• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Patent office cancels Redskins trademarks

tres borrachos said:
He's not wrong about that. It's the only poll anyone is aware of which was exclusively comprised of Native Americans. 9 out of 10 did not believe the name was offensive:


http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr2.pdf
Click to expand...

Well, I took a poll last Christmas in my living room. Three out of three Natives said the name sucks.
They were unanimous about the Cleveland Indians logo, too. But like I said, it doesn't matter.
 
I say we send the other 10 percent back to India. :lol:

Seriously though, I think at best, it's racially insensitive. I don't mind being in the minority, but I do consider it a slur.
 
tres borrachos said:
He's not wrong about that. It's the only poll anyone is aware of which was exclusively comprised of Native Americans. 9 out of 10 did not believe the name was offensive:


http://cdn.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr2.pdf
Click to expand...

That's interesting to see it in writing. I had heard the same thing, but never seen it in black and white. I don't see why anyone would give a flying leap what a sports team is called. We went though this about 10 years ago when all these PC goody two shoes tried to get the Braves name changed. Heck during the height of it, even some ESPN announcer were calling the Braves, the Bravos. What the heck is a Bravo?

Perhaps all these goody two shoes who want the name changed so bad would be better off to put all that energy into helping the Indians achieve a better life. They seem to think if the name is changed, then all is right with the world.
 
rocket88 said:
What's wrong with any of those racial slurs? If they have a right to use a racial slur, they should be able to use any racial slur.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right. They should be able to use any slur that they want to. It's called freedom of speech. And if they are stupid enough to call their team the Washington niggers than I an thousands of other people would boycott the team in every way possible until they were run out of business. It is not the governments job to control speech just because it might hurt someone's feelings. And what you call your team or business is freedom of speech
 
Grand Mal said:
I believe you're wrong about that, and I also believe that it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

How Many Native Americans Think ‘Redskins’ is a Slur? « CBS DC

There are Native American schools that call their teams Redskins. The term is used affectionately by some natives, similar to the way the N-word is used by some African-Americans. In the only recent poll to ask native people about the subject, 90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive, although many question the cultural credentials of the respondents.
Click to expand...

Have anything other than a belief to counter this?
 
Arbo said:
Always the 'race card'… :roll:


Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.
Click to expand...

That settles it! An article by slate that you didn't bother to read settles it! Only...

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer, too, has weighed in on the connection between redskin's power to offend and its origins when he compared it to the derogatory verb gyp:

Charles Krauthammer said:
When I was growing up, I thought 'gyp' was simply a synonym for 'cheat,' and used it accordingly. It was only when I was an adult that I learned that gyp was short for gypsy. At which point, I stopped using it.
Click to expand...

...

Nonetheless, it is easy to see from 19th-century newspapers that the term did frequently appear in the context of violence by and against Indians. Stories about life-or-death encounters with hostile tribes can be found by searching redskin in Chronicling America, the National Digital Newspaper Database.

But the informal usage of redskin seems to have made it especially inviting to the creators of frontier tales.

Such contexts and, more importantly, the violent history of U.S. Indian policy, help explain why the 1898 Webster's Collegiate dictionary labeled red-skin "often contemptuous," as Peter Sokolowski of Merriam-Webster has pointed out. But our lexicographical take on the word remained complicated.



In short, this article presents many views on the word, you only showed the part you wanted.
 
Bodhisattva said:
The Redskins are a racist league played by Redskins and that white people wouldn't be caught alive participating in? Are you actually trying to parallel the two? :lol:
Click to expand...

No, read the actual post instead of trying your hardest to be asinine. I correctly pointed out that using a particular part of the races' acceptance of a word does not make it any less derogatory.
 
Hatuey said:
No, read the actual post instead of trying your hardest to be asinine. I correctly pointed out that using a particular part of the races' acceptance of a word does not make it any less derogatory.
Click to expand...

If they do not see it as derogatory... then why is it derogatory again? :lol:

...and asinine is my fall back characteristic... no need for me to try hard.
 
tres borrachos said:
How many times have you called a Native American a "redskin" as a means of insulting them? How many times have you heard the term used outside of the team we all know and hate (at least we Giants fans hate them!)?
Click to expand...
I'm not familiar with too many slurs directed at American Indians. After all few people have reason to insult them anymore since they aren't around much these days. But, Redskins would be one. I am sure.
 
Bodhisattva said:
If they do not see it as derogatory... then why is it derogatory again? :lol:
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you liked Arbo's post without actually reading it and how it completely obliterates that type of argument:

Read the article you liked:

Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer, too, has weighed in on the connection between redskin's power to offend and its origins when he compared it to the derogatory verb gyp:

When I was growing up, I thought 'gyp' was simply a synonym for 'cheat,' and used it accordingly. It was only when I was an adult that I learned that gyp was short for gypsy. At which point, I stopped using it.
Click to expand...

In short - words have meanings - even if some within the group don't find them derogatory, it's still there. If you want me to make it even simpler: just because you have black friends, and they think it's cool for you to use the word nigger, it doesn't make it any less of a slur. ;)
 
tres borrachos said:
Women were treated badly 100 years or more ago too. Should Baylor be forced to change the name of their female sports teams from "Lady Bears"?
Click to expand...
A local high school is the Rams... and the girls teams are called the Lady Rams.

Ummm, shouldn't they be called the Ewes? :mrgreen:
 
Arbo said:
Yeah, that bastillion of right wing news… Slate. :roll:
Click to expand...

What is a "bastillion"? Is that like a million bastions?
 
tres borrachos said:
Again with the Negro Leagues. We aren't talking about the Negro Leagues, nor are we talking about black people and why they joined the only leagues they COULD join at the time.
Click to expand...

I repost:

Your inability to comprehend the relationship between your statement and the Negro League example because you don't have the knowledge necessary to comprehend it is not my problem.
Click to expand...

You're obviously not friends with extrapolation.

Or are you saying that the reservation schools (with 100% Native American populations in them) have no choice but to use what you consider a slur?
Click to expand...

That they use it doesn't make it any less of a slur. What part of that don't you understand?

So people shouldn't make money on the backs of others? Then when are you going to scream about the Vikings? How many Vikings play for the NFL in Minnesota?

Good grief.
Click to expand...

Look C.B., your comparisons simply aren't even remotely the same. The Vikings? What ethnic group currently living in North America are they named after? None? Alright. Moving on. The point of your argument was a weak one. If some NAs like it, why is it slur and why is it bad to use it? Actually, it was a slur before they started using it. Arbo provided the context in which the word has been used for the past 200 years, though it has gone back and forth for about half that time, the last 100 years it has been covered with the same noble savage, violent savage tinge that idealizes NAs without seriously looking at the effects of that word. Now, you can keep complaining and complaining - but it's a slur. It's no different than nigger or mick or slut or even guinea. It's a slur. There is nothing positive about it and that it's still being used perpetuates false stereotypes of that ... what was it? "Fighting spirit" Grim talked about. You know, the fighting spirit that got 25 million of them exterminated. :shrug:
 
Hatuey said:
I'm assuming you liked Arbo's post without actually reading it and how it completely obliterates that type of argument:

Read the article you liked:

Redskins: The debate over the Washington football team's name incorrectly invokes history.



In short - words have meanings - even if some within the group don't find them derogatory, it's still there. If you want me to make it even simpler: just because you have black friends, and they think it's cool for you to use the word nigger, it doesn't make it any less of a slur. ;)
Click to expand...

If they do not see it as derogatory... then why is it derogatory again?
 
CRUE CAB said:
Pretty much do anyway. I have two #44 Riggins jerseys. One is a real deal NFL one and the other is a knock off. Very hard to tell the difference.
Click to expand...

Then you should cheer this move because when the Redskins change their name, from that day forward the value of your vintage jersey's should rise. Just as I wish I still had my Baltimore Colts pennant I got when I visited the NFL Hall of Fame when I was a kid.
 
ocean515 said:
Not at all. Just ignored on the basis of merit, but followed by a flick of a $10 chip, and a pull on the handle of the slot machine, in recognition of all the Indians have done for the US.
Click to expand...

wow..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom