benderbender Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I can't help but wonder what exactly defines the alleged racism of a team name? Is it based solely on skin color? There aren't any lawsuits protesting the use of Vikings or Cowboys. Its my opinion that you would name your team after a people or an animal for their admirable qualities. Hoping somehow to infuse your team with the symbol on the helmet. Not a backhanded slight against whomever you happen to have racist tendencies. Your thoughts?
Juice_32 Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I'm a quarter Viking and it offends the hell out of me.
sodbuster Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I wish I was a Viking. I could rape and pillage for days. And I would spend tons of time on a boat.
26CornerBlitz Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I'm a quarter Viking and it offends the hell out of me. Start a lawsuit or be quiet about it
NoSaint Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Remind me when Viking was last a slur? Ps there's a huuuuge thread on this already
Juice_32 Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I wish I was a Viking. I could rape and pillage for days. And I would spend tons of time on a boat. Pillaging is seriously underrated. You got to try it.
26CornerBlitz Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Pillaging is seriously underrated. You got to try it.
DrDawkinstein Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Because the Vikings were a group of Germanic folk that took to the sea almost a millennium ago. The term "Redskin" is a derogatory name used on a race which was systematically slaughtered on orders of the Government located in the town said team represents. Remind me when Viking was last a slur? Ps there's a huuuuge thread on this already indeed http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/154949-poll-should-the-redskins-name-be-changed/page__hl__redskins
Just in Atlanta Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Giants are offensive to people with giantism. Or to midgets. When the midgets have their say in the public eye, watch out. The PC among us will deplore our casual use of this offensive word. Redskin is offensive because some people consider it so, and because it was once generations ago used as a less than positive moniker. Someday, Viking could very well be deemed offensive due to their violent exploits. I wonder if the people raped and pillaged by the Vikings centuries ago would be offended by our casual use of the word today. It is no different than Redskin. It may have once been an "offensive" name for American Indians. Or Native Americans. (Right moniker?) Because so, we who are not PC are considered to be crass, or even worse...the R word. Cowboys--is that a stereotype? Are cowboys uneducated? Political correctness is a disease of the mind. It leads to censorship, lost freedoms, and mindlessness. People afflicted with it cannot be changed because they feel they are in the moral right, because not offending is more important to their world view than freedom or logic or anything else. Oh ****. Here we go... Edited May 2, 2013 by Just in Atlanta
26CornerBlitz Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Giants are offensive to people with giantism. Or to midgets. When the midgets have their say in the public eye, watch out. The PC among us will deplore our casual use of this offensive word. Redskin is offensive because some people consider it so, and because it was once generations ago used as a less than positive moniker. Someday, Viking could very well be deemed offensive due to their violent exploits. I wonder if the people raped and pillaged by the Vikings centuries ago would be offended by our casual use of the word today. It is no different than Redskin. It may have once been an "offensive" name for American Indians. Or Native Americans. (Right moniker?) Because so, we who are not PC are considered to be crass, or even worse...the R word. Cowboys--is that a stereotype? Are cowboys uneducated? Political correctness is a disease of the mind. It leads to censorship, lost freedoms, and mindlessness. People afflicted with it cannot be changed because they feel they are in the moral right, because not offending is more important to their world view than freedom or logic or anything else. Oh ****. Here we go... Your points are a major stretch at best.
Just in Atlanta Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Your points are a major stretch at best. As I said.
26CornerBlitz Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 This thread is a major downer coming off the draft of EJ3, the other draft picks, and a promising UDFA haul. Thanks for that OP.
papazoid Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Viking = Scandanavian Pirate Redskin = racial descriptor big difference !!
Chef Jim Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 As a non-believer I'm offended by the Angels As a career B grade student I'm offended by the A's As a Jim I'm offended by being exluded from the Bills Blah....blah.....blah....
Just in Atlanta Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 Because it's a racial descriptor...that makes it bad? Indians OK (or is it?). Redkins bad. Is Seminoles OK? How is that any less offensive than redskin? Skin color is bad? Tribe affiliation is good?
Juice_32 Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 I understand both sides of the argument here, but I think we can all agree that all of these names are better than Pelicans. Seriously New Orleans? Pelicans?
Just in Atlanta Posted May 2, 2013 Posted May 2, 2013 As someone who likes to win, and hates to pay bills, I am offended by the Bills.
Recommended Posts