Should (or should not) Washington remain Red Skins?

31Herd55

New member
Dec 26, 2012
86
3
0
I think LowFatMilk has the solution. Of course they can NEVER use a spelling of the N-word that would offend anyone. Therefore, we could only use the spelling used by all the glorified Rappers, that is acceptable as being non-racist in the black community, NIGGA
 

doneagain

New member
Mar 12, 2004
52,778
203
2
I don't have a strong opinion on this issue but I've read arguments like yours many times and they always leave me shaking my head. The terms mentioned in your posts are not derogatory. They are just the names of people and groups - factual ones. (RE: Italian v. Dago)

Redskins is a derogatory term for Native Americans. It's not a tribe. It's just a mean word white people used to call Native Americans while we were busy murdering and kicking them off their land and spreading diseases.

It's not like Apache, Cherokee, Seminole, - or even just the generic, "Indian". It's a mean word with a bad history.


You obviously do have a strong opinion, and it's wrong. If I decide to call myself African-American, and I am not, does it make it any less derogatory to actual African-Americans that I didn't call myself a slur?

In what way does that stupid leprechaun logo Notre Dame uses equate nobility or in what way should it be looked upon as dignified? What about the potbellied, derby-wearing caricature that the mis-pronounced Celtics utilize. How is either of those circumstances not demeaning?

You seem like the quintessential PC pusher, only concerned when it fits whatever agenda you need it to, ever hoping that you will get your gold star from some group you desperately seek validation from, just so you can say, "Yes, I may be a member of ___________ demographic, but I am better than the others of my kind because I have a self loathing tendency that they don't have, and I carry guilt/shame/pride/graciousness/etc... fill in the blanks as it fits for you... which clearly demonstrates that it is okay for you to like me despite my belonging to the lecherous group I was born among."

If people truly wanted the obnoxiously over bearing PC dogma to work, it would apply to all and not select groups, but it doesn't, therefore it will always create a portion of the population that resent it and will continue to perpetuate the types of reactions that lead to resentment among differing groups of peoples, whether they be ethnic, religious, geographic, philosophic or whatever.

The truth is, I don't care if anyone likes my perspective or "Shakes their head" at it. I don't have a need for approval or to get my self worth from others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wvvidd

bEER_Nation13

New member
Mar 1, 2012
54,632
32
0
If anyone should be offended by "Redskins", it should be us Gingers lol.

Native Americans don't have redskin, never did. But we Gingers do! lol.

I'm not offended, carry on. They have bigger problems to deal with than their name.
 

VaultHunter

New member
Apr 15, 2014
13,233
522
0
I dont really care either way but if they are made to change their name then so should every single team that uses a Native American name.
 

LowFatMilk

New member
Apr 21, 2012
4,201
82
0
I dont really care either way but if they are made to change their name then so should every single team that uses a Native American name.

When I originally read your reply I thought it was ridiculous.... ....but then I decided to do a bit of Internet research.

It seems that that up until the 1920 or 30's the term Redskins was used A LOT as a negative connotation (in written works for sure) but yet was only on par with the use of Indians. Certainly native Americans didn't (originally) refer to themselves using anything similar to either term (not to mention native Americans).

Point being, despite the unflattering use of the word 'Indian' (for those that don't know...you can thank Columbus being lost for the name) it has been embraced by those that belong 'to the tribe' (sorry...couldn't help myself). So yea, what's the diff ?

Again....shouldn't actual Indians be deciding....?

----------

It should be noted that the term, '******' (or variations of it) were not always considered negative....it simply described a (skin) color. .....it's what the crackers did with it that made it an insulting term.
 

BrewandGold

New member
Nov 24, 2001
4
2
0
It's hard for me to see that a team named Redskin is offensive. However, it's not up to me to define what offends others or what pays homage to them. If you had teams named Blackskins or Yellowskins, the names would have been changed already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woody in Helvetia

bEER_Nation13

New member
Mar 1, 2012
54,632
32
0
It's easier to change a name than to fix the real problems. Native Americans have many problems. There are many issues regarding the Native Americans that need to be fixed. They have always been at a far disadvantage. But that actually takes time, effort, resources, money, etc. If you ask the Native Americans what could be done to better their lives, I'm pretty confident that removing the term "Redskins" would be one of the last things on their list.