• 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!

Is Redskin a slur? [W:282]

Is Redskin a slur?


  • Total voters
    96
Here's several definitions of redskin that label it as offensive.

https://www.google.com/search?q=red...:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=fflb
redskin: definition of redskin in Oxford dictionary (American English) (US)
Redskin - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
Redskin | Define Redskin at Dictionary.com

You are correct that originally, Native Americans referred to themselves as redskins, but the term gradually became offensive in the 19th century, as outlined in the second link.

One lists it as "offensive" in an overall sense. However the other three all acknowledge that it can be used in non-offensive/derogatory ways.

Originally, they used it to refer to themselves. Over time, it grew to be used in an offensive manner. Over time again, it's primary use has been to refer to a sports team that utilized the non-offensive/dated version of the word to describe native americans.
 
One lists it as "offensive" in an overall sense. However the other three all acknowledge that it can be used in non-offensive/derogatory ways.

Originally, they used it to refer to themselves. Over time, it grew to be used in an offensive manner. Over time again, it's primary use has been to refer to a sports team that utilized the non-offensive/dated version of the word to describe native americans.

As I said in my original post, the denotational modern definition is an offensive one, but someone can use it in a non-offensive way, such as a reference to the sports team. But the original question asked if redskin was a slur; I think its fairly obvious that throughout history, people have used it as a slur. I agree that it's not always intended as a slur, but nevertheless, it it one.
 
Yes, I'm perfectly serious, and you don't have to be at a loss to explain it to me. I don't see it as you do. You see it as a "slur". I don't see recognizing the color of skin as a slur.

If you call me a white skinned woman, you aren't slurring me. It isn't offensive to me for someone to mention the color of my skin. End of story.

Whatever whitey.
 
Often times it is. There are times when it's not being used as a slur or in a derogatory fashion.

So you at least acknowledge you rationalize and pick and choose which slurs you find more offensive and which slurs you don't. So why is your rationalization and opinions on what is more or less worthy of comdenmnation something that people should care about our respect more than anyone elses?
[quoet]Also Native Americans lost their land in a bloody and devastating conflict in which they were shamed.
Appeal to emotion. This has nothing to do with whether or not the word is always used in a slurring fashion.

And as I said earlier, no it's not. It CAN be used a slur, it isn't ONLY or ALWAYS a slur. It can be used in a non-disparaging or insulting manner, which even your definitions indicate by noting it is use is not ONLY offensive in nature, and as such is not always a slur.[/QUOTE]

I'll agree with you when I see the Alabama Darkies and the Tennessee Crackers playing.
 
That makes no sense, particularly given that the word red skins is used in tribal language to describe other tribes. Then there is another problem with your claim. 90% of tribes members polled also did not find the term offensive, particularly in the context or connotation it is used in as the name of this football team. You are ignoring that connotation or context, which is striking because you were accusing someone else of ignoring connotation or context. ;)

So if we had a team called the Florida Niggers or the Georgia Honkies it would be okay in context?
 
Does it matter what we think?!

It`s what native Americans think of it that matters!

Yes it does, they are less than 1% of the population, they have very little power. It is the tyranny of the majority over the minority in its purest form.
 
I'm curious what percentage of people think Redskin is a slur separate from whether or not the team's name should be changed.

I think a lot of people are so used to the Redskin name they don't even think of it as a slur because they see it simply as a descriptor of Native Americans or of its heritage and never thought of it as an insult.

How many American Indians play football? The name should be changed It does not apply.
 
By should the team name be changed, do you mean that the team should choose to change their name, or that they should be forced to change their name?

I'm only focusing on the term Redskin in this thread. I think the team should choose to change their name. Should they be forced to? I don't know, it gets messy and brings up other issues, I haven't really thought through it all the way.
 
...and I would venture to guess those that don't have a problem with "redskin" don't have a problem throwing the occasional 'nigger' out there.

Ah, the old racist card. When all else fails, throw it out there.
 
So what you are saying, is you didn't look them up. Figures.

I did. So what is your point? If the native americans want the name changed, they should be able to do it imo
 
So 'offensive' and 'slur' is the same thing to you? Anything that is 'offensive' to somebody is justification to demand that it not exist? Does that include such things that are offensive to some such as 'gay marriage' or 'bi-lingual requirements' or a lot of rap music or adult bookstores or certain politicians or the way my neighbor dresses when he goes to church or the grocery store or my uncovered head in the presence of Muslims or the guy passing out religious pamphlets on the street corner? Whatever 'offends' us but does not bother the vast majority of Americans justifies that it not be allowed? Or should there be some evidence of harm or damages or negative consequences before somebody is required to cease and desist whatever is offensive to another?

Call it what you like - a slur or offensive. It doesn't matter. It shouldn't be the name of any professional team in the 21st century. All the rationalization by you really doesn't affect that basic fact in any way.
 
Call it what you like - a slur or offensive. It doesn't matter. It shouldn't be the name of any professional team in the 21st century. All the rationalization by you really doesn't affect that basic fact in any way.

I'm guessing you elected yourself dictator of what names shall and shall not be used?
 
No, you'd guess wrong. Basic human decency and concern for others dictates what names should not be used. It's something most of us learn in grade school or from our parents, if our parents are worth anything.
 
Indians, Braves, Blue Devils(are we attacking smurfs here?), are all fine because they are not racial descriptors.

White crackers? seriously? That doesn't even make sense... we're talking about racial epithets. If Kraft had a picture of a white slave owner on their Saltine boxes then sure but... wtf?

White cracker can be offensive, depends how it is used, just like Redskins. Not offensive as the name of a football team. As I said before, I've never heard it used as a slur in my life.

Of course, there is the bigger question of; What in hell is our federal government doing getting involved in this?
 
No, you'd guess wrong. Basic human decency and concern for others dictates what names should not be used. It's something most of us learn in grade school or from our parents, if our parents are worth anything.

You have no idea of the history of the word. Got it.
 
White cracker can be offensive, depends how it is used, just like Redskins. Not offensive as the name of a football team. As I said before, I've never heard it used as a slur in my life.

Of course, there is the bigger question of; What in hell is our federal government doing getting involved in this?

Yes calling a Caucasian a white cracker is most definitely a slur and offensive, same as calling a Native a redskin.

White cracker on a box of crackers is not offensive. Just like red skin potatoes are not offensive. Am I really having to say this?

Same thing the government did getting involved in the 60's civil rights. Racism and discrimination are ills that should be rooted out by government when necessary. This is a free and great country for all.
 
Yes calling a Caucasian a white cracker is most definitely a slur and offensive,

In 40+ years I have never seen a single whitey that was offended by being called a cracker. Not once. It may have been said in an attempt to be offensive, but it was never seen as offensive.
 
In 40+ years I have never seen a single whitey that was offended by being called a cracker. Not once. It may have been said in an attempt to be offensive, but it was never seen as offensive.

In high school a friend of mine was called a white boy by a Native American, he assaulted the N.A. and was suspended.

I've seen numerous examples of racial epithets slung back and forth between white and brown people and each side was offended every time.
 
In 40+ years I have never seen a single whitey that was offended by being called a cracker. Not once. It may have been said in an attempt to be offensive, but it was never seen as offensive.

You musta been hanging with some real pu***es then. I've seen dozens of fights where the slur 'cracker' was thrown out and it was ONNNNN! :roll:

Honkey was good as well... Where were you and who did you hear use the slur? I was in the FRG, 1Bde, 3AD, in 1977. 'Roots' yanno...
 
See, most of the people I have known in my life, that would not and have not been offended, are reasonable people that think for themselves and prefer logic and reason over emotional outbursts. Where with just two posts we see that the left prefers violence against those they disagree with. Go figure.
 
ya know,,im looking at a common can of "redskin" peanuts...

their called redskins because they have red skin...
now, our natives are not peanuts, but they have whats often been described as "red" skin...

whites, white skin...blacks, black skin,,,hispanics, brown skin, aisan, yellow etc.

and then you have the pickup games played all over the country every day that self identify as the "shirts" and "skins"....

its a complicated world we live in...
 
Not true.

Because I can rely on their representatives to be ernest and sincere.

How about the five Native Americans that I know who are not the least bit offended by the name of the Washington Redskins--in fact one is the governor of one of our local pueblo tribes and is a fan of the Washington Redskins after living in DC for a number of years? Do my five representatives offset your five representatives?
 
Back
Top Bottom