Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

FRPLG · 06-23-2014, 10:24 PM

Here's what I don't understand...and I am really trying to "get" this. It seems to me that the term simply is not offensive. It's not used derogatorially on any real basis and it seems when you ask a population of NAs the most dramatic opinion is one of support. There are a few NAs it seems driving this and they don't seem to have any real evidence that the term is offensive nor much real support in their community. Why is this so ignored? My gut tells me this...the term sounds like it SHOULD be offensive. Like a bunch of non-NAs hear the term and just assume "well that's offensive" and then some questionably motivated NA leaders say yes and now the debate is over in their eyes? What happened to discourse? No matter the final disposition this isn't a trivial discussion. An honest debate should be had. The media doesn't seem interested in that.

06-23-2014, 10:24 PM	#11
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 46 Posts: 10,164	Re: Redskins Trademark cancelled Here's what I don't understand...and I am really trying to "get" this. It seems to me that the term simply is not offensive. It's not used derogatorially on any real basis and it seems when you ask a population of NAs the most dramatic opinion is one of support. There are a few NAs it seems driving this and they don't seem to have any real evidence that the term is offensive nor much real support in their community. Why is this so ignored? My gut tells me this...the term sounds like it SHOULD be offensive. Like a bunch of non-NAs hear the term and just assume "well that's offensive" and then some questionably motivated NA leaders say yes and now the debate is over in their eyes? What happened to discourse? No matter the final disposition this isn't a trivial discussion. An honest debate should be had. The media doesn't seem interested in that.