Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 56
  1. #16

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?



    Alright, alright, let the Redskins keep their name. But then how would people feel if the Giants or Jets were renamed to the "New York Jews" or "Harlem Negros"?

    The term "Redskin" is offensive. Just like the term "Negro" or even "Jew" (the latter more dependent on connotation). Just because folks like you and me can't see it as being offensive because we're not Indian, does not legitimize the name. I hope the American Indians force the name change.




  2. #17

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    Quote Originally Posted by ActualSpamBot View Post
    I have argued vehemently that FSU is under no obligation to change their name as they have the full support of the local Seminole peoples and use the name respectfully and without the racially insensitive imagery that teams like the Cleveland Indians do.

    And while I can acknowledge that the Skins mascot is racially respectful, I agree with others who point out that the term redskin is not. Perhaps a compromise would be to adopt FSU's approach and honor a specific local Native American tribe. I confess I'm a bit ignorant as to the local tribes, but perhaps a more knowledgable poster could fill us in on which nations originated in the DC, Md, NoVa area.
    Unless the "compromise" is that the Redskins can adopt that tribe's name, this will not do. What makes a single tribe a sudden spokesman for the entire Indian community? They are as different as French and Germans and English are, so does America conduct business with just Spain on behalf of Europe?




  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Rookie View Post
    Alright, alright, let the Redskins keep their name. But then how would people feel if the Giants or Jets were renamed to the "New York Jews" or "Harlem Negros"?

    The term "Redskin" is offensive. Just like the term "Negro" or even "Jew" (the latter more dependent on connotation). Just because folks like you and me can't see it as being offensive because we're not Indian, does not legitimize the name. I hope the American Indians force the name change.
    I'd like to see some proof to back up your claims here.

    Because a senior linguist at the Smithsonian Institute completely disagrees with you.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100201139.html
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pikesville
    Posts
    4,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Rookie View Post
    Unless the "compromise" is that the Redskins can adopt that tribe's name, this will not do. What makes a single tribe a sudden spokesman for the entire Indian community? They are as different as French and Germans and English are, so does America conduct business with just Spain on behalf of Europe?
    You clearly missed my entire point.
    My motto was always to keep swinging. Whether I was in a slump or feeling badly or having trouble off the field, the only thing to do was keep swinging. -Hank Aaron




  5. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    13,453
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    It's ironic naming tribes to teams, cities and states and especially military weapons
    systems after the white man killed them all.

    Then they honor them. There's a lot of native Americans out west on reservations today
    that still hate Custer and even George Washington killed the Oneida indians after they
    fed his army at Valley Forge and all but wiped out the Iriquios sending 5,000 troops in.
    Their chief was hit in the back of the head with his own tomahawk. He pulled it out and
    gave it to him and he hit him again this time finishing him off. They were very brave
    people.

    No where was the name REdskins in honor of anyone.




  6. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Stuttgart, Germany
    Posts
    8,273

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Rookie View Post
    Alright, alright, let the Redskins keep their name. But then how would people feel if the Giants or Jets were renamed to the "New York Jews" or "Harlem Negros"?

    The term "Redskin" is offensive. Just like the term "Negro" or even "Jew" (the latter more dependent on connotation). Just because folks like you and me can't see it as being offensive because we're not Indian, does not legitimize the name. I hope the American Indians force the name change.
    Negro is not offensive.




  7. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    7,256

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dade View Post
    Negro is not offensive.
    I think Rookie is actually on the culturally sensitive side of this. Probably just wrote the first word that came to mind, but for the sake of argument let's imagine s/he said "spooks" or something. The Harlem Spooks. Now there's a team!

    Can't prove they don't mean "spooks" as in "ghosts"! It's a term that HONORS ghosts!




  8. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    7,256

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    I'd like to see some proof to back up your claims here.

    Because a senior linguist at the Smithsonian Institute completely disagrees with you.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...100201139.html
    Rookie said, "the term 'Redskin' is offensive." You asked them to back up their claims. And then you presented an article where the very first paragraph is this:

    For many Americans, both Indian and otherwise, the term "redskin" is a grotesque pejorative, a word that for centuries has been used to disparage and humiliate an entire people, but an exhaustive new study released today makes the case that it did not begin as an insult.

    Rookie never mentioned how the word began, they were concerned with how it currently offends people. The link you gave proves Rookie's point in like the first 10 words.




  9. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    Just because some people see that word as a pejorative (or the author acknowledges such) doesn't mean the word IS a pejorative or, more to the point, that its a word that never honored Native Americans.

    I don't think Dan Snyder ought to change anything because a vocal few are applying the word incorrectly, lack the proper historical perspective on the word and when there's a substantial number of Native Americans who are totally fine with it.
    Last edited by HoustonRaven; 05-25-2013 at 10:06 AM.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  10. #25

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    I qualify as an Indian. Both grandfathers were half, one grandmother was 3/4. I don't think the 'Skins should change their name.

    Personally I think this is a stupid argument that shows up once a decade and nothing ever comes of it.
    "A moron, a rapist, and a Pittsburgh Steeler walk into a bar. He sits down and says, Hi Im Ben may I have a drink please?
    ProFootballMock




  11. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    Chief Robert "Two Eagles" Green is on Sirius XM right now. He's the Chief of the Patawomek tribe.

    His argument is the same I've been making and that of the Smithsonian linguist to which I linked.

    It's a historically honorable word and its use of a pejorative is a recent phenomenon started by folks who assumed it was a word that associated skin color.

    He says the "overwhelming" majority of his tribe understands the history of the word and have no issue with it.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  12. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,923
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    Quote Originally Posted by akashicrecorder View Post
    I think Rookie is actually on the culturally sensitive side of this. Probably just wrote the first word that came to mind, but for the sake of argument let's imagine s/he said "spooks" or something. The Harlem Spooks. Now there's a team!

    Can't prove they don't mean "spooks" as in "ghosts"! It's a term that HONORS ghosts!
    Or spooks can also be a term applied to spies.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    I was wondering why no study has even been done on this.

    As it turns out, there has been ....

    http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycent...s_09-24_pr.pdf

    It's a sample survey. 4,000 Native Americans, from differing tribes and from across the country, were asked if they found the term "Redskin" to be offensive. 91% of those polled did not find the term offensive.

    Granted, this study is from 10 years ago so maybe opinions have changed since then. I doubt it, considering the topic of conversation on Sirius XM is all about this and the overwhelming majority of the folks calling in don't see this as an offensive term.

    The term "Tempest in a Tea Pot" is now coming to mind.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  14. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,923
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Landover "Redtails"?

    I think the real problem here is that Dan Snyder is offensive.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,526
    Quote Originally Posted by wickedsolo View Post
    I think the real problem here is that Dan Snyder is offensive.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland