“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes
My own take on it is whether a significant part of a group of people finds it offensive. When it is a small minority, I put it down to people simply wanting to be offended. But when it is a larger minority or majority, I tend to think there is cause for it to be considered offensive. For example, words can change to being offensive to a significant minority when they are in widespread use with even a derogatory tone.
I haven't really definitively heard whether the word 'redskin' offends very many these days. I wouldn't use it in the contexts meant by the OP because I just don't mind being cautious, and I know that there is a perfectly accepted phrase that has the necessary meaning. So, I can sympathize with anyone that has actually addressed the OP by stating that they wouldn't use it in the contexts meant by the OP, and yet state that this doesn't necessarily mean that the word is offensive.
The OP attempts to make a point that avoidance of the use of a potentially offensive word in place of an accepted word means that the potentially offensive word is in fact offensive. I think it fails to make that point.
You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.
Do you honestly think the OP was about name calling or do you think it was about the need to use a racial designation in front of a Native American person, and choosing between 'Native American' or 'Redskin'
The OP, as I've already said more than once, was another poll that was asking the same question as the first poll on here about the use of the word "Redskins". It was a trap for the people who said they don't think "Redskin" is a slur, and a feeble attempt to get people to rethink their answers by saying "Would YOU call someone a Redskin to his face"?
I keep repeating that. The poll here is flawed. I also don't think "Blondie" is a slur, but I wouldn't call someone I don't know "Blondie". So the poll is flawed because he may as well have asked "Do you ever call a stranger a name other than his name?"
I LOL'ed at the obvious joke....but funnily enough here in Ashburn VA I'd dare say you're more likely to have a black person randomly called "redskin" than a native american.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
I agree with what Lizzie said on page 1:
If everyone would try to stop being so freakin uptight about offending someone these days, and actually spend some time getting to know other people with different backgrounds, maybe all you people with severe cases of white guilt could get over your angst. It's rather pathetic.
“We just don’t think that (name) is an issue,” Yazzie said. “There are more important things like busing our kids to school, the water settlement, the land quality, the air that surrounds us. Those are issues we can take sides on.”
“Society, they think it’s more derogatory because of the recent discussions,” Yazzie said. “In its pure form, a lot of Native American men, you go into the sweat lodge with what you’ve got — your skin. I don’t see it as derogatory.”
Neither does Eunice Davidson, a Dakota Sioux who lives on the Spirit Lake reservation in North Dakota. “It more or less shows that they approve of our history,” she said.
No way, it wouldn't be polite.