I know its part of our history but people could definately get offended.
2007-12-02 05:00:30 · 22 answers · asked by thinkin 2 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
100% Indian here don't Bother me. i only hated seeing drunk guys in costume making fools out of themself
2007-12-02 05:08:29 · answer #1 · answered by squay692000 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes and No.
My high school team was the Redmen and our mascot was a big indian...my year book has a big indian head on the cover and at games our marching band would play a war song and we would do the 'chopping' motion in the stands. However, this wasn't done with the native american population in mind, it was done to amp us up for football. So in that sense I would like to say it's not racist.
However, this question was also posted in the sociology area of yahoo, which means you want a deeper answer sooooooo
I think where the problem lies is why the names were given in the first place. Native Americans were seen as fighters, as warriors and as vicious at times (I'm not saying I believe it all, yes I know what they went through with colonization, but this isn't the time to discuss it. They were wronged, we'll leave the history at that). They were also known for the fact they above all else they were a tribe, everything was together. With that said, is it any surprise that someone would want to name a football team after a group of people like that? A football team is supposed to stick together, and as a group 'slay' the other team. Which is what Indians were connected to during the time of colonization.
Today, obviously not many people look that far into it. "It's just a name" and I think more importantly (as it did with my high school team) the connection to the indians brings a brotherhood to the team. While redskin is considered a racist name to call a native american, if it was used in a negative way who would want to be connected with that team? It's used in a positive way, which is why young boys dream of playing on the team and people are fans. It's used for strength, not discrimination. There for I don't think it is a problem.
*we will never over come racism if we allow it to consume our lives. A word or a name is only racist when we allow it to have that meaning.*
____That was for the sociologist_____
___For the Football Fans_____
GO JETS!
2007-12-02 14:26:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely!!!!!
Names like Seminoles, Illini, Braves, Chiefs, (etc) are at least names of tribes or positions within a tribe.
In many cases, Native Americans do not mind the names, but are offended by how team mascots look and act.
HOWEVER, to call a Native American a "redskin" is not much different than calling an African American a "darkie".
(Please forgive the terms- trying to make a point)
Added: Conman255,
Get a clue!!!! The Browns were named after their founder Paul Brown.
Fe47d,
The term Redskin is a derogative term for all Native Americans. It is not historic in any way. Our nation's capital could find far better ways to pay tribute to the first Americans!!
2007-12-02 13:06:05 · answer #3 · answered by Patrick B 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i think real Native Americans are only peoples opinions who should count for that question - anybody else will just say "its not bothering my life so they should get over it"
no mix breeds - im part Indian but nobody thinks im an Indian when I walk down the street
2007-12-02 13:07:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Depends in what context it's used. People started coming down on the Atlanta Braves a few years ago. Aren't there more serious problems in this world?
2007-12-02 13:04:13 · answer #5 · answered by Splitters 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Yes it is a racist name
2007-12-02 13:05:20 · answer #6 · answered by julio_slsc 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think people are becoming too sensitive...the redskins are not called the redskins to prove something against them...it is a team name...in a SPORT
2007-12-02 13:05:23 · answer #7 · answered by Scruffy 3 · 1⤊ 4⤋
If that offends anyone, they need to get a life.
That's like saying Taco Bell could be offending to Mexicans.
2007-12-02 13:08:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
No. If that's that case, then they should change the name of the San Diego Padre's because its offensive to hispanics or the Cleveland Browns saying its a disrespect to ****.
2007-12-02 13:15:41 · answer #9 · answered by conman255 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
no... no more so than Irish, Spartans, Seminoles, Indians
no more offensive than Beavers, Blue Devils, Demon Deacons,,,,, the list goes on, where does it stop...
The bottom line is that these names are chosen as a means of respect for the mascot chosen.... the PC people have gotten way out of hand.
2007-12-02 13:06:05 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋