Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="LowFatMilk" data-source="post: 129310790" data-attributes="member: 1912770">When I originally read your reply I thought it was ridiculous....&nbsp;&nbsp; ....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&nbsp; (in written works for sure) but yet was only on par with the use of Indians.&nbsp; &nbsp; 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.&nbsp;&nbsp; .....it's what the crackers did with it that made it an insulting term.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="LowFatMilk, post: 129310790, member: 1912770"] 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. [/QUOTE]

Name