Poll: Should the "Redskins" name be changed?

[dwight in philly]

Wait, a second ago, you said you read it in article and publications. Now, when pressed, it's just something we should all know?

 

Again, you are stating your very small opinion as fact.

for crissakes! i cant quote publications, maybe you should get out once in a while, read, whatever, there is a life outside of being a thread accuracy policeman

[RK_BillsFan]

now you are offending transgendered people

 

Cross genders are called hogs?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

so be it, but to compare kikes to redskins is a stretch to make a point.

 

why?

 

Would you prefer "Hebes?"

 

Seriously, I didn't vote in the poll because I recuse myself from things that don't concern me.

 

I have opinions on abortion but I keep them to myself because I'm not a woman.

 

Same with the Redskins thing. I have my opinion but ultimately I don't care.

 

Let me say though that I'm not one of those alarmists who believe something like this is "an assault on free speech." Exaggerate much?

 

I also think that there must be polls somewhere of only native Americans on this subject and that would be interesting.

 

I also don't think Snyder should be forced to do anything but it certainly would make me feel much better about him as a person if he changed the team name.

 

Finally, let me add that Daniel Snyder is a real a!@#$. I won't bother digging up all the supporting "evidence." It's all readily available so don't ask to be spoon fed.

[DrDawkinstein]

for crissakes! i cant quote publications, maybe you should get out once in a while, read, whatever, there is a life outside of being a thread accuracy policeman

 

Hey, Im stuck at this computer until 5-6pm, so until then things like accuracy, logic, and facts will be ENFORCED. I know it will be tough, but you'll have to deal with it.

[C.Biscuit97]

Would you prefer "Hebes?"

 

Seriously, I didn't vote in the poll because I recuse myself from things that don't concern me.

 

I have opinions on abortion but I keep them to myself because I'm not a woman.

 

Same with the Redskins thing. I have my opinion but ultimately I don't care.

 

Let me say though that I'm not one of those alarmists who believe something like this is "an assault on free speech." Exaggerate much?

 

I also think that there must be polls somewhere of only native Americans on this subject and that would be interesting.

 

I also don't think Snyder should be forced to do anything but it certainly would make me feel much better about him as a person if he changed the team name.

 

Finally, let me add that Daniel Snyder is a real a!@#$. I won't bother digging up all the supporting "evidence." It's all readily available so don't ask to be spoon fed.

 

I agree with this. Like I said, let Native Americans vote. IF they are good with it, then I'm good with it. If they have a problem with it (and I do think it is a bad name), then change it.

 

But to not even considered changing a team that was named in 1932 because it would be too "PC" is about as ignorant as you can get. But I guess for some, the 1930s were the good ol' days.

[dwight in philly]

Would you prefer "Hebes?"

 

Seriously, I didn't vote in the poll because I recuse myself from things that don't concern me.

 

I have opinions on abortion but I keep them to myself because I'm not a woman.

 

Same with the Redskins thing. I have my opinion but ultimately I don't care.

 

Let me say though that I'm not one of those alarmists who believe something like this is "an assault on free speech." Exaggerate much?

 

I also think that there must be polls somewhere of only native Americans on this subject and that would be interesting.

 

I also don't think Snyder should be forced to do anything but it certainly would make me feel much better about him as a person if he changed the team name.

 

Finally, let me add that Daniel Snyder is a real a!@#$. I won't bother digging up all the supporting "evidence." It's all readily available so don't ask to be spoon fed.

i agree about snyder, classic a-hole, but there have been varied opinions about the" redskin" and if it should be changed. i do not know the answer, but , was "buffalo bill" an indian(thats what they were called in his time) hunter of some sort?

[eball]

If nothing ever changed because it would interfere with "tradition" this would be a pretty terrible country to live in.

[DrDawkinstein]

i agree about snyder, classic a-hole, but there have been varied opinions about the" redskin" and if it should be changed. i do not know the answer, but , was "buffalo bill" an indian(thats what they were called in his time) hunter of some sort?

 

Ok, you're just trolling now right?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_Bill

 

I love the thought process behind your posts. You start out by admitting you have no idea what you are talking about, and then post your assertions anyways to become part of the discussion, and ultimately dilute and kill the real argument.

 

Well done.

[dwight in philly]

Ok, you're just trolling now right?

 

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Buffalo_Bill

 

I love the thought process behind your posts. You start out by admitting you have no idea what you are talking about, and then post your assertions anyways to become part of the discussion, and ultimately dilute and kill the real argument.

 

Well done.

huh??yes sir! .. you are the man!(trolling?) Edited May 13, 2013 by dwight in philly

[eme123]

The absurdity of a few is insane!

 

Do people of Native American heritage even have red skin???

 

Redskin is a term that does NOT refer to the skin of Native Americans. It is a word used to describe their vermilion face and body paint. -Oxford Dictionary

 

Wikipedia describes Redskin as a racial slur referring to the Native American race. This is a terrible source for one thing. However, since this is the only medium people seem to get their information from lately, check out two polls listed regarding the term.

 

1) A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.

2) A 2004 Univ. of Penn poll found that 91% of American Indians found the name acceptable.

[RK_BillsFan]

The Hogs would be a way more fun name for a team. Just saying.

[DrDawkinstein]

The absurdity of a few is insane!

 

Do people of Native American heritage even have red skin???

 

Redskin is a term that does NOT refer to the skin of Native Americans. It is a word used to describe their vermilion face and body paint. -Oxford Dictionary

 

Wikipedia describes Redskin as a racial slur referring to the Native American race. This is a terrible source for one thing. However, since this is the only medium people seem to get their information from lately, check out two polls listed regarding the term.

 

Actually, as you linked earlier, Oxford defines it thusly:

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/redskin

 

Definition of redskin

noun

dated offensive

• 
  an American Indian.
   
  

 

Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. In time, however, through a process that in linguistics is called pejoration, by which a neutral term acquires an unfavorable connotation or denotation, redskin lost its neutral, accurate descriptive sense and became a term of disparagement. Red man is first recorded in the early 17th century and was originally neutral in tone. Red Indian is first recorded in the early 19th century and was used by the British, far more than by Americans, to distinguish the Indians of the subcontinent from the Indians of the Americas. All three terms are dated or offensive. American Indian and Native American are now the standard umbrella terms. Of course, if it is possible or appropriate, one can also use specific tribal names (Cheyenne, Nez Percé, etc.).

 

You do however list some interesting information here:

1) A 2002 poll commissioned by Sports Illustrated found that 75% of American Indians surveyed had no objection to the Redskins name.

2) A 2004 Univ. of Penn poll found that 91% of American Indians found the name acceptable.

 

The name is questionable, as best. If they were making a new team, there is no way that would even come up as a consideration. I'd bet most people in this thread wouldnt call someone a Redskin to their face. That alone should tell us everything we need to know about the name, and we shouldn't be surprised when people voice their opinions against it.

 

I agree with what SJBF says above that Snyder shouldnt be forced to change it. Although, he doesnt have any good reason not to.

[eme123]

Actually, as you linked earlier, Oxford defines it thusly:

http://oxforddiction...english/redskin

 

Definition of redskin

noun

dated offensive

• 
  an American Indian.
  

Redskin is first recorded in the late 17th century and was applied to the Algonquian peoples generally, but specifically to the Delaware (who lived in what is now southern New York State and New York City, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania). Redskin referred not to the natural skin color of the Delaware, but to their use of vermilion face paint and body paint. In time, however, through a process that in linguistics is called pejoration, by which a neutral term acquires an unfavorable connotation or denotation, redskin lost its neutral, accurate descriptive sense and became a term of disparagement. Red man is first recorded in the early 17th century and was originally neutral in tone. Red Indian is first recorded in the early 19th century and was used by the British, far more than by Americans, to distinguish the Indians of the subcontinent from the Indians of the Americas. All three terms are dated or offensive. American Indian and Native American are now the standard umbrella terms. Of course, if it is possible or appropriate, one can also use specific tribal names (Cheyenne, Nez Percé, etc.).

 

You do however list some interesting information here:

 

 

The name is questionable, as best. If they were making a new team, there is no way that would even come up as a consideration. I'd bet most people in this thread wouldnt call someone a Redskin to their face. That alone should tell us everything we need to know about the name, and we shouldn't be surprised when people voice their opinions against it.

 

I agree with what SJBF says above that Snyder shouldnt be forced to change it. Although, he doesnt have any good reason not to.

 

 

 

Snyder has a great reason not to change the team name. Its been their name since 1932. Its the brand he purchased for a large sum of money. Snyder didn't purchase the team to rebrand them as the Washington Pelicans.

 

Most people wouldn't call a Native American a Redskin to their face because it doesn't make any sense. Their skin isn't red! If a person did want to try this stunt I imagine the person of Native American descent as being pretty perplexed.

 

The point in my above post was the original definition of Redskin has been slandered. People crying racism are helping turn it into something else. The original definiton is still the original definition even though a FEW take it as something else.

[Prickly Pete]

Snyder has a great reason not to change the team name. Its been their name since 1932. Its the brand he purchased for a large sum of money. Snyder didn't purchase the team to rebrand them as the Washington Pelicans.

 

Most people wouldn't call a Native American a Redskin to their face because it doesn't make any sense. Their skin isn't red! If a person did want to try this stunt I imagine the person of Native American descent as being pretty perplexed.

 

The point in my above post was the original definition of Redskin has been slandered. People crying racism are helping turn it into something else. The original definiton is still the original definition even though a FEW take it as something else.

 

 

Weak.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

But this "tyranny by minority" is getting in the way of my good ol' regular tyranny!

 

There is no logic in the opposing argument. Just spoiled juveniles upset that they cant get their way 100% of the time.

There is that name calling again... stick to the argument instead of the name calling. Not everyone will be happy and some will be offended by a myriad of things. If we banned everything offensive to everyone, we'd be left with no culture at all. You cannot please EVERYONE,.. why is that so hard to understand??? Edited May 14, 2013 by BmoreBills

[DrDawkinstein]

Snyder has a great reason not to change the team name. Its been their name since 1932. Its the brand he purchased for a large sum of money. Snyder didn't purchase the team to rebrand them as the Washington Pelicans.

 

None of those reasons amount to anything more than "I dont WANNA!". Fair enough since he owns the team, but they aren't good reasons.

 

Most people wouldn't call a Native American a Redskin to their face because it doesn't make any sense. Their skin isn't red! If a person did want to try this stunt I imagine the person of Native American descent as being pretty perplexed.

 

The point in my above post was the original definition of Redskin has been slandered. People crying racism are helping turn it into something else. The original definiton is still the original definition even though a FEW take it as something else.

 

You aren't familiar with history.

 

There is that name calling again... stick to the argument instead of the name calling. Not everyone will be happy and some will be offended by a myriad of things. If we banned everything offensive to everyone, we'd be left with no culture at all. You cannot please EVERYONE,.. why is that so hard to understand???

 

Stop trying to oppress my free speech you tyrannical minority! Sorry, when I see a bunch of adults responding like children, that's what they get called, as it's the most accurate way to describe them (and the entire "tyranny by minority" BS argument).

 

You're right, you can not please everyone. And in this case, we have two sides. One that might not like the name because it is a derogatory term that reminds an entire race of the systematic genocide of their people sponsored by the very Government whose Capital is the city where the team resides. And the other side who thinks it should stay because... umm... because that has been the name for a while?... uhhh... or maybe.... because they don't like it when a small group gets a voice?... I still don't understand anyone's argument for keeping it. Other than "because Snyder CAN keep it".

 

So you cant please everyone. But who would changing the name upset? And do you truly think the name of a sports team would carry the same offensiveness as the history behind US/Indian relations?

 

The team name doesnt offend me at all. Ive never been bothered by it. But if they changed the team mascot, or even if they changed the Buffalo team name, or any other team name for that matter.... who cares?

[NoSaint]

 

 

None of those reasons amount to anything more than "I dont WANNA!". Fair enough since he owns the team, but they aren't good reasons.

 

 

 

You aren't familiar with history.

 

 

 

Stop trying to oppress my free speech you tyrannical minority! Sorry, when I see a bunch of adults responding like children, that's what they get called, as it's the most accurate way to describe them (and the entire "tyranny by minority" BS argument).

 

You're right, you can not please everyone. And in this case, we have two sides. One that might not like the name because it is a derogatory term that reminds an entire race of the systematic genocide of their people sponsored by the very Government whose Capital is the city where the team resides. And the other side who thinks it should stay because... umm... because that has been the name for a while?... uhhh... or maybe.... because they don't like it when a small group gets a voice?... I still don't understand anyone's argument for keeping it. Other than "because Snyder CAN keep it".

 

So you cant please everyone. But who would changing the name upset? And do you truly think the name of a sports team would carry the same offensiveness as the history behind US/Indian relations?

 

The team name doesnt offend me at all. Ive never been bothered by it. But if they changed the team mascot, or even if they changed the Buffalo team name, or any other team name for that matter.... who cares?

 

I think we're very like minded on this one. Like you said up thread - he shouldn't be forced, but its a little ridiculous that it hasn't been done by choice.

[eme123]

None of those reasons amount to anything more than "I dont WANNA!". Fair enough since he owns the team, but they aren't good reasons.

 

You aren't familiar with history.

 

 

Stop trying to oppress my free speech you tyrannical minority! Sorry, when I see a bunch of adults responding like children, that's what they get called, as it's the most accurate way to describe them (and the entire "tyranny by minority" BS argument).

 

You're right, you can not please everyone. And in this case, we have two sides. One that might not like the name because it is a derogatory term that reminds an entire race of the systematic genocide of their people sponsored by the very Government whose Capital is the city where the team resides. And the other side who thinks it should stay because... umm... because that has been the name for a while?... uhhh... or maybe.... because they don't like it when a small group gets a voice?... I still don't understand anyone's argument for keeping it. Other than "because Snyder CAN keep it".

 

So you cant please everyone. But who would changing the name upset? And do you truly think the name of a sports team would carry the same offensiveness as the history behind US/Indian relations?

 

The team name doesnt offend me at all. Ive never been bothered by it. But if they changed the team mascot, or even if they changed the Buffalo team name, or any other team name for that matter.... who cares?

 

"I dont WANNA!" is the best reason. Its HIS team and business. If you or anyone else doesn't like it than support another product.

 

Im actually incredibly familiar with history. When were American Indians being referred to as "Redskins" by a significant group of people?

 

75%-91% of people of American Indian heritage probably don't know and obviously don't care.

Edited May 14, 2013 by eme123

[reddogblitz]

You're right, you can not please everyone. And in this case, we have two sides. One that might not like the name because it is a derogatory term that reminds an entire race of the systematic genocide of their people sponsored by the very Government whose Capital is the city where the team resides.

Thanks for typing this. Saves me the keystrokes.

 

I don't think the question, if there was one, would be to change the name is not that it offends anyone or not. To me, if it offends American Indians or not is kindof irrelevant. It's that the government in whose city this team resides tried to murder, run out, and ethnically cleanse these people from the planet. And that's disgusting. That should be the reason IMHO.

[eme123]

Thanks for typing this. Saves me the keystrokes.

 

I don't think the question, if there was one, would be to change the name is not that it offends anyone or not. To me, if it offends American Indians or not is kindof irrelevant. It's that the government in whose city this team resides tried to murder, run out, and ethnically cleanse these people from the planet. And that's disgusting. That should be the reason IMHO.

 

Systematic genocide? murder? ethnically cleansed from the planet?

 

Is that what happened????? Oh thanks for educating me.

 

Now I know why you are in the extreme minority of people who think the Redskins should change their name. You don't know the facts!