Re: This again
I am suprised by these numbers and fully concede that I was wrong in arguing that an overwhelming majority oppose these names. But there still exists a sizable group that I think clearly extends beyond an "activist minority," and I do not think its appropriate to mock their intentions.
But whatever, that wasn't my point. Rather, I just can't understand how people from outside the Native American culture think they have any right to argue what should and should not be offensive for people within the culture, which is essentially what this thread has done. And I fail to understand the fervor with which so many insert themselves into this debate. Why argue against Native American advocates, even if they are a minority? Why not let the have this one? I mean, if the worst case scenario happened and the skins had to change their name to the magicians or something what it would really be that big a deal? I know everyone would have to go get a new Mark Brunell jersey, but we would get over it right?
Even if only one hundred thousand Native Americans are offended by the name (and I'm pulling a number out of thin air here) why would anyone object to satisfying their demands. Of course the answer is not rooted in any question of offensiveness, but instead revolves around people liking the colors and tradition of their favorite sports team.
It may well be the case that the name is not offensive, and I have confidence that that will be fleshed out in court. But in the meantime I will not tell any representative of the Native American nation that they are wrong for objecting to a mascot, Redskin or otherwise.
|