Should the Redskins Change Their Name?

Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Should the Redskins Change Their Name?

 http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/fight-on-battle-over-redskins-name-heads-to-court/

Once again people who apparently have nothing useful to do with their lives are attempting to prevent the Redskins from maintaining their trademark which would force them to change their name to something else. According to this story Suzan Harjo has spent "a third of her life" trying to force the Redskins to change their name. What an incredible waste of ones valuable lifetime. How can someone be offended by the name of a football team? I am offended by people who get offended. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
It's pretty stupid. Don't

It's pretty stupid. Don't the Black Hawks have to go through the same every now and then?
A third of her life eh? What a colossal waste. As if the name of a sports team could even make it into the top million problems facing our species.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15751
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
No, because the meaning of

No, because the meaning of when it started is not the meaning fans take it to be today. Just like the original word "Gay" meant "happy" then got turned into a slur for gays, but now "gay" is used by gays as a positive.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Can't link.

 

 

 

                              The link is not working, BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!  I have never used the "official" name of the DC football team, EVER!!! I'm not going to waste 1/3 of my  life fighting the offensive name (even now when they have an offense) but I never use it. On this site I use the term Washington first nations;  have you noticed?   WHY???  Growing up I knew meny Penobscots & Miq Maq  they did not have red  skin and did not care for the word, I may well be 1/4 Miq Maq myself.  These native Americans wouldn't know a teepee or a buffalo if it ran over them but they do know about hogans and 3 dozen ways to cook frog legs;  They wouldn't understand feathered war bonnets or horse riding eather but they could tell tales of icebergs the size of mountains and fish that breath air the size of 100 canoes, things the logo of  the DC football  team would find mind blowing and unbelievable [he seems to be a Piute or Kiowa] I'm no expert on native Americans.    I do wish they would change the name to something less offensive and I have written this before on this site. 

 

 

                             Why don't we have the Kanses City Darkies or maybe the St.Louis N*****s? Those names are at least as offensive.

 

 

    

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15751
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick

Jeffrick wrote:

 

 

 

                              The link is not working, BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!  I have never used the "official" name of the DC football team, EVER!!! I'm not going to waste 1/3 of my  life fighting the offensive name (even now when they have an offense) but I never use it. On this site I use the term Washington first nations;  have you noticed?   WHY???  Growing up I knew meny Penobscots & Miq Maq  they did not have red  skin and did not care for the word, I may well be 1/4 Miq Maq myself.  These native Americans wouldn't know a teepee or a buffalo if it ran over them but they do know about hogans and 3 dozen ways to cook frog legs;  They wouldn't understand feathered war bonnets or horse riding eather but they could tell tales of icebergs the size of mountains and fish that breath air the size of 100 canoes, things the logo of  the DC football  team would find mind blowing and unbelievable [he seems to be a Piute or Kiowa] I'm no expert on native Americans.    I do wish they would change the name to something less offensive and I have written this before on this site. 

 

 

                             Why don't we have the Kanses City Darkies or maybe the St.Louis N*****s? Those names are at least as offensive.

 

 

    

Jefferic I am surprised at you really.

If we never allow uses of words to change language wouldn't change.

You do realize up until recent history the word "Atheist" was used as a slur to mean evil, immoral, and used to demonize us? Yet we still use it don't we?

No sane Redskins  fan I know treats the word "Redskins" in the same manor as the slur it once was.

Just like gays do not treat the word gay the same way bigots do. Should gays not call themselves gay because others use it as a slur?

Really, no one should downplay the dark side of history EVER, but times change and this is now and not then.

Redskins as used now is NOT the same context and IS NOT a slur. Just like when I call Hillbilly atheist a "Redneck" him being my friend is not the same as as using it to denote a right wing bigot.

CONTEXT matters and as it stands now no one should be offended by the name "Redskins" to the  fans it is a term of affection, not a slur.

 Let me add, should Catholics or the Irish get upset about Notre Dame"s team name the "Fighting Irish"? Football is a violent sport so that must mean all Catholics and Irish are violent people.

What about Spartans? Are all Greeks violent?  What about Trojans? Are all Romans violent?

This dwelling in the past is akin to the same "sins of the father" argument we argue against blaming current society for what Adam did in the garden.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Why surprised??

 

 

                There is nothing I wrote above that I have not written before, right here, directed at you and other football fans. And I resent a histrionics lessons from anyone,  my reputation here should cover that without further comment.   I don't like the team name, I never use it and I wish they would change it and I am not joinig any crusade about it just throwing in my 5 cents worth [Canada doesn't trade in penny's anymore].

 

 

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:my 5 cents

Jeffrick wrote:
my 5 cents worth [Canada doesn't trade in penny's anymore].

lol. I wonder if that'll catch on.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
http://anthropology.si.edu/go

http://anthropology.si.edu/goddard/redskin.pdf 

The ironic thing is that the term "red skin" did not form as a slur. It was a direct translation of what they called themselves to differentiate themselves from white people. The first recorded usages of the term were translations of negotiations first between the Piankashaw's and the French where the "Old Sachem" Mosquito said in a letter sent to Lt. Col. John Wilkins who was tasked with peace negotiations among the Illinois tribes.  

Quote:

je serai flatté que tu Vienne parler

toimeme pour avoir pitie De nos

femmes et De nos enfans, et si

quelques peaux Rouges te font Du

mal je Scaurai soutenir tes Interests

au peril De ma Vie

 

Which when translated to english

 

Quote:

I shall be pleased to have you

come to speak to me yourself if you

pity our women and our children;

and, if any redskins do you harm, I

shall be able to look out for you

even at the peril of my life.

 

The village chief Hannanas replied to the Lt. Col saying

Quote:

aparament que tu crois que je ne

serai pas capable De rien Lorsque

tu me privera de poudre et De

balles, tu dois scavoir que je scais

me servir de Bois pour faire mes

armes et que avec ce meme bois ye

tue Des hommes, …

“… tu Crois que je suis Orphelin,

mes tous les Gens De ces rivieres

et tout les peaux rouges apprenderont

ma mort 

 

Which translates to

Quote:

Apparently you think that I shall not

be capable of anything when you

deprive me of powder and ball. You

must know that I know how to use

wood to make my weapons and that

with this same wood I kill men .…

“… You think that I am an orphan;

but all the people of these rivers and

all the redskins will learn of my death

 

The first time the term was used directly in english was during a meeting of President Madison and several prominent Chiefs. French Crow of the Santee Sioux said 

Quote:

I am a red-skin, but what I say is

the truth, and notwithstanding I

came a long way I am content, but

wish to return from here

 

The first widely published use of the term was a direct translation of a speech by Meskwaki chief Black Thunder who said,

Quote:

My Father—Restrain your feelings,

and hear ca[l]mly what I shall say. I

shall tell it to you plainly, I shall not

speak with fear and trembling. I feel

no fear. I have no cause to fear. I

have never injured you, and innocence

can feel no fear. I turn to all,

red skins and white skins, and challenge

an accusation against me

 

Anyway the link is to a journal article written by Professor Ives Goddard an expert in linguistics and he provides a very detailed account of how the term came into use. He summarizes at the end

Quote:

Cooper’s use of redskin as a Native

American in-group term was entirely

authentic, reflecting both the accurate

perception of the Indian self-image and

the evolving respect among whites for

the Indians’ distinct cultural perspective,

whatever its prospects. The

descent of this word into obloquy is a

phenomenon of more recent times. 

 

Which when you think about it makes perfect sense. One can easily see how the term "Indian" could be offensive since it originated from the ignorance of Europeans. As well as the term "injun". Those were the terms used most often while the Americans were slaughtering them. I think it would make more sense to find the term "Native American" offensive since most of the tribes had no desire to be in any sense "American". In the supposedly politically correct term, we remind everyone how they were utterly conquered and forced to become Americans. What is more offensive, using a term that was created by white Americans to designate them, or to use the word they chose for themselves before Americans killed most of them?

You will also note that most of the native languages often tended to use less abstract words like "redskin" which point directly to the physical as opposed to english which is rife with various abstract words (like american). (I'm sure there is probably some linguistic term for such a difference in languages but my linguistic knowledge has been tapped- anyone?) 

How can it be offensive to call your people by the name they adopted and died for? While saying it isn't offensive to adopt the name assigned to you by the people who conquered you? If you could get a time machine and pick up one of those chiefs who fought against American colonialism I bet they would bristle with rage at being called "native american", they were not american, they did not recognize american ownership of the land, they were redskins and many of them wanted nothing to do with America. 

If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 4901
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is offlineOffline
I agree. I mean, if the

I agree. I mean, if the organization, players or fans went running around saying disrespectful slurs about Indians then I would say, sure force them to change the name because they don't respect the Indians.

But, fans, players and the organization love the redskins and they don't disrespect the Indians. sure they make money off the image but it isn't like they are calling their team a specific Indian (like Cherokee or Seminole)

Which by the way is illegal because the Seminole tribe gave the FSU team the right to keep the name because why? they respect the Indians.

As for other tribes, no they were offended and asked that the teams change the names. Which has happened at the professional and college level.

 

(on another note)

I think we should get rid of all coins. We should only use whole dollars or have a 50 cent dollar bill. I hate coins. They are a by-gone-product of the old world. They should be tossed out just like day-light-savings.