Redskins Name Change

Stephen SeaHawking

New member
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
254
Reaction score
0
I don't know, but if you find yourself agreeing with BOTH Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell on a topic, you are probably wrong.

Being from Seattle, surrounded by a lot of Native Americans on a semi-daily basis, I would be embarrassed to have anything with "Redskins" printed on it. What do you think?
 

Seatown001

New member
Joined
Sep 28, 2012
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Location
Seattle
I really didnt care about the name until I heard the AM show on 710 this morning they explained a few things about the history of the name.

Doing this from memory but it was basically that the owner back then changed the name from the Braves to the redskins, it was thought he did so because the second coach had a Native American background and he did it as a insult to said coach. The owner also died in the late sixties and left most of his money to a foundation with the stipulation that the foundation couldn't do any work that helped overcome segregation and any work or money that would help or aid any native Americans or African Americans in any way.

I was pretty blown away at just how racist the owner was, after hearing that I would fully support a name change just to make that former owner roll over in his grave (even more so if they went with the red tails).
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,115
Reaction score
938
Location
Kissimmee, FL
Times change. I think that nowadays the name is mildly racist, but I'm not sure history should have to be changed to suit current political climate changes. Textbooks still refer to Indians instead of Native Americans in plenty of instances.

Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.
 

Subzero717

Active member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
14
Location
Is Everything
RolandDeschain":2gd2aa6b said:
Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.

Weak sauce bro dog. You and I both know you have better juice than that.

This is being discussed in the shack btw.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,115
Reaction score
938
Location
Kissimmee, FL
I know it is, and this isn't the shack; so I'm not sure why you're callin' my sauce weak in THIS thread! :)
 

Scottemojo

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
14,663
Reaction score
1
I will be honest for once. I know.

I want the name changed mostly because I think Redskins fans are mostly a stupid bunch and I want them to cry.
 
OP
OP
S

Stephen SeaHawking

New member
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
254
Reaction score
0
Scottemojo":1h7r3oec said:
I will be honest for once. I know.

I want the name changed mostly because I think Redskins fans are mostly a stupid bunch and I want them to cry.
Ha, I told a group of them last year that if they beat us in the playoffs, I am going to petition to get the name changed to the Washington Constitutions.
 

Throwdown

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
24,042
Reaction score
1,325
Location
Tacoma, WA
Scottemojo":hhcsm4yh said:
I will be honest for once. I know.

I want the name changed mostly because I think Redskins fans are mostly a stupid bunch and I want them to cry.

This
 

hawker84

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
5,603
Reaction score
318
Location
Tri Cities, WA
If it bothers Native American groups, then change the name.. if it doesn't , change it anyways because i too want to see those idiot fans crying..
 

SirTed

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
844
Reaction score
0
Location
Queen Anne
RolandDeschain":100h1ae3 said:
Times change. I think that nowadays the name is mildly racist, but I'm not sure history should have to be changed to suit current political climate changes. Textbooks still refer to Indians instead of Native Americans in plenty of instances.

Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.


You realize there's a difference between you being called a "whiteskin" and redskin, right? The name or word is completely associated with horrible racism and horrible acts.

Would you really make the same argument - saying "wigger" doesn't bother me at all" ? I doubt it. It's a horrible word (they both are) and it's an embarrassment that ANYONE would still cling to it over money, some false sense of football history (for god's sake) over ACTUAL history. Daniel Snyder is a clueless moron. The fact that Goodell backs him, and the name is the most shocking of all. I'm not surprised that he's not going against Snyder on this, but he could have easily kept quite - But no - He had to release an incredibly ignorant statement. I honestly can't believe that this story isn't getting more traction.
 

Missing_Clink

New member
Joined
Mar 12, 2012
Messages
3,287
Reaction score
1
That team name is an absolute embarrassment. It's a racial slur, bottom line. No team should be named after a racial slur. I really hope they lose their federal trademark because of it.
 

AbsolutNET

New member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
8,974
Reaction score
1
Location
PNW
RolandDeschain":4tyv84y3 said:
Times change. I think that nowadays the name is mildly racist, but I'm not sure history should have to be changed to suit current political climate changes. Textbooks still refer to Indians instead of Native Americans in plenty of instances.

Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.

So you'd have no problem going to a reservation and call them redskins?
 

salamander

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2012
Messages
209
Reaction score
6
I think the name should change...in fact after recently reading some books on the indian wars/trail of tears I'm uncomfortable using Native Americans as mascots for any team in any sport. I think making them mascots whitewashes history and dehumanizes them to a certain extent. Our ancestors did perform genocide on these people and it's pretty disrespectful to that history to trivialize it by making them sports mascots.
 

Rambitious

New member
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
Stephen SeaHawking":3i057wg2 said:
I don't know, but if you find yourself agreeing with BOTH Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell on a topic, you are probably wrong.

Being from Seattle, surrounded by a lot of Native Americans on a semi-daily basis, I would be embarrassed to have anything with "Redskins" printed on it. What do you think?


I am part American Indian (which I prefer) but I did hear of a poll taken - 100% American Indians.

Over 90% thought the name "Redskins" was not offensive and they were just fine with it.
As am I.

Keep the Redskins name!!!!!!!!

Kind of funny that most white people don't like the name and most American Indians appear to be just fine with it.
 

pinksheets

Active member
Joined
Apr 21, 2011
Messages
3,254
Reaction score
19
Location
Seattle
Here's my problem with the "history" argument- It's basically just rewarding being so stubborn, out of touch, and arrogant to hold strong to a racist nickname or a racist logo or whatever for far too long. Just because you've done something wrong a long time, doesn't mean the onus is on others to just accept it.

Here's my problem with the "Native American's are fine with it" argument - I don't believe racial slurs, racist jokes, hate speech, etc. are wrong just because they offend those they are directed at. If I had a kid and he pointed out an African-American and said "look dad a n-----," I wouldn't feel like it was okay so long as no African-Americans heard it. Crap like the Redskins or Chief Wahoo offend my sense of decency, and I'm not any part Native American. Same way I feel when I see old racist caricatures, literature, etc. There's a reason we try to bury so much of it in the past, because it hurts to look at now, and that's how a lot of people feel about these teams.

The change is inevitable, it WILL happen, people are not going to grow more accepting of ugly racist relics on grand display over time.
 

Subzero717

Active member
Joined
Nov 5, 2010
Messages
10,005
Reaction score
14
Location
Is Everything
Rambitious":2lbhqcd9 said:
Stephen SeaHawking":2lbhqcd9 said:
I don't know, but if you find yourself agreeing with BOTH Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell on a topic, you are probably wrong.

Being from Seattle, surrounded by a lot of Native Americans on a semi-daily basis, I would be embarrassed to have anything with "Redskins" printed on it. What do you think?


I am part American Indian (which I prefer) but I did hear of a poll taken - 100% American Indians.

Over 90% thought the name "Redskins" was not offensive and they were just fine with it.
As am I.

Keep the Redskins name!!!!!!!!

Kind of funny that most white people don't like the name and most American Indians appear to be just fine with it.

That's the problem with polls.
 

JOz56

Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
748
Reaction score
0
Location
Spokane WA
Rambitious":2nik1kke said:
Stephen SeaHawking":2nik1kke said:
I don't know, but if you find yourself agreeing with BOTH Dan Snyder and Roger Goodell on a topic, you are probably wrong.

Being from Seattle, surrounded by a lot of Native Americans on a semi-daily basis, I would be embarrassed to have anything with "Redskins" printed on it. What do you think?


I am part American Indian (which I prefer) but I did hear of a poll taken - 100% American Indians.

Over 90% thought the name "Redskins" was not offensive and they were just fine with it.
As am I.

Keep the Redskins name!!!!!!!!

Kind of funny that most white people don't like the name and most American Indians appear to be just fine with it.

Did they actually question 100% of the Native Americans, with all sorts of blood lines, in this country or was it some stupid online poll that a bunch of Redskin fans were able to pump up their support for?

I'm part Native American as well, and it is all out racist. Just because some people are fine with something, doesn't mean it isn't wrong.
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,115
Reaction score
938
Location
Kissimmee, FL
AbsolutNET":2tpudy2p said:
RolandDeschain":2tpudy2p said:
Times change. I think that nowadays the name is mildly racist, but I'm not sure history should have to be changed to suit current political climate changes. Textbooks still refer to Indians instead of Native Americans in plenty of instances.

Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.

So you'd have no problem going to a reservation and call them redskins?

That's just provocative. I have no problem calling anyone an idiot, but that doesn't mean I'll drive to their house and call them an idiot out of the blue.
 

Stoned Cold

New member
Joined
Mar 15, 2013
Messages
255
Reaction score
0
RolandDeschain":24etml9a said:
That's just provocative. I have no problem calling anyone an idiot, but that doesn't mean I'll drive to their house and call them an idiot out of the blue.

You are perfect for the internet.
 

AbsolutNET

New member
Joined
Feb 23, 2007
Messages
8,974
Reaction score
1
Location
PNW
RolandDeschain":b7bjhdgl said:
AbsolutNET":b7bjhdgl said:
RolandDeschain":b7bjhdgl said:
Times change. I think that nowadays the name is mildly racist, but I'm not sure history should have to be changed to suit current political climate changes. Textbooks still refer to Indians instead of Native Americans in plenty of instances.

Is calling me a whiteskin because I'm white racist? I don't know. It certainly wouldn't bother me, though.

So you'd have no problem going to a reservation and call them redskins?

That's just provocative. I have no problem calling anyone an idiot, but that doesn't mean I'll drive to their house and call them an idiot out of the blue.

So you have no problem calling an Indian American a "redskin" to their face?
 
Top