Smithsonian Museum - yet another thread on team name

[CultBrennan59]

Call me crazy, but I think the word Savage sounds more offensive/worse than the word Redskins.

[SFREDSKIN]

If they changed the name to whiteskins i wouldn't have a problem with name. How about the Washington Caucasianskins? I hope they never change the name.

[HailGreen28]

Yeah, like Poser's article. the earliest usage of "Redskin" a Google search yields me are examples of indians like "Black Thunder" referring to themselves and whites as "red skins" and "white skins" non-pejoratively.

The racism associated with the name "redskin" came later, in western entertainment like old cowboy movies. These people trying to sue the Redskins should go after those estates / copyright holders. Maybe the club and we fans should join the protesters in that lawsuit, lol.

To suggest the Washington football team would pick an insulting name to call THEMSELVES, for people TO CHEER FOR, is beyond stupid. It's ignoring facts of the name's origin, it's origin with the team, and current usage, to try to win a political issue (Common tactic for liberals/conservatives/everybody it seems sadly), and maybe a guilty liberal "feel good", or bashing those rowdy football fans, or power trip telling an NFL franchise what to do, or even a monetary gain behind taking away a club trademark. Who knows? It's ultimately just plain ignorant to bash the Washington Redskins today.

Lastly, what George Preston Marshall did with segregation was evil and wrong. But ours wasn't the only NFL franchise to segregate, only the last to change because of one racist, the owner. I'm tired of our club being singled out as if all the other clubs old as ours were clean.

[Alvin Walton]

I vote we change the name to "Youoverbearingpoliticalcorrecttreehuggingpinheads cankissmyroyalassandgosuckeggsinacloset"

[SBXVII]

What it all boils down to is INTENT. Is the name being used to intentionally to degrade a specific person or group of people? And that answer is NO. I doubt the NFL would have let any owner past or present use a name that was intended to degrade anyone or any group.

If anything its intent was to promote or give a positive light to a group of people. They should, instead of complaining, be proud and glad the American Indian is in such a spot light for the world to see.

But for those who seek change and would like DS to change the name so he would get even more money because EVERYONE would want the new Jersey with the new logo and name...... I suggest a slight name change so there is no major difference. I recommend the name "REDNECKS".

The colors can stay the same and most rednecks I know would be proud of the name on a professional team. Pick whatever logo works for that name. Lol.

[44Deezel]

Go back to the R logo, which I like better anyway, and claim the Redskin name refers to potatoes. We don't need to have a potato logo. Packers is for meat packers, but you don't see a butcher as their mascot.

[BaltimoreSkins]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

I vote we change the name to "Youoverbearingpoliticalcorrecttreehuggingpinheads cankissmyroyalassandgosuckeggsinacloset"

Don't bring tree huggers into this.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

What it all boils down to is INTENT. Is the name being used to intentionally to degrade a specific person or group of people? And that answer is NO. I doubt the NFL would have let any owner past or present use a name that was intended to degrade anyone or any group.

If anything its intent was to promote or give a positive light to a group of people. They should, instead of complaining, be proud and glad the American Indian is in such a spot light for the world to see.

Great point!

On CSN last night Brian Mitchell said that if the name is offensive to even ONE person it should be changed and I have to call BS on that. I'm not saying "Redskins" can't be used as an insult, but individual people are nuts and can be insulted by the dumbest crap!
I guarantee you could find a PETA member who finds any animal-based team name offensive because they think it exploits the animal for human entertainment.
I bet there are born again Christians who find any name with the words "Devil" or "Daemon" offensive because it invokes evil.
There are probably extreme pacifists and/or environmentalists who are offended by Jets and Rockets.
Hell, there are probably color-blind people who find color-based names offensive!
(okay, I've been watching too much Parks & Rec; this is turning into one of those town forum scenes)

[SBXVII]

The thing is the Indian head (logo) has been such a great tradition. So if you can't beat them join them. If every Indian bought into the Redskins as being their team and said "it's awesome how the team is promoting Indians" this whole issue would be a different story. One would think the American Indians would be complaining that there are no other teams recognizing the Indian.

I've often wondered the same thing about the Rebel flag. The flag originally was not a negative symbol. It was a symbol to differentiate the North from the South and it was only used in battle. Later a bunch of racists adopted the flag and the sentament has changed about the flag. What would happen if Black Americans started flying the flag? wearing shirts with the flag on it? sported it more often? The whole conotation more then likely would change and those racist groups would not want to fly something their enemy is flying.

[irish]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

This "debate" has been what, 20+ years in the making? Gotta think if it had real merit something would have changed by now.

Goodell was asked about it at the SB and he basically shrugged it off as no big deal. Doesn't seem to be an issue on his radar.

I suspect Goodell shrugged it off because it was something he didnt want to deal with during SB week but I am sure its on his radar.

I dont have a problem with the name Redskins and I dont care if they change it or not, but I do think that the fact the debate has been going on so long means it does still have some merit. Just because something is debated over many years without a resolution doesnt mean something wont change in the future and anyone who thinks the name isnt going to change at some point is fooling themselves. The name will be changed in the next 5 years.

[hooskins]

This goes all the way to the top. Wait, Joe Biden!?!

[jdlea]

Originally Posted by irish

I suspect Goodell shrugged it off because it was something he didnt want to deal with during SB week but I am sure its on his radar.

I dont have a problem with the name Redskins and I dont care if they change it or not, but I do think that the fact the debate has been going on so long means it does still have some merit. Just because something is debated over many years without a resolution doesnt mean something wont change in the future and anyone who thinks the name isnt going to change at some point is fooling themselves. The name will be changed in the next 5 years.

I tend to agree with this. I mean, would a change to something like Warriors really be that big of a deal? Hell, you wouldn't have to change much of Hail to the Redskins to get to Hail to the Warrirors. That might be the only changed required.

I, personally, voted for 'yes.' Half because I'm sick of hearing about the name and half because the name is considered offensive. At this stage, I'm somewhat resigned to the fact that it's going to change and I'm pretty much fine with that.

Does this change anyone's opinion?

George Preston Marshall: The guy that gave the Redskins their nickname was the same owner who was last to integrate African Americans into his team. That's downright embarrassing and will always be a black eye on our organization. It's hard for me to defend a nickname when the original Redskins owner has a history of racism. From a NY Times 2011 article, "As his second head coach, Marshall hired William "Lone Star" Dietz, a journeyman coach at the collegiate level whose mother was most likely a Sioux. It was in "honor" of Dietz, who coached the team for just two seasons and who at Marshall's urging willingly put on war paint and Indian feathers before home games, that Marshall changed the team's name to the Redskins. " Anything that distances our franchise from the beliefs of this guy I'm OK with.

Hogs Haven

It didn't change mine, but I never had a strong opinion one one way or another. I personally, won't be changing my allegiance if they do change their name. I root for the team/organization/players, the name doesn't make much of a difference. Now, of course, there are plenty of names I wouldn't like, but I also don't feel the need to get my panties in a wad just because this is being discussed.

Personally, I don't have a problem with the name, but the fact that a. some people do and b. Webster's defines it as:

noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.

I can see why some people are calling for a name change.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by irish

I suspect Goodell shrugged it off because it was something he didnt want to deal with during SB week but I am sure its on his radar.

I dont have a problem with the name Redskins and I dont care if they change it or not, but I do think that the fact the debate has been going on so long means it does still have some merit. Just because something is debated over many years without a resolution doesnt mean something wont change in the future and anyone who thinks the name isnt going to change at some point is fooling themselves. The name will be changed in the next 5 years.

$100 says it won't

[irish]

Put it in the bet book.

[FRPLG]

What a baffling bunch of crap this all is.