Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=EARTHQUAKE2689;279409]Or we could leave it the way it is and tell everyone who doesnt like it to go to h*ll[/quote]

I agree with that as well.

But if we have no other options I think those are the two best alternatives.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Freedom of speach, plain and simple. Well if they take Redskins away we can change our name to Black skins and see who we offend there.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Regardless... it's not changing. Snyder has too much money and too good of lawyers for that shit to change.

I really don't care either way. It obviously doesn't offend that many people, and you can't appease everyone. To be honest your probably offending more people by changing it then by leaving it alone.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=jdlea;279301]I know, I know, we've covered this a million times. However, tonight the Illinois Illini intend to retire their mascot, Chief Illiniwek (a chief in stereotypical Native American garb).[/QUOTE]

Maybe the U. of Illinois should spend less time concerned about some dude dancing at halftime and more time dealing with things like [URL="http://cbs2chicago.com/local/local_story_051143642.html"]this[/URL]

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

you know, we had some serious pc bullshit decision here at William and Mary, being forced to remove their Feathers!! thats right I said f e a t h e r s. The nickname is the 'Tribe'. really, is that offensive? But florida can still do all their antics, which I dont find offensive either. Oh brother, what is going on here........

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[B]NCAA rules 'Tribe' not offensive; objects to feathers[/B]

[URL="http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=1150"][COLOR=#0000ff]News[/COLOR][/URL] · [URL="http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=1472"][COLOR=#0000ff]W&M News[/COLOR][/URL] · [URL="http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=5506"][COLOR=#0000ff]2006 archive[/COLOR][/URL] · NCAA ruling on Tribe
Author: Brian Whitson, Source: W&M News
Date: May 17, 2006
[IMG]http://www.wm.edu/news/images/tpjone/tribelogo.jpg[/IMG]
[B]Related content[/B]
See [URL="http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=5855"][COLOR=#0000ff]President's letter to the community concerning the NCAA ruling[/COLOR][/URL].

William and Mary will appeal a recent ruling by the NCAA stating that the College should stop using two feathers on its athletic logo. In that same ruling, issued in a letter May 16 to William and Mary President Gene R. Nichol, the NCAA review committee did agree with the College that the nickname “Tribe” is not offensive.

“We learned last evening that the NCAA staff review determined the use of the nickname ‘Tribe’ by our athletic teams was neither ‘hostile or abusive,’” Nichol wrote in an e-mail to the campus community and alumni. “The report did object, however, to the use of the feathers as part of our sports logo. We will appeal the ruling as it applies to the logo.”

Nichol added, “The good news, of course, is the NCAA has agreed with our assessment of the term ‘Tribe.’ The nickname—so close to the heart of this community—will remain the College’s moniker.”

In 2004, the NCAA requested that several member institutions, including William and Mary, submit a self-evaluation to determine if the Native American imagery or nicknames used at the schools were hostile or abusive. Schools found in violation would not be permitted to wear the offending logos during postseason competition or be allowed to host postseason NCAA athletic events on their own campuses.

The College will appeal the ruling regarding the use of the feathers to the NCAA’s executive committee and expects a decision by the end of the summer, said William T. Walker, associate vice president for public affairs at William and Mary.

“It boggles our minds that the NCAA would find objectionable what William and Mary does, and at the same time find acceptable what schools like Florida State University do,” said Walker, referring to FSU’s use of a spear-wielding warrior during football games.

“Perhaps it is the absurdity of judgments like these that is causing the U.S. Congress to consider taking this matter out of the hands of the NCAA,” Walker said. “The Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and several of his colleagues have introduced legislation that would forbid the NCAA from regulating mascots and nicknames.”

Several schools, including Florida State, have been removed from the list because the NCAA ruled that “namesake” tribes have given authority to use the nicknames. William and Mary uses the generic nickname Tribe. William and Mary does not have a mascot.

“The nickname Tribe connotes the strong sense of community at William and Mary,” Walker said. “It is meant to signify the affirmative and inclusive nature of our campus community, our strong commitment to each other. We are pleased the NCAA agrees.”
[URL="http://www.wm.edu/news/?id=5854#"][COLOR=#0000ff]Contact Us[/COLOR][/URL] © 2007 The College of William & Mary

Anyone else think this is WAY out of line or what?! I hope the U.S. House of Rep. prevails.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

My whole problem with this is the sensitivity of everyone in the world today. Come on, every heritage has been persecuted on some level.

Yes the term can be perceived as derogatory, although most slang terms can be derogatory given the context. I hate to say it, but this is the same argument most politicians use. Everything today must be considered in the context that they are used, but it is the implied intent of the comment that should be analyzed.

For example as mentioned earlier, if someone refers to say "Blackskins" and identifies that moniker with a Zulu Warrior, anyone who is educated should know that this is the contemporary equivalent of respect and admiration for warrior who at the time was considered primitive, and later proved to be a worthy adversary of the most fearsome military in the world. I would say that in this context this was a show of respect and admiration for the warrior spirit inherit to this culture and should be appreciated by it's people. But if they are too ignorant to understand context and it's applications in the world today, then I say ---- them!!!!!!

Irish Skins Fan

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

I am Cherokee and have no problem with the name. Those who are offended by such trifles have too much time on their hands. Why give so much power to a word? Usually it is people who have low self worth and self loathing who get all aggro over silly things like this anyway.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=djnemo65]I just think there is something inherently patronizing about someone from outside of that ethnic group dictating to them what they should and should not be offended by.[/QUOTE]


[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;279381]I find it somewhat interesting that so-called civil libertarians who get so riled up about the "PC police" think that no one has the right to get offended.[/QUOTE]


If both of you go back and look, you will find that nowhere in any of my posts do I imply that people 'don't have a right to be offended'.

I question the right of people who are offended to force someone into action in order to conceed to the offended party's demands.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=sportscurmudgeon;279341]Sheriff:

When much of this controversy started about 8-10 years ago, I suggested to some colleagues that there was a simple solution to the problem:


Keep the name Redskins.

[B][I] Change the logo on the helmet to a potato.[/I][/B]


No one liked the idea then; I doubt lots of folks would like it now. But it might stop the focus on the team name and allow people to focus on the team performance - - which is a lot more important to me. :soapbox:[/quote]

How about a sun-burned picture of my ass??!!

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

when will someone draw the line on the PC crap. To have a NFL franchise, one of, if not, the richest franchise in all of sports honor your heritage would make me proud. They dont do all the crap Florida state does with the guy riding a horse and throwing a spear and doing the little dance. This stuff is what America is all about. We are able to express ourselves freely. Like it or not, as americans we have that right. Because someone finds it offensive, doesn't make it wrong. We can't even call Christmas, christmas. It is now not PC to say that. Halloween is being cut out of neighborhoods, pledge of alegance... this stuff has gone way too far. its just people trying to get their names in the paper and face on TV. WE as americans are losing our rights to people that move in to our country because things are offensive. Well, if you dont like it, dont watch it, celebrate it, take part in it, what ever. That is what living in America gives you, choices!

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic;279478]WE as americans are losing our rights to people that move in to our country because things are offensive.[/QUOTE]

What does that mean?

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

I still am amazed by people on [I]both [/I]sides of this issue who get their panties in a wad.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;279492]What does that mean?[/QUOTE]He means these damn Native Americans need to stop trying to take over our country! It's like they think they own the damn place.









(BTW, I'm obviously kidding ;) )

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

After killing their whole race, trails of tears, lying and theiving, forcing them on reservations, destroying them, and making resolutions only to break later, hell, if they want the name to be changed, go ahead. Its ****ing football, not life.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

I usually dont get my pantys in a wad over too many things. But this issue is one exception. I guess my thing is why persecute something whose intention is not meant to be negative? This franchise was born in 1932 as the Boston Braves. George Preston Marshall bought the new team in 1932. A year later he renamed them the Redskins and hired an Indian coach named Lone Star Dietz. They reached the NFL championship in 1936, losing to Green Bay. Not getting much fan support, he moved the team to D.C. in 1937. Enter Sammy Baugh, Cliff Battles and other Redskin greats. I guess my point is the name has always represented something great and proud. The attendance nearly doubled the first year in D.C. from 57,363 for 7 games in Boston to 120,022 for 6 games the first year in D.C. And back then people were much more divded. I just hate to even think that some people consider the name Redskin, as it is associated to the football team, offensive. Im sure the team will never be faced with a name change, but man it just drives me crazy to even think about it.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=Bushead;279503]After killing their whole race, trails of tears, lying and theiving, forcing them on reservations, destroying them, and making resolutions only to break later, hell, if they want the name to be changed, go ahead. Its ****ing football, not life.[/quote]


I agree, this is football were talking about, and those things did happen. But the name Redskins in no way, shape or form represents any of that.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

If the team is "Forced" to change there name and logo's, would you still be a fan of the franchise? Especially the out of state fan's.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

I'd still be a fan but I'd be super-pissed.

I did a research paper on this in high school in like '94 or '95.

Something like 90-95% of ACTUAL Native Americans either loved the name and felt it was a honor, or had nothing against it.

A tiny minority actually cares and claim they're offended. MOST of the people raising this issue are white people, mainly politicians, mainly Democrat, PC-dictators...the same people who want to call secretaries "administrative assistants", garbage men "waste removal technicians" and dog walkers "canine fitness coordinators".

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Oh, and I've been told I'm "vertically challenged".

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=djnemo65;279344]My take has always been that its the Washington part of the name I root for, not the Redskins part.

What I have never understood is the passion with which predominantly white fans oppose a change. It clearly is the the most offensive moniker out there, so if in keeping with the zeitgeist they decide to go a more politically correct route, why is that such a tragedy? The Wizards name change was much worse - because the original name was not offensive and the new name and colors were so ridiculously stupid - and we all got over that pretty quickly.

To people who say I dont see what the big deal is with the name, isn't the inverse true as well? That its not that big a deal to change it?[/quote]


No, I still call them the Bullets and love uniform throwback nights. They should wear Bullets uni's for all home games. I hate the name "Wizards". It sounds like one of the corny WNBA team names. The colors aren't too bad, but I preferred the red/white/blue.

I think the major reason they were forced to change was because in 1994, there were a lot of whackjobs shooting at the White House from the sidewalk, trying to get rid of Clinton. A small plane even tried taking him out from the air. A lot of people in that town were "afraid" of bullets in '94 and '95. The press has said it was a high murder rate among blacks in D.C. that prompted the change, but the timing is suspucious and the Clintons always got their way.

While that's horrible, you can't blame the basketball team. If they were in any other city than ultra-liberal & PC Washington, D.C....their name wouldn't have changed. They could even still be the Baltimore Bullets.

The name Redskins is only offensive if you make an effort to be offended. Our logo is tasteful and looks more like a tribute than an attempt to offend, not like the Cleveland Indians (who I have no problem with them remaining the Indians). If we make ANY change, I wouldn't be opposed to going back to our spear logo. That looked GREAT.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;279492]What does that mean?[/quote]


what i mean is we can't call christmas, christmas. Kids can't participate in halloween because it offends people. or against there religion. Things that we have grown up with or done are now wrong. IF people dont agree with certain things, or dont participate for whatever the reason is, then dont participate in it. Dont celebrate christmas, halloween, or thanksgiving.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=TAFKAS;279368]Holla![/quote]

THAT'S humor!

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=SkinEmAll;279426]you know, we had some serious pc bullshit decision here at William and Mary, being forced to remove their Feathers!! thats right I said f e a t h e r s. The nickname is the 'Tribe'. really, is that offensive? But florida can still do all their antics, which I dont find offensive either. Oh brother, what is going on here........[/quote]
I have a better one than that for William & Mary. A person was offended by a cross which has been at the school sense it opened back in (I think the early 1900's) and now the schoold board is considering removing it and will be voting on it this month if they have not allready voted.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=#56fanatic;279533]what i mean is we can't call christmas, christmas. Kids can't participate in halloween because it offends people. or against there religion. Things that we have grown up with or done are now wrong. IF people dont agree with certain things, or dont participate for whatever the reason is, then dont participate in it. Dont celebrate christmas, halloween, or thanksgiving.[/QUOTE]

I think he meant what did you mean when you wrote this "WE as americans are losing our rights to people that move in to our country because things are offensive."

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

If they change the name Redskins will they change the song lyrics to "Hail to the Redskins"? Will it no longer be "Braves on the Warpath" and then, most importantly, will we have to change the URL here? Will this no longer be TheWarpath.net? Whatever will we do?

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=firstdown;279539]I have a better one than that for William & Mary. A person was offended by a cross which has been at the school sense it opened back in (I think the early 1900's) and now the schoold board is considering removing it and will be voting on it this month if they have not allready voted.[/quote]
I'm sorry I left out the best part the cross that offended the person was in the campus church.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Am I the only person of Irish decent that's mad at the NBA team in Boston's name? I'm not mad that they're the Celtics (I couldn't care less what they're called), I'm just mad that they mispronounce the word. It should sound like Kel-tic, not Cell-tic. That is all.

As far as the Skin's are concerned, I would still be a fan if they were forced to change the name, and unfortunately I really the team will feel forced to change it at some point in my life time. At first I won't be happy cheering for the Washington Wolfpack or whatever, but I'll adjust.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

This is really just a lame arguement that people are offended by the name. There have been good suggestions, like just changing the name to the Skins, cause that is what we call them anyway. I love the thought of putting a white guys totally sunburned on the helmet that would be hilarious.

But really, think about it. "The Cheif" at the stadium is a Black guy, heck so is the Cowboy. Are hog farmers offended by the Hogettes?

Everyone needs to know it is a good thing cause we ware showing them as warriors, if we have to change our name, I think everyone should have to. The Packers have to tick off people working in a meat packing plant, or a cheese plant. The Giants has to offend people who are abnormally tall or large. The Patriots must offended people who are not loyal to their country or wear those old style hats.

As it has been said, it is a name of a team. I wear my Skins gear all the time and have been in a group of Native Americans while wearing a shirt that said Redskins and the only comment I got was the "redskins sucks" (stupid cowboy fans or just do not know what they are talking about), but they were referring to the football team, not the Native component... So it will not change, and if it does I will be upset cause the name is about history of the team. We already did a change for PC reasons when we changed the words in Hail to the Redskins (the scalp em part), so we have done our part.

Danny Boy will not let it happen, he loves the team and knows the history.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

PC BS is.................PC BS. You can't tell the truth anymore for fear of offending someone and get your ass sued off. It has reached epidemic proportions in ridicularity.
The FEW who are doing the complaining are not necessarily representive of those THEY SAY they are protecting.
I think it was last year that I saw the "Chief" representaive (I don't recall the title) in the state of Florida for the Seminole Indian tribe in an interview. The interviewer thought they would make some PC headlines, but the Seminole rep surprised him. She flatly stated, and I paraphrase " the Seminole people do NOT look upon the use of it's name, image ar anything thing else by FSU as negative. On the contrary, we know from experience that the students, alums, and faculty hold the school and it's Seminole affiliation in the highest possible regard! Why would we have a problem with that?"
I about stroked out on hearing that.
The face of reason.

We as a race need to lighten up and quit TRYING to find new ways to be the victim.

And if that does not work for you, you can support my..........second favorite team:

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_Whites]Fighting Whites - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

[url=http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/647579/posts]Fighting Whities Mascot Causes Stir[/url]

[url=http://www.cafepress.com/fightinwhite?CMP=KNC-G-EF]The Fighting Whites Online Shop : CafePress.com[/url]

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=Hog1;279556]PC BS is.................PC BS. You can't tell the truth anymore for fear of offending someone and get your ass sued off. It has reached epidemic proportions in ridicularity.[/QUOTE]

I generally agree that society has gotten too sensitive. However, I think PC-ness has had its benefits. For example, 10 years ago no one would have blinked at Hardaway's recent comments. Today, in part because of PC-ness, it's frowned upon. Moreover, it's hard to define what is "PC." If it's being PC to not use racial epithets, then I'm all for being PC. If being PC means you must espouse left-leaning politics or you're automatically labeled as a--hole, then I'm not for being PC.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

I hear you. To many atty's lining their pockets.....needlessly, jamming a civil court system that is hopelessly jammed. Hopelessly complicating a system that already does not work. To many people looking for reasons to be pissed off. blah, blah, blah
I advocate a simpler, more reasonable world. I have the right to call you a worthless Martian! YOU, being a fine upstanding Martian, have the right to take issue and kick my earthling ass, etc. OR you could right me off as just another dumbass, air breathing, bi-ped and go down the road, NOT being a victim. No harm, no foul.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;279548]Am I the only person of Irish decent that's mad at the NBA team in Boston's name? I'm not mad that they're the Celtics (I couldn't care less what they're called), I'm just mad that they mispronounce the word. It should sound like Kel-tic, not Cell-tic. That is all.
[/quote]


No, I'm Irish and that annoys me too. My wife (not Irish) even hates its too since I pointed it out.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=TAFKAS;279544]If they change the name Redskins will they change the song lyrics to "Hail to the Redskins"? Will it no longer be "Braves on the Warpath" and then, most importantly, will we have to change the URL here? Will this no longer be TheWarpath.net? Whatever will we do?[/quote]

Hail to the Redskins...

...potatoes on a hot grill...eat in old D.C.



We'll then be logging onto [url]www.thedeepfried.net[/url]

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

As I said before, I just dont see this ever happening, but if they are forced to change their name, I guess I'll have to change mine too, ya know just because it implies so many degrading, barbaric, hateful,things.






:yeahright

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[QUOTE=SkinEmAll;279667]As I said before, I just dont see this ever happening, but if they are forced to change their name, I guess I'll have to change mine too, ya know just because it implies so many degrading, barbaric, hateful,things.






:yeahright[/QUOTE] Good point. My last name is Cannon, I don't want to offend peace-loving hippies, so I guess I'll have to change it to Lillywhite or some such bullshit.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Let me just say that there are two arguments being presented here: one is that the name is not that offensive and that not many Native Americans identify at as such. The second is that a minority group being offended by something such as this is overly-PC and problematic. The first is what is known as a cogent argument. The second is an inane argument. We need to distinguish between the two.

If a minority group expresses offense at a comment it is incredibly insensitive for someone outside of the group to question their right to be offended. To say, maybe people with funny hats are offended by the patriots or whatever is beyond stupid, because that's not a minority group, and because they aren't offended anyway. Sensitivity is definitely a good thing. Living here in Japan where there is only one ethnic group, and where those outside of that group are at best illiterate morons and at worst foreign devils, has made me really appreciate how good Americans are at existing within a heterogeneus population.

As to the second argument, it very well may be that it is only a tiny minority of Native Americans offended by the term Redskins. But why then the passion about this issue? Why not say, based on the info I have this name is not really deemed that offensive, and if I find out otherwise then maybe we should change it? Instead you guys are like, screw that, nobody is changing MY football team's name, and its not offensive, and if you think it is you are a liberal PC latte drinker, and Clinton is behind all this, and btw, Native Americans aren't really offended anyway.

So its the fervor that I don't get.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

[quote=ArtMonkDrillz;279548]Am I the only person of Irish decent that's mad at the NBA team in Boston's name? I'm not mad that they're the Celtics (I couldn't care less what they're called), I'm just mad that they mispronounce the word. It should sound like Kel-tic, not Cell-tic. That is all.

As far as the Skin's are concerned, I would still be a fan if they were forced to change the name, and unfortunately I really the team will feel forced to change it at some point in my life time. At first I won't be happy cheering for the Washington Wolfpack or whatever, but I'll adjust.[/quote]

To bad we're talking about basketball. If I was a poor Boston fan the only thing I would be mad about is they SUCK!

Hail to the REDSKINS, if the name offends ya OL WELL! Get over it, we don't have to be politically correct. WE CAN AT LEAST THINK WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH!

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

Is it just me or does it seem like it's mainly non-Native Americans who come out and say that the team name is offensive? Granted, there aren't too many, if any, Native Americans in the media but to me it seems like it's a bunch of people who are not actually in the offended group being all self righteous.

Re: Mascot Issue (AGAIN)
 

While I'd be disappointed if the team were to change its name, I would only be upset for selfish reasons (memories, history etc). Remaining obstinate for the sake of history isn’t enough to negate change, if necessary.

So what if the Redskins were the Braves in 1932 or that the “redskins” terminology hasn’t been used in a derogatory fashion by the football organization. Times change and we must adhere to the climate. Sheriff made a good point re: Tim Hardaway’s comments… they would have been brushed off in the 80s, but now they’re being denounced in the media.

It is sometimes important to step outside of one’s own perception of how the world should be and into somebody’s else’s… I know it’s hard, but just bear with me. While we see the term “Redskin” as non-offensive because of the context in which the football team uses it (proud warrior, etc), some people attach a stigma to the term itself. The dictionary even states that it’s a derogatory term. Does it matter that the usage of this term is non-offensive? It’s been brought up in this thread that if you replace the “redskin” term with the N-bomb, there would be no discussion at all. Or better yet, let’s replace the N-bomb with something just as offensive, but a little more subtle- like sanbo or pickaninny. As long as we show AA’s in a respectful light with a non-offensive mascot, does that make it any less offensive by keeping the name?

To the argument that most Native Americans accept the Redskins name and mascot: sometimes it’s good to look past the numbers. Perhaps the “10 percent” of Native Americans who are offended and taking action are in the minority for a reason. I remember seeing a chart in the Washington Post somewhere a few years back (I’ll look for it) with a breakdown. As a total group, it is true that most NA’s did not find the team’s use of “redskins” as offensive. Yet looking at a sample breakdown, other tables showed interesting numbers. Native American college students overwhelmingly found the term offensive. I’m not slighting the intelligence of NA’s that did not attend college, but this fact is important. How many full-blooded NAs do you know that actually went to college with you (not people that are from Reston or Springfield that claim 1/8th Cherokee or something)? I can count maybe one NA that I even met at my school- and USC is pretty damn diverse.

The miniscule proportion of NAs that have made it into college or the business world to the overwhelming number that has stayed on the reservation is noticeable. Without getting into historical events that have caused this decimation of an entire people (and yes, the current state of NA is attributable to American government atrocities more than personal self-motivation), the chart numbers tell me this: A huge population of Native Americans have stayed on the rez, including a sizable percentage struggling with extreme poverty and substance addiction. You ask them if they’re offended by the term “redskin” and they’ll probably be indifferent (or ambivalent at most). Most Native Americans aren’t offended because they’re in positions that relegate proactive social movements secondary on their priority list- they're too busy dealing with conditions outlined above to consider the big picture. The small percentage of NAs who find it offensive are college kids or similar aged ([URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/11/AR2006081101045_2.html"]as described in this article[/URL]), people who have the time and means to address social issues.

Here’s an analogy (congratulations if you’re still with me) that may help with what i'm trying to convey… Lawn jockeys, blackface and product symbols (aunt jemima, etc.) were considered acceptable by 1950's mainstream America- I’d even venture to say a good percentage of black folks owned offensive caricatures in their own homes back them. I didn’t live through the 40s and 50s, but if you were to poll a group of AAs back then with a current sample re: the offensiveness of the TV show “Amos and Andy”, I truly believe the results would be extremely distinct. Why would more AA people (probably most people) find the show offensive today, but not in the 50s? There’s probably a multitude of reasons: Pre-civil rights, black people were struggling big time with social and economic status issues, mainstream America still viewed them as subservient people, AAs themselves had lower self-worths (self-fulfilling prophecy), etc etc. Back then, black people probably watched “Amos and Andy” themselves because they didn’t have the same looking glasses they have today… the civil rights movement changed all that.

Bringing it back to the Native American struggle, a civil rights movement hasn’t occurred for them to have that same wake up. Sadly, they won’t ever have a movement on the same scale as African Americans. Their people have been damn near destroyed to the point of extinction. So what we’re left with is the “10 percent” that has the ability to make it an issue. It’s easy to say most NAs don’t have a problem with it when only “10 percent are complaining.” But it’s a bigger story than the numbers tell you.

Yes, it would suck to have a name change. Believe it or not, I always argue with one of my closest friends that I don’t want the name change. But I try to step outside the box. jdlea mentioned how pissed he was during the Bill Parcells “Jap” comment awhile back. I also remember the thread on this very same board during that time… Although I’m not Japanese, I am Asian and I also was offended by this… moreso, I was offended at the lack of sensitivity by the majority of posters in that thread. People said America is too “PC” nowadays and that the term “jap” has been used in war vernacular, thus it shouldn’t be considered offensive. After getting a bit heated, positive dialogue was exchanged… and while minds didn’t necessarily switch, some were at least opened enough to step outside the box. As someone who’s been accused of being too “PC” during the Bill Parcells debate, I sympathize with another marginalized group who cites offensiveness (even if I can’t understand it myself).

Nemo brings up a valid question: Why is there such passion for this issue? Are our fans really that angry about changing the redskins' name for the sake of the name, itself? Or is it due to an underlying distaste for “the political correctness agenda.” Remember, just because you or I don’t see why something is offensive, that doesn’t mean it isn’t to someone. You don’t need to slap on a wide-grinned ‘injun face on a helmet or have some drunk frat boy running around with feathers at half court (credit: “Around the Horn”, AJ Adande) to realize something may be inherently wrong with a word (“redskin”) that is suspect, at best.

You get an A if you’re still reading this… and a free soapbox from yours truly.