Redskins in Washington DC? You've offended an entire people with the name, and you're using tradition as an argument? Why don't we just start up a team called the Atlanta Confederates and have the Confederate Flag painted on their helmets? How about the Oklahoma White Trash or the Tennessee Crackers?
2006-07-10
11:05:27
·
12 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Sports
➔ Football (American)
jtownballer: free speech only applies to the government, i.e. the government cannot censor most speech. The NFL is not part of the government and could censor an inappropriate team name, just like a restaurant owner could ask you to leave for wearing something offensive into his restaurant or for saying something offensive. People who don't understand the First Amendment are the ones who usually try to use it as a defense.
2006-07-10
11:18:01 ·
update #1
Come on people, so far you're all exaggerating. I'm not claiming that there is anything wrong with the Florida Seminoles or the Cleveland Indians. The Seminole tribe has already said they are not offended by Florida's team. What I am offended by is "Redskins". That's really the only team name that offends me. I'm being perfectly reasonable here. No one, I'm sure, would start up a team and call it "The Darkies". Everyone would see this as offensive. So why isn't "Redskins" offensive? This is the question I want answered.
2006-07-10
11:27:06 ·
update #2
I grew up a Redskins fan, and I'd have no problem with a name change. It always seemed pretty inappropriate to me, and I'm a bit surprised it's hung around this long. I don't think you'd have many people grumble about it for very long. Plus, it's an opportunity for Dan Snyder to market a whole new wardrobe to fans. I can't believe he's not jumping on that opportunity.
2006-07-11 00:50:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Screamin_Al 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
A played out question, but I'll toss my opinion in.
As long as the minority group does not have a big enough population, those sports nicknames stay. Nobody in the government cares about the American Indian population because they're not part of a huge voting category that needs to be won. They're also not the ones w/ a huge amount of money to contribute to political campaigns. (That may be a big ol' generalization, but I'm just trying to get a point across.) The people who value these traditions (the Indian sports nicknames) are the ones w/ the "important" support for the politicians AND the cash that they so greedily desire.
Unimportant votes + no money into politicians' pockets = no support. American Indians vs. the Fat Cats? I'd wager on the Fat Cats even at -35pts. Call this America, but the politicians have bastardized the concept of America. Believe what you want, but open your eyes & at least question the crap they're feeding ya.
My rant is over.
2006-07-10 12:16:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Hassan56 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
hmm, i like all those names. Last time I checked there was a free speech law. If these names honestly offend you, then you have to be a very sensitive person. How dumb do u have to be to say OH MY GOD! Redskins that is sooooo offensive- I'm called a cracker everyday, so my message is toughen up America, this isnt an issue that should be even discussed, u forgot the New York City Gangsters, and Miami Beaners!
2006-07-10 11:10:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by jtownballer5415 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No they ought to not. I stay 20 miles from the Navajo reservation (the most important interior the U. S. I do believe) and the redskins and the chiefs are 2 of the most widespread football communities among Navajos. the final public do not see it as a adverse racial slur, yet truly the option, a source of community pride. And why not? It of direction isn't meant to be a adverse stereotype. that is meant to symbolize Indian warriors. that's going to be (and is) taken as a supplement to community people. i believe that a huge majority of this dispute is taking position because of white those who're afraid of coming off as racist. even as it does nonetheless exist among the illiberal and the ignorant, the final public of racism is on the way out. we favor to easily quit taking existence so heavily and study a thanks to have relaxing and be tolerant. We should not be operating so problematic to quit a emblem that would or gained't be extremely offensive to a small style of people, even as there are serious issues we favor to cope with.
2016-10-14 08:01:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by atleh 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's also do away with the Atlanta Braves, Cleveland Indians, Kansas City Chiefs, and Florida State Seminoles. In Colorado people were offended by the "Avalanche" name because Avalanches kill people. Lets do away with all sports names and symbols thart offend someone and see what we have left.
2006-07-10 11:23:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ron P 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with the original poster. "Redskins" is a racial slur. The reason it still exists is because the Native Americans don't have enough political clout to raise a big enough fuss.
Gregg Easterbrook, who writes the "Tuesday Morning Quarterback" column (currently on espn.go.com), has mentioned this several times. He also points out that the "Washington" part is incorrect, since the team neither plays nor practices in the District of Columbia. He usually refers to them as the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons.
2006-07-10 12:21:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why only recently are there complaints? Why wasn't the name asked to be removed 30 years ago? Is political correctness these days allowing everyone to cry about every little thing they dislike and sue to have it changed? Are some people trying to take advantage of this new movement to ban everything they don't agree with? I don't ask to have rap music removed, I just don't listen to it and haven't watched MTV in the last 10 years. If you don't like something then avoid it! Maybe others like it, so people - stop trying to take away others rights to enjoy something!
2006-07-10 12:13:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mike H 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No other team in sports refers to a skin color, hair type, political slant, etc. At the time this name was created, there was no sense of it being a distraction, diversion, impedence--nothing like that. Today, however, it is. I call them the Porkskins, Pork Rinds, anything but the name on their letterhead. I wonder which player on that team would play for them if they were called the "Coons", "Spics", or any other horribly racial name. Change the damn thing already!
2006-07-10 18:13:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by XManiac 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are you really that offended by the name.....people pick names for their team that are supposed to scare the opposition....I don't see any of the ones you listed as doing that. Pretty soon the Giants in NY are going to offend tall large men, and the Bills in Buffalo are going to offend a bunch of men named Bill. I mean get over it.
2006-07-10 11:11:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by jpxc99 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hate the Redskins,but even more than that P.C.nutjobs with an Axe to grind.ie You.
2006-07-10 14:33:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by timgsweet 4
·
0⤊
0⤋