• 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!

Tribal chief: No FedEx until Redskins change team name

That should make UPS happy.
 
Top Cat said:
I haven't asked them. I'm not the one presuming to know. Let's assume that some are, others not. What difference does that make? (I'm sure you can find some African Americans that are not offended by the N word, does that make it any less offensive?)
Click to expand...

So if only 1 person is offended by the name "Chicago Black Hawks" or "New York Giants" or "Oklahoma", then they need to be changed, no questions asked.....right?
 
radcen said:
Your point is incomplete. Does it matter what percentage of a given population considers it offensive? If not, then it only takes one person to declare something offensive. If so, at what percentage does something become offensive enough to warrant change? 5%? 10%? 25%? 50%+?
Click to expand...

It also depends on whether the name is intrinsically offensive. Redskins is offensive, because we don't have teams called white skins, pink skins, blacks skins etc.
 
I'm no longer eating Pork skins until they change the name.
 
tres borrachos said:
So if only 1 person is offended by the name "Chicago Black Hawks" or "New York Giants" or "Oklahoma", then they need to be changed, no questions asked.....right?
Click to expand...

Of course. Note my answer is as inane as your question.
 
Hard Truth said:
It also depends on whether the name is intrinsically offensive. Redskins is offensive, because we don't have teams called white skins, pink skins, blacks skins etc.
Click to expand...

How does "not [having] teams called white skins, pink skins, black skins, etc" show that Redskin is "intrinsically offensive"? Does the fact there is not a team called the "hillbillys", a regional based ethnic slur towards those of the southern appalachian areas, intrinsically prove that the name "Yankee" is offensive since it's a regional based ethnic slur towards those of the north eastern US?

If someone wants to make an argument that Redskins is inherently offensive in every fashion of use then I can understand that....but this argument for WHY that would be the case just doesn't seem to make sense.

Whites largely haven't referred to themselves as "white skins" as a means of identifying a group of their race. Same goes for blacks. However historically native americans have identified groups of native americans from disparate tribes as "red skins". In part because on an individual level, many native americans in the settler days didn't consider themselves "native americans" or "indians"...they considered themselves Apache, Seminole, Cherokee, Mohawk. Redskin was a term created by native americans as a way to refer to the various indigenious people as a collective when speaking to the new "white man" (or even at times "white skins" as they did call the settlers at times) that showed up.
 
AliHajiSheik said:
It's their right to boycott whomever they wish. The publicity they can generate is going to create a bigger stir than any loss of business.

Maybe they can boycott the State of Maryland too.
Click to expand...


Why not? I did, but not because something as stupid as faux offense at a name that has been in place for 50 years or more....Good grief...:doh:
 
What makes it offensive is the history of how the word has been used. And it should be noted most dictionaries define it as an offensive term.
 
tres borrachos said:
They should boycott the state of Oklahoma, considering that name means "Red People".
Click to expand...

That's exactly right! If they have a burr up their asses over a sports team name, then shouldn't they be upset over other indian-related names...like states?

This whole Redskins fiasco has wider consequences then some people think. If the Redskins eventually change their name due to the whining, then it'll set an ugly precedent.
 
Boo Radley said:
What makes it offensive is the history of how the word has been used. And it should be noted most dictionaries define it as an offensive term.
Click to expand...

Oh so what? The team has been the Washington Redskins since 1936. It is only in this latest era of political correctness that it has become an issue with pansy asses....I say keep the name forever!
 
Roadvirus said:
That's exactly right! If they have a burr up their asses over a sports team name, then shouldn't they be upset over other indian-related names...like states?

This whole Redskins fiasco has wider consequences then some people think. If the Redskins eventually change their name due to the whining, then it'll set an ugly precedent.
Click to expand...

Next you won't be able to buy your kids items like these:
racist-sexist-retro-toys-11-660x574.jpg


racist-sexist-retro-toys-10-660x572.jpg


sambobank.jpg


7e1e2570186d5cb829befa8c8f3072d9.jpg


White people are so oppressed.
 
ocean515 said:
LOL.

Yea, that's why the Prog/Lib manual demands anyone not complying with the covenents of the ideology be sought out and destroyed both personally and professionally. The tolerant left in all it's glory, as long as what is being tolerated meets the assigned agenda.

The PC covenant is probably one of the more curious of the offensives used to eliminate others. What was once an honor has now become offensive, just because. What an awesome way to "Progress".
Click to expand...

Yep. Definitely not any hate or spite in there.

I'm sorry you're so offended that people aren't tolerating your intolerance.
 
americanwoman said:
On the news last night they had a story about Redskin employees, including Chris Cooley, going to reservations to find out how they really feel and also to give back to the nations. They broke the story after learning the representatives were landing at the airport here.


Washington Redskins send representatives to Kickapoo Reservation | Local News - KETV Home







I thought it was kind of cool for them to do that and I'm glad the news reported it.
Click to expand...

Looks an awful lot like a bribe. I mean, the natives whose land they go to say "redskins are a football team" and this story is projecting that they don't associate with the football team yet the football team's organization is going out of its way to spend money into tribal areas. I find it hard to believe that they are spending this money out of pure benevolence when at the same time they are saying their org and indians are supposedly not interrelated in any way. When I hear about other NFL teams' charity work it is generally very locally aimed.
 
Deuce said:
Yep. Definitely not any hate or spite in there.

I'm sorry you're so offended that people aren't tolerating your intolerance.
Click to expand...

Au contraire! I am quite tolerant of the intolerance from the intolerable.
 
ecofarm said:
I didn't say it insulted anyone and I couldn't give a **** if it did.

It does, however, stereotype a race.
Click to expand...

Is it an accurate stereotype though? Calling a black person black isn't a stereotype, it's an accurate description of their skin color. Is it any different calling a Native American a "redskin"?
 
Boo Radley said:
A right? No. But a right to protest they do have. And being someone who offends knowing just makes you a jerk. It's not illegal to be one. And it has nothing to do with rights. But it marks you all the same. And it always has.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying they can't protest, they're welcome to do so, just as I, and many others, can think they're ridiculous for doing so. But of course, instead of actually dealing with the reality here, you'd rather insult me. It's okay, I know you liberals aren't intellectually capable of having a rational conversation.
 
Cephus said:
Is it an accurate stereotype though? Calling a black person black isn't a stereotype, it's an accurate description of their skin color. Is it any different calling a Native American a "redskin"?
Click to expand...

It's stereotyping NAs as warrior-like.
 
ecofarm said:
It's stereotyping NAs as warrior-like.
Click to expand...

First off, it says nothing whatsoever about Native Americans, it's the name of a sports team. Secondly, there are certainly a lot of worse things to be called than warriors. Stop making a big deal out of nothing.
 
Cephus said:
First off, it says nothing whatsoever about Native Americans, it's the name of a sports team. Secondly, there are certainly a lot of worse things to be called than warriors. Stop making a big deal out of nothing.
Click to expand...

Let's not play dumb. The team logo, the fight song and the very fact that it's a football team stereotypes NAs as warriors. This, clearly, marginalizes NAs that do not fit the stereotype, thereby harming society.
 
ecofarm said:
Let's not play dumb. The team logo, the fight song and the very fact that it's a football team stereotypes NAs as warriors. This, clearly, marginalizes NAs that do not fit the stereotype, thereby harming society.
Click to expand...

Anyone whose self-worth is affected by the name of a sports team has some serious psychological problems and needs professional help.
 
ecofarm said:
Let's not play dumb. The team logo, the fight song and the very fact that it's a football team stereotypes NAs as warriors. This, clearly, marginalizes NAs that do not fit the stereotype, thereby harming society.
Click to expand...

It's a freakin' compliment. Nobody is harmed, let alone all of society. Good grief, someone better fetch the fainting couch.

Do you know anything about Native American history? Obviously not.
 
countryboy said:
It's a freakin' compliment. Nobody is harmed, let alone all of society. Good grief, someone better fetch the fainting couch.

Do you know anything about Native American history? Obviously not.
Click to expand...

Cephus said:
Anyone whose self-worth is affected by the name of a sports team has some serious psychological problems and needs professional help.
Click to expand...


It has nothing to do with individuals either harmed or insulted. It has to do with racial stereotypes being bad for society. If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.
 
ecofarm said:
It has nothing to do with individuals either harmed or insulted. It has to do with racial stereotypes being bad for society. If you can't grasp that, I can't help you.
Click to expand...

In other words, you're just declaring victory without actually being able to demonstrate victory. Typical liberal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom