- Joined
- May 19, 2011
- Messages
- 4,810
- Reaction score
- 2,647
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
It's not hard at all.
Redskin CAN be a racial slur. It is not, nor has it ever been, JUST a racial slur.
And there's ample evidence to suggest that the method of it's use by the Washington Redskins is in line with the uses of it that don't align with a racial slur.
Which evidence is that? Every dictionary classifies it as a usually offensive term. By definition, it's offensive. Sure it's possible for someone to use the term as a legitimate compliment, but they're just using it wrong.
Native Americans have been officially protesting the name since 1968. A huge list of announcers and writers have announced that they are boycotting the name redskins. They're the 'skins, not the redskins. And even if you view this as a borderline issue, our historical mistreatment of the Native Americans would seem to argue for a little bit of deference.
What the Redskins do is their business. If they want a racist name and are willing to live with the consequences, then so be it. But changing their name to the Pigskins, or back to the braves is kind of the obvious call.