Further Proof of an Anti Redskins Bias in the National Media

So in other words he's saying check yourself before you wreck yourself...

Straight 80s style BEYOTCH. :)

BrudLee,

I didn't intend to question anyone's loyalty nor imply anyone was a bandwagon jumper. I don't doubt that Daseal is a consistent Redskins supporter. Everytime I read his/her tag line, however, I can't help but think once again that fanatics do indeed have unrelenting optimism. That is sort of what defines fanaticism. As I wrote elsewhere on the board:


The word "fan" is short for "fanatic." It refers to an ardent devotee, and there is at least the implication that this devotion isn't particularly rational. For me, there is also the idea of "keeping the faith" tied into fanaticism. No matter how dark things look, WE BELIEVE! We believe irrationaly. We believe fanatically. And it is this belief that carries us through to eventual success. Our unfailing belief buoys the spirits of the players as we cheer them on at games. For if they don't themselves believe, how shall they ever be victorious? So, for me, unrelenting optimism and fanaticism do indeed go hand-in-hand. Realistic fanaticism just seems rather oxymoronic, doesn't it?

That why the Redskins WILL have a great season this year and WILL go to the playoffs. I BELIEVE!

Foolishness? Perhaps. Fanticism? You better believe it! After all, I AM A FAN!


From the perspective of true fanaticism, I do indeed believe that it stretches the meaning of such for someone to consistently take a pessimistic view. Such a person may still be a loyal supporter, but not all loyal supporters are fanatics. To me, fanatics leave it to media critics to talk about how the Redskins are losers, perrenial or otherwise. As long as Daseal keeps a sig line in place that pretends that fanaticism doesn't imply unrelenting optimism and belief, I hardly think its fair to moderate me for pointing out that, in fact, it does. By doing so, I don't intend to be disrespectful toward anyone, only to provide an alternative view that I believe passionately is more appropriate to the idea of fanaticism. I have nothing at all against Daseal as a person, I just think the sig line is incredibly misleading, and, quite frankly, wrong.

--Phin the Fanatic

Even with the idea that you can't have fanatic without fan, the two are most definitely not one in the same.

A fan is quite simply an ardent devotee. To put it simply, someone who supports a cause enthusiastically.

A fanatic is someone who does the same, but takes this a step further and also supports a cause enthusiastically but rationality goes out the window.

Daseal is a fan, as are most of the people on this site. And by supporting his cause enthusiastically, Daseal proves he is a fan. Even though there is a method to his madness, he often "keeps it real" but nonetheless qualifies for all definitions of a fan.

The people I find on here to be the fanatics are the ones who would still support the Redskins if Snyder himself shot your dog and burned your house to the ground. It's the idea of rationality that separates the two.

P.S. I'll be happy to change my view on fans and fanaticism the day that Sonny Jurgensen predicts a Redskins' loss for the weekend. It ain't gonna happen, though, 'cause Sonny is a true fanatic.

--Phin the Fanatic

TMC,

What you call a fan, I call a supporter. They consistently support their team.

"Fan" is just a shortened form of the word "fanatic," so it is difficult for me to see how they can have different meanings. That's like "Fridge" meaning something different that "Refrigerator."

Perhaps it is just semantics, but I don't think it is unreasonable at all to expect a fan to possess unrelenting optimism, and I'll continue to express this perspective to balance against those who consistently promote the idea that such a view is unreasonable.

--Phin the Fanatic

Hey, I just go by what the majority view states is a fan and a fanatic (that being the dictionary meanings of the two) because that's the only true way you can really "define" one or the other. It's really not semantics when you look up the definitions. A lot of people can easily say, "Well that's just the dictionary." But you have to have some kind of standard and for me, as well as the majority of the country, that IS the standard, so that is what I base my arguments over definitions on.

You can call them supporters and I can call myself the President of the United States. :)

That's like "Fridge" meaning something different that "Refrigerator."



when i hear the word "fridge"
i always think of a 350 lb black man with a huge gap between his front teeth and wearing a bears jursey.

And running for touchdowns? :)

Funny, I think of the exact same thing when I hear "Refrigerator." :D

--Phin the Fanatic

The people I find on here to be the fanatics are the ones who would still support the Redskins if Snyder himself shot your dog and burned your house to the ground. It's the idea of rationality that separates the two.


Well, fan or fanatic...it really is all the same. Think about it...I doubt any of us here are just "fans" if we devote each and everyday to this forum posting messages about our beloved team and getting to know other Redskins fans. Your average casual fan probably won't devote that much time and energy. So, in a way, we're all actually fanatics.

Supporting the Redskins through thick and thin isn't irrational - just shows a sign of being devoted to the team.