The Name Change

And you know, if the team was the Washington Savages, with that logo, I'd be much, much more inclined to change the name. It seems to me Savages is the term used to degrade native americans, but I'm not exactly from that period of time

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.

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...

Not really. Because the folks who named the team have stated, unequivocally for the record what the term represented. And it wasn't a general derogatory description of the skin color of native americans.

I'm not sure what relevance of the team's frequently clumsy handling of the 'controversy' is...although I agree some of it smacks of tokenism. Then again, look at the background of the folks advocating that this 'outrage' be set right. Not exactly shining examples of Native American culture from what I've seen.

lol.......NICE...Redskin Nation should blow that number up / too funny

i would call if i thought there was even a remote chance Reid would stick to his word, but he's not that type of person.

I'm only trying to shed light and not turning this thread political by intention. Definitely borderline retarded & Reid's presence is probably closest associated to a herpe.

Lowest approval rating out of our congress, and that's saying something IMO.

Reid has lowest approval rating among congressional leaders, poll finds | TheHill

From fb...
1
Kevin Sorbo Official Facebook Page
Yesterday at 7:07pm
Perfect!


Politically incorrect teams:

I agree with our Native American population. I am highly insulted by the racially charged name of the Washington Redskins. One might argue that to name a professional football team after Native Americans would exalt them as fine warriors, but nay, nay. We must be careful not to offend, and in the spirit of political correctness and courtesy, we must move forward.

Let's ditch the Kansas City Chiefs, the Atlanta Braves and the Cleveland Indians. If your shorts are in a wad because of the reference the name Redskins makes to skin color, then we need to get rid of the Cleveland Browns.

The Carolina Panthers obviously were named to keep the memory of militant Blacks from the 60's alive. Gone. It's offensive to us white folk.

The New York Yankees offend the Southern population. Do you see a team named for the Confederacy? No! There is no room for any reference to that tragic war that cost this country so many young men’s lives.

I am also offended by the blatant references to the Catholic religion among our sports team names. Totally inappropriate to have the New Orleans Saints, the Los Angeles Angels or the San Diego Padres.

Then there are the team names that glorify criminals who raped and pillaged. We are talking about the horrible Oakland Raiders, the Minnesota Vikings, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Pittsburgh Pirates!

Now, let us address those teams that clearly send the wrong message to our children. The San Diego Chargers promote irresponsible fighting or even spending habits. Wrong message to our children. The New York Giants and the San Francisco Giants promote obesity, a growing childhood epidemic. Wrong message to our children.



The Cincinnati Reds promote downers/barbiturates. Wrong message to our children.

The Milwaukee Brewers---well that goes without saying . . . Wrong message to our children.

So, there you go. We need to support any legislation that comes out to rectify this travesty, because the government will likely become involved with this issue, as they should. Just the kind of thing the do-nothing congress loves . . .



With all of this in mind, it might also make some sense to change the name of the Oregon State women's athletic teams to something other than "the Beavers.

Lol, Kevin Sorbo. Blast from the past!!

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

Excellent SS!

And I still refuse to call the Washington NBA team the Wizards. It being offensive to muggles and all.

heh. it used to be offensive to call them an NBA team.

My final thoughts on the name controversy, in something of a stream of consciousness format:

*Words and connotations evolve continuously, this is a fact of life. I don't know if that should matter or not; I think part of it is our culture in America. We are pulled so many ways by so many sets of rules, and worry about offending. We were asked in Scotland if we had any children, my immediate response without even thinking was "we're not married," and the immediate response to that was "oh that doesn't matter in this country." I'm not even religious; being married before children theoretically shouldn't even matter to me, yet that was my response. Really made me stop and think.

*I'm not sure how important proof that 'Redskin' has been used as a racial slur is, but I also feel that no amount of proof will ever be enough for some. I do think some solid, irrefutable evidence that it actually has been used as a slur (and not just 'omg skin color is referenced!') would go a long way. Evidence from long enough ago can mostly be explained away by the connotation argument anyway.

*I'm not sure how important a thorough and all-inclusive survey to gauge how many Native Americans are offended is, because for some I'm not sure any percentage will ever be enough, and for others any percentage is already too much.

*I don't know if we'll ever have an "answer." Life on the reservation, from what I gather, is a tough one in most circumstances. There is rampant poverty and alcoholism and unemployment, and the name of an NFL team will likely never be at the forefront of issues for reservation living. It should be. We as a people and a country should be embarrassed by how we've treated and mostly ignored these problems, and that after all this time, it's what we call a football team that grabs or interest.

In any event, I'm curious to see how far Harry Reid takes this, and also what kind of other controversy he's trying to keep quiet.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

For the record as some might know i am neither a Native American orany type of American, is born bred and resident in Scotland and damn proud of it.

I love my Washington Redskins (almost as much as I love Albion Rovers, both seem to win as much in the new Centuary) the root of the problem wither people like to admit it or not is money, I have no doubt the minuite Snyder or anyone within a position of authority with our organization or the NFL says "yes the name is derogatery/racist/offensive" the Oneida will be straight into court to fill grievance and ask for monetary recompense. Now we can pretend that will not happen or we can shove our heads were the sun does not shine and pretend this is about hurting peoples feelings. The problem has been created because civilized society has decided that every minority has rights that superseed those of the majority. That is not to say some words are nopt racist and should not be dealt with vigerously, but seriously "Redskins".

There is no middle ground in this argument, if we give one inch tose who "demand" a name change will push even harder. You cannot apease them only cave into their demand. I would almost think they had a point if they were at the same time as hounding us, they hounded every other sports or buisness that uses a native moniker or eblem. But they are not, and they refuse to state why not. Here is a guess?

we are an easy target, national even international media (check out this report from the BBC BBC News - Washington Redskins: Time to change the name? if you do not believe me) finds us an easy target and will continue their assault because it easy to attack harder to defend. Every since Obama said if enough people feel offended then change is required the ground swell has grown. But no one has said how many is enough.

I know my words might not sit well with everyone but they are how i feel. But I will try to finnish on a lighter note. Scotsmen are affectionaly known as "Jocks" all round the world. as a proud "Jock" i want to know who gave male student athletes the right to call themselfs "Jocks" are they even remotely related to anyone Scottish or did they just have a half of whiskey on turning 18. I am embarresd and affronted at the constant drunken debauchery reported to be done by "sports Jocks" us real Jocks can carry out those duties on our own tyvm.

Kevin Sorbo laying the smack down!

Lanky Livingston said:

In any event, I'm curious to see how far Harry Reid takes this, and also what kind of other controversy he's trying to keep quiet.

Click to expand...

He's a Senator. That should be rhetorical.

Nick

why is it so many people make it their business to worry about what other people think? other people's motives? what other people find offensive?

what is the schism in their psychology that drives these people to constantly partition social phenomena into perpetrators and victims? why are their psychological sicknesses never examined?

why is it these people are so rabidly focused on how other people live their lives?

why are these people so obsessively focused on legislating their values? judging all non-compliers? using the government, ultimately, to coerce their preferred solutions? power. control. cowardice.

these are the real enemies. these are the people we need to be afraid of.

drumlinboy: very interesting post. you betcha! money is a big part of it!

I would add, at least here, at least now...ideology is also a major driver. these phenomena are as old as the ages. submit or disappear.

Lanky Livingston said:

*I don't know if we'll ever have an "answer." Life on the reservation, from what I gather, is a tough one in most circumstances. There is rampant poverty and alcoholism and unemployment, and the name of an NFL team will likely never be at the forefront of issues for reservation living. It should be. We as a people and a country should be embarrassed by how we've treated and mostly ignored these problems, and that after all this time, it's what we call a football team that grabs or interest.

Click to expand...

Emphasis mine. I am trying to understand if I am reading what you meant correctly. Are you seriously saying that the name of an NFL team should be at the forefront of issues for reservation living?

Shi no Tenshi said:

Emphasis mine. I am trying to understand if I am reading what you meant correctly. Are you seriously saying that the name of an NFL team should be at the forefront of issues for reservation living?

Click to expand...

Sorry, that was definitely phrased poorly and unclear. That's what I get for posting in stream of consciousness.

I meant, those other problems should be addressed and corrected so that the name is a legit concern. As in, we're in large part to blame for the current conditions Native Americans are living in.

Hope that clears it up.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

Lanky Livingston said:

Sorry, that was definitely phrased poorly and unclear. That's what I get for posting in stream of consciousness.

I meant, those other problems should be addressed and corrected so that the name is a legit concern. As in, we're in large part to blame for the current conditions Native Americans are living in.

Hope that clears it up.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

It does. I am curious why your end goal is to make the name a legit concern though. It just shows a bias is all, at this point.

Shi no Tenshi said:

It does. I am curious why your end goal is to make the name a legit concern though. It just shows a bias is all, at this point.

Click to expand...

That's not the end goal. Again, sorry for the unclear post.

I should have phrased that "so the name could be a legit concern." As in, right now it doesn't really matter because of all the other hardships.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk

I think it is revealing that for $200K a year Harry Reid has this much free time over the past year to talk publicly about the Redskins name.

I guess standing up to Snyder is easier than standing up to Putin.

Yep, canceling the visas of the girlfriends and wives of top Russian Government officials so they can't shop for shoes in New York - that stance took a lot of guts.