• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

The Name Change

Boone said:
The issue I had with Greenberg's comments was his emphatic declaration that 'Redskins' is a racist and offensive term and that 'cannot be argued' (that is an exact or near exact quote).

All the while continuing to use the term himself on a national radio program.
Click to expand...

tshile said:
And this is why I've given up on the conversation. The people on the other side aren't interested in discussion - they've made up their mind and it's their way or it's the 'wrong' way.

Which is why when this conversation came up with my buddy and his girlfriend when I was on vacation, both of whom think the name should be changed immediately, I responded by saying "Good, I'm glad its racist and it offends you."

Caught them off guard and ended the conversation :)
Click to expand...


I think the problem is like everything else in our country right now - neither side is willing to sit down and have a discussion. One side insists its racist, the other side insists its not. You can't point to one side or the other and claim fault; in reality, there is no way to sit down with 5.2M Native Americans and ask each one whether or not they find the name offensive, and even if you could, the fact that you have to ask answers the question a little bit already, does it not?

So let's have a discussion.

I've heard and read enough from actual Native Americans (the ones who should matter in this discussion, no?) that it (and other sports monikers and mascots) are offensive, to formulate an opinion. That doesn't mean if I type the team name or if I wear a jersey I'm some huge hypocrite, because I believe that the pro-name has a point as well; context matters. One of CounterTrey's favorites that always resonates with me, is that there are high schools with the Redskins mascot (at least one I know of) - I don't see any historically black colleges with teams named the Sambos or anything like that, so that definitely strikes a chord.

Before I left on my vacation I was going to start a poll, but after reading some of the responses in this thread, it probably wouldn't be a great idea. But what exactly would it take for anyone on the pro-name side to switch sides? I've asked this question before, but no one really responded. If there isn't anything that would convince you the name is racist, then perhaps its you who are not open to discussion.

For the record, I'm firmly in the "I don't know" camp. It bothers me that it might be offensive, and it also bothers me that we are going down a very PC road, and the Skins might just be another victim.
 
Lanky Livingston said:
But what exactly would it take for anyone on the pro-name side to switch sides?
Click to expand...

First - have the native american schools stop using similar logos and the actual name Redskins for their teams. If it's so offensive, they shouldn't be using it...
Second - Explain why this never seems to be a problem until the team has national attention and popularity? The team has been around for ~80 years. Looking over the history this argument comes up when the team is popular/good, and goes away when it's not. Why should I not to draw the obvious conclusion from that?
Third - Please explain to me why it is this team you've so aggressively gone after.
Fourth - Please explain to me why the fact that Native Americans sculpted our logo out of wood, then trucked it down to the redskins, and asked the team to use the logo has no bearing on whether or not you accuse its use as being racist and/or racially motivated.

When they've done that I'll reconsider my position. I don't know that I'll 'switch sides' at that point, but I'll absolutely take a step back and reconsider. I'll want to hear from the Native Americans at that point though, the white people telling me it's offensive can go shove it as far as I'm concerned; their opinion is irrelevant.
 
It's much much simpler than all that. Name one time - ONE TIME - that you've heard yourself, or heard referenced by others the term 'Redskin' being used as an epithet.

You know why you haven't heard it used as a racial epithet?

Because it isn't one.

And it doesn't matter how hard some try to convince us all it's a horrible word (all the while, freely and unabashedly using the 'horrible word' without blinking an eye),.. It's not and never has been an epithet.
 
I have to admit... I've never heard the term used outside the 'Skins or a potato.

Whenever you hear someone make fun of Indians, it's always "Me scalpum paleface" or something to do with firewater or some nonsense.

Nick
 
Boone said:
It's much much simpler than all that. Name one time - ONE TIME - that you've heard yourself, or heard referenced by others the term 'Redskin' being used as an epithet.

You know why you haven't heard it used as a racial epithet?

Because it isn't one.

And it doesn't matter how hard some try to convince us all it's a horrible word (all the while, freely and unabashedly using the 'horrible word' without blinking an eye),.. It's not and never has been an epithet.
Click to expand...

But that's totally dependent on your point of view, is it not? Of course you nor I have ever heard it used as an epithet, because our frame of reference is football team. So, you're asking the wrong question (or the wrong people), IMO.

It doesn't matter one bit if you, or I, or anyone else on a fan message board has ever heard the name used as a racial epithet.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
That's ridiculous Jaimie. I'm not black, but I've certainly heard the 'N word' about a gazillion times in my life. What you seem to be implying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that although no one has ever used the word in a negative fashion towards someone of Native American descent that we know of, it is an epithet regardless. How does that make any logical sense???
 
tshile said:
First - have the native american schools stop using similar logos and the actual name Redskins for their teams. If it's so offensive, they shouldn't be using it...
Second - Explain why this never seems to be a problem until the team has national attention and popularity? The team has been around for ~80 years. Looking over the history this argument comes up when the team is popular/good, and goes away when it's not. Why should I not to draw the obvious conclusion from that?
Third - Please explain to me why it is this team you've so aggressively gone after.
Fourth - Please explain to me why the fact that Native Americans sculpted our logo out of wood, then trucked it down to the redskins, and asked the team to use the logo has no bearing on whether or not you accuse its use as being racist and/or racially motivated.

When they've done that I'll reconsider my position. I don't know that I'll 'switch sides' at that point, but I'll absolutely take a step back and reconsider. I'll want to hear from the Native Americans at that point though, the white people telling me it's offensive can go shove it as far as I'm concerned; their opinion is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I don't think the timing has any relevance; I think the battle has been ongoing, we only hear about it when the team is doing well, because that's when the media is covering the team more. I'll remind you that they we were terrible last year. :)

Other than that, seems like a reasonable list. I'm assuming "you" is the proverbial "you" in your post as well.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
To answer your previous question, if I did believe it had commonly been used as an epithet demeaning Native Americans, that would be enough for me to support a name change. If the term 'Redskin' had been originally used because native Americans all have 'red skin' that would be enough for me. But neither of those scenarios are factual. It's not an epithet. Basically those upset want to pretend that the intent of the word is to disparage and then call for it's banning. It is not and never has been intended to refer to the color of native Americans. It's manufactured 'fact' that all the other arguments to ban the name are based on. That's the way I see it.
 
Boone said:
That's ridiculous Jaimie. I'm not black, but I've certainly heard the 'N word' about a gazillion times in my life. What you seem to be implying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that although no one has ever used the word in a negative fashion towards someone of Native American descent that we know of, it is an epithet regardless. How does that make any logical sense???
Click to expand...

No, that wasn't what I was implying. I'm saying, we've only ever heard it used as the team name, but that doesn't prove that it hasn't been used as a racial slur elsewhere.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
every time I ever heard the term "redskin" while living on a reservation it was because a Native was drunk and his skin turned red like he was constantly blushing. Then it was used like as if calling him a drunk ass, not someone lower or less dignified.
 
Boone said:
To answer your previous question, if I did believe it had commonly been used as an epithet demeaning Native Americans, that would be enough for me to support a name change. If the term 'Redskin' had been originally used because native Americans all have 'red skin' that would be enough for me. But neither of those scenarios are factual. It's not an epithet. Basically those upset want to pretend that the intent of the word is to disparage and then call for it's banning. It is not and never has been intended to refer to the color of native Americans. It's manufactured 'fact' that all the other arguments to ban the name are based on. That's the way I see it.
Click to expand...

I'd never heard that before. What I've read is actually the opposite. But I've also read the term originated from native Americans themselves, as how they referred to the differences between settlers and themselves. Red face/red skin vs white face/white skin.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
Lanky Livingston said:
No, that wasn't what I was implying. I'm saying, we've only ever heard it used as the team name, but that doesn't prove that it hasn't been used as a racial slur elsewhere.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Is that where the bar is set now though? The Redskins have to prove the word has never been used negatively? We are still a country of consensus. And not only is there scant evidence that most (people OR native Americans) view it as an epithet, there are literally no examples aware of that it's ever been used as an epithet.

And yeah, I like saying 'epithet' :)
 
can we just flush this topic once and for all...really, the Media Loves this topic...its not going to happen so they need to STOP...BLEEDING burgundy & gold for 53 years this SUNDAY...#HTTR
i guess this is a sore subject with me.....
 
You haven't heard the Redskins state over and over again that the origin of the term was the red ochre war paint warriors would apply to their face before going into battle?? If you apply logic, what NFL team gives itself a derogatory name - the name was designed to bring about an image of bravery, strength, determination... Someone claiming it doesn't mean those things, with absolutely nothing in terms of facts or evidence beyond some political lobbyists claims - I just don't find that convincing...
 
Lanky Livingston said:
If there isn't anything that would convince you the name is racist, then perhaps its you who are not open to discussion.
Click to expand...
The same could be said toward those who think it's racist.

This is exactly why nobody has a "sit down". Neither side will ever agree with the other. The keep the name crowd is fine with that. The other side isn't. And since the anti-name crowd can't switch the opinions of the pro-name crowd, they claim the keep the name crowd refuses to have a discussion. There's no discussion to have, they just want them to agree, and it will never happen. Disagreeing doesn't mean someone isn't open to discussion.
 
Lanky Livingston said:
I don't think the timing has any relevance; I think the battle has been ongoing, we only hear about it when the team is doing well, because that's when the media is covering the team more. I'll remind you that they we were terrible last year. :)

Other than that, seems like a reasonable list. I'm assuming "you" is the proverbial "you" in your post as well.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I think timing is relevant. The claim is that the word has always been racist yet we didn't even start hearing about this until the team was successful in the 80's. Then they lost their court battle and it went away until.... we drafted Griffin, we won a division, and he won Rookie of the Year and started being all over the place for Adidas, Gatorade, and the NFL.

There's one time I can remember between the two, and it's when there was talk of us drafting Sam Bradford and he was asked if he cared.

In addition to that... they're back in court, again because of timing. Because the Judge said the same thing I just said - Why did you wait until now to suddenly realize you're offended? So what did they do? They went and found someone young and as soon as they turned 18 they filed the suit in her name (I think it is a her?)

And yes, the proverbial you :) Well, it's directed at the Native Americans, not just anyone that is claiming the name is racist :)
 
Boone said:
You haven't heard the Redskins state over and over again that the origin of the term was the red ochre war paint warriors would apply to their face before going into battle?? If you apply logic, what NFL team gives itself a derogatory name - the name was designed to bring about an image of bravery, strength, determination... Someone claiming it doesn't mean those things, with absolutely nothing in terms of facts or evidence beyond some political lobbyists claims - I just don't find that convincing...
Click to expand...

The team also paraded out "Chief Dodson" to defend the name, who turns out isn't a chief and probably not even Native American. Then they start a charity, and put a guy in charge who's biggest claim to game is ripping off Native American tribes. So, I don't take what the team says on the matter very seriously.

I've heard the war paint thing, and I've heard the skin color thing. How much the origin of the term matters is probably up for discussion. The derogatory word for homosexuals originally meant a "bundle of sticks," but that doesn't make it any less offensive to homosexuals.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
 
ll him and voice your displeasure
if he gets 10,000 some calls he wont bring up the subject again
202-224-3542 Harry Reids DC number

 
Lanky Livingston said:
The team also paraded out "Chief Dodson" to defend the name, who turns out isn't a chief and probably not even Native American. Then they start a charity, and put a guy in charge who's biggest claim to game is ripping off Native American tribes. So, I don't take what the team says on the matter very seriously.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Snyder is a blithering idiot. He doesn't seem to be able to do much right.

Lanky Livingston said:
I've heard the war paint thing, and I've heard the skin color thing. How much the origin of the term matters is probably up for discussion. The derogatory word for homosexuals originally meant a "bundle of sticks," but that doesn't make it any less offensive to homosexuals.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well that's not a fair comparison at all because that word was used for decades to degrade homosexuals. It's orig is irrelevant - it was used in a different way for a long period of time and there's not a single person that can deny that.

I, personally, have never heard anyone use the term Redskins in a derogatory fashion. I've heard, at some point in time, every other slur I can think of even if it wasn't directed at someone but only used in a joke.

Can't even say that I've heard it used in a joke...
 
You want racism? This is racism: Sonic's Racist Sign About Redskins, Chiefs Prompts Quick Apology (PHOTO)

Notice, it isn't the use of the word Redskin in that sign that is racist. It's the use of stereotypes and hate speech that is. They didn't even, in that racist sign, use the word Redskin as the racist weapon. It was the feed them whiskey and send 2 reservation part.

The name changers are creating a monster, then trying to act like it was there all along. There haven't been, and really still aren't, racist rants against us using the word Redskin as a derogatory naming. There are just people out there throwing it around as fact, when they have no proof that it is used so. You can easily look and see that the n-word was there. Lots of recorded documentation. Everything people try to use regarding Redskin is implied to be there, with no sources.

You want to know why the argument is on shaky ground? It isn't substantiated except by feelings. I'm sorry, but that isn't enough to make whole scale change, you need facts. They aren't there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Help Users
As we enjoy today's conversations, let's remember our dear friends 'Docsandy', Sandy Zier-Teitler, and 'Posse Lover', Michael Huffman, who would dearly love to be here with us today! We love and miss you guys ❤

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top