AnonEmouse
06-08-2020, 09:57 AM
Just the viewpoint from an educated Brit with a mixed race family. Don't shoot me down, these are just musings, and as I'm a) not an American and b) I picked the Skins when the sport became popular in the UK, I have less of a vested interest.
I can't help thinking this is a minority of parties stirring the pot up every year or so. I mean, if you want to get into semantics and imagery, maybe the retort is "well rename/image the Patriots then too?". I mean you can easily argue that their name and logo (especially the old one) implied that only white men can be patriots. I don't believe that was the intent but it's a valid argument.
Having spent nearly a day next to a blue collar native American on a Greyhound bus discussing it among a few topics, I got the distinct impression he felt that most NA's would suggest they have far more/bigger issues than the naming of one sports team. If I recall, and it was quite a while ago, he said that maybe if there was a mass protest or the like then they should change it, but he would rather the effort go into improving job opportunities etc. than changing a brand name.
Unlike Rocnrik, I'd still follow the team, but I can see both sides of the coin. It can be construed as derogatory in a historical context, but it can also be construed as celebrating a people that should be proud of their heritage that was all but destroyed. If they did change the name, I'd have no issue as long as the new name carried that same message of pride in a culture rich in heritage.
I can't help thinking this is a minority of parties stirring the pot up every year or so. I mean, if you want to get into semantics and imagery, maybe the retort is "well rename/image the Patriots then too?". I mean you can easily argue that their name and logo (especially the old one) implied that only white men can be patriots. I don't believe that was the intent but it's a valid argument.
Having spent nearly a day next to a blue collar native American on a Greyhound bus discussing it among a few topics, I got the distinct impression he felt that most NA's would suggest they have far more/bigger issues than the naming of one sports team. If I recall, and it was quite a while ago, he said that maybe if there was a mass protest or the like then they should change it, but he would rather the effort go into improving job opportunities etc. than changing a brand name.
Unlike Rocnrik, I'd still follow the team, but I can see both sides of the coin. It can be construed as derogatory in a historical context, but it can also be construed as celebrating a people that should be proud of their heritage that was all but destroyed. If they did change the name, I'd have no issue as long as the new name carried that same message of pride in a culture rich in heritage.