The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

Irn-Bru wrote:As we say every year . . . must be the offseason . . .

Irn-Bru wrote:As we say every year . . . must be the offseason . . .

Thank God for philosophers!

Trying to change the name of the Redskins would be like changing the New York Yankees or L.A. Lakers etc.. Aint happening!

HEROHAMO wrote:Trying to change the name of the Redskins would be like changing the New York Yankees or L.A. Lakers etc.. Aint happening!

Funny you mention that, because the LA Lakers is one of the stupidest team names of all time. Right up there with Utah Jazz and the Phoenix Suns (the NBA has a monopoly on stupid names.)

Care to guess how many lakes are in Los Angeles?

Skinsfan55 wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:Trying to change the name of the Redskins would be like changing the New York Yankees or L.A. Lakers etc.. Aint happening!

Funny you mention that, because the LA Lakers is one of the stupidest team names of all time. Right up there with Utah Jazz and the Phoenix Suns (the NBA has a monopoly on stupid names.)

Care to guess how many lakes are in Los Angeles?

It made more sense when they were the Minneapolis Lakers and the New Orleans Jazz. The Suns? Meh.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

riggofan wrote:I think you're almost right about that except it apparently still bothers some actual Native Americans. You could probably test this theory by visiting an indian casino and saying, "Hey redskin! Get me a drink!"

Wow, that post is probably the most stupid test possible to make that determination. Think about this, is the term engine block offensive to you? Try your test there and see if anyone takes it as a slur. Hey, engine block, get me a drink! You came up with a situation where almost anything you put in there sounds like an insult. Even a positive word could sound sarcastic and like an insult.

If you did that where I live, everyone would look to see who you were talking to because members of the tribe do not normally work in the casino.

Skinsfan55 wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:Trying to change the name of the Redskins would be like changing the New York Yankees or L.A. Lakers etc.. Aint happening!

Funny you mention that, because the LA Lakers is one of the stupidest team names of all time. Right up there with Utah Jazz and the Phoenix Suns (the NBA has a monopoly on stupid names.)

Care to guess how many lakes are in Los Angeles?

It's just because they moved and didn't change. Like the Tennessee "Oilers," only drawn out for decades.

riggofan wrote:the name Redskins is an ethnic slur.

Actually, it's not. There was a Smithsonian Institution historical linguist a few years back who did a study on the origins of the word Redskin, and concluded that it is a direct translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. They literally called themselves the Redskins.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.si.edu/research/spotlight/3_17.htm Unfortunately, clicking on it no longer brings up the article itself, but stops at SI's reasearch homepage. Perhaps you can dig to find the actual article in their archives if you are interested enough.

TCIYM wrote:

Skinsfan55 wrote:

HEROHAMO wrote:Trying to change the name of the Redskins would be like changing the New York Yankees or L.A. Lakers etc.. Aint happening!

Funny you mention that, because the LA Lakers is one of the stupidest team names of all time. Right up there with Utah Jazz and the Phoenix Suns (the NBA has a monopoly on stupid names.)

Care to guess how many lakes are in Los Angeles?

It made more sense when they were the Minneapolis Lakers and the New Orleans Jazz. The Suns? Meh.

There's only one sun. That's what's dumb about the Phoenix Suns

Skinsfan55 wrote:

TCIYM wrote:

Skinsfan55 wrote: Funny you mention that, because the LA Lakers is one of the stupidest team names of all time. Right up there with Utah Jazz and the Phoenix Suns (the NBA has a monopoly on stupid names.)

Care to guess how many lakes are in Los Angeles?

It made more sense when they were the Minneapolis Lakers and the New Orleans Jazz. The Suns? Meh.

There's only one sun. That's what's dumb about the Phoenix Suns

Actually, there are billions of suns in our galaxy alone. But more to the point, there are five on the floor during any Phoenix basketball game.

I think their logo is pretty cool too.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

riggofan wrote:we should just admit that yeah we have a racially offensive name, but its not so offensive that we're going to change it.

There is nothing racially insensitive about it. A good rule in life is to not take offense where none is intended. Redskins fans mean no offense and actually do mean a lot of positive things. We have to stop catering to political correctness. None of the people who care are offended for any reason other then they are looking for things to be offended about. We didn't offend them with their name, but if they want to be offended that's fine.

To the idiots who whine about the name. You are a bunch of fat, lazy self race baiting slugs who have too much time on your hands. You are too stupid to realize you are being led by the nose by a bunch of hate mongers looking for contrived issues to champion to bring attention to themselves and are manipulating you because you're a moron. You are an idiot with no sense of perspective. You are a waste of skin and a waste of space.

There, if they're going to be offended, let's give them an actual reason.

It's nice to see you've become more moderate on these political issues.

crazyhorse1 wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

riggofan wrote:we should just admit that yeah we have a racially offensive name, but its not so offensive that we're going to change it.

There is nothing racially insensitive about it. A good rule in life is to not take offense where none is intended. Redskins fans mean no offense and actually do mean a lot of positive things. We have to stop catering to political correctness. None of the people who care are offended for any reason other then they are looking for things to be offended about. We didn't offend them with their name, but if they want to be offended that's fine.

To the idiots who whine about the name. You are a bunch of fat, lazy self race baiting slugs who have too much time on your hands. You are too stupid to realize you are being led by the nose by a bunch of hate mongers looking for contrived issues to champion to bring attention to themselves and are manipulating you because you're a moron. You are an idiot with no sense of perspective. You are a waste of skin and a waste of space.

There, if they're going to be offended, let's give them an actual reason.

It's nice to see you've become more moderate on these political issues.

I just like that he complains about hatemongers in the same paragraph where he calls everybody who disagrees with him fat, lazy idiots. Nice!

This is the kind of argument you hear from white guys angry that they can't use the "n word" because they heard Kanye say it. The difference is that there are enough black people around to let you know how they feel about it. Most of us probably don't know many Native Americans who can tell us what they think about the Redskins name.

Anyway, it is what it is. I wouldn't support any court telling the Redskins they need to change their name. I just think its embarrassing to see all of these old Glenn Beck fans get so righteous about it and telling Native Americans they shouldn't "be so sensitive". Try a little empathy once in a while.

Though the quote below is partially true (one tribe in their language did call themselves "redskins") it doesn't really follow that from this fact stem all uses of the word redskin when referring to those who lived here before the whites came nor does it follow that whites have long used the word in some neutral/honorable way. Many good points have been made in this thread. Almost any old western movie shows whites using the word redskin in much the same way as I remember nigger, wop, and spic being used in the '60s. Having said that, it is rarely used that way today. "Redskin" is certainly not an honorific. "Brave" is. "Indian" is either a misnomer (from the Indies??) or a weird sort of honorific (evolving from Indios perhaps loosely meaning people of God). Most Indians prefer being referred to as Cree, Apache, etc.

I am of Blackfoot descent. I would rather be called a Blackfoot than an Indian. I would not liked to be called a redskin. Depending on where I was and the tone used I would most likely take if as an insult - mild or harsh depending.

When I grew up (in College Park, Maryland) the first game I ever saw on TV was the infamous "Ice Bowl" in Green Bay. I knew I was a Blackfoot and instantly hated the Cowboys. I therefore loved the Packers when that game ended. Before the merger my favorite teams, in order, were the Baltimore Colts, the Washington Redskins, and the Green Bay Packers. After the merger the Steelers and Browns joined that list as NFL teams that moved to complete the AFC. When the Colts moved to Indy they slid down to the #2 spot and my favorite team ever since has been Washington. I hate the Ravens and the Raiders almost as much as I hate the Cowboys.

I have no problem with the name of our team now. I understand the history. Redskins was probably a bad choice for the nickname. Braves would have been a lot better. Wasn't that actually the name at one point?

Peace,

DarthMonk

Deadskins wrote:

riggofan wrote:the name Redskins is an ethnic slur.

Actually, it's not. There was a Smithsonian Institution historical linguist a few years back who did a study on the origins of the word Redskin, and concluded that it is a direct translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. They literally called themselves the Redskins.

Here is the link to the article: http://www.si.edu/research/spotlight/3_17.htm Unfortunately, clicking on it no longer brings up the article itself, but stops at SI's reasearch homepage. Perhaps you can dig to find the actual article in their archives if you are interested enough.

And in the article the linguist states that he is in no way saying that the word has not been used as a pejorative over the years. He was simply researching the origin of the word.

And yes, the team name was changed from the Braves to the Redskins to differentiate them from the baseball Braves, also in Boston at the time.

crazyhorse1 wrote:It's nice to see you've become more moderate on these political issues.

Unlike you crazyhorse, I've never claimed to be a moderate. In fact I have consistently and clearly stated I am not a moderate. I am aware of that. I have no desire to be what is a moderate today because they have listened to the intellectually lazy siren call of greedy lawyers and are crashing our economy on the rocks because of it. Look around you. There is nothing to respect about American "moderates" and there is no way I'd ever identify myself with them.

riggofan wrote:I just like that he complains about hatemongers

I didn't "complain" about them, I "criticized" them. Buy a dictionary, please

riggofan wrote:in the same paragraph where he calls everybody who disagrees with him fat, lazy idiots. Nice!

I called people who sign on PC motivated frivolous lawsuits "fat, lazy idiots." Are you saying those are in fact the only people who disagree with me because I frankly find that hard to believe. I'm guessing a whole lot of people who don't sign onto PC motivated frivilous lawsuits disagree with me.

That you can't address my actual position and have to fabricate my views isn't a sign you're secure either in your own views or your disagreement with mine. Get more comfortable with what you believe, address me for what I actually say, and this would be a whole heck of a lot more fun

Here is an old article that might shed some light on the team name and logo for some that don't know their history.

I read the work and the quote below makes sense.

I would add one caveat to the 1st paragraph. In his research the author discovered one origin of a use or some uses rather than the origin of all uses. In other words, a lot of (dare I say the vast majority?) those who used the word redskin to refer to Indians were not doing so because some tribe referred to themselves that way in their language which, of course, sounded nothing like the utterence "redskin." They simply did so because of an obvious reddish hue.

As a footnote to the second paragraph, people to this day say "the New York Football Giants" which was done originally to differentiate them from the baseball team of the same name. I wish this had continued with the Braves but no big deal.

DarthMonk

Deadskins wrote:And in the article the linguist states that he is in no way saying that the word has not been used as a pejorative over the years. He was simply researching the origin of the word.

And yes, the team name was changed from the Braves to the Redskins to differentiate them from the baseball Braves, also in Boston at the time.

DarthMonk wrote:I would add one caveat to the 1st paragraph. In his research the author discovered one origin of a use or some uses rather than the origin of all uses. In other words, a lot of (dare I say the vast majority?) those who used the word redskin to refer to Indians were not doing so because some tribe referred to themselves that way in their language which, of course, sounded nothing like the utterence "redskin." They simply did so because of an obvious reddish hue.

I don't think I agree with that assumption. In the article he talks about the word not being in use until the the "Redskins" translation from the French became popular. People didn't just all come to the decision on their own to start calling Indians redskins. It became popular because it was used in print by those French missionaries and more and more people started using it. Europeans had been interacting with Indians for a couple of hundred years at that point, so it doesn't follow logically that the Illinois tribe's name was not the origin for the vast majority. But yes, they did refer to themselves as Redskins because their skin had a reddish hue.

DarthMonk wrote:In other words, a lot of (dare I say the vast majority?) those who used the word redskin to refer to Indians were not doing so because some tribe referred to themselves that way in their language which, of course, sounded nothing like the utterence "redskin." They simply did so because of an obvious reddish hue

If you are looking at a group of birds, wouldn't the first thing you'd point to if possible to differentiate them color? Same with a school of fish? If there were blue and green men on a planet we visited, would you probably refer to them that way first? I don't get how, oh my God, they are more red and they are being referred to as red people is horrible. If a guy were running down the street fleeing the cops, wouldn't the first thing you'd mention if you had to find him fast (accurately, not politically correctly) be his race/color? I don't get hwy that's a big deal.

Nevertheless, if someone does find it objectionable and they say "Wow, Redskin, that offends me." Fine. If they say I'm not going to root for them. Fine. If they decide to picket them. Fine. Their choice. When they run to the government and demand they do something, it's not longer fine. It's very wrong and and they should be just ignored as the thin skinned morons they are. We have to stop using government as a medium to make every thin skinned little baby happy. That's their problem? They can't deal with the name of a Sports team? It's wrecking their lives, causing them to be unable to live a happy life because someone used a name that offends them? Tissue? Cry baby...

redskins14ru wrote:How many football teams are called the redskins?? I played for the redskins when iwas young .. We were the redskins and had the same helmets as Washington..

I was driving though Arizona this past July 2010 and the highway went through a reservation. I was surprised to see painted in huge letters on the roof of the High School - "HOME OF THE REDSKINS" and next to it was the huge logo very similar to the Washington Redskins Indian head.

Red_One43 wrote:

redskins14ru wrote:How many football teams are called the redskins?? I played for the redskins when iwas young .. We were the redskins and had the same helmets as Washington..

I was driving though Arizona this past July 2010 and the highway went through a reservation. I was surprised to see painted in huge letters on the roof of the High School - "HOME OF THE REDSKINS" and next to it was the huge logo very similar to the Washington Redskins Indian head.

OMG, a reservation of racist Indians. That offends me. I'm offended! I demand a lawyer and government do something!

KazooSkinsFan wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

redskins14ru wrote:How many football teams are called the redskins?? I played for the redskins when iwas young .. We were the redskins and had the same helmets as Washington..

I was driving though Arizona this past July 2010 and the highway went through a reservation. I was surprised to see painted in huge letters on the roof of the High School - "HOME OF THE REDSKINS" and next to it was the huge logo very similar to the Washington Redskins Indian head.

OMG, a reservation of racist Indians. That offends me. I'm offended! I demand a lawyer and government do something!

LMAO!

KazooSkinsFan wrote: That you can't address my actual position and have to fabricate my views isn't a sign you're secure either in your own views or your disagreement with mine. Get more comfortable with what you believe, address me for what I actually say, and this would be a whole heck of a lot more fun

Give me a break. You wrote what you wrote. You didn't address any issues, you called everybody who didn't agree with you idiots, fat and lazy. Let me put your exact words here for you again:

To the idiots who whine about the name. You are a bunch of fat, lazy self race baiting slugs who have too much time on your hands. You are too stupid to realize you are being led by the nose by a bunch of hate mongers looking for contrived issues to champion to bring attention to themselves and are manipulating you because you're a moron. You are an idiot with no sense of perspective. You are a waste of skin and a waste of space.

I don't see alot nuance or position in there. Why not just own what you wrote instead of complaining that I misinterpreted it?

riggofan wrote:

KazooSkinsFan wrote: That you can't address my actual position and have to fabricate my views isn't a sign you're secure either in your own views or your disagreement with mine. Get more comfortable with what you believe, address me for what I actually say, and this would be a whole heck of a lot more fun

Give me a break. You wrote what you wrote. You didn't address any issues, you called everybody who didn't agree with you idiots, fat and lazy. Let me put your exact words here for you again:

To the idiots who whine about the name. You are a bunch of fat, lazy self race baiting slugs who have too much time on your hands. You are too stupid to realize you are being led by the nose by a bunch of hate mongers looking for contrived issues to champion to bring attention to themselves and are manipulating you because you're a moron. You are an idiot with no sense of perspective. You are a waste of skin and a waste of space.

I don't see alot nuance or position in there. Why not just own what you wrote instead of complaining that I misinterpreted it?

Dude, even in your quote you emphasize my point. I criticized the people who file frivolous lawsuits fat, lazy...

You continue to state I said everyone who disagrees with me is fat, lazy.. I'd be glad to discuss the issue with you. That's not going to happen if you continue to misrepresent what I said. I never said anything about everyone who disagrees with me. Here, I'll highlight it for you. It's in the quote you cited. Hello.

To the idiots who whine about the name

If you want to say moron, everyone who whines about the name isn't fat and lazy, that's fine. But I'm not having a rational discussion with the lie I said "everyone who disagrees with me." Show me a quote that says that. My quote that you brought forward says what I say I said. Unless you're seriously saying that the only people who disagree with me happen to be people who whine about the name "Redskins." I seriously doubt that. In fact, there are lots of people on this site who actually like the name Redskins and disagree with me on a wide range of issues.