Mascot Issue (AGAIN)

[Hail2theskins]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

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?

The thing is, washington is typically not a basketball town, while yes there are a lot of wizards fans, this is football country. Furthermore the bullets were not one of the most storied programs in the NBA, pretty far from it actually, there isnt nearly as big of a wizards following than that of the skins. As much as maybe you wouldnt like to admit it, people in numbers mean a lot, and so does history and tradition, and when you combine the two its pretty damn hard to change.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

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?

In your opinion it's offensive. In my opinion it's not. I always heard it referred to the face paint Indians used to apply before going into battle. I am aware that the phrase 'red skin' was at one time used as a derogatory term, but there could be two different meanings.

But here's the key -- why should one party who claims to be offended always be in the position to dictate over the offending party and force them to change or cease what they were doing based solely on the perception of the one who was offended?

It's the principle that would get people upset if the offended parties got their way and succeeded in forcing the Redskins to change their name and logo.

Can we all get together as Redskins fans and suddenly become offended at the name "Cowboys" and blue star logos? What would prevent the Cowboys from being obligated to conceed to our demands?

[djnemo65]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

In your opinion it's offensive. In my opinion it's not. I always heard it referred to the face paint Indians used to apply before going into battle. I am aware that the phrase 'red skin' was at one time used as a derogatory term, but there could be two different meanings.

But here's the key -- why should one party who claims to be offended always be in the position to dictate over the offending party and force them to change or cease what they were doing based solely on the perception of the one who was offended?

It's the principle that would get people upset if the offended parties got their way and succeeded in forcing the Redskins to change their name and logo.

Can we all get together as Redskins fans and suddenly become offended at the name "Cowboys" and blue star logos? What would prevent the Cowboys from being obligated to conceed to our demands?

In my opionion i dont give a crap. It has nothing to do with me, that's the point. The name Redskins has an ethnically specific context which has been deemed to be offensive by many, ergo the repeated efforts to change it. 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. And I don't think I really need to take the time to break down the differences between Cowboys and Redskins right? That argument makes no sense. People arent suddenly becoming offended by the nickname.

But if someone told me that a lawn ornament I was displaying offended them for some reason I didn't understand, my reaction would be, well I think you may be overreacting, however I am going to err on the side of not offending you and get a different ornament. It's just an ornament after all.

As a Jew people frequently make comments that do legitimitaly offend me; but what bothers me more is their response when I point out to them that they should not say whatever it was they said. They respond, ooh, here comes the PC police, everybody gotta get in line. I think many of the responses surrounding this debate are similar.

And by the way, Redskins referers to the scalps of Indians which were rewarded with bounty payments.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

As a Jew people frequently make comments that do legitimitaly offend me; but what bothers me more is their response when I point out to them that they should not say whatever it was they said. They respond, ooh, here comes the PC police, everybody gotta get in line. I think many of the responses surrounding this debate are similar.

And by the way, Redskins referers to the scalps of Indians which were rewarded with bounty payments.

I totally understand how you feel djnemo65. 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.

Again, I'm not all against the Redskins name/logo (in fact I love it), but I can understand why people would be upset by it.

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I totally understand how you feel djnemo65. 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.

Again, I'm not all against the Redskins name/logo (in fact I love it), but I can understand why people would be upset by it.

While I'm not really happy if they have to change the name, I really don't care. If it offends people, what is the harm in changing it. The problem, as some see it, is also the logo. While some believe it portrays nobility, it actually portrays "the noble savage" another stereotype that a lot of Native Americans resent. The fact is the name is considered derogatory and the team puts a caricature on the side of the helmet. Whether people wanna make a big deal about it or not is their prerogative. Should they choose to not care, then I don't care. However, if there becomes an uproar over a name change, I won't belittle anyone for feeling the way they do.

I'm part Asian and there are plenty of things that irritate/offend me. I don't feel the need to list them, but there are often caricatures of Asians portrayed and makes me almost irrate. I can understand where people can become offended because it's hard to understand when you're not a member of the race.

Example: Bill Parcells' comment about "Jap plays" really pissed me off. So, everyone making a big deal about Irvin's behavior...Parcells made a racist remark, I'm more upset that he's working for ESPN than anyone has a right to be over Michael Irvin. Well, until he made the comment about Italian Americans.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by 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.

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

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.

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.

[Monkeydad]

Originally Posted by djnemo65

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?

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.

[CanadianSkin]

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.

[SkinEmAll]

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

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by SkinEmAll

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

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.

[SkinEmAll]

It IS a big deal to change it. All this pc crap is bullshit. I will never be in favor of changing the name. And its not ONLY the white fans who oppose. have you done a poll on the fans that are white, black, asian,hispanic, indian and whatever else there is out there? I dont buy that for one second that. The only people who oppose this should focus their efforts on something worth a shit. Everyone I have ever known as a Redskin fan, black, white ,phillipino,INDIAN, think of football only when they hear, read or say redskin. Im sick of it. There are truly soooooooooooooo many more things these people need to focus on, not this. I must step away from the computer now before I really say how I feel. Mic Light time out.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by SkinEmAll

It IS a big deal to change it. All this pc crap is bullshit. I will never be in favor of changing the name. And its not ONLY the white fans who oppose. have you done a poll on the fans that are white, black, asian,hispanic, indian and whatever else there is out there? I dont buy that for one second that. The only people who oppose this should focus their efforts on something worth a shit. Everyone I have ever known as a Redskin fan, black, white ,phillipino,INDIAN, think of football only when they hear, read or say redskin. Im sick of it. There are truly soooooooooooooo many more things these people need to focus on, not this. I must step away from the computer now before I really say how I feel. Mic Light time out.

Native American....

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Native American....

Holla!

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Holla!

THAT'S humor!

[hooskins]

Annenberg Public Policy Center 1 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATE: September 24, 2004 CONTACT:

Most Indians Say Name of Washington “Redskins” Is Acceptable
While 9 Percent Call It Offensive, Annenberg Data Show