Jump to content

Poll: Should the "Redskins" name be changed?

Just in Atlanta

By Just in Atlanta
in Off the Wall Archives

 Share

Redskins Name Change  

539 members have voted

  1. 1. Should the "Redskins" name be changed?

    • Yes. It's a derogatory word and the NFL should set a good example.
      169
    • No. It's not derogatory to most people and changing it would set a bad example.
      302
    • Maybe. I don't have a strong opinion but I wouldn't be fazed by a name change.
      68

  2. 2. How many of the following statements capture your views?

    • It's insensitive to have a team name that denotes skin color.
      150
    • I'm deeply offended; it's borderline bigotry.
      51
    • It's a politically-correct manufactured controversy.
      182
    • Another example of a select "offended" few forcing their PC views on everyone.
      177
    • The term doesn't bother me but it is offensive to many others.
      135
    • I value tradition in this debate.
      105
    • Why is this even an issue?
      229

Recommended Posts

NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted

What the deal w/ Blackhawks? Should they change that one too? It sounds like it could be racist. I don't know anything about that term.

 

Actually named in honor of a specific person when you trace the lineage of the name. Apples to oranges with the term redskin in my opinion.

 

From wiki:

 

The team's first owner was coffee tycoon Frederic McLaughlin, who outbid grain magnate James E. Norris for the franchise. McLaughlin had been a commander with the 333rd Machine Gun Battalion of the 86th Infantry Division during World War I.[3] This Division was nicknamed the "Blackhawk Division", after a Native American of the Sauk nation, Black Hawk, who was a prominent figure in the history of Illinois.[3] McLaughlin evidently named the hockey team in honor of the military unit, making it one of many sports team names using Native Americans as icons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 851
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Joe Miner Veteran

Joe Miner

Posted
Posted

What % of people do you think give a crap about the Buffalo Bills other than us fan-atics?

 

I think you missed the point.

 

On this site, where this thread is posted, only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this great offense. Yet from only 4% of the people of this site finding it offensive, there has spawned a 30 page thread on this site.

 

Your reply to me seems to indicate that you might suffer from a reading comprehension problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
26CornerBlitz Hall of Famer

26CornerBlitz

Posted
Posted

I think you missed the point.

 

On this site, where this thread is posted, only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this great offense. Yet from only 4% of the people of this site finding it offensive, there has spawned a 30 page thread on this site.

 

Your reply to me seems to indicate that you might suffer from a reading comprehension problem.

 

Thanks for pointing this out. I'll give it all of the consideration it merits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matt in KC Veteran

Matt in KC

Posted
Posted

I think you missed the point.

 

On this site, where this thread is posted, only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this great offense. Yet from only 4% of the people of this site finding it offensive, there has spawned a 30 page thread on this site.

 

Your reply to me seems to indicate that you might suffer from a reading comprehension problem.

Actually ~30% said "Yes. It's a derogatory word and the NFL should set a good example." and another 12% "Maybe. I don't have a strong opinion but I wouldn't be fazed by a name change" It's all right up at the top for anyone to look at....

 

I don't think "only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this" is at all accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Joe Miner Veteran

Joe Miner

Posted
Posted

Actually ~30% said "Yes. It's a derogatory word and the NFL should set a good example." and another 12% "Maybe. I don't have a strong opinion but I wouldn't be fazed by a name change" It's all right up at the top for anyone to look at....

 

I don't think "only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this" is at all accurate.

 

That was the only option that implied strong self interest in the poll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matt in KC Veteran

Matt in KC

Posted
Posted

That was the only option that implied strong self interest in the poll.

But I think the 30% who thought it was derogatory explains why the 30 page thread. I was one of them, and I care, and have posted a few times... which I think is what you were questioning.

 

On this site, where this thread is posted, only 4% of the people on this site seem to care about this great offense. Yet from only 4% of the people of this site finding it offensive, there has spawned a 30 page thread on this site.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

That was the only option that implied strong self interest in the poll.

 

to be fair, 4% is a pretty solid number considering our board, as far as i know, isnt overwhelmingly native american and also has a lot of want to be macho tough guys that rage against being PC (not meant to offend or characterize all that are on that side of the argument, but naturally a football board tends to have a heavier helping of those than a general sampling id guess)

 

Edited by NoSaint
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mr. WEO Hall of Famer

Mr. WEO

Posted
Posted

to be fair, 4% is a pretty solid number considering our board, as far as i know, isnt overwhelmingly native american and also has a lot of want to be macho tough guys that rage against being PC (not meant to offend or characterize all that are on that side of the argument, but naturally a football board tends to have a heavier helping of those than a general sampling id guess)

 

Macho guys? Native Americans?

 

This guy (far left) has no issue with the DC football team name....

 

large_village%20people.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ExiledInIllinois Hall of Famer

ExiledInIllinois

Posted
Posted

What the deal w/ Blackhawks? Should they change that one too? It sounds like it could be racist. I don't know anything about that term.

 

The original owner named the team after his Blackhawk Army Divison (86th Infantry) from WWI.

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/86th_Infantry_Division_(United_States)

 

Actually, the Blackhawks... Originally Black Hawks. They do kinda handle the whole thing like the Illini do down state... In a more repectful way. I am not sure if it rubs some the wrong way with Native head logo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted

And in a hilarious twist, the man that daniel snyder used (previously cited in this thread) who claimed to be an indian chief and that the word was a sign of endearment.... just some guy. not 100% inuit, but apparently 25% aleut.

 

his arrest records do show "chief" as an AKA, as some friends call him that.

 

http://deadspin.com/redskins-indian-chief-defender-not-a-chief-probably-590973565

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...