Washington Redskins

[TechnoViking]

Originally Posted by cairns

9 out of 10 Native Americans as well as the vast majority of Americans think differently.

Please cite a source.


Braves, Chiefs, Senators, Pirates, etc. all describe a position a person can hold within a society.

Redskin describes a race. So a race of humans is a team mascot. It is racist by definition.

Originally Posted by cairns

Other (US) teams that use the term "redskins". Note the high schools in Arizona, Oklahoma and Washington state. Again from Wiki:

Time to join the 21st century and change the name. My high school (Arvada Redskins, Arvada CO) managed to change the mascot some years ago because it was the right thing to do.

[TechnoViking]

Originally Posted by cairns

I am part Cherokee (a very small part- one great Grandmother)

50% of the white people I know claim to be "part Indian". Very few can back it up.

[sammyg2]

Poll finds widespread support for Redskins name Add to ...
BEN NUCKOLS

WASHINGTON — The Associated Press

Published Thursday, May. 02 2013, 3:58 PM EDT
It’s been a rough off-season for the Washington Redskins, and not just because of the knee injury to star quarterback Robert Griffin III.

The team’s nickname has faced a new barrage of criticism for being offensive to Native Americans. Local leaders and pundits have called for a name change. Opponents have launched a legal challenge intended to deny the team federal trademark protection. A bill introduced in Congress in March would do the same, though it appears unlikely to pass.

But a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows that nationally, “Redskins” still enjoys widespread support. Nearly four in five Americans don’t think the team should change its name, the survey found. Only 11 per cent think it should be changed, while 8 per cent weren’t sure and 2 per cent didn’t answer.

Although 79 per cent favour keeping the name, that does represent a 10 percentage point drop from the last national poll on the subject, conducted in 1992 by The Washington Post and ABC News just before the team won its most recent Super Bowl. Then, 89 per cent said the name should not be changed, and 7 per cent said it should.

The AP-GfK poll was conducted from April 11-15. It included interviews with 1,004 adults on both land lines and cellphones. It has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.

Several poll respondents told The AP that they did not consider the name offensive and cited tradition in arguing that it shouldn’t change.

“That’s who they’ve been forever. That’s who they’re known as,” said Sarah Lee, a 36-year-old stay-at-home mom from Osceola, Ind. “I think we as a people make race out to be a bigger issue than it is.”

But those who think the name should be changed say the word is obviously derogatory.

“With everything that Native Americans have gone through in this country, to have a sports team named the Redskins — come on, now. It’s bad,” said Pamela Rogal, 56, a writer from Boston. “Much farther down the road, we’re going to look back on this and say, ’Are you serious? Did they really call them the Washington Redskins?’ It’s a no-brainer.”

Among football fans, 11 per cent said the name should be changed — the same as among non-fans. Among nonwhite football fans, 18 per cent said it should change, about double the percentage of white football fans who oppose the name.

A Redskins spokesman declined to comment on the poll’s findings or to make team executives available for interviews.

In Washington, debate over the name has increased in recent months. In February, the National Museum of the American Indian held a daylong symposium on the use of Indian mascots by sports teams. Museum Director Kevin Gover, of the Pawnee Nation, said the word “redskin” was “the equivalent of the n-word.”

District of Columbia Mayor Vincent Gray, a Democrat, suggested that the team would have to consider changing the name if it wanted to play its home games in the city again. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, a Democrat who represents the district in Congress, said she’s a fan of the team but avoids saying “Redskins.” Just this week, a D.C. council member introduced a resolution calling for a name change, and it appears to have enough support to pass, although the council has no power over the team.

“We need to get rid of it,” said longtime local news anchor Jim Vance in a commentary that aired in February. Vance, of WRC-TV, revealed that he has avoided using the name on the air for the past few years.

Other media outlets have done the same. The Washington City Paper substitutes the name “Pigskins,” and DCist.com announced in February that it would avoid using the name in print. The Kansas City Star also has a policy against printing “Redskins.”

In March, a three-judge panel heard arguments from a group of five Native American petitioners that the team shouldn’t have federal trademark protection, which could force owner Daniel Snyder into a change by weakening him financially. A decision isn’t expected for up to a year, and the Redskins are sure to appeal if it doesn’t go their way. A similar case, ultimately won by the team, was filed in 1992 and needed 17 years to go through the legal system before the Supreme Court declined to intervene.

Susan Shown Harjo, a plaintiff in that case, said the poll results were “irrelevant” because popular opinion shouldn’t decide the issue.

“This is a really good example of why you never put racism up to a popular vote, because racism will win every time,” she said. “It’s not up to the offending class to say what offends the offended.”

Several poll respondents told AP that they were unaware of the ongoing debate.

“If we’re going to say that ‘Redskins’ is an offensive term, like the n-word or something like that, I haven’t heard that,” said David Black, 38, a football fan from Edmond, Okla., who doesn’t think a change is necessary.

George Strange, 52, of Jacksonville, Fla., who feels the name should change, said people might change their minds if they become more educated about the word and its history.

“My opinion, as I’ve gotten older, has changed. When I was younger, it was not a big deal. I can’t get past the fact that it’s a racial slur,” Strange said. “I do have friends that are Redskins fans and ... they can’t step aside and just look at it from a different perspective.”

There’s precedent for a Washington team changing its name because of cultural sensitivities. The late Washington Bullets owner Abe Pollin decided the nickname was inappropriate because of its association with urban violence, and in 1997, the NBA team was rechristened the Wizards.

Other professional sports teams have Native American nicknames, including the NFL’s Kansas City Chiefs and baseball’s Atlanta Braves and Cleveland Indians. But former U.S. Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell of Colorado, who is Native American, said “Redskins” is much worse because of its origins and its use in connection with bounties on Indians.

“There’s a derogatory name for every ethnic group in America, and we shouldn’t be using those words,” Campbell said, adding that many people don’t realize how offensive the word is. “We probably haven’t gotten our message out as well as it should be gotten out.”

American Indians make up 1 per cent of the population, according to Census figures.

Numerous colleges and universities have changed names that reference Native Americans. St. John’s changed its mascot from the Redmen to the Red Storm, Marquette is now the Golden Eagles instead of the Warriors and Stanford switched from the Indians to the Cardinal.

Synder, however, has been adamant that the name should not change, and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has said he supports the team’s stance. General Manager Bruce Allen said in March that the team isn’t considering a new name.

Following the symposium at the museum, the team posted a series of articles on its official website that spotlighted some of the 70 U.S. high schools that use the nickname Redskins.

“There is nothing that we feel is offensive,” Allen said. “And we’re proud of our history.”

Poll finds widespread support for Redskins name - The Globe and Mail

Over the years I've spent a total of about a month living on reservations doing volunteer work for the Apaches in Arid-zona, and with the Navahos in northern New Me-he-co.
Believe me, they have bigger problems than the name of a football team.
And if you are really concerned for them, there are more appropriate ways to demonstrate that concern.

[sammyg2]

Former Native American Chief: I'd Be 'Offended' if Redskins Change Name
by Tony Lee 30 May 2013

A longtime chief of a major Virginia Native American tribe said he would be offended if the Washington Redskins DID change the team name and said society has gotten too "politically correct" and "touchy" these days.
Speaking on Sirius XM NFL Radio's "The Morning Drive" on Wednesday, Robert "Two Eagles" Green, whom CBS notes "retired from his presiding role over the 1300-member Patawomeck Tribe in March," said most members of his tribe "don’t find" the Redskins name to be "offensive.”

“I’ve been a Redskins fan for years and to be honest with you, I would be offended if they did change it," Green said.

Chief Green said his research indicated the term came from Indians, and it is "not a term that the white man created." He said Native Americans used the term to refer to themselves in negotiations with white settlers and noted "we have people in this country that try and gin up problems that don’t exist.”

He believes the term originated when Native Americans applied a bug repellant that caused their skins to turn red, prompting early settlers to remark "that their skins turn red."

He also said there was "nothing offensive about the logo" and that "one of the great things about the logo is that it’s an Eastern Indian, and they didn’t go to the full warhead headdress and things."

"It was never intended to be offensive. I think that sometimes, we’re a little too touchy in our society these days," he said.

He added that the country "has become too politically correct. And you can find it in any number of areas. Little League, where everybody has to get a trophy now, or otherwise, the poor child that doesn’t get a trophy will have his psyche hurt.”

Even though Redskins owner Dan Snyder said he would "NEVER" change the team's name, the Redskins have been pressured by Washington, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray in addition to Members of Congress. Recently, Republican Rep. Tom Cole (OK) joined nine Democrats in signing a letter to Snyder, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, NFL owners, and FedEx asking them to change the name of the football team they deemed to be "offensive."

Former Native American Chief: I'd Be 'Offended' if Redskins Change Name

[sammyg2]

Most Indians Say Name of Washington “Redskins” Is Acceptable
While 9 Percent Call It Offensive, Annenberg Data Show

Most American Indians say that calling Washington’s professional football team the “Redskins”
does not bother them, the University of Pennsylvania’s National Annenberg Election Survey
shows.
Ninety percent of Indians took that position, while 9 percent said they found the name
“offensive.” One percent had no answer. The margin of sampling error for those findings was
plus or minus two percentage points.

http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/Downloads/Political_Communication/naes/2004_03_redskins_09-24_pr.pdf

[cairns]

Redskin describes a race. So a race of humans is a team mascot. It is racist by definition.

Indians describes a race. So a race of humans is a team mascot. It is racist by definition.

50% of the white people I know claim to be "part Indian". Very few can back it up.

50%? Really? Can you back that up?

[biosurfer1]

Originally Posted by cairns

Indians describes a race. So a race of humans is a team mascot. It is racist by definition.



50%? Really? Can you back that up?

No, he can't, he just demands it of other people to cite their sources which Sammy did.

Go ask anyone what a "Redskin" is and I'd bet they will say "a football player in Washington". Touchy politically correct BS is just that, total BS.

[wdfifteen]

This is what comes to my mind.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Generally speaking, those crying racism are typically old white people on tv. That tells me all that I need to know. I like Chief Green's quote, "we have people in this country that try and gin up problems that don’t exist.”

[cairns]

God Help the All-Blacks. Next they'll want to ban the haka....

haka dance - YouTube

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Generally speaking, those crying racism are typically old white people on tv. That tells me all that I need to know. I like Chief Green's quote, "we have people in this country that try and gin up problems that don’t exist.”

...because there is no such thing as a "Native American". There were and are a lot of Native American Tribes, but no homogenous, let's all hug Native American.

The differing Plains Tribes pillaged each others villages with a skill and abandon that is stunning in scope. No quarter was asked, none taken...captives became slaves, sold and bartered. Same on the East Coast. Read "Chesapeake" for gods sake.

I just wish the history of Native American Tribes was told well and honestly, without guilt. To try and tie the Hopi's with the Apaches to the Comanches and Patuxents is sad and intellectually dishonest.

[RWebb]

they should change to a local tribe's name - and pay for the privilege

that is what the Seminoles do

[RWebb]

hey - what about the Minn. "Vikings"??

[cairns]

Speaking of policital correctness....(italics mine):

According to Linn’s Stamp News, the US Postal Service has now been forced to destroy the entire run of stamps based on Michelle Obama’s “Let’s Move” initiative.

That’s because three of the stamps showed children doing unsafe activities: one showed a child jumping cannonball-style into water; a second showed a child skateboarding without kneepads; a third showed a child doing a headstand without a helmet.

The President’s Council on Fitness, Sports & Nutrition had not approved the stamps, but were only made aware of the problem after Nagisa Manabe, USPS marketing chief, asked Michelle Obama to take part in the ceremony inaugurating the initiative.

You just can't make this stuff up.

[manbridge 74]

Name is totally offensive. It should be changed to Maryland Redskins.

[onlycafe]

i didn't start whining when kinky friedman named his band the texas jewboys.

[Seahawk]

Originally Posted by RWebb

they should change to a local tribe's name - and pay for the privilege

that is what the Seminoles do

Every form of refuge has its price, tribes included. Eagles, too.

[craigster59]

At least we still have the Compton High School Tar Babes.

[dan88911]

Originally Posted by Seahawk

...because there is no such thing as a "Native American". There were and are a lot of Native American Tribes, but no homogenous, let's all hug Native American.

The differing Plains Tribes pillaged each others villages with a skill and abandon that is stunning in scope. No quarter was asked, none taken...captives became slaves, sold and bartered. Same on the East Coast. Read "Chesapeake" for gods sake.

I just wish the history of Native American Tribes was told well and honestly, without guilt. To try and tie the Hopi's with the Apaches to the Comanches and Patuxents is sad and intellectually dishonest.

I just wish the history of all the people that make up this great country was told well and honestly,without guilt. So the ignorance about how society has arrived at this point can be better understood.

[sammyg2]

Hay, I was born here.
Does that make me a native American?