Redskins facing severe pressure to change name.

[Numark3]

native Americans were upset about this and met with the team in 1972.  Stop saying this is a manifestation of white people from the past couple of years.  It has been a controversy for almost 50 years

[jkx2]

On 7/3/2020 at 8:57 AM, SectionC3 said:

I think Red Tails would be really cool.  Snyder trademarked "Bravehearts" a couple of years ago, though, so that's my bet. 

Not sure this was posted. But here's the mockup of the Redtails someone did

https://www.facebook.com/groups/955307551490179/permalink/1175350259485906/

[BarleyNY]

11 hours ago, Rob's House said:

I imagine it's been mentioned, but WaPo did a survey a few years ago and found that ~ 90% of actual Indians didn't find the name offensive and a lot of them think it's cool.

 

This contrived controversy isn't for the benefit of oppressed or marginalized communities, it's for self-righteous white people who want to advertise their wokeness and feel good about themselves.

Seems like that was a pretty bad survey for a lot of reasons.  It’s telling that WaPo won’t release it’s raw data or other important information about the poll.  Here is a follow up survey that got very different results.  

[Rob's House]

20 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Seems like that was a pretty bad survey for a lot of reasons.  It’s telling that WaPo won’t release it’s raw data or other important information about the poll.  Here is a follow up survey that got very different results.  

They say they're transparent about their methodology then hide it behind a paywall. ???.

 

What a pile of *****.

[aceman_16]

4 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

They say they're transparent about their methodology then hide it behind a paywall. ???.

 

What a pile of *****.

Stop being lazy. Read the article and click on a link. Just to be transparent the link was embedded in the first sentence of the second paragraph: "... a new study from academics at the University of Michigan and UC Berkeley contradicts [the] data."

 

You will have the ENTIRE survey as well as the 31-page scholarly report that is associated with it. And well... for those who still are too bothered to check it out - it says Native Americans are offended....a BIG percentage of them.

[BarleyNY]

13 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

They say they're transparent about their methodology then hide it behind a paywall. ???.

 

What a pile of *****.

I don’t have a sub and I could read it

[jkx2]

1 hour ago, Rob's House said:

 

Wokeness is not about understanding the experience of others and showing consideration for them. It is about dehumanizing people by identifying them as members of groups, ranking them accordingly, and aggressively seeking out an enemy to destroy. When there is no enemy one must be invented.

 

The Redskins name isn't a primary target. It's a secondary target, but it's worth asking why it's a target at all. American Indians weren't upset about it. It wasn't hurting, offending, or oppressing anyone. Then one day the woke police unilaterally decided on behalf of a perceived victim group that this thing is now offensive.

 

It doesn't matter that there was no ill intent behind it, that they can't agree on the explanation for why it's supposedly offensive, or what it means to the fans, it only matters what it means to the offended. And "the offended" are the woke.

 

Strangely, that standard only applies to the targets of the woke. When the shoe is on the other foot we have a different standard. Say, for example, millions of people are offended by kneeling for the anthem as a show of disrespect to the flag. It no longer matters how it's perceived by the offended, but only what the woke claim it really means. It's pretty convenient.

 

These people claim to oppose racism, yet rank people according to race. They claim to oppose hate, yet preach wholesale condemnation of all who oppose them. They claim to value tolerance but seek the destruction of all who challenge their faith based ideology. These are not good people. They are who they purport to hate.

 

They've set race relations back decades in the name of "progress." Over a decade ago a majority of people, both black and white, thought race relations in America were good. That is no longer the case. The reason isn't because white people suddenly became more racist, but because there are people actively stirring the pot for the purpose of causing problems, and the woke are the ones buying the propaganda and spreading the message. They do nothing but spread racism and hatred.

 

You sound so white you must be an albino.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Rob's House said:

Wokeness is not about understanding the experience of others and showing consideration for them. It is about dehumanizing people by identifying them as members of groups, ranking them accordingly, and aggressively seeking out an enemy to destroy. When there is no enemy one must be invented.(....)

They've set race relations back decades in the name of "progress." Over a decade ago a majority of people, both black and white, thought race relations in America were good.

 

I dunno about that "over a decade ago a majority of black people thought race relations in America were good"

I suspect that came from a survey with an agenda and suspect methodology.  I notice you don't include sources or links when you make such statements

But it's not like I'll stick around to debate - just a note that refraining from debate does not equate to inability to debate, or to agreement:

 

19 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

They say they're transparent about their methodology then hide it behind a paywall. ???.

 

What a pile of *****.

 

I was able to click on the link and read the article without any difficulty

[jkx2]

1 hour ago, Rob's House said:

 

Wokeness is not about understanding the experience of others and showing consideration for them. It is about dehumanizing people by identifying them as members of groups, ranking them accordingly, and aggressively seeking out an enemy to destroy. When there is no enemy one must be invented.

 

The Redskins name isn't a primary target. It's a secondary target, but it's worth asking why it's a target at all. American Indians weren't upset about it. It wasn't hurting, offending, or oppressing anyone. Then one day the woke police unilaterally decided on behalf of a perceived victim group that this thing is now offensive.

 

It doesn't matter that there was no ill intent behind it, that they can't agree on the explanation for why it's supposedly offensive, or what it means to the fans, it only matters what it means to the offended. And "the offended" are the woke.

 

Strangely, that standard only applies to the targets of the woke. When the shoe is on the other foot we have a different standard. Say, for example, millions of people are offended by kneeling for the anthem as a show of disrespect to the flag. It no longer matters how it's perceived by the offended, but only what the woke claim it really means. It's pretty convenient.

 

These people claim to oppose racism, yet rank people according to race. They claim to oppose hate, yet preach wholesale condemnation of all who oppose them. They claim to value tolerance but seek the destruction of all who challenge their faith based ideology. These are not good people. They are who they purport to hate.

 

They've set race relations back decades in the name of "progress." Over a decade ago a majority of people, both black and white, thought race relations in America were good. That is no longer the case. The reason isn't because white people suddenly became more racist, but because there are people actively stirring the pot for the purpose of causing problems, and the woke are the ones buying the propaganda and spreading the message. They do nothing but spread racism and hatred.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/shortcuts/2020/jan/21/how-the-word-woke-was-weaponised-by-the-right

[Jauronimo]

On 7/3/2020 at 11:28 AM, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

....quite the crock of crap.....self righteous beyond.....been following NFL football since 1962 and NEVER once did I associate "Redskins" to Native Americans nor twist it into something detrimental....but the overtly sensitive "politically correctness crowd" wants you undivided attention......are we this screwed up?....

You NEVER associated Redskins and this logo with native americans?  How? What do you think the name is referring to?

 

[muppy]

1 hour ago, Rob's House said:

 

Wokeness is not about understanding the experience of others and showing consideration for them. It is about dehumanizing people by identifying them as members of groups, ranking them accordingly, and aggressively seeking out an enemy to destroy. When there is no enemy one must be invented.

 

The Redskins name isn't a primary target. It's a secondary target, but it's worth asking why it's a target at all. American Indians weren't upset about it. It wasn't hurting, offending, or oppressing anyone. Then one day the woke police unilaterally decided on behalf of a perceived victim group that this thing is now offensive.

 

It doesn't matter that there was no ill intent behind it, that they can't agree on the explanation for why it's supposedly offensive, or what it means to the fans, it only matters what it means to the offended. And "the offended" are the woke.

 

Strangely, that standard only applies to the targets of the woke. When the shoe is on the other foot we have a different standard. Say, for example, millions of people are offended by kneeling for the anthem as a show of disrespect to the flag. It no longer matters how it's perceived by the offended, but only what the woke claim it really means. It's pretty convenient.

 

These people claim to oppose racism, yet rank people according to race. They claim to oppose hate, yet preach wholesale condemnation of all who oppose them. They claim to value tolerance but seek the destruction of all who challenge their faith based ideology. These are not good people. They are who they purport to hate.

 

They've set race relations back decades in the name of "progress." Over a decade ago a majority of people, both black and white, thought race relations in America were good. That is no longer the case. The reason isn't because white people suddenly became more racist, but because there are people actively stirring the pot for the purpose of causing problems, and the woke are the ones buying the propaganda and spreading the message. They do nothing but spread racism and hatred.

 

 

Your post reads to me like an angry man who wants the status quo and there really are no issues need address in our country. You make some Very broad stroke statements there I won't elaborate since this thread isn't in the PPP ..As far as the name of a football team clearly for you this is only the tip of the iceberg. Being "woke" certainly "woke" you Rob. Quite an impassioned plea to what.....condemn changes You deem unnecessary . Gotcha.

[Rob's House]

8 minutes ago, aceman_16 said:

Stop being lazy. Read the article and click on a link. Just to be transparent the link was embedded in the first sentence of the second paragraph: "... a new study from academics at the University of Michigan and UC Berkeley contradicts [the] data."

 

You will have the ENTIRE survey as well as the 31-page scholarly report that is associated with it. And well... for those who still are too bothered to check it out - it says Native Americans are offended....a BIG percentage of them.

 

Yeah, it's junk science. They even admit they don't have a representative national sample. The survey includes only 31% men, and 83% of those surveyed have no meaningful connection to a reservation. What constitutes their inclusion isn't clear. Perhaps Elizabeth Warren was one of those surveyed.

 

What is clear is that those conducting this "study" had their conclusion from the outset and designed their study to achieve that outcome.

 

Even with that, and watering down levels of offensiveness, they could still only get 49% to say they were even a little offended, which is crazy when you consider the level of manipulation and the eagerness with which Americans look for ways to be offended these days.

 

This is nothing more than an excuse for woke whities to justify their busy body activism.

[NoHuddleKelly12]

Haven't gone through the entire upthread since yesterday to see if this has been posted anywhere, but you've gotta feel for Rivera at the moment, who seems tasked with the unenviable role of divining as Snyder whisperer what the boss will want, as well as accommodating incoming fire as graciously as possible on a "rudderless" boat. I wonder if he regrets taking the job yet?

 

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/07/05/dan-snyders-been-out-of-country-with-a-small-circle-at-trying-time/  

[Niagara]

I have an idea. Call them the Washington Snowflakes in honor of the upcoming millennial fans. Not possible to offend with a snowflake.

 

A similar thing happened around gay marriage. Gay union was not good enough, it had to be called marriage, so marriage it is. Name of the game not is not to  offend, so Snowflakes is perfect in that regard.

[aceman_16]

27 minutes ago, jkx2 said:

You sound so white you must be an albino.

You DO know Albinism is NOT just a Caucasian disorder..... it affects blacks too (among others).

[Jauronimo]

2 minutes ago, Niagara said:

I have an idea. Call them the Washington Snowflakes in honor of the upcoming millennial fans. Not possible to offend with a snowflake.

 

A similar thing happened around gay marriage. Gay union was not good enough, it had to be called marriage, so marriage it is. Name of the game not is not to  offend, so Snowflakes is perfect in that regard.

Did changing the name of a tax advantaged relationship structure make you less satisfied with your wife?

Edited July 6, 2020 by Jauronimo

[Rob's House]

15 minutes ago, Muppy said:

 

Your post reads to me like an angry man who wants the status quo and there really are no issues need address in our country. You make some Very broad stroke statements there I won't elaborate since this thread isn't in the PPP ..As far as the name of a football team clearly for you this is only the tip of the iceberg. Being "woke" certainly "woke" you Rob. Quite an impassioned plea to what.....condemn changes You deem unnecessary . Gotcha.

 

Seems like there's a lot of projection in this post. You are right that the name of a team is just the tip of the iceberg. Once that's gone you'll move on to the next target. And there will always be a next target.

 

If the "change" you seek is essentially eliminating a football rivalry between cowboys and indians, and you think that's pressing enough to garner this level of attention, especially when most of those who are supposedly aggrieved don't care, it really illustrates the extent to which the problems we face on this front are incredibly minor.

 

Back in the 50s and 60s people didn't have to search for things to be offended by. They didn't have to put statements under a microscope to interpret them as racist. We've come so far that people whose passion is fighting"racial injustice" have to work overtime to find new and creative ways to be offended.

 

This isn't progress and it doesn't move us away from racism. It creates racism among all races, often where none existed in the first place, all in the name of "change."

[Niagara]

12 minutes ago, Jauronimo said:

Did changing the name of a tax advantaged relationship structure make you less satisfied with your wife?

Married in 1991 to a woman. You? Is your partner a brave or a squaw?

[aceman_16]

57 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

 

Yeah, it's junk science. They even admit they don't have a representative national sample. The survey includes only 31% men, and 83% of those surveyed have no meaningful connection to a reservation. What constitutes their inclusion isn't clear. Perhaps Elizabeth Warren was one of those surveyed.

 

What is clear is that those conducting this "study" had their conclusion from the outset and designed their study to achieve that outcome.

 

Even with that, and watering down levels of offensiveness, they could still only get 49% to say they were even a little offended, which is crazy when you consider the level of manipulation and the eagerness with which Americans look for ways to be offended these days.

 

This is nothing more than an excuse for woke whities to justify their busy body activism.

/yawn. So let me see IF I understand the game plan here.

 

FIRST swear by a faulty study that the ORIGINAL authors refuse to give details or even the questions involved in the study.

 

SECOND, go on forums utilizing said study as if its gospel without knowing ANY details other than what fits the 90% dont care narrative.

 

THIRD, when posters point out alternative studies they get they were bad ones with agendas.

 

FOUR, when a peer reviewed study gets completed with a representative sample AND they show the entire planet their data it gets dismissed behind "heresay....they are showing their transparency behind a paywall lololool."

 

AND FIVE when an open link gets provided the come back is "This is nothing more than an excuse for woke whities to justify their busy body activism."

 

Quite learned and adorable argument there. I wish people would just call their bias for what it is and stop pretending they have facts behind it. It is truly okay to say "This makes me mad and I feel that my identity is being threatened." One might get scoffed for it but it would be genuine.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 6, 2020 by aceman_16

[Jauronimo]

3 minutes ago, Niagara said:

Married in 1991 to a woman. You? Is your partner a brave or a squaw?

And are you going to divorce now that same sex unions are also called marriage?  I would.  If the Redskins change their name I'm done with the NFL, football, and television in general.