A message to Native Americans. The Washington Redskins name.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
A message to Native Americans. The Washington Redskins name.

DAMN IT I LOVE THE LEFT AND THEIR INTENT, but this shit pisses me off. Words change over time. The word "gay" originally meant "happy". It went on later to become a pejorative to demonize homosexuals. Yet today, gays are not demanding people not call them gay. I am an atheist, the word itself invokes visions of immorality and bad and evil in the minds of theists. I am not going to abandon the term because of the baggage of asshole bigots.

Now, I grew up in the DC area. So I grew up a Redskins fan. If anyone seriously thinks I view that word in a bigoted manor can go fuck themselves. I am an atheist. I don't assume because the word "atheist" IS used by many theists as a slur to demonize me by equating me being godlless to Po Pot or Stalin, that means ALL theists see the word "atheist' as evil, anymore than gays who use the word gay use it in the same way the people who use it as a slur do.

The Redskins name to ME is one of pride, one of toughness. I always saw them as the underdog, especially growing up hating the over hyped "America's team" the Cowboys. The name to me is one of David vs Goliath, and by no means TO ME having anything doing with bigotry at all. The thing I always loved about going to the games, when I had the money, is that it unified us. A fellow Redskins fan, unless in a luxury box, you could not tell what the person sitting next to you did for a living. You could have a lawyer sitting next to a truck driver, next to me, at the time, a 7-11 store clerk. You could have a republican sitting next to a democrat and at least for 3 hours, there was no politics. You could have a baptist sitting next to me, a catholic at the time. I even saw a Redskins catalog with a SIKH with a burgundy turban on pictured in the stands.

I loved them as a kid because they represented the fight in the little guy, the pride in the little guy. I think Native Americans do pluralism a disservice by not understanding that TIMES DO CHANGE and so do words. Otherwise, if you insist on times not changing, then argue with gays over the history of that word.

We can remember history without using guilt by association. Otherwise I'd call myself a Humanist because of the THOUSANDS of years theists have demonized non believers with the slur "atheist".

 

 

 

"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


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
And like leftists normally

And like leftists normally do they rely on and propagate ignorance. The term "Redskin" was adopted by the tribes themselves when they first started participating in joint negotiations with the Americans. Prior to that, they had no term that was all inclusive because they identified by tribe. It was used for almost 100 years before it ever was used in a derogatory manner. From the mid to late 19th century, the term Redskin was only used by white people in newspapers and by the government.

Certainly many newspapers were less than kind since during this period we were in the process of exterminating all of them and most white newspapers sided with the white pioneers. However, there is no evidence that the term Redskin was widely used as a perjorative any more than the term "German" was a perjorative during WW2. When someone wanted to be deliberately insulting they were far more likely to use terms like "injun" "heathens", or "savage". The tribes continued to use the term "redskin" to describe themselves throughout this period.

The term became widely portrayed as a perjorative about 40 years later in Western novels and later movies which portrayed the white cowboys using the term to put down the natives who were almost always portrayed as the antagonists. It was popular culture that made people believe it was used as a perjorative even though it never really was.

I find it incredibly ironic that the term adopted by the people themselves is considered a perjorative, while the term "Native American" is the politically correct term. "Native American" was a term assigned to them by the elitist white fuckers who wanted to pretend to be all compassionate and ignore the ugly history of what we did to them (it was adopted in the 1960's). I think it is incredibly insulting that we call a people anything-"American" when they only became American through extreme violent force. 

Of course, a good leftist would never let a little thing like history and reality get in the way of being offended. And that ignorant imbecile Suzan Harjo has devoted some 20 years of her life to trying to get the Redskins to change their name. It is unlikely she will give up anytime soon. 

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

 

Furthermore, it is exceedingly obvious that the name was not meant to be a perjorative when the Redskins adopted it. At the time they made the change they were coached by Lone Star Dietz who was Sioux and had several players who were Indians. It wouldn't make much sense to name a team something that was offensive to the coach and the players would it? Indeed, many racists at the time were quite upset with the number of teams adopting names that were a tribute like "Braves", "Indians", "Redskins" and "Chiefs" which were quite common because the names were associated with being a warrior and warriors are good for sports.

It was this practice which inspired Earl H. Emmons to write the book "Redskin Rimes" which was an explicitly racist book to "remind" people and the "savages" and their terrible "crimes". Emmons' favorite racial slur in the book was "injun".   

https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=T_UpAAAAYAAJ&rdid=book-T_UpAAAAYAAJ&rdot=1

 

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


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:And like

Beyond Saving wrote:

And like leftists normally do they rely on and propagate ignorance. The term "Redskin" was adopted by the tribes themselves when they first started participating in joint negotiations with the Americans. Prior to that, they had no term that was all inclusive because they identified by tribe. It was used for almost 100 years before it ever was used in a derogatory manner. From the mid to late 19th century, the term Redskin was only used by white people in newspapers and by the government.

Certainly many newspapers were less than kind since during this period we were in the process of exterminating all of them and most white newspapers sided with the white pioneers. However, there is no evidence that the term Redskin was widely used as a perjorative any more than the term "German" was a perjorative during WW2. When someone wanted to be deliberately insulting they were far more likely to use terms like "injun" "heathens", or "savage". The tribes continued to use the term "redskin" to describe themselves throughout this period.

The term became widely portrayed as a perjorative about 40 years later in Western novels and later movies which portrayed the white cowboys using the term to put down the natives who were almost always portrayed as the antagonists. It was popular culture that made people believe it was used as a perjorative even though it never really was.

I find it incredibly ironic that the term adopted by the people themselves is considered a perjorative, while the term "Native American" is the politically correct term. "Native American" was a term assigned to them by the elitist white fuckers who wanted to pretend to be all compassionate and ignore the ugly history of what we did to them (it was adopted in the 1960's). I think it is incredibly insulting that we call a people anything-"American" when they only became American through extreme violent force. 

Of course, a good leftist would never let a little thing like history and reality get in the way of being offended. And that ignorant imbecile Suzan Harjo has devoted some 20 years of her life to trying to get the Redskins to change their name. It is unlikely she will give up anytime soon. 

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

 

It is no different than the word "gay" or even "atheist". "Gay" long before it was used as a slur against homosexuals it simply meant "happy". And the Greeks had the word "a" and "theist" meaning without god, but not meaning evil.

"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


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gay is actually a really

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

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


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Gay is

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

Why do I feel like Pelosi sitting next to Newt agreeing with them. You are a really strange bedfellow.

 

I'd actually protest if they renamed the team the Washington Ayn Rands.

"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
don't like the name don't use the name, never will,it's racist.

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

Why do I feel like Pelosi sitting next to Newt agreeing with them. You are a really strange bedfellow.

 

I'd actually protest if they renamed the team the Washington Ayn Rands.

"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?


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
Brian Sapient I need a feild required for comment box please

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

Why do I feel like Pelosi sitting next to Newt agreeing with them. You are a really strange bedfellow.

 

I'd actually protest if they renamed the team the Washington Ayn Rands.

"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?


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
D.C. is 80% black; why not the Washington "darkies" ?

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

Why do I feel like Pelosi sitting next to Newt agreeing with them. You are a really strange bedfellow.

 

I'd actually protest if they renamed the team the Washington Ayn Rands.

"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?


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2517
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Welcome to the world of Language Evolution

Regardless of past usage words in the English language evolve based on usage and the understanding of the current culture.

Take for example the word gay.

I went to school with a girl who was named Gay.

It dates to early English meaning to be happy and joyful. As time passed a gay woman was considered a prostitute in the 17th century. A gay man was a womanizer. A gay house was a brothel.

Now it means a homosexual.

If you heard a movie was called "The Gay Divorcee" today you'd think it was a homosexual film. However in 1934 with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers it wasn't.

Good Luck in your quest to alter perceptions and language evolution.

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:Gay is

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gay is actually a really good comparison, like Redskin, the term "gay" was adopted as slang by gays long before it was used as a perjorative. Although, it is a bit misleading to say that gay meant happy. By the 19th century the term was tied to promiscuity, lasciviousness and immorality. It was "happy" but it was a certain type of happy. The word was usually associated with brothels, vagabonds and womanizing men. Which is probably why it was adopted by gay men because they were outside of societies moral standards. "Gay" generally wasn't used to imply a family friendly type of happy, that idea is a relatively modern one, probably adopted in an attempt to take the word away from homosexuals. 

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=gay

 

Agreed. See we can agree on something. I am not a complete dip shit. I just play one most of the time.

 

 

"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


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I'd be all for removing

I'd be all for removing Andrew Jackson from the 20.

"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


RobbyPants
atheist
RobbyPants's picture
Posts: 148
Joined: 2011-11-30
User is offlineOffline
Red skins!


 

Last week, I was listening to the radio, and they were discussing this topic. At the end, someone emailed the show and said "Guys! The team doesn't have to change their name! They just need to change their mascot to a potato!"

 

That would solve everything!


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
RobbyPants wrote: Last

RobbyPants wrote:


 

Last week, I was listening to the radio, and they were discussing this topic. At the end, someone emailed the show and said "Guys! The team doesn't have to change their name! They just need to change their mascot to a potato!"

 

That would solve everything!

Then they would have to move to Idaho.

"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


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Until some whiny lib decided

Until some whiny lib decided to get offended at naming potatoes after native americans. There are people who live to be offended and nothing you do will make them stop whining.

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


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  I've got an idea for a

  I've got an idea for a politically correct, non-ethnic mascot.   It's an image that evokes masculinity without resorting to offensive stereotypes.  Call them the Washington Foreskins.  Plus, it's a visual that would look great on the side of their helmets.   Go Skins !!!

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  I've got an idea for a politically correct, non-ethnic mascot.   It's an image that evokes masculinity without resorting to offensive stereotypes.  Call them the Washington Foreskins.  Plus, it's a visual that would look great on the side of their helmets.   Go Skins !!!

Laugh it up funny guy. If they called them the Foreskins, I will admit it would reflect our dick of an owner.

"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


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
              

 

                                                                 Just trying to be helpful...

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote: 

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

  I've got an idea for a politically correct, non-ethnic mascot.   It's an image that evokes masculinity without resorting to offensive stereotypes.  Call them the Washington Foreskins.  Plus, it's a visual that would look great on the side of their helmets.   Go Skins !!!

*Attempts to picture the ramifications of such a move*

*Chuckles*

Btw, in the 60's gay was a family friendly type of happy. Just watch The Flinstones if you don't believe me. Smiling

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
I consider myself a flaming

I consider myself a flaming liberal, both socially and economically, but this shit is really pissing me off.

When people say "what if they were called the Niggers or Crackers", DUH OF COURSE.  The term "Redskin" was not started by racists, nor was it used as a team name to be used as racist. IT WAS COINED BY NATIVES!

To any ATHEIST OR GAY reading this, if you are going to be consistent in your PC crap then do not call yourself an atheist or call yourself gay.

 

Atheists should call themselves "non-believers" and gays, "sexual orientation" or "homosexual"(but even that was used as a slur). The term "Jew" was used as a slur as well, but Jews call themselves Jews.

 

This also cuts to the evolutionary history of our species. We fail to recognize we are the same species. We fail to recognize that we are both the majority and the minority, depending on our physical location, that if we move we can easily go from top to bottom or bottom to top, depending on location.

 

It also is demeaning to ALL human suffering, that while rightfully remembering the cruelty we can inflict on others as a species, no label, in human history, has a monopoly on pain. The lesson of the Natives is the lesson of blacks, is the lesson of Muslim women in the east. It is the lesson of the Jews of the Holocaust. It is the lesson of the victims of "The Lord's Resistance Army". It is the lesson of 9/11. It is the lesson of the civilian deaths in Iraq.

 

To say I cant understand not being a Native myself is insulting. Considering I have had people try to have me fired for being an atheist, and have been yelled at and threatened. Knowing others have lost their jobs, had their property damaged and even entire families being chased out of the towns they live in, I really don't want to hear it. Genocide is simply allowed in human history, because of money and power and apathy and zeal, but it still goes on today and others are victims of it, even if atheists in the west are not. Lack of genocide does not mean there is no bigotry. 

But Muslims, Christians, Jews, gays and atheists get murdered all the time in the east, just as natives were. Just as blacks were lynched. For the same reason a Sikh living in Texas was murdered mistaken for a Muslim.

If you want to go after bigots, go after Andrew Jackson on our $20. If you want to go after bigots, go after North Carolina and their ban on gay marriage. If you want to go after bigots, go after states that still have bans on atheists holding public office. If you want to go after bigots, go after fascist theocracies that would condemn ALL OF US here for apostasy and defend pluralism.  You want to honor the suffering of Natives, then honor the suffering of all humans.

 

The usage of the term "Redskins" IS NOT RACIST,  and this is NOT the way to battle bigotry. It is just a nickname as it was when it was started by Natives, and to the fans it IS a positive word as it always has been.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"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


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 724
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
 COME ON you guys! You are

 COME ON you guys! You are so full of crap! I am an atheist and I've shown how Jesus is Judeo Christian MYTH but Redskins is clearly offensive! So what if some Native Americans don't find if offensive? Some blacks don't find nigger offensive so why not call them the Washington Niggers? Bob Costas was right on how if you apply skins to another race it is obviously offensive like Blackskins or Shitskins.

Get used to a name change because it WILL happen eventually!

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
   Change the team's name

   Change the team's name and then shut the hell up.    I fucking hate football anyway.

 

   ( BTW, I wasn't telling you to personally shut up JesusNEVERexisted )

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 724
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:  

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

   Change the team's name and then shut the hell up.    I fucking hate football anyway.

 

   ( BTW, I wasn't telling you to personally shut up JesusNEVERexisted )

LOL..I got it PDW. I used to watch NFL but now I'm just sick of it!

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3359
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:   I

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

   I fucking hate football anyway.

You and me both. I detest sports in general.

 

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Why anyone likes football

Why anyone likes football has always eluded me. It's as boring as golf.
Actual football (soccer) is better, but it still doesn't compare to hockey.
Too bad the NHL had to ruin hockey.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Why anyone

Vastet wrote:
Why anyone likes football has always eluded me. It's as boring as golf. Actual football (soccer) is better, but it still doesn't compare to hockey. Too bad the NHL had to ruin hockey.

 

   For some reason all team sports bore the hell out of me. 

  Nevertheless, I certainly appreciate the skill involved in being a professional football or soccer player I just don't want to watch it.  The only sports that I follow are motorized sports, especially Super Bike and Moto GP, Motocross/Supercross as well as individual competition such as kick boxing ( K1 and Muay Thai ) and MMA events and also competitive strength events.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I never really understood

I never really understood vehicular 'sports' either. It just makes me want to be behind the wheel. Or it would, if you weren't just going in circles most of the time.

UFC, WWE, etc I can understand. In UFC/etc you have real fighters with great skills who tell each other off for weeks until they get to put their money where their mouth is. In WWE/etc you have amazing stunts done by people who you'd never tell by looking they could do them. Like an action movie with a story often better than action movies have (though sometimes so shitty a 2 year old could write better, action movies often have the same flaw).

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 4127
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
  My preference for combat

  My preference for combat sports would exclude the so-called "professional wrestling" type of events.   I will admit that I am in awe of these huge guys doing some extremely dangerous stunts but I just don't get interested in "worked" fights where the outcome is predetermined.  Plus I don't care for all the drama and crazy characters. 

  I want to see guys actually fight.  I prefer pure striking sports over MMA but I'll watch either sport as long as the level of competition is intense.   I absolutely love watching Muay Thai.

Patrick is an edgy edgelord.


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 724
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:Why anyone

Vastet wrote:
Why anyone likes football has always eluded me. It's as boring as golf. Actual football (soccer) is better, but it still doesn't compare to hockey. Too bad the NHL had to ruin hockey.

 

COME ON dude! Soccer only puts you to sleep! It is boring as hell! At least in football you have all these set plays and there's more drama and strategy involved but I will give you that baseball is beyond boring as hell and even more boring than soccer but for some inexplicable reason baseball is still popular in America although its national popularity is greatly fallen since its peak in the 1970s.

Baseball: ball...strike...foul...ZZZZZZZZZ

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
JesusNEVERexisted

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

 COME ON you guys! You are so full of crap! I am an atheist and I've shown how Jesus is Judeo Christian MYTH but Redskins is clearly offensive! So what if some Native Americans don't find if offensive? Some blacks don't find nigger offensive so why not call them the Washington Niggers? Bob Costas was right on how if you apply skins to another race it is obviously offensive like Blackskins or Shitskins.

Get used to a name change because it WILL happen eventually!

 

Ok you immoral godless Communist Stalin, Hitler loving ATHEIST! No one ever equates the word "atheist" to bad or evil. NEVER!

Believe me I have my limits too, pick on ABBA, that is where I draw the line.

 

 

 

"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


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
JesusNEVERexisted

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Why anyone likes football has always eluded me. It's as boring as golf. Actual football (soccer) is better, but it still doesn't compare to hockey. Too bad the NHL had to ruin hockey.

 

COME ON dude! Soccer only puts you to sleep! It is boring as hell! At least in football you have all these set plays and there's more drama and strategy involved but I will give you that baseball is beyond boring as hell and even more boring than soccer but for some inexplicable reason baseball is still popular in America although its national popularity is greatly fallen since its peak in the 1970s.

Baseball: ball...strike...foul...ZZZZZZZZZ

No soccer is always moving. Football is a bunch of guys standing around for 5 minutes before a 10 second burst of action leading directly back into 5 minutes of boredom. Even baseball is more entertaining, and baseball sucks ass.

If I want tactics and strategy I'll watch some Starcraft or chess games.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 15761
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Vastet

Vastet wrote:
JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

Vastet wrote:
Why anyone likes football has always eluded me. It's as boring as golf. Actual football (soccer) is better, but it still doesn't compare to hockey. Too bad the NHL had to ruin hockey.

 

COME ON dude! Soccer only puts you to sleep! It is boring as hell! At least in football you have all these set plays and there's more drama and strategy involved but I will give you that baseball is beyond boring as hell and even more boring than soccer but for some inexplicable reason baseball is still popular in America although its national popularity is greatly fallen since its peak in the 1970s.

Baseball: ball...strike...foul...ZZZZZZZZZ

No soccer is always moving. Football is a bunch of guys standing around for 5 minutes before a 10 second burst of action leading directly back into 5 minutes of boredom. Even baseball is more entertaining, and baseball sucks ass. If I want tactics and strategy I'll watch some Starcraft or chess games.

That is actually not far from the truth. If you only timed the actual action in a football game with a stop watch, the game is about 12 minutes on average. Still like it better than soccer. Watch a stupid ball get kicked around for what 1 to 0 or 2 to 1 score? BORING! Baseball too, most of it is a ball going between the pitcher and catcher. And with the players at the pro level today, the field should actually be bigger.

"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


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 724
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
 In soccer they always move

 

In soccer they always move but nothing is happening! In baseball they rarely move and nothing is happening! Both games are snoozefests!

Back to the Redskins. A name change will happen but it's just a question of when.

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
In football they rarely move

In football they rarely move and nothing is happening. Sticking out tongue

In hockey they always move, very fast, and something is always happening. Eye-wink

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
atheist
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 5448
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:In football

Vastet wrote:
In football they rarely move and nothing is happening. Sticking out tongue In hockey they always move, very fast, and something is always happening. Eye-wink

I'm not really a fan of hockey, I simply don't have the understanding of the sport to know what is going on so to me it is more or less random. However, of all the major sporting events I have attended live, hockey is by far the most exciting, the energy that the crowd had was unbelievable and you couldn't help but get caught up in it even though I didn't give a fuck which team won and my beers were ridiculously overpriced.

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


JesusNEVERexisted
Superfan
JesusNEVERexisted's picture
Posts: 724
Joined: 2010-01-03
User is offlineOffline
Vastet wrote:In football

Vastet wrote:
In football they rarely move and nothing is happening. Sticking out tongue In hockey they always move, very fast, and something is always happening. Eye-wink

 

Hockey ruled during the days of Lemieux and Gretzky but in the mid 90s or so The Devils introduced their boring as hell trap defense which ruined the game. Now hockey is mostly just dump and chase and mostly boring as hell.

Remember even Lemieux said how the game isn't the same and not the game he grew up with when he retired the first time.

Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com


Vastet
atheistBloggerSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 13210
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Yeah the NHL is a shadow of

Yeah the NHL is a shadow of its former self. But the NHL isn't the only source of hockey. And it's still better than any other team sport I've ever seen.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.