9 in 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by Redskins name

[dwight in philly]

IMHO, once this went to the PPP , it lost its luster.

[Magox]

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/04/67-percent-native-americans-say-redskins-offensive-155143

 

“Of course it is both disgusting and predictable,” Fenelon told ICTMN about the 90 percent figure that Goodell quoted. “It is a major reason why I agreed to take this [study] on… The dominant society knows on some level that it is bogus to run these uncritical polls, and then reproduce results that don't resonate with real experience.”

 

 

Yeah, this guy had nothing up his craw when he conducted his "study".

[DC Tom]

No one on planet Earth- Native Americans or otherwise- thinks that the name 'Washington Redskins' is a greater problem in the Native American community than poverty and alcoholism. Like zero people.

Did I say they THINK that? No, I said they ACT like that.

 

Therein lies the source of their ridiculousness: excessive histrionics and manufactured outrage, to the detriment of real problems.

[Azalin]

Which bathroom can a native American use?

 

The "pee-pee-tee-pee".

 

 

Honestly, the only person that should have any say in what that team is named is Dan Snyder.

[boyst]

when topics end up here it unveils a new box of shiny toys. they're going to get dirty and used. it will be funny.

 

 

 

 

 

Its a derogatory term used by trolls to refer to normal people that bother to argue with trolls on the internet. Sort of like a millennial version of the term, "libtard." Accordingly, the vast majority of the people wielding the cudgel are less intelligent and less reasonable than the vast majority of the people it is wielded against.

that's about as stupid of definition as can be ever stated. a very birddog like answer mixed with tiberous. see, your answer attacks people who would object as being non intellectual but it also reaffirms victimhood.

 

well done safe space boy.

 

If you called me an a**hole, or any other insulting word, I wouldn't feel offended because my self-esteem is internal and not based on what you say. But calling another human being 'a**hole' is wrong nonetheless.

 

What if only 10% of blacks said the 'N" word was offensive? Would it then be okay to use it as a team nickname? What if only 10% of Hispanics felt offended by the pejorative "sp*c." Could we then name a NFL club with that term?

 

This poll, and questions of methodology aside, the "Redsk*n" name remains wrong.

your self of steam on the other hand might be lowered.

 

So because "9 out of 10" are not offended, we should keep offending the other 10% and continue using a derogatory racial slur? Got it

as someone else put, 9 out of 10 dentists...

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that burning the american flag was bad? should we outlaw it?

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that muslims were dangerous? should we kick them out?

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that japan was west of china? should we just realize they're probably american and stupid?

 

21% finding the term disrespectful is enough to change the name, imo.

 

But I'm also kinda of tired of the debate.

so you're tired of the debate but we should do something about it? why is it an issue? did you think about this issue at all over the last year? do you think anyone else did that was not out to get some financial windfall?

 

I've been axing all the people in the projects why they still live there. If its so bad and bleak there, why not go live in the Hamptons where opportunity and success are just handed to you? Seems like common sense to me.

you know by the time obama leaves office it's likely to happen or they'll cut educational funding. bus kids from king county tennessee to the hamptons.

 

 

Or: rich, white busy-bodies who act like changing a team mascot will rip all of their own memories and pride away. Seriously, come check out the beauties in Lancaster that are losing their **** over changing their school mascot. You'd think the school board was trying to burn their houses down.

 

It baffles me that white people feel so strongly about having to keep it.

 

Who cares if you are called the Legends from now on? At least its not insulting an entire group of people.

 

Because the media knows the NFL will get viewers (especially controversy in the NFL), while helping people improve their situation is boring and bad TV.

there are probably as many who feel as strong to change it as those oppose it and i'd say that's 10-15% at both on either side. That leaves 70-80% who really don't care one way or another.

 

that likely means that most people honestly don't care. i know its not great logic... but some times the best move is not to play at all. don't change it, keep it as it is. realize its not perfect but move on. find another battle worth fighting. it's not nice but it is what it is.

 

sort of the question i was asked about it, which comes to mind. should we change the name of the negro league hall of fame? or the ncaap? just because times change doesn't mean history does. some times our history is not something we are all proud of but it is our history.

 

I am not agreeing or disagreeing with what you say. It just seems that by saying 9/10 are okay with it justifies the use of a term that is offensive to many people (well if only 90% of this population is offended by the name then I guess I'll have to cut my losses with the other 10%). I know that nobody has to support the team if they're offended by it. However, just because saying 9/10 people are okay with it doesn't really make the behavior right or appropriate (using the racial slur redskin). I expect more from the powerful in this situation (a professional football team) than the random fan. I would expect the team to be a leader in trying to end the bias, rather than just plugging along because 10% are offended. My logic and my opinion has nothing to do with what the behavior should be of the club. But then again they are a business trying to make money...

.03% identify as mentally handicap or now more contemporary known to be as transgendered and demand change

now we have to deny funding to schools because of this .03% of idiots?

 

what about the 10% who are actually handicap and still have great difficulty in the bathroom with their limited abilities?

 

http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2014/06/04/67-percent-native-americans-say-redskins-offensive-155143

your link from indiancountrymedianetwork.com is from 2+ years ago and also pretty damn ignorant. no surprise you found it. i bet you have it bookmarked, probably since 2014 waiting to use it.

 

good job slugger

 

IMHO, once this went to the PPP , it lost its luster.

no it just becomes more fun as people actually have to support their bull ****.

 

 

The "pee-pee-tee-pee".

 

 

Honestly, the only person that should have any say in what that team is named is Dan Snyder.

that's funny. i peepeepeeteepeeed my pants

[DC Tom]

 

Question the sample size, the accuracy, etc, but holy hand grenade, Can you imagine a world where if 10% of people are "offended" by something that we do away with it?

 

Yes, I can. Visit a college campus.

[metzelaars_lives]

 

 

 

You assumed I was talking about the media which is very telling. I was talking about *you*. Your attention is focused on this issue.

No it's not. I've already said it's a complicated issue and I can see both sides. I think most smart people can. But yes, abyone who dismisses this one as "PC run amok" is being pretty insensitive themselves. But to be honest, I don't really care that much about this particular issue.

Did I say they THINK that? No, I said they ACT like that.

 

Therein lies the source of their ridiculousness: excessive histrionics and manufactured outrage, to the detriment of real problems.

That's fair, yes, I totally agree. A staunch liberal myself, I cannot argue with a conservative who calls out black lives matter folks for getting all worked up over 5-10 acts of violence a year by cops when that many people get killed in one weekend in Chicago. They're right. So yeah, more people- white people worked up over this to be specific- should visit a rez and try and put this issue into proper perspective. All fair. Still doesn't change how I feel about this issue though. Edited May 20, 2016 by metzelaars_lives

[3rdnlng]

when topics end up here it unveils a new box of shiny toys. they're going to get dirty and used. it will be funny.

 

that's about as stupid of definition as can be ever stated. a very birddog like answer mixed with tiberous. see, your answer attacks people who would object as being non intellectual but it also reaffirms victimhood.

 

well done safe space boy.

 

your self of steam on the other hand might be lowered.

 

as someone else put, 9 out of 10 dentists...

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that burning the american flag was bad? should we outlaw it?

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that muslims were dangerous? should we kick them out?

what about if 9 out of 10 people thought that japan was west of china? should we just realize they're probably american and stupid?

 

so you're tired of the debate but we should do something about it? why is it an issue? did you think about this issue at all over the last year? do you think anyone else did that was not out to get some financial windfall?

 

you know by the time obama leaves office it's likely to happen or they'll cut educational funding. bus kids from king county tennessee to the hamptons.

 

there are probably as many who feel as strong to change it as those oppose it and i'd say that's 10-15% at both on either side. That leaves 70-80% who really don't care one way or another.

 

that likely means that most people honestly don't care. i know its not great logic... but some times the best move is not to play at all. don't change it, keep it as it is. realize its not perfect but move on. find another battle worth fighting. it's not nice but it is what it is.

 

sort of the question i was asked about it, which comes to mind. should we change the name of the negro league hall of fame? or the ncaap? just because times change doesn't mean history does. some times our history is not something we are all proud of but it is our history.

 

.03% identify as mentally handicap or now more contemporary known to be as transgendered and demand change

now we have to deny funding to schools because of this .03% of idiots?

 

what about the 10% who are actually handicap and still have great difficulty in the bathroom with their limited abilities?

 

your link from indiancountrymedianetwork.com is from 2+ years ago and also pretty damn ignorant. no surprise you found it. i bet you have it bookmarked, probably since 2014 waiting to use it.

 

good job slugger

 

no it just becomes more fun as people actually have to support their bull ****.

 

that's funny. i peepeepeeteepeeed my pants

Now that this thread is down here at PPP many of the people who rarely frequent here will stay away because they are afraid (ostensibly) of being called an idiot and a !@#$ing moron. The real reason they don't come here though is that they can't support their views.

[unbillievable]

Does a starving person care about the flavor of Ramen? These are things we must know!

 

If you want to see the most racist depictions of Native Americans, visit an Indian Casino.

Edited May 21, 2016 by unbillievable

[klos63]

For all those who use this poll to support keeping the Washington nickname, if the poll were reversed, would you support a name change as fervently as you support keeping the name?

[Azalin]

For all those who use this poll to support keeping the Washington nickname, if the poll were reversed, would you support a name change as fervently as you support keeping the name?

 

I don't see people here using the poll to support anything. They're using it to illustrate the fact that more white people are offended by the term "Redskins" than there are in the native American communities.

[What a Tuel]

For all those who use this poll to support keeping the Washington nickname, if the poll were reversed, would you support a name change as fervently as you support keeping the name?

 

I would support the ability of the Owner of the name to do whatever he wants to do with his property. If he loses sales by it then so be it, the choice should remain with him. The idea that the American public needs to be guilted into bullying him into changing it is annoying. I am not sure what changes if the name ever changes? Less hurt feelings? Doubtful. More respect for Native Americans? Doubtful.

 

I take issue with the SJW's who see it as their civic duty to correct anything and everything they perceive as an "injustice" through bullying, demonizing, insulting, and baiting people into changing for the good of their agenda. If you disagree you are just a braindead redneck who can't get with their times. That's their game though.

 

Problem with the AC being too cold? Put on a damn sweater like a normal person or wear pants like the rest of us. Can't dress fashionably because of it? Wooest you.

[B-Man]

Redskins name offensive to sports journalists, but not to 90 percent of Native Americans.

[IDBillzFan]

 

I don't see people here using the poll to support anything. They're using it to illustrate the fact that more white people are offended by the term "Redskins" than there are in the native American communities.

 

The simple truth of the matter is that virtually no one would give a living crap about this topic if the left's leadership didn't raise a bunch of noise about it. And that's because vritually no one DOES give a crap about it.

 

Redskins. $15/hour min wage. War on women. Islamaphobia.

 

All of this is window dressing, pulled out in the past seven years, to keep people from focusing on the actual problems this country faces. There's nothing like a divided country to keep people from being focused.

 

It's all just one big Harold Hill scene, with the left standing on a crate, asking the people of River City if they've noticed that the presence of a pool table had led to their children using phrases like "Swell" and "So's your old man!" And wearing their knickerbockers "below the knee????!!!"

 

One big scam. And the mindless leftists like gatorbob and birdog chew it all day like a dog on a new bully stick.

[B-Man]

"I think the hoo-ha about it is crazy. To me, it’s kind of like an honor. I think we should be proud to have a team named after us."

"I don’t have a problem with that word. I don’t relate it to the color of your skin. We call black people ‘black people.’ We call European people ‘white people.’"

 

From "In their words: 12 Native Americans talk about the furor over the Redskins name" in The Washington Post, following a Washington Post poll that showed 9 out of 10 Native Americans don't have a problem with the football team name Washington Redskins.

 

The NYT also has an article following up on the WaPo poll results: "A Heated Linguistic Debate: What Makes ‘Redskins’ a Slur?" The title really gives away the elitism of the NYT viewpoint, doesn't it? Excerpt:

Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguist at the University of California, Berkeley, who served as an expert for Native Americans petitioning to have the federal government cancel the Washington Redskins organization’s trademark registration, said the term was a qualified form of a reclaimed epithet. Some scholastic teams in Indian country have nicknames that include Redskins and Braves, he said, sort of as a way to say, “If you want redskin savages, then we’ll give you redskin savages.”

 

“It’s used in those schools in that reclaimed way,” Mr. Nunberg said. “But that doesn’t license its use by third parties.”

 

The term has come to be associated with hostility, and savagery, and a mélange of popular culture stereotypes that include “F Troop” and “Davy Crockett,” removed in some way from the fact of sustained genocide and mistreatment.

I like getting some scholarly analysis, but when you're examining American culture and find yourself going back to “F Troop” and “Davy Crockett" to exemplify the cultural stereotype, you should be questioning your data. "Davy Crockett" was on TV from 1954-1955.

"F Troop" is a more recent artifact of American cultural history. It was on the air from 1965 to 1967. That was half a century ago. The Native American were — as Brent Cox put it in "The Joys And Derangement Of 'F Troop'" — "New York Italian and Jewish comics... doing... standard Borscht Belt schtick":

 

I'd be embarrassed to write what I thought was a serious article about "What Makes 'Redskins' a Slur" and to use “F Troop” and “Davy Crockett" and only “F Troop” and “Davy Crockett" as my references for anything currently living in American popular culture. The NYT is choosing present its views in the pose of elite opinion, and then it does nothing to earn respect as a purveyor of scholarly analysis. That's embarrassing. And it's beyond embarrassing when it's part of a sustained attack on someone else's business, as it is here.

 

 

Well, the narrative must be protected

[Azalin]

 

The simple truth of the matter is that virtually no one would give a living crap about this topic if the left's leadership didn't raise a bunch of noise about it. And that's because vritually no one DOES give a crap about it.

 

Redskins. $15/hour min wage. War on women. Islamaphobia.

 

All of this is window dressing, pulled out in the past seven years, to keep people from focusing on the actual problems this country faces. There's nothing like a divided country to keep people from being focused.

 

It's all just one big Harold Hill scene, with the left standing on a crate, asking the people of River City if they've noticed that the presence of a pool table had led to their children using phrases like "Swell" and "So's your old man!" And wearing their knickerbockers "below the knee????!!!"

 

One big scam. And the mindless leftists like gatorbob and birdog chew it all day like a dog on a new bully stick.

 

Pretty much sums it up perfectly. I couldn't have said it better myself.

[Malazan]

 

The simple truth of the matter is that virtually no one would give a living crap about this topic if the left's leadership didn't raise a bunch of noise about it. And that's because vritually no one DOES give a crap about it.

 

Redskins. $15/hour min wage. War on women. Islamaphobia.

 

All of this is window dressing, pulled out in the past seven years, to keep people from focusing on the actual problems this country faces. There's nothing like a divided country to keep people from being focused.

 

It's all just one big Harold Hill scene, with the left standing on a crate, asking the people of River City if they've noticed that the presence of a pool table had led to their children using phrases like "Swell" and "So's your old man!" And wearing their knickerbockers "below the knee????!!!"

 

One big scam. And the mindless leftists like gatorbob and birdog chew it all day like a dog on a new bully stick.

 

Yeah, nothing like the important issues of what bathroom people use, who's getting married to who, and abortion that the extremists on the other side go on and on about. Extremists suck.

 

You seem like an extremist more interested in fighting the extremists on the left than getting something done.

[IDBillzFan]

 

Yeah, nothing like the important issues of what bathroom people use, who's getting married to who, and abortion that the extremists on the other side go on and on about.

 

You do realize, I hope, that those are ALL issues stirred up by the left to create more distractions, no?

 

Does the left not launder federal money to Planned Parenthood so they can sell baby parts from an aborted fetus and then have that money donated to Democratic election campaigns?

 

Did the leftist city of Charlotte not first pass a law forcing everyone to let transgenders use whichever bathrooms they like before the state got involved?

 

Does the left not force Christian bakeries to accept gay marriage or be put out of business because a gay couple wants to make the news?

 

Does the left not attempt to force Catholic nuns running a shelter to help the elderly poor to provide contraceptives to all employees?

 

Perhaps you're so eager to believe what you're told that you're not taking the time to fully understand the issues.

 

In other words, you seem like a Democrat.

[3rdnlng]

 

Yeah, nothing like the important issues of what bathroom people use, who's getting married to who, and abortion that the extremists on the other side go on and on about. Extremists suck.

 

You seem like an extremist more interested in fighting the extremists on the left than getting something done.

Just what would you like to get done? Please be specific.

[boyst]

 

Yeah, nothing like the important issues of what bathroom people use, who's getting married to who, and abortion that the extremists on the other side go on and on about. Extremists suck.

 

You seem like an extremist more interested in fighting the extremists on the left than getting something done.

hey, boy. you were owned. come back and eat your crow.

 

labillz has fan made a point, you did not come back.

it's ok, he has it as labillz... like its 1990 something...with a z. he isn't that cool. don't be scared.

 

just bring your ass back here to get schooled.