it back my friend.

Edited February 11, 2013 by 26CornerBlitz

[KD in CA]

Where exactly did I say I had a problem with it? You will not find it, because I didn't say I did and I don't.

 

Walk it back my friend.

 

You response to me seemed to imply otherwise. I don't know why you would have responded in that way if there wasn't some disagreement with my question to EII.