Senators Urge N.F.L. to Act on Redskins’ Name

[Rocky Landing]

National Assosiation for the Advancement of Colored People

Context

[BuffaloFan68]

Next thing you know, a bunch of "Bill"s will be starting a petition that the Buffalo Bills change their name.

[kota]

Anyone offended by this hasn't done any research about why they are named "Redskins". At the time it was done as respect. Now when you have people like reverend Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton who only want their names in the paper to make money. it's the same for a politician someone somewhere found that the number of native americans voting for them was low so they push this agenda to get votes. I don't anyone of them actually cares.

 

Sooner or later the NFL will force the Redskins to change their name because they need political tie.

[Hplarrm]

My understanding from some of the Native Americans I talk with is:

 

A. In general they view themselves as a people oppressed by the majority (what we would call) thewestern culture. Some feel oppressed by western culture, but others view the idiocies of western culture as unfortunate but part of the natural order for a conquerer.

 

B. Some of these people tend to refer to themselves as THE PEOPLE OR the 1st nations or indigenous people rather than the phrase Native Americans since the word American is derived from European mapmaker Amerigo Vespucci.

 

C. The leadership of these first nation's is complex and not generally not well understood by Westerners. For many tribes it actually is a matriarchal society with truly important things under the control of older women. Essential but ultimately less important stuff like war making or hunting is left to the men

 

D. There is often a division in tribes between those who choose to operate in the Western world (often operating casinos, selling tabbaco or cigarettes) who are sometimes called the progressives and those who want the tribe to live in the old ways sometimes called the traditionalists.

 

Ultimately, this NFL/DC team dispute is a non-issue for them as they could not care less what the weatern culture calls them.

 

 

I don't think the natives are oppressed anymore for the most part, they have special legal protections and run tax free businesses

[GripnRip]

Do you really think the multi billion dollar company called the washington redskins would choose to name and pursue an enterprise that has a deragotory name? If the name was truly offensive, how many fans would they have? How many seats would they sell? If it was the Washington spics, kikes, !@#$s, retards, etc...nobody would show up or support the team regardless of their race or ethnicity....The people who still did support them would just be attention seekers and psychos that nobody would want to be associated with. This is obviously not the case with the Redskins, whose native american fans grossly outnumber the number of native americans actually offended by the team.

Edited May 27, 2014 by GripnRip

[sodbuster]

Next thing you know, a bunch of "Bill"s will be starting a petition that the Buffalo Bills change their name.

If my name was Bill, I'd be offended.

[Mr. WEO]

If my name was Bill, I'd be offended.

 

Where do I sign.

[IDBillzFan]

Context

 

Oh, context. Well, then. That makes it all just swell, I guess.

 

Okay everyone. Listen up. Referring to black people as "colored" is bad, unless you're colored, then it's okay, but only in context, so if you hear about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, please just don't refer to it as that at all and we'll be fine. Also, stop referring to the Congressional Black Caucus, unless you're a black congressman or congresswoman or congressperson, in which case it's okay so long as it is within context. But otherwise, don't mention it.

 

Please return here daily to get updated on things that offend people who need to be offended by something so they have somethig to complain about.

 

Thank you,

 

Sincerely,

Every thin-skinned fool with a keyboard.

Edited May 27, 2014 by LABillzFan

[Rocky Landing]

Oh, context. Well, then. That makes it all just swell, I guess.

 

Okay everyone. Listen up. Referring to black people as "colored" is bad, unless you're colored, then it's okay, but only in context, so if you hear about the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, please just don't refer to it as that at all and we'll be fine. Also, stop referring to the Congressional Black Caucus, unless you're a black congressman or congresswoman or congressperson, in which case it's okay so long as it is within context. But otherwise, don't mention it.

 

Please return here daily to get updated on things that offend people who need to be offended by something so they have somethig to complain about.

 

Thank you,

 

Sincerely,

Every thin-skinned fool with a keyboard.

No. Go ahead and call black people "colored," and see how many friends you make.

[IDBillzFan]

No. Go ahead and call black people "colored," and see how many friends you make.

 

Most thinking people like myself have no need or desire to ever refer to people by the color of their skin in the first place

 

But that doesn't keep the whiners from crying about it anyway.

 

My point was about hypocrisy, but maybe you didn't understand it, y'know, in context.

[zow2]

Ok, so we have phased out many native american nicknames in high school and college. These programs (i have to believe) were named as a sign of respect and strength not as a racist thing. Now the politicians will legislate out the Redskins name so we can completely forget about Native American anything. It's so stupid. This small minority of "political correctness" will basically remove the name from anything. Instead of keeping tradition alive and the importance of our 1st generation we will make all names obsolete and remove from our consciousness. good job.

[All_Pro_Bills]

Next thing you know, a bunch of "Bill"s will be starting a petition that the Buffalo Bills change their name.

My nephew once asked me why I root for a team named after the thing I hate to pay?

Edited May 27, 2014 by All_Pro_Bills

[Mark Vader]

No it doesn't. Irish are part of the main power structure. They are not expoited and oppressed (anymore).

True.

 

Nevertheless, the term "Fighting Irish" can be viewed as a stereotype, and some people of Irish descent may be offended by that.

 

Therefore, if people were to demand that the term "Fighting" be removed, should we not consider that?

[KD in CA]

Ok, so we have phased out many native american nicknames in high school and college. These programs (i have to believe) were named as a sign of respect and strength not as a racist thing. Now the politicians will legislate out the Redskins name so we can completely forget about Native American anything. It's so stupid. This small minority of "political correctness" will basically remove the name from anything. Instead of keeping tradition alive and the importance of our 1st generation we will make all names obsolete and remove from our consciousness. good job.

 

Somehow 'Fighting Irish' is an honor that speaks to the spirit of people who can stand up for themselves, but 'Fighting Sioux' (in a state that actually once had fighting Sioux) was demeaning, apparently because the government decided those people couldn't actually stand up for themselves. My, how 'empowering' that must have felt for the locals.

[Mark Vader]

My nephew once asked me why I root for a team named after the thing I hate to pay?

[Rocky Landing]

Ok, so we have phased out many native american nicknames in high school and college. These programs (i have to believe) were named as a sign of respect and strength not as a racist thing. Now the politicians will legislate out the Redskins name so we can completely forget about Native American anything. It's so stupid. This small minority of "political correctness" will basically remove the name from anything. Instead of keeping tradition alive and the importance of our 1st generation we will make all names obsolete and remove from our consciousness. good job.

There will be no legislation passed that will force the Redskins to change their name. The Redskins name is protected under the first amendment. This has been one of the reasons that legal challenges from Native American groups have failed. Edited May 27, 2014 by Rocky Landing

[Doug Flutie Band]

Do you really think the multi billion dollar company called the washington redskins would choose to name and pursue an enterprise that has a deragotory name? If the name was truly offensive, how many fans would they have? How many seats would they sell? If it was the Washington spics, kikes, !@#$s, retards, etc...nobody would show up or support the team regardless of their race or ethnicity....The people who still did support them would just be attention seekers and psychos that nobody would want to be associated with. This is obviously not the case with the Redskins, whose native american fans grossly outnumber the number of native americans actually offended by the team.

 

Such bad logic.

 

"Oh, if it were bad, then it wouldn't exist, right? Must be fine!"

 

This kind of garbage mentality is what inhibits positive change in the world.

 

It's good that you understand the Washington Spics would be offensive, but if you can't draw the parallel from that to Redskins you are missing the point.

 

It wouldn't be appropriate to name a team the Washington Black Guys, the Washington African Americans, the Washington Colored People, or the Washington N*gg*rs. Even if you want to argue that Redskins isn't offensive (which is absurd do you think Asians want to be referred to collectively as Yellowskins?), it's still not appropriate for a team name.

 

What happens in these type of threads is that people who are mildly bigoted try to come up with some twisted logic that allows them to support social injustice without having to admit or confront the reality of their world views.

 

Sometimes it is mind blowing that people can look at an image like the one below and not see any sort of issue.

 

 

Chief Wahoo just wants to support his team, what's the big deal right?

Edited May 27, 2014 by Doug Flutie Band

[DC Tom]

Somehow 'Fighting Irish' is an honor that speaks to the spirit of people who can stand up for themselves, but 'Fighting Sioux' (in a state that actually once had fighting Sioux) was demeaning, apparently because the government decided those people couldn't actually stand up for themselves. My, how 'empowering' that must have felt for the locals.

 

If the history of this nation has proven anything, it's that the government knows what's best for the Native Americans and acts in their interest.

 

 

[/sarcasm, for the sarcasm-impaired]

[Rocky Landing]

Such bad logic.

 

"Oh, if it were bad, then it wouldn't exist, right? Must be fine!"

 

This kind of garbage mentality is what inhibits positive change in the world.

 

It's good that you understand the Washington Spics would be offensive, but if you can't draw the parallel from that to Redskins you are missing the point.

 

It wouldn't be appropriate to name a team the Washington Black Guys, the Washington African Americans, the Washington Colored People, or the Washington N*gg*rs. Even if you want to argue that Redskins isn't offensive (which is absurd do you think Asians want to be referred to collectively as Yellowskins?), it's still not appropriate for a team name.

 

What happens in these type of threads is that people who are mildly bigoted try to come up with some twisted logic that allows them to support social injustice without having to admit or confront the reality of their world views.

 

Sometimes it is mind blowing that people can look at an image like the one below and not see any sort of issue.

 

 

Chief Wahoo just wants to support his team, what's the big deal right?

That's a hard pill for just about anybody to swallow.

 

If the history of this nation has proven anything, it's that the government knows what's best for the Native Americans and acts in their interest.

 

 

[/sarcasm, for the sarcasm-impaired]

Well played, sir!

[FireChan]

 

 

Such bad logic.

 

"Oh, if it were bad, then it wouldn't exist, right? Must be fine!"

 

This kind of garbage mentality is what inhibits positive change in the world.

 

It's good that you understand the Washington Spics would be offensive, but if you can't draw the parallel from that to Redskins you are missing the point.

 

It wouldn't be appropriate to name a team the Washington Black Guys, the Washington African Americans, the Washington Colored People, or the Washington N*gg*rs. Even if you want to argue that Redskins isn't offensive (which is absurd do you think Asians want to be referred to collectively as Yellowskins?), it's still not appropriate for a team name.

 

What happens in these type of threads is that people who are mildly bigoted try to come up with some twisted logic that allows them to support social injustice without having to admit or confront the reality of their world views.

 

Sometimes it is mind blowing that people can look at an image like the one below and not see any sort of issue.

 

 

Chief Wahoo just wants to support his team, what's the big deal right?

 

So not supporting the name change means I think I'm better than Native Americans?

 

Interesting leap.

 

I can show you pictures of people with green beer and shamrocks on St Patrick's day. That's the exact same thing as dressing up as a cartoon Indian (except for the red face paint).

Edited May 27, 2014 by FireChan

[Rocky Landing]

So not supporting the name change means I think I'm better than Native Americans?

 

Interesting leap.

 

I can show you pictures of people with green beer and shamrocks on St Patrick's day. That's the exact same thing as dressing up as a cartoon Indian (except for the red face paint).

I feel entitled to post this because I'm 1/32 Irish.

http://o.onionstatic.com/images/7/7372/original/700.jpg?3640

[What a Tuel]

1) What???

2) Did you even read my response?

3) Does not apply to the conversation AND YOU KNOW IT.

4) I would call someone a brown person BEFORE I CALLED THEM COLORED!!!

 

1) Let me elaborate. You completely ignore the origin of the Redskins name. (Named after a Boston Redskins coach that was thought to be Indian). You know the team that played in the same park as the Boston Red Sox. But those things aren't relevant, it's racist!

 

2) Is led into by the fact that if you ignore the true origin of the Redskins name, you have to ignore the true origin of the Browns name.

 

3) It absolutely does.

 

4) Now I am racist . Sheesh.

 

Like I said, the argument is absurd, just like the Redskins argument. If you don't like the name, don't watch or follow the team. You do not have the right to not be offended.

[Mark Vader]

I feel entitled to post this because I'm 1/32 Irish.

http://o.onionstatic...al/700.jpg?3640

Is that you?

[Rocky Landing]

Is that you?

[LB3]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/05/27/nfl-players-urged-by-civil-rights-groups-to-oppose-washington-teams-name/

 

“Despite team officials claiming the name ‘honors’ Native Americans, the ‘R-word’ does exactly the opposite,” the letter states. “It was the word screamed at Native Americans as they were dragged at gunpoint off their lands, it is the word for the object needed to collect a bounty—literally ‘red skins’—ripped from dead Native American bodies and exchanged for money as proof of kill, and it is a term that still denigrates Native Americans today. The name does not honor people of color, instead it seeks to conceal a horrible segment of American history and the countless atrocities suffered by Native Americans.”

[DC Tom]

http://profootballta...ton-teams-name/

 

"Despite team officials claiming the name 'honors' Native Americans, the 'R-word' does exactly the opposite," the letter states. "It was the word screamed at Native Americans as they were dragged at gunpoint off their lands, it is the word for the object needed to collect a bounty—literally 'red skins'—ripped from dead Native American bodies and exchanged for money as proof of kill, and it is a term that still denigrates Native Americans today. The name does not honor people of color, instead it seeks to conceal a horrible segment of American history and the countless atrocities suffered by Native Americans."

 

No, it's not. Stop claiming that.

[BUFFALOKIE]

Just curious...are any of you actually bloods? Partial? Related to, married to, friends with, work with, acquainted with, actually spoken to any indigenous folks? I am partial, my children are more than half, I have many fine friends who are 100% "Skins". Most of them that I know are more offended by this entire discussion, than they are by the by some team name. Indian folk I know, for the most part, do not care. Many others like the recognition. But again, most just dont care what Whitey names there team.

[dave mcbride]

I posted this in another thread, but for those interested in a factual (as opposed to fact free) take on the subject, here's the definitive article from the world's leading historical journal (The American Historical Review): http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1857900?uid=3739256&uid=2460338175&uid=2460337935&uid=2&uid=4&uid=83&uid=63&sid=21104079110377 .

 

It's a pejorative term regardless of its origins in the 17th century, but I don't expect anyone who thinks otherwise to change their minds.

Edited May 28, 2014 by dave mcbride

[LB3]

 

 

No, it's not. Stop claiming that.

 

I only quoted the article. Are you claiming that the term was never used in that context, or just disputing it's origin? If you are disputing the origin, then I agree with you. If you are saying that it was never used that way, I'd have to disagree.

 

 

[Drop Kick Flutie]

Just curious...are any of you actually bloods? Partial? Related to, married to, friends with, work with, acquainted with, actually spoken to any indigenous folks? I am partial, my children are more than half, I have many fine friends who are 100% "Skins". Most of them that I know are more offended by this entire discussion, than they are by the by some team name. Indian folk I know, for the most part, do not care. Many others like the recognition. But again, most just dont care what Whitey names there team.

I know from researching my family tree that there is a better than likely chance I am part American Indian, but I don't really advertise it because I have no need to, I don't need to tell people I'm part Swedish either, the Irish is kind of out of the bag due to my name and all

[DC Tom]

Just curious...are any of you actually bloods? Partial? Related to, married to, friends with, work with, acquainted with, actually spoken to any indigenous folks? I am partial, my children are more than half, I have many fine friends who are 100% "Skins". Most of them that I know are more offended by this entire discussion, than they are by the by some team name.

 

I figured as much. Native American values and mores as discussed by pasty-white people who've never listened to them to begin with? I'd rather rely on the opinions of the Native American nations than I would the opinion of the US Senate.

[Rocky Landing]

I figured as much. Native American values and mores as discussed by pasty-white people who've never listened to them to begin with? I'd rather rely on the opinions of the Native American nations than I would the opinion of the US Senate.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/27/native-american-leaders-speak-out-against-redskins-name/

[DC Tom]

http://profootballta...-redskins-name/

 

"Nations." Not "leaders."

 

Jesus...

[Rocky Landing]

"Nations." Not "leaders."

 

Jesus...

And what is your excuse for ignoring the "leaders" of said "nations?"

[FireChan]

And what is your excuse for ignoring the "leaders" of said "nations?"

 

Because the President's opinion isn't mine? Thought that'd be obvious.

[Rocky Landing]

Because the President's opinion isn't mine? Thought that'd be obvious.

DC Tom was referring to the Native American nations, not our own. It just seems like an inconsistency to me that he would listen to "the opinions of the Native American nations" (his words), but not their leaders. And, had I not posted that article directly after he had made the comment, I don't believe he would have drawn the distinction. Indeed, I suspect that if the leaders of the Native American nations supported his position, he would be quoting them.

[DC Tom]

And what is your excuse for ignoring the "leaders" of said "nations?"

 

Um...I don't care if the leaders are offended, I want to know what the people they represent think themselves?

[Rocky Landing]

Um...I don't care if the leaders are offended, I want to know what the people they represent think themselves?

Gotcha...

[Doug Flutie Band]

So not supporting the name change means I think I'm better than Native Americans?

 

Interesting leap.

 

Yes, it's especially interesting considering I didn't say that and you chose to write "I think I'm better than Native Americans".

[FireChan]

 

 

Yes, it's especially interesting considering I didn't say that and you chose to write "I think I'm better than Native Americans".

 

You wrote "bigoted people." So I'm a bigot because I don't support the name-change?