Poll: Should the "Redskins" name be changed?

[dave mcbride]

So in other words complete bullsh--, just like your stated causes of the Civil War. I think that just about takes care of your 'contributions' here.

 

 

 

Boy if that isn't the pot calling the kettle black. Taking your own personal viewpoint and presuming that's suddendly the prevailing wisdom among American Indians based on "memory serves"? Exactly how many AI have you interviewed on the topic? Yes attitudes can change in 9 years but a) we're talking about a poll that was 91% vs. 9%; and b) your comparison to gay marriage is weak at best. Calling a football team 'Redskins' is hardly an act of overt legal discrimination such as homosexuals face on the marriage issue.

 

 

 

What's my viewpoint again? I never articulated it, actually. In fact, you have no idea what my viewpoint is. My decision to wade into this conversation was to criticize a weak usage of evidence, which the OP commendably addressed (and in non-moralizing language to boot). At this point, I'm merely stating that opinions may have changed over the course of nine years. Neither you nor I know if they have to any significant degree among the NA population. I wouldn't be surprised if they have, but I have no evidence to support my hunch. I do know that on other culture war issues, opinions have changed in the last decade. As for "memory serves," that's exactly what I meant. This may or not be indicative of a broader trend, but it does suggest that Native Americans are the ones who took the case to court: http://www.myfoxdc.c...#axzz2cWsctSjR.

Edited August 20, 2013 by dave mcbride

[SBUffalo]

So in other words complete bullsh--, just like your stated causes of the Civil War. I think that just about takes care of your 'contributions' here.

 

So you're saying that the Civil War had absolutely nothing to do with race or that thing where they were enslaving human beings? Oh. I should probably go back to school.

 

too hard... too much work... it's much easier to sit back and type your disdain on a message board.

 

Boycotts aren't the only way to create change. How do you know what I do outside of this message board? You have no idea about my life outside this message board. I have done much more than just sit on a message board and gripe with far right conservative jerks.

[Joe Miner]

What's my viewpoint again? I never articulated it, actually. In fact, you have no idea what my viewpoint is. My decision to wade into this conversation was to criticize a weak usage of evidence, which the OP commendably addressed (and in non-moralizing language to boot). At this point, I'm merely stating that opinions may have changed over the course of nine years. Neither you nor I know if they have to any significant degree among the NA population. I wouldn't be surprised if they have, but I have no evidence to support my hunch. I do know that on other culture war issues, opinions have changed in the last decade. As for "memory serves," that's exactly what I meant. This may or not be indicative of a broader trend, but it does suggest that Native Americans are the ones who took the case to court: http://www.myfoxdc.c...#axzz2cWsctSjR.

 

I don't believe you can take a racial discrimination case to court and be that successful if you are not of the race that is being discriminated against.

 

Check the Paula Dean court case for a reference.

 

So as a whitey, I can't sue the NFL or the Redskins, or anyone for racially discriminating against American Indians.

 

So it only makes sense that the case is brought by Native Americans, they have the best, and possibly only potential to win.

[SBUffalo]

I don't believe you can take a racial discrimination case to court and be that successful if you are not of the race that is being discriminated against.

 

Check the Paula Dean court case for a reference.

 

So as a whitey, I can't sue the NFL or the Redskins, or anyone for racially discriminating against American Indians.

 

So it only makes sense that the case is brought by Native Americans, they have the best, and possibly only potential to win.

 

No, but you can lead a case to get a court order that the name be changed. In order for the case to work, you'll need strong support from the group being offended, but it's still possible in that sense.

[eme123]

I heard the PC's are going after Thanksgiving next.

[Joe Miner]

No, but you can lead a case to get a court order that the name be changed. In order for the case to work, you'll need strong support from the group being offended, but it's still possible in that sense.

 

Suzan Shown Harjo, descended from the Cheyenne and Muscogee tribes, said the word Redskin is "the worst thing we can be called in the English language … [a reminder of the] days we were skinned and the days we were scalped."

 

And yet the term predates that period in history.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/02/AR2005100201139.html

[uncle flap]

[/font][/color][/size]

 

And yet the term predates that period in history.

 

http://www.washingto...5100201139.html

 

So? The origin of the term doesn't have anything to do with it, if that is even accurate.

 

Besides referring to the football team, the term has been most widely used in a disparaging way, or at best insensitively.

 

Social mores change. So do the meanings/connotations of words.

[SBUffalo]

[/font][/color][/size]

 

And yet the term predates that period in history.

 

http://www.washingto...5100201139.html

 

I'm not sure why you quoted my comment here.

[Joe Miner]

 

So? The origin of the term doesn't have anything to do with it, if that is even accurate.

 

Besides referring to the football team, the term has been most widely used in a disparaging way, or at best insensitively.

 

Social mores change. So do the meanings/connotations of words.

 

Since this thread based on sweeping generalizations, here's one for you.

 

No one uses the term to refer to scalping or mutilating native Americans today. Hell, no one really uses it as any type of reference to native Americans at all. Basically the only time it's used today is in regards to the NFL team.

 

So why is society able to change the word negatively, but seemingly unable to change it to something as neutral as a football team? Can words only change once?

 

 

I'm not sure why you quoted my comment here.

 

My quote is from the article you linked.

[Rocky Landing]

Forgive me if this link has already been posted (I really couldn't bother with 33 pages on this subject), but here is a pretty good link on the subject by an extremely well-informed, reliable, and prestigious news source- The Onion.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/report-redskins-name-only-offensive-if-you-think-a,33449/

[SBUffalo]

Forgive me if this link has already been posted (I really couldn't bother with 33 pages on this subject), but here is a pretty good link on the subject by an extremely well-informed, reliable, and prestigious news source- The Onion.

http://www.theonion....-think-a,33449/

 

Yea, I posted it a few pages ago and I think it's hilariously correct.

 

Since this thread based on sweeping generalizations, here's one for you.

 

No one uses the term to refer to scalping or mutilating native Americans today. Hell, no one really uses it as any type of reference to native Americans at all. Basically the only time it's used today is in regards to the NFL team.

 

So why is society able to change the word negatively, but seemingly unable to change it to something as neutral as a football team? Can words only change once?

 

Just because it's not used in that context today doesn't make it okay. Sometimes when a word has historic relations to such a terrible time of genocide and hate then that word should never be used again.

 

The n word originated just as a simple way to describe black people. It didn't have negative connotations, but it's connection to slavery and the worst time in this countries history makes the word forever terrible. Even though it's thrown around in some social groups like a term of endearment (which baffles me).

 

The r word is the same.

[Baba Booey]

Redskin is as offensive to Native Americans as the "n" word is to African Americans. The NFL should set an example and make them change the nickname.

[uncle flap]

Since this thread based on sweeping generalizations, here's one for you.

 

No one uses the term to refer to scalping or mutilating native Americans today. Hell, no one really uses it as any type of reference to native Americans at all. Basically the only time it's used today is in regards to the NFL team.

 

So why is society able to change the word negatively, but seemingly unable to change it to something as neutral as a football team? Can words only change once?

 

First of all, plenty of people still use the term disparagingly, although you are correct that the most prominent use today is in reference to the football team. But the football team's name is in reference to a disparaging term. So the connotation hasn't completely changed, just the context. It's not like "awful" which was once used to describe things in a positive way, or "nice" which at one time meant "foolish."

 

Stanford linguist Geoffrey Nunberg, an expert witness in our case, wrote to me on June 13 that ''Ron Butters posted a message to the American Dialect Society list a while ago claiming that 'redskin' was rarely used and was not disparaging.'' Butters is an expert witness for the Washington football club, but did not identify himself as such in his posting.

 

''I did a search in Google Groups,'' wrote Nunberg, ''and found a number of citations that demonstrate that the word is still widely used in its pejorative sense. I attach these; the names of the relevant discussion groups are in parens. These are all from the last ten years or so:''

 

-- ''Hey Redskin: Go back to the Indian Reservation and make some illegal booze.'' (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)

 

-- ''These redskin c***sucks up at the reservation are now claiming that THEY own the portion of Nebraska that pertains to Whiteclay....Times like this make me wish Custer had access to air support and a couple of tactical nukes.'' (alt.tasteless)

 

-- ''Hop down to Any Boat store. Don't you know how to read? I bet your one of the redskin, indian whoop de do's who object to seeing sports teams demeaning native americans and B word about everything.'' (alt.scooter)

 

-- ''I am getting f***ing tired of these damn redskins belly aching about how the paleface came and stole their land. Why don't they get off their lazy, reservation living-asses and start working?'' (alt.discrimination)

 

-- ''As I said the white Europeans had 'firesticks' for CENTURIES before the redskin savages even HEARD about them! The redskin savages didn't even have the incredibly complex machine known as 'the wheel' until CENTURIES after other races had it! They were a VERY backwards people!'' (alt.atheism)

 

-- ''Those indian savages instead opted for much more equisite forms of torture and methods of creating intense pain in their redskin neighbor victims.'' (Thread, ''Indians Are Sleaze Merchants,'' alt.fan.rush-limbaugh)

 

-- ''I stopped into a New York club and found an American Indian bar-tending. I ordered a Manhattan and the redskin f***er charged me twenty-four dollars!'' (3do.bad-attitude)

 

The R-word for public school athletic programs is being challenged legislatively in California and Oklahoma, and both laws deserve to pass. Opponents say the word is an honorific, which is has never been and is not now.

 

No Native person who has been called the R-word has ever said: ''Wow, they must think I'm a football player or a sport mascot or a person covered in red paint for war.'' It has always been a fighting word and has never been a compliment.

 

People of ill will and poor taste need to stop playing their dirty word games, and good people must stop enabling them. They must have better things to do with their time than to hang on to racial-based stereotypes and anti-Indian vulgarities.

 

http://web.archive.org/web/20071010125236/http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096411092

 

Furthermore, I still fail to understand why so many are so defensive of the name. Like I said upthread, I even agree with the anti-PC crowd in the sense that Snyder shouldn't be forced to change the name. I get the fear of the slippery-slope. But one can be anti-PC without being pro-racist nomenclature/imagery. It's a shame some can't or won't separate the two.

[BUNCH OF MULARKEY]

No. It's tradition. If the redskins name is changed, then we choose to forget American history... The good, ..and the bad.

 

 

[uncle flap]

No. It's tradition. If the redskins name is changed, then we choose to forget American history... The good, ..and the bad.

 

You can't be serious.

[SBUffalo]

No. It's tradition. If the redskins name is changed, then we choose to forget American history... The good, ..and the bad.

 

Damnit. There's no team named the n word so NOBODY remembers slavery.

 

 

(for the record, I don't say "n word" while discussing topics such as this in real life. I use the actual word. In online forums you don't get a feel for how everybody around the "room" is so I just avoid it).

Edited August 21, 2013 by DStebb716

[San Jose Bills Fan]

It's a shame that the Nazis were overthrown because no one remembers who they were.

[BUNCH OF MULARKEY]

It's got nothin to do with slavery or anything else. There's a lot of team names that go back almost 100 years that are rooted in American history. Good or bad. The patriots, the cowboys the redskins, steelers, and yes, the bills.

Should the steelers change their name because of the horrible working conditions their industry endured?

Should animal rights activists and the spca petition that the bills name be changed because buffalo bill Cody slaughtered over

4200 American bison?

It gets to a point where, in the words of Stevie Johnson, "why so serious?"

[RuntheDamnBall]

It's a shame that the Nazis were overthrown because no one remembers who they were.

They should change the Dolphins' name to the Nazis so that everyone can remember, and properly hate them.

[SBUffalo]

It's got nothin to do with slavery or anything else. There's a lot of team names that go back almost 100 years that are rooted in American history. Good or bad. The patriots, the cowboys the redskins, steelers, and yes, the bills.

Should the steelers change their name because of the horrible working conditions their industry endured?

Should animal rights activists and the spca petition that the bills name be changed because buffalo bill Cody slaughtered over

4200 American bison?

It gets to a point where, in the words of Stevie Johnson, "why so serious?"