"Redskins" trademark registrations likely to be re-instated

[Best Player Available]

That's a fair stance. I don't sit around thinking about it either. I only questioned the process by which you formulated your opinion on the issue.

 

Personally, it doesn't really bother me either. What bothers me are the people who come on here guns-a-blazin', hell bent on not changing the name, telling us a) that Native Americans are not offended because they know one guy who isn't (of course many of them are- enough of them for this to be an issue) or b) they shouldn't be offended because it used to not be an issue. As another pointed out, "negro" used to be an accepted term. Could you imagine if there was a Triple-A baseball team named the Mississippi Negroes? Do you think people would be talking about it being some sort of trademark/first amendment issue? No, they would just change it. The problem is that Native Americans don't really have much of a voice/advocate here. As evidenced by this thread. Last week when we talked about Crohn's Disease, at least ten people WITH CROHN'S DISEASE chimed in. When it comes to this topic, it's always "a guy I know" or a "girl I dated for two weeks who was half..." Believe me when I tell you that in many circles it IS an offensive term. In some, it's not. But it is in enough of them to just change the damn name already.

SO, it's just not the redskins that need to become PC. What a country.

 

here's just a few of my pet peves in names that need to be banned. people need to be fired, community's need to be punished. The Cincinnati Reds (especially that racist logo), The Average White Band. WTF? hereford whitefaces (in texas). Ole Miss Rebels ( think about that one), Wahpeton Wops ( no explanation needed) The Robstown cotton pickers ( brutal).

 

Two of my favorites---- The Freeburg Midgets ( insult to the vertically challenged everywhere) and last butte not least the Butte Pirates.

 

i could go on for hours, when does the BS PC Crappola end? Gotta go practice up on my tomahawk chop spring training is coming. meanwhile the world burns.

[FireChan]

That's a fair stance. I don't sit around thinking about it either. I only questioned the process by which you formulated your opinion on the issue.

 

Personally, it doesn't really bother me either. What bothers me are the people who come on here guns-a-blazin', hell bent on not changing the name, telling us a) that Native Americans are not offended because they know one guy who isn't (of course many of them are- enough of them for this to be an issue) or b) they shouldn't be offended because it used to not be an issue. As another pointed out, "negro" used to be an accepted term. Could you imagine if there was a Triple-A baseball team named the Mississippi Negroes? Do you think people would be talking about it being some sort of trademark/first amendment issue? No, they would just change it. The problem is that Native Americans don't really have much of a voice/advocate here. As evidenced by this thread. Last week when we talked about Crohn's Disease, at least ten people WITH CROHN'S DISEASE chimed in. When it comes to this topic, it's always "a guy I know" or a "girl I dated for two weeks who was half..." Believe me when I tell you that in many circles it IS an offensive term. In some, it's not. But it is in enough of them to just change the damn name already.

You have no say in whether they change the name or not. Sorry. That's the way it is.

[Robert James]

Thanks for sharing the link, it will be interesting to see if the court of appeals in the Redskins case will take the same approach. I'm particularly interested to see where this ends up on the commercial speech issue, the government speech issue, and how they treat the fact that the law in question doesn't forbid Daniel Snyder's team from using the name, but only refuses to extend federal trademark protection to it.

[metzelaars_lives]

You have no say in whether they change the name or not. Sorry. That's the way it is.

Never said I did. To the point a few others have brought up however, what if they were called the Washington Negroes? Would they similarly not be forced to change the name in that instance? I am conceding to not having read up on the whole copyright angle here. I am just thinking that it would probably be in good taste to change the name at some point. And I can assure you that if they were called the Washington Negroes that it would have been changed already (even if the mascot was a proud looking negro). My point, again, is that the American Indian does not have enough of a voice/advocate and instead you have a bunch of white guys on some website telling us the extent to which/whether or not they should be offended. And I am of the mind that America is WAY too PC in many regards. I just don't think this is a good example of that.

 

And lastly, to the whole "they're not offended" or "I know a guy who isn't offended" crowd- I am aware that many of them are not offended. Are you aware that many of them are? It seems not.

Edited December 26, 2015 by metzelaars_lives

[dwight in philly]

i think it is pointless to waste time on this stuff anymore. in the "i am offended" mindset of current society , a day does not go by where some wuss does not get offended by something, somebody, some institution, some tradition. who cares about the redskins , or any of the mindless drivel of the PC'ers. cue the "white privilege" labeling crowd.

Edited December 26, 2015 by dwight in philly

[FireChan]

Never said I did. To the point a few others have brought up however, what if they were called the Washington Negroes? Would they similarly not be forced to change the name in that instance? I am conceding to not having read up on the whole copyright angle here. I am just thinking that it would probably be in good taste to change the name at some point. And I can assure you that if they were called the Washington Negroes that it would have been changed already (even if the mascot was a proud looking negro). My point, again, is that the American Indian does not have enough of a voice/advocate and instead you have a bunch of white guys on some website telling us the extent to which/whether or not they should be offended. And I am of the mind that America is WAY too PC in many regards. I just don't think this is a good example of that.

 

And lastly, to the whole "they're not offended" or "I know a guy who isn't offended" crowd- I am aware that many of them are not offended. Are you aware that many of them are? It seems not.

Every time you say "just change it," you are assuming you have any say. You don't. The US government doesn't. Time to deal.

[metzelaars_lives]

i think it is pointless to waste time on this stuff anymore. in the "i am offended" mindset of current society , a day does not go by where some wuss does not get offended by something, somebody, some institution, some tradition. who cares about the redskins , or any of the mindless drivel of the PC'ers. cue the "white privilege" labeling crowd.

We agree that the United States is, by and large, too PC in 2015. I think most people- even liberals- would agree with this. Comedians- who, outside of the blue collar comedy tour, are pretty much exclusively liberal- pretty much unanimously agree with this. Bill Maher complains about it all the time. Jerry Seinfeld, Louis CK, etc., etc. Would you agree that a line even exists though? For instance, in Moab, UT there is a canyon and a trail both named after "Negro Bill" (see link below). Until not too long ago, both the canyon and the trailhead were named after "Ni**er Bill." You could literally be driving in Utah and see a sign that read: "Ni**er Bull Trailhead Parking." Was the state of Utah being too PC when they changed the name to "Negro Bill?" Were you all grumpy, complaining about how it just aint right and that people were too sensitive and you wished it was still the 1950's when they changed it? Were people lobbying that there was some sort of copyright infringement at the time? I don't know, probably. The point is that the idea of America being too PC and there being certain instances, like this one, where it is appropriate to be a little sensitive are not mutually exclusive concepts.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro_Bill_Canyon

Edited December 26, 2015 by metzelaars_lives

[dwight in philly]

Dude you are such a badass.

Edited December 26, 2015 by dwight in philly

[FireChan]

We agree that the United States is, by and large, too PC in 2015. I think most people- even liberals- would agree with this. Comedians- who, outside of the blue collar comedy tour, are pretty much exclusively liberal- pretty much unanimously agree with this. Bill Maher complains about it all the time. Jerry Seinfeld, Louis CK, etc., etc. Would you agree that a line even exists though? For instance, in Moab, UT there is a canyon and a trail both named after "Negro Bill" (see link below). Until not too long ago, both the canyon and the trailhead were named after "Ni**er Bill." You could literally be driving in Utah and see a sign that read: "Ni**er Bull Trailhead Parking." Was the state of Utah being too PC when they changed the name to "Negro Bill?" Were you all grumpy, complaining about how it just aint right and that people were too sensitive and you wished it was still the 1950's when they changed it? Were people lobbying that there was some sort of copyright infringement at the time? I don't know, probably. The point is that the idea of America being too PC and there being certain instances, like this one, where it is appropriate to be a little sensitive are not mutually exclusive concepts.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negro_Bill_Canyon

What did you do to change it Metz? Did you sign a petition? Write a Utah congressman? Or just complain on a message board?

[metzelaars_lives]

What did you do to change it Metz? Did you sign a petition? Write a Utah congressman? Or just complain on a message board?

I'm not complaining about anything. I am taking issue with the people who are hell bent on keeping the name and think you're a "wuss" if you can even see the other side of the argument. I have already stated on numerous occasions, that I don't care that much about the subject myself. I freely refer to them as the "Redskins" and think nothing of it. I am however, sympathetic to the Native Americans who are offended by the name, which many on here snicker at and THAT offends me. I think you like to argue for the sake of arguing more than I do.

[FireChan]

I'm not complaining about anything. I am taking issue with the people who are hell bent on keeping the name and think you're a "wuss" if you can even see the other side of the argument. I have already stated on numerous occasions, that I don't care that much about the subject myself. I freely refer to them as the "Redskins" and think nothing of it. I am however, sympathetic to the Native Americans who are offended by the name, which many on here snicker at and THAT offends me. I think you like to argue for the sake of arguing more than I do.

I'd say you absolutely do care, judging by your vast amount of posts on the subject.

 

Some folks, like you, don't care and are sympathetic (a total contradiction by the way) whereas other folks don't care and don't think any large number of folks really cares either, and that's somehow offensive to you. Interesting.

 

Again. "Hell bent on keeping the name." THEY DONT HAVE A SAY. Stop pretending like they do.

Edited December 26, 2015 by FireChan

[Webster Guy]

I'd think those offended by Redskin would also have a problem with Buffalo Bills. Killed a bunch of Indians (they called them savages back then mostly), even scalped a famous warrior and got a lot of notoriety for it.

 

Was nominated for the purple heart four times but lost in the selection finals every time. He was a lefty but his horse's name was wide right.

[boyst]

When you say "who cares just change it" who are you telling to change?

you did change wrong.

 

It's... #CHANGE!