Washington Football Franchise team name discussion

[Jenksismyhero]

Really no it doesn't. I mean, literally just read the word. "Red skins". This isn't like "Antidisestablishmentarianism" changing definitions subtly, it literally spells out for you what it means.

 

So if someone were to say Washington Redskins to you, the first thing you think is an American Indian. Is that right?

Edited August 20, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[StrangeSox]

So if someone were to say Washington Redskins to you, the first thing you think is an American Indian. Is that right?

I'm not sure why you think this helps your case. The logo of said team is an Indian. The link is still blatant.

[StrangeSox]

See above.

 

And it's not about "wishing" to use it. You've got a word that no longer means what it used to mean. It has an entirely different interpretation now.

The word is still a racial slur that's long been used as the name of a football team with an American Indian as it's logo. Even in the context of the team, it refers to American Indians

[Jake]

I don't see how the team normalizing an insensitive word in the common brain makes it okay - that makes it worse. Unfortunately, the people who are affected aren't always easily identified by looking at them, they don't all think or organize together, and they were so successfully annihilated that there just aren't very many of them around. Divide and conquer is the strategy being pursued again, ironically.

[Jake]

Our only contact with American Indians are in sports iconography - that's why it doesn't seem outrageous. And the point is that these things, especially a word like Redskin, don't have to be created or distributed with malice to be wrong.

 

It's just like I was saying in the thread about Hawk and skirts. It's okay to say something and not know it was offensive or otherwise problematic for society if you're willing to listen to criticism and realize that your intent doesn't make the overall impact of your words any better.

[T R U]

yeah, totally. Nobody has ever tried to get this name changed before. Certainly the first I've heard of it.

 

As big of an issue as it is now? No. I wasn't saying that no one ever in the history of the world had a problem with it before recently. The size of the fight against it is what I was referring to.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Indians is a proper and scientific name for a group of people (though of course it is sort of hilariously inaccurate). In fact Native Americans was added later as an attempt to be more sensitive (or PC if you like), but then those people themselves in many cases felt that was just as inaccurate as Indians. That's why American Indians is the way you now, again, often see the groups termed in academic papers and textbooks. It was never an insult, unless terms like "white" or "Irish" or "people" are also insults.

 

Indian and Redskin are in no way interchangeable in their tone - only in the people they point at.

 

It is a term of historical ignorance and racism assigned by colonialists. There is no such historical figure as an Indian, or an American Indian, just like there is no group that is a Redskin.

 

There were tribes and nations all over these lands. Not a one of them would have self identifed as an Indian. They are Iroquois, or Pottawattomie, or whatever their historical nations were.

 

It is just as historically of a loaded term as any others.

[EvilMonkey]

Maybe we need to get Emmanual Lewis to OK the definition change for redskins like he did with 'f**' on South Park.

[StrangeSox]

It is a term of historical ignorance and racism assigned by colonialists. There is no such historical figure as an Indian, or an American Indian, just like there is no group that is a Redskin.

 

There were tribes and nations all over these lands. Not a one of them would have self identifed as an Indian. They are Iroquois, or Pottawattomie, or whatever their historical nations were.

 

It is just as historically of a loaded term as any others.

I'm sure you have copious citations for your assertion that it was originally used and perceived as a racially derogatory term, right? I mean there were also French and English, but at some point a larger identity of "European" still emerged. American Indians still have their tribal identities, but they also embrace the larger category. You need to show that the origins of "Indian" weren't just ignorance but deliberate malice and that it was perceived as such. I suspect you will have a difficult time given that the term predates modern conceptions of race and that early colonists had no problem continuing to distinguish between individual tribes, but I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

 

That still doesn't address why we should continue to use a word today that is unquestionably historically racist and still perceived that way, though. Why do you assume that one day it will no longer be perceived as racist by American Indians when plenty of other racial slurs remain racial slurs? How long might that take? Why should present-day American Indians who object to that term now suffer continued insult for the sake of white people who hope they'll eventually get over it? Should it be acceptable to go around saying other racial slurs on the hopes that they will one day stop being offensive? Why is it so important to keep using these words that express racist ideas, anyway?

[southsider2k5]

I'm sure you have copious citations for your assertion that it was originally used and perceived as a racially derogatory term, right? I mean there were also French and English, but at some point a larger identity of "European" still emerged. American Indians still have their tribal identities, but they also embrace the larger category. You need to show that the origins of "Indian" weren't just ignorance but deliberate malice and that it was perceived as such. I suspect you will have a difficult time given that the term predates modern conceptions of race and that early colonists had no problem continuing to distinguish between individual tribes, but I'm happy to be shown otherwise.

 

That still doesn't address why we should continue to use a word today that is unquestionably historically racist and still perceived that way, though. Why do you assume that one day it will no longer be perceived as racist by American Indians when plenty of other racial slurs remain racial slurs? How long might that take? Why should present-day American Indians who object to that term now suffer continued insult for the sake of white people who hope they'll eventually get over it? Should it be acceptable to go around saying other racial slurs on the hopes that they will one day stop being offensive? Why is it so important to keep using these words that express racist ideas, anyway?

 

So you are intentionally using a racist term, just because it is socially acceptable.

[StrangeSox]

I'm asking you to actually back up your claim that it was at one point racist. Well, that's part of what I'm asking. There are other questions regarding your argument in that post, too!

 

It is also the term that American Indians ask be called, and I see no reason to reject their self-identification.

Edited August 21, 2014 by StrangeSox

[southsider2k5]

I'm asking you to actually back up your claim that it's racist. Well, that's part of what I'm asking. There are other questions regarding your argument in that post, too!

 

NEVERMIND.

 

This is going no where. I should have walked away much earlier.

[cabiness42]

Can't we just rename them the Washington Fighting Irish and be done with it?

[Middle Buffalo]

This moment is taylor-made for the Score. This has full phone lines written all over it.

It's especially good fodder for the Score because Ditka is an ESPN personality. It would be more interesting to bring up the topic on ESPN 1000 and see how they handle/run from it.

[StrangeSox]

NEVERMIND.

 

This is going no where. I should have walked away much earlier.

I know, right? Flailing and then refusing to ever actually justify or even explain your point is kinda your thing.

[iamshack]

SS, you should once again devote your efforts to helping a cause of the "AmerIndian" that "AmerIndians" actually give two s***s about.

 

It seems like you just engage on these issues as another intellectual dick measuring contest, as usual. It's like practice for the debate team or something.

 

My company deals with the Paiute tribe of "AmerIndians" fairly often, and I can tell you they care much more about economic opportunity and being able to achieve some level of sustenance on the godforsaken s***hole reservations we've put them on than some silly football team name/logo.

 

As the Hawkeroo would say, you're all hat, no cattle, it seems.

[StrangeSox]

But that continues the mistaken assumption that one precludes the other, that there is some finite amount of "care" and that if I think that racist name should changed, it means I have to take some care points from another category.

 

Some of them obviously care enough to organize against it. A majority find it offensive. There are obviously more important issues, and no one has said otherwise. That more important issues exist isn't an excuse to do nothing about an issue that is easily fixable. All that has to happen is for Snyder to stop being am asshole, and that's more likely if people would stop making weak excuses for racial slurs.

 

Why are you putting AmerIndians in scare quotes? If my posts are intellectual dick measuring, what does that make the posts of people defending the use of racial slurs?

Edited August 21, 2014 by StrangeSox

[iamshack]

But that continues the mistaken assumption that one precludes the other, that there is some finite amount of "care" and that if I think that racist name should changed, it means I have to take some care points from another category.

 

Some of them obviously care enough to organize against it. A majority find it offensive. There are obviously more important issues, and no one has said otherwise. That more important issues exist isn't an excuse to do nothing about an issue that is easily fixable. All that has to happen is for Snyder to stop being am asshole, and that's more likely if people would stop making weak excuses for racial slurs.

 

Why are you putting AmerIndians in scare quotes? If my posts are intellectual dick measuring, what does that make the posts of people defending the use of racial slurs?

Hmmm, I forgot that one...scare quotes (I almost put scare quotes around the phrase scare quotes)...

 

Here is the issue, SS, at least as I see it from my little perch out in the desert...you are incredibly bright, and you make me think about a lot of things in a different way. For that, you deserve to be complimented. HOWEVER, it appears that you read your political commentators/editorialists and latch onto an issue. You do a good amount of research so you can educate yourself on all the proper terminology and the various arguments for and against an issue. This is all admirable. But then you come over here and set your trap, waiting for someone a little less left or bleeding than you, and you pounce! You do so in a way so as to appear to be thumbing your nose at the rest of us (with the possible exception of your crew of bleeding hearts), as if you have always been an avid supporter of the plight of the Indians/Native Americans/AmerIndians/Whatever someone decides they would prefer to be called, and that rest of us are not only ignorant, but also complicit in conspiring against these poor people from the day we exited the womb. And our direct ancestors were even more complicit! Then you spend the rest of the time this debate ensues repeating this with new victims until we all get tired of it and go back to talking about horrific White Sox baseball.

 

Then we never hear anything about other "care points" you expend on the plight of these folks again. It's not like you come back a month later with pictures of you volunteering at the nearest AmerIndian reservation or in the ghetto handing out foodstuffs.

 

Obviously, some people have to educate others on the inequality and oppression, and perhaps you view that as your role. I'm just telling you I don't think you come off in a particularly comforting light when doing so.

 

I do learn quite a bit from you though, so for that I am thankful. But the above is why I do avoid posting in here much, because of those traps you spring...

[greg775]

Why not just change it to Washington Pigskins? Just sayin ... You still get 'Skins. And pigskin is a funny term for a football.

[southsider2k5]

I know, right? Flailing and then refusing to ever actually justify or even explain your point is kinda your thing.

 

One of these days you'll be able to debate a complex topic in something other than a extremely simplified manner.

[greg775]

Someday they are going to finally change the name and we can get on with proper respect to the American Indian. I love the fact many newspapers and announcers won't use Redskins. They only will put "the team from Washington."

 

I'm not offended by Ditka. It's neat he is ripping the PC police, but he's wrong here. You can't call a team Redskins. In fact, I'd make the Cleveland Indians change, too. WTF?

[iamshack]

Someday they are going to finally change the name and we can get on with proper respect to the American Indian. I love the fact many newspapers and announcers won't use Redskins. They only will put "the team from Washington."

 

I'm not offended by Ditka. It's neat he is ripping the PC police, but he's wrong here. You can't call a team Redskins. In fact, I'd make the Cleveland Indians change, too. WTF?

Yeah, and change the Cowboys too!

[ChiSox_Sonix]

Yeah, and change the Cowboys too!

 

And Vikings! I can't believe people support a team named after a group of people known for rape, murder, pillage and unquestionably poor hygiene.

[Jenksismyhero]

The word is still a racial slur that's long been used as the name of a football team with an American Indian as it's logo. Even in the context of the team, it refers to American Indians

 

Nope, not anymore it doesn't. It refers to the team nickname. No one uses the word redskins to refer to american indians anymore. No one. It's so antiquated it's laughable as a slur. I asked my wife last night what redskins means. Her football exposure is about 25% of the Superbowl each year. Even she said, you mean the football team?

 

You're basically telling me that slurs can never in the future change meanings and become something different. I think that's bulls***. "Queer" used to be a terrible word for members of the LGBT community. Now it's a term that you're SUPPOSED to use. That happened in about 20 years.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Jenksismybitch

[Jenksismyhero]

Someday they are going to finally change the name and we can get on with proper respect to the American Indian. I love the fact many newspapers and announcers won't use Redskins. They only will put "the team from Washington."

 

I'm not offended by Ditka. It's neat he is ripping the PC police, but he's wrong here. You can't call a team Redskins. In fact, I'd make the Cleveland Indians change, too. WTF?

 

Yeah, because changing the name of a football team will really jump start that movement. A movement that hasn't been jump started...ever. This response is exactly why this entire scandal is a bunch of nonsense.