• 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!

Poll: 71 percent say keep Redskin

ecofarm said:
It's a football team, with a warrior logo (which used to be a spear) and a mascot that runs around in war paint with a tomahawk, they have a 'fight song', but there's nothing at all being said about Native Americans. It's just the name in a void and there are no implications about anyone or anything.

:roll:
Click to expand...

There is no mascot in war paint. There is no mascot at all. There is no tomahawk. They do have a fight song. So what? Your claim has no factual foundation.
 
Moot said:
No one except perhaps the NFL commissioner using the fake Indian, Chief Dodson as evidence that most Indians didn't mind the name in a letter to congress.


"...The NFL's commissioner, trying to score points with Congress, leaned on the Redskins' too-good-to-be-true spokes model, too. On June 5, Roger Goodell wrote to the co-chairs of the Congressional Native American Caucus, whose members had been urging the team to change its name. On NFL letterhead, the league boss alleged that "Redskins" was "a unifying force that stands for strength, courage, pride and respect."

"Importantly, this positive meaning is shared by the overwhelming majority of football fans and Americans generally, including Native Americans," Goodell wrote. And as Exhibit A, Goodell cited the support of "Chief Steven (sic) Dodson," whom Goodell identified as "an American Inuit chief and resident of Prince Georges (sic) County, Maryland."...."

Read Roger Goodell's Letter To Congress Defending The Redskins Name
Click to expand...

The man may or may not be an Indian but it's a point of no importance.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no mascot at all. There is no tomahawk.
Click to expand...

False

Anyway, claiming the sport, team, logo, mascot and other representations say nothing about NAs is stupid.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no mascot. There is no tomahawk.
Click to expand...

The team's unofficial mascot is Zema Williams (Chief Zee), an African-American man who began attending games in 1978, wearing an Indian costume consisting of a feathered headdress and rubber tomahawk. Other fans also attend games in costume and are celebrated by the team.[143]
Click to expand...
Native American mascot controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Claiming the sport, team, logo, mascot and other representations say nothing about NAs is stupid.
 
shrubnose said:
I would strongly support changing the name to the 'Bloviators'

That has a nice ring to it and if any sport has a lot of bloviation associated with it it's football and Washington, D.C. certainly has more than its fair share of bloviators.
Click to expand...

Until it changes I'm going with the Foreskins.
 
The team name could be changed to Warriors and everything else left as it is. The only problem is the attempt to depict a race. Or get a tribes' endorsement and change it to their name.
 
Jack Hays said:
The man may or may not be an Indian but it's a point of no importance.
Click to expand...

It's of no importance to you perhaps but it's important to the Indians.
 
ecofarm said:
The team name could be changed to Warriors and everything else left as it is. The only problem is the attempt to depict a race. Or get a tribes' endorsement and change it to their name.
Click to expand...

Well if we went with the Native nations that were in the area it'd be cool to go with Mohawks. Then watch the players do haircuts to pay tribute.

TribalMap1600sb.jpg
 
Jack Hays said:
I have said there is no negative stereotype.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter if the stereotype is negative or "positive", all stereotypes marginalize.

I'll grant "warrior is a positive stereotype", it's still wrong.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no universal principle to cover all cases.
Click to expand...

I could say the same about your opinion. Which you seem to think matters while no one else's does in this case.
 
Jack Hays said:
There is no universal principle to cover all cases.
Click to expand...

Do you believe any "positive racial stereotype" is good or neutral for society?
 
Jack Hays said:
They can be.
Click to expand...


Wrong.

Racial stereotypes always marginalize those left out and thereby serve oppression and the suppression of potential and contributions.

Racial stereotypes are inherently bad for society.
 
Jack Hays said:
I have said more than once they are entitled to their views as I am to mine.
Click to expand...

Of course you did.... out of one side of your mouth. Then you say any opinion that disagrees with your is nonsense. You tend to not disagree... you tend to dismiss differing opinions. This is what you do out of the other side of your mouth. It's called living a paradox.
 
ecofarm said:
Wrong.

Stereotypes always marginalize those left out and thereby serve oppression and the suppression of potential and contributions.

Stereotypes are inherently bad for society.
Click to expand...

That is your view. I do not share it.
 
poweRob said:
Of course you did.... out of one side of your mouth. Then you say any opinion that disagrees with your is nonsense. You don't disagree... you dismiss differing opinions. This is what you do out of the other side of your mouth. It's called living a paradox.
Click to expand...


No. I characterized a particular set of assertions as nonsense.
 
Jack Hays said:
That is your view. I do not share it.
Click to expand...

No, that's reality.

If you cannot understand how stereotypes marginalize those left out, that's your own lack of capability and it bears not upon my logic and reason.

It might explain why your position is so irrational, but that's a problem you'll have to figure out on your own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom