Washington Redtails.....Discuss

[Kevin W.]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

[NatsFan2004]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

Actually, if you go up to anyone in the street in any town in the country and say 'the Redskins won yesterday', I would bet you large sums of money that people would assume you're referring to the sports team and not a racial slur. So how can it be a slur if it's not taken as such?

(Hint, it's not - at least not if you're living in 2013 instead of 1913)

[tBBP]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

Actually, if you go up to anyone in the street in any town in the country and say 'the Redskins won yesterday', I would bet you large sums of money that people would assume you're referring to the sports team and not a racial slur. So how can it be a slur if it's not taken as such?

(Hint, it's not - at least not if you're living in 2013 instead of 1913)

Because if you phrase it in that manner, people know you'te talking about a football team—it's all about context.

Now, if you happened to pass by a group of American Indians and then walked up to someone, pointed back to that group and said "look at those redskins over there", the response might be markedly different.

Again, it's all in the context. (And that's regardless of the year.)

[rams80]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

Actually, if you go up to anyone in the street in any town in the country and say 'the Redskins won yesterday', I would bet you large sums of money that people would assume you're referring to the sports team and not a racial slur. So how can it be a slur if it's not taken as such?

(Hint, it's not - at least not if you're living in 2013 instead of 1913)

Because the name is still a slur. If you said Redskin outside of that context you'd get your ass kicked by any native American within hearing. And that's not including the fact that George Preston Marshall selected the name because it was a slur.

I'll put it another way. If the NBA had a team called the Minnesota Dagos since the 30s, do you think that name would be ok today because, well, its been that way forever?

[keynote]

Offending 1 out of 5 people shouldn't be chalked up as collateral damage, IMHO.

Actually if you look at the results, 2% didn't respond, and 8% were indifferent, so 11% actually think it should be changed

Fair enough. 10+% of the population, then. My argument still stands.

if you look at the reason why the team is called the redskins you need to look at the teams history, the team was originally named the braves when the were first playing in boston because they played at braves field, they then moved to playing at fenway park home of the red sox, the owners wanted to add the word red to their name to go along with the red sox but keep the native american imagery. So they became the redskins, nothing racially offensive was meant about the name, they just wanted to go along with the red sox brand, and it has stuck for the next almost 80 years now. It shouldn't be changed because of the PC world we are in now, where you can't say anything without someone getting offended about it.

I'm familiar with the history. But that doesn't change the fact that 10+% of the population *today* finds it offensive - not a smattering of vocal outliers, but a substantial percentage. Especially when they're competing for mind share in a league where 31 other teams bear trademarks that, while they may be more or less valuable, are certainly less controversial.

The world *has* changed. We can complain and call it PC, we can celebrate and call it progress; but the label we use doesn't change the fact that society has different standards in 2013 than it did 80 years ago. Snyder is only willing to write off the feelings of 10% of the population because it's currently financially expedient for him to do so. If that percentage of offended people continues to grow (which is a possible trend, but not a certainty), then Snyder and/or his successor will find themselves at a tipping point. They'll make an economic decision shortly thereafter.

[rams80]

I'm just glad to see the Associated Press-GfK poll showed that 79% of Americans nationally support the Redskins name.

Why?

Simple. Most people can see that it is just a team name in 2013 and can get over it. Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used. When someone says Redskins in 2013, you think of the NFL team. Not Native Americans.

One would argue the fact that a word has disappeared from the public vernacular outside of a sporting nickname because it is so grossly offensive is even more of a sign that the nickname should go away. Or maybe you think the Seattle Nips is a fine name for a baseball team if they had been that way since the 1930s.

[Old School Fool]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

If it was 100% full on offensive then I firmly believe it wouldn't even exist today. Yes, at one point in time it was an offensive word, but guess what? Things change over time.

[rams80]

Actually if you look at the results, 2% didn't respond, and 8% were indifferent, so 11% actually think it should be changed, but that also doesn't mean they are necessarily offended by it, maybe just feeling the PC guilt trip of it, if you look at the reason why the team is called the redskins you need to look at the teams history, the team was originally named the braves when the were first playing in boston because they played at braves field, they then moved to playing at fenway park home of the red sox, the owners wanted to add the word red to their name to go along with the red sox but keep the native american imagery. So they became the redskins, nothing racially offensive was meant about the name, they just wanted to go along with the red sox brand, and it has stuck for the next almost 80 years now. It shouldn't be changed because of the PC world we are in now, where you can't say anything without someone getting offended about it.

There is evidence that George Preston Marshall ramrodded the NFL's own brief color barrier into existence soon after he entered the league with the Braves ownership group. In addition to that George Preston Marshall was so openly racist he turned it into a marketing strategy to build the Redskins a fanbase and television network throughout the South in the 1950s. He was so racist that he only integrated his football team because they would have been kicked out of their stadium by the Federal Government if they didn't. This despicable, worthless hunk of barely-called humanity was so racist that when he died in 1969, he left a foundation to serve the interests of children in Washington with the explicit instruction that none of that money could be used "for any purpose which supports or employs the principle of racial integration."

If you expect me to believe that this profoundly self-aware racist chose to call his team the Redskins out of comparative ignorance, well I'm sorry, I can't. He consciously chose the name because it was a slur, but he believed he would get away with it anyway.

-Side note. Marshall is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame and his brief biography is one of the most disgraceful pieces of literature put out by them. Somebody really needs to be giving Canton crap for this.

[rams80]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

If it was 100% full on offensive then I firmly believe it wouldn't even exist today. Yes, at one point in time it was an offensive word, but guess what? Things change over time.

Because all variants of the "N-word" have completely vanished as well.

[Old School Fool]

Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used.

It's still a slur. There's no way around that.

If it was 100% full on offensive then I firmly believe it wouldn't even exist today. Yes, at one point in time it was an offensive word, but guess what? Things change over time.

Because all variants of the "N-word" have completely vanished as well.

You and I both know that the term Redskin is not a common thing anymore. When was the last time you heard someone get called that? Go search Twitter right now and try to find someone using it as a slur, I bet you'll barely find anything.

Also, I just found this article: http://www.redskins....cd-18d7fb768bb7

Maybe I have a lack of understanding, maybe I'm stupid, maybe I'm retarded, I just don't think anyone should be up in arms about this.

Maybe they should just do what this guy said...

just call them the Redskin Peanuts or rednuts if you choose.

[rams80]

You and I both know that the term Redskin is not a common thing anymore. When was the last time you heard someone get called that? Go search Twitter right now and try to find someone using it as a slur, I bet you'll barely find anything.

Also, I just found this article: http://www.redskins....cd-18d7fb768bb7

Maybe I have a lack of understanding, maybe I'm stupid, maybe I'm retarded, I just don't think anyone should be up in arms about this.

The other tack is this; if something is so extremely offensive that it can only be used as the nickname for a sports team, it's time for it to disappear completely from the public vernacular.

Personally I think part of the issue is that the NFL and the contemporary Redskins organization are well aware of the grossly offensive nature of Marshall's views and behavior on the subject of race relations and have therefore been very successful at obfuscating and hiding said racism after his death. If the contemporary public today was aware of the depth of his racism, as well as his conscious awareness and use of it (Archie Bunker he wasn't), I think the outrage would be much greater.

Again. The (so-called) man used his own racism as a marketing strategy for a generation. "Ignorance" and "Product of his times" don't fly as excuses.

[hugevolsfan]

I'm just glad to see the Associated Press-GfK poll showed that 79% of Americans nationally support the Redskins name.

Why?

Simple. Most people can see that it is just a team name in 2013 and can get over it. Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used. When someone says Redskins in 2013, you think of the NFL team. Not Native Americans.

I agree here if you are reading racism today you are thinking to much about it at this point most people see it as just a name

[rams80]

I'm just glad to see the Associated Press-GfK poll showed that 79% of Americans nationally support the Redskins name.

Why?

Simple. Most people can see that it is just a team name in 2013 and can get over it. Seriously, it's a team name and nothing more. Possibly a racial term a long time ago and maybe still used in certain locations in America, but as a whole, it isn't used. When someone says Redskins in 2013, you think of the NFL team. Not Native Americans.

I agree here if you are reading racism today you are thinking to much about it at this point most people see it as just a name

1. Cultural osmosis is not a defense.

2. You might want to report your anecdotal findings to the Oxford English Dictionary.

[Old School Fool]

I will say though, Rams80 has a very interesting point with the George Preston Marshall stuff. I honestly did not know that. Crazy.

[Midway]

If it's just a team name and nothing more then why can't we just change it for good measure?

Again, connotations may change over time but if they hypothetically announced that they were going to have their first NFL football team in 2013 with the name Redskins, the people of DC would not accept it along with the rest of the nation. The negative connotation would be the only one people would associate the name with in this instance and that's where this argument ends.

Fwiw I have no problem with the Redskins' logo package. There are plenty of sports teams that use Native american imagery in a respectable manner. It's just the name that doesn't sit right with me.

[nuordr]

Here is a view of an actual full-blooded Native American:

http://www.redskins.com/news-and-events/article-1/Native-American-Chief-Talks-About-Redskins/cdb3c94e-f5c6-4d98-9acd-18d7fb768bb7

[Captain Poncho]

Whatever side you're on in regards to whether or not "Redskins" is offensive enough to require a name change, I'd like to strongly suggest that the change should be driven by the people who patronize the NFL and the Washington Redskins - not by some governmental agency bent on imposing itself onto major league sports.

[oldschoolvikings]

Here is a view of an actual full-blooded Native American:

http://www.redskins....cd-18d7fb768bb7

And did you read the posting in the comment section from the guy's uncle? Yeah, kind of a different story. According to a guy claiming to be his uncle, this "full-blooded Native American" is actually 1/4 Indian, and "Chief" is an Air Force nickname, not a title. It might be that you aren't going to get a two-sided story on the Redskins' own website.

You know, you can find a Native American who's OK with it, then someone else kind find one who isn't... on and on. Doesn't prove much.

[BrianLion]

Whatever side you're on in regards to whether or not "Redskins" is offensive enough to require a name change, I'd like to strongly suggest that the change should be driven by the people who patronize the NFL and the Washington Redskins - not by some governmental agency bent on imposing itself onto major league sports.

yes because football fans as a collective are always such a forward thinking and inclusive group,

[Captain Poncho]

yes because football fans as a collective are always such a forward thinking and inclusive group,

Speaking of broad-brush stereotypical assumptions...

The bottom line here is, a politician is trying to force the change from on high - as governmental types are wont to do. A truly gargantuan waste of taxpayers' time.