|
Pages :
1
[ 2]
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
djnemo65 02-21-2007, 08:32 PM My take has always been that its the Washington part of the name I root for, not the Redskins part.
What I have never understood is the passion with which predominantly white fans oppose a change. It clearly is the the most offensive moniker out there, so if in keeping with the zeitgeist they decide to go a more politically correct route, why is that such a tragedy? The Wizards name change was much worse - because the original name was not offensive and the new name and colors were so ridiculously stupid - and we all got over that pretty quickly.
To people who say I dont see what the big deal is with the name, isn't the inverse true as well? That its not that big a deal to change it?
Hail2theskins 02-21-2007, 08:36 PM My take has always been that its the Washington part of the name I root for, not the Redskins part.
What I have never understood is the passion with which predominantly white fans oppose a change. It clearly is the the most offensive moniker out there, so if in keeping with the zeitgeist they decide to go a more politically correct route, why is that such a tragedy? The Wizards name change was much worse - because the original name was not offensive and the new name and colors were so ridiculously stupid - and we all got over that pretty quickly.
To people who say I dont see what the big deal is with the name, isn't the inverse true as well? That its not that big a deal to change it?
The thing is, washington is typically not a basketball town, while yes there are a lot of wizards fans, this is football country. Furthermore the bullets were not one of the most storied programs in the NBA, pretty far from it actually, there isnt nearly as big of a wizards following than that of the skins. As much as maybe you wouldnt like to admit it, people in numbers mean a lot, and so does history and tradition, and when you combine the two its pretty damn hard to change.
Beemnseven 02-21-2007, 08:46 PM It clearly is the the most offensive moniker out there, so if in keeping with the zeitgeist they decide to go a more politically correct route, why is that such a tragedy? The Wizards name change was much worse - because the original name was not offensive and the new name and colors were so ridiculously stupid - and we all got over that pretty quickly.
To people who say I dont see what the big deal is with the name, isn't the inverse true as well? That its not that big a deal to change it?
In your opinion it's offensive. In my opinion it's not. I always heard it referred to the face paint Indians used to apply before going into battle. I am aware that the phrase 'red skin' was at one time used as a derogatory term, but there could be two different meanings.
But here's the key -- why should one party who claims to be offended always be in the position to dictate over the offending party and force them to change or cease what they were doing based solely on the perception of the one who was offended?
It's the principle that would get people upset if the offended parties got their way and succeeded in forcing the Redskins to change their name and logo.
Can we all get together as Redskins fans and suddenly become offended at the name "Cowboys" and blue star logos? What would prevent the Cowboys from being obligated to conceed to our demands?
SmootSmack 02-21-2007, 08:52 PM Sheriff:
When much of this controversy started about 8-10 years ago, I suggested to some colleagues that there was a simple solution to the problem:
Keep the name Redskins.
Change the logo on the helmet to a potato.
No one liked the idea then; I doubt lots of folks would like it now. But it might stop the focus on the team name and allow people to focus on the team performance - - which is a lot more important to me. :soapbox:
That's the same thing Tony Kornheiser says. Are you TK? By the way, I prefer to have an optimistic, cheery mood when it comes to sports. I find your username offensive
SkinEmAll 02-21-2007, 09:03 PM It IS a big deal to change it. All this pc crap is bullshit. I will never be in favor of changing the name. And its not ONLY the white fans who oppose. have you done a poll on the fans that are white, black, asian,hispanic, indian and whatever else there is out there? I dont buy that for one second that. The only people who oppose this should focus their efforts on something worth a shit. Everyone I have ever known as a Redskin fan, black, white ,phillipino,INDIAN, think of football only when they hear, read or say redskin. Im sick of it. There are truly soooooooooooooo many more things these people need to focus on, not this. I must step away from the computer now before I really say how I feel. Mic Light time out.
hooskins 02-21-2007, 09:37 PM It IS a big deal to change it. All this pc crap is bullshit. I will never be in favor of changing the name. And its not ONLY the white fans who oppose. have you done a poll on the fans that are white, black, asian,hispanic, indian and whatever else there is out there? I dont buy that for one second that. The only people who oppose this should focus their efforts on something worth a shit. Everyone I have ever known as a Redskin fan, black, white ,phillipino,INDIAN, think of football only when they hear, read or say redskin. Im sick of it. There are truly soooooooooooooo many more things these people need to focus on, not this. I must step away from the computer now before I really say how I feel. Mic Light time out.
Native American....
jdlea 02-21-2007, 09:40 PM 4 results for: redskin
–noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.
[Origin: 1690–1700, Americanism; red1 + skin]
red·skin (rěd'skĭn') Pronunciation Key
n. Offensive Slang
Used as a disparaging term for a Native American.
redskin
"American Indian," 1699. Red as the skin color of Native Americans is from 1587; red man is from 1587.
redskin
noun
offensive terms for Native Americans
Something to consider: these are the only results from dictionary.com. 3 out of 4 say "offensive" and not one references football.
SmootSmack 02-21-2007, 09:40 PM Native American....
Holla!
hooskins 02-21-2007, 09:41 PM Something to consider: these are the only results from dictionary.com. 3 out of 4 say "offensive" and not one references football.
Then why did all those native american groups surveyed say the Washington Redskins were not offensive?
jdlea 02-21-2007, 09:47 PM Then why did all those native american groups surveyed say the Washington Redskins were not offensive?
I'm not really saying that they should change the name, I'm just presenting facts. I don't really think it matters what I think, it's gonna change. It doesn't matter how I feel about the situation, I think it's going to happen. I'm concerned about a lot more important things than the name of the football team in Washington.
|