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

SkinsHead56 wrote:On the contrary as meeting American Indians is not uncommon for you, you should have plenty of opportunities to use this honored term as you address the people you know.

No. As has already been stated, "redskin" is not a currently-used term. It would be akin to running around insisting on only speaking in the common vernacular of the 1820s.

cvillehog wrote:

SkinsHead56 wrote:On the contrary as meeting American Indians is not uncommon for you, you should have plenty of opportunities to use this honored term as you address the people you know.

No. As has already been stated, "redskin" is not a currently-used term. It would be akin to running around insisting on only speaking in the common vernacular of the 1820s.

Not currently used except for the trade mark on my hat that says 2005.

SkinsHead56 wrote:

cvillehog wrote:

SkinsHead56 wrote:On the contrary as meeting American Indians is not uncommon for you, you should have plenty of opportunities to use this honored term as you address the people you know.

No. As has already been stated, "redskin" is not a currently-used term. It would be akin to running around insisting on only speaking in the common vernacular of the 1820s.

Not currently used except for the trade mark on my hat that says 2005.

Don't be a jerk, it is not currently used to refer to a person of American Indian decent.

Also, to spell it out even further for you, that would be an offensive formulation if you changed out the term Redskin for almost any ethnic group. Most people wouldn't call the term "Jew" offensive, but if you went up to someone and said that you couldn't believe you were meeting an actual Jew, they would probably be offended.

You're right cville! This is constantly taken out of context by insinuating that you might call someone a name that you know is offensive.

We normally only use the term to describe our team. As has often been pointed out (this year and in the past!) this is not used as a demeaning term (except by other team fans!) it is used with respect and love for our great team.

SkinsJock wrote:You're right cville! This is constantly taken out of context by insinuating that you might call someone a name that you know is offensive.

If by offensive, you mean inapplicable, I guess you are right. Just like if I said you were a woman if you aren't, you might be offended, since woman isn't a term used to refer to men.

Exactly! altho, we have a couple of guys? up here that would love to be referred to as ...well, you get the picture! I just would not, in normal conversation refer to someone as something which I do not think they are. I try and not call people names.

I grew up in Fiji and we called the natives Fijians and the people who came to live and work in Fiji from India, Indians. The people who lived there who were white were all called Europeans even though they may have been born in New Zealand or Australia.

One of the best rugby teams in the world is the "All Blacks" - this team is primarily white with a few Maoris and even some natives from Fiji and Samoa that live in NZ!

The offense here is only taken or perceived by certain people who just want to make a "case" out of it each year.


The only people that we refer to as Redskins IMO are the Washington Redskins football team!

SkinsJock wrote:Exactly! altho, we have a couple of guys? up here that would love to be referred to as ...well, you get the picture! I just would not, in normal conversation refer to someone as something which I do not think they are. I try and not call people names.

I grew up in Fiji and we called the natives Fijians and the people who came to live and work in Fiji from India, Indians. The people who lived there who were white were all called Europeans even though they may have been born in New Zealand or Australia.

One of the best rugby teams in the world is the "All Blacks" - this team is primarily white with a few Maoris and even some natives from Fiji and Samoa that live in NZ!

The offense here is only taken or perceived by certain people who just want to make a "case" out of it each year.


The only people that we refer to as Redskins IMO are the Washington Redskins football team!

Ah, I see your point. Sorry I misunderstood before.

All Blacks is a good analogy (I hadn't thought of that, though I have heard of the team).

SkinsJock wrote:Exactly! altho, we have a couple of guys? up here that would love to be referred to as ...well, you get the picture! I just would not, in normal conversation refer to someone as something which I do not think they are. I try and not call people names.

I grew up in Fiji and we called the natives Fijians and the people who came to live and work in Fiji from India, Indians. The people who lived there who were white were all called Europeans even though they may have been born in New Zealand or Australia.

One of the best rugby teams in the world is the "All Blacks" - this team is primarily white with a few Maoris and even some natives from Fiji and Samoa that live in NZ!

The offense here is only taken or perceived by certain people who just want to make a "case" out of it each year.


The only people that we refer to as Redskins IMO are the Washington Redskins football team!

Does that rugby team also have a minstrel caricature as it's logo? Acctually to be more in line with the topic a logo of say a Zulu warrior for instance, or does this refer to the color of the teams uniform. I am not familiar with rugby so please shed some light on this. Thanks.

The New Zealand national teams colors are a basic black with a "silver" fern leaf on the chest!

FYI - The New Zealand rugby team, the "All Blacks" will typically do a war dance called a "haka" before their matches - this is always led by a native (Maori) and involves a lot of gestures towards and specifically directed at the opposing team. This is a fairly unique form of intimidation and generates a lot of response when performed before a match in the opponents country like England, South Africa or Australia. The New Zealand Moris claim they never lost a battle and only signed a treaty with Great Britain because it gave them (the Kiwis) control of their country!

As a matter of interest for a long while the All Blacks played against the South African national team and that did not include any blacks - they weren't even considered for selection - this was always an all white team! Then the opposing teams/countries boycotted all matches until they "changed".

But, we are not going to see any name change here! !

I wonder if the term "Buccaneer" is offensive to pirates?


I also wonder if the term "Yankee" is offensive to northeastern U.S. residents?


Is "Cowboy" an offensive term for a settler?


And personally, I find the term "Wizard" to be more offensive than "Magician."

It doesn't matter whether Washington, Virginia or Maryland is attached to it. It is a racist word period. Are you saying that if the team was called the Washington N-----s, the N-word here wouldn't be just as offensive?

How can the Redskin word be racist if this name is not used at all othen then to address the Washington Redskins.. Do people use the N word that you included.? yes.. they do use that word.. so if a team called themself that name that then would be different... When have you ever heard someone call sombody a Redskin to offend someone....? The N word is always used all the time.. I hear people saying it all the time to offend people.. Just like people use profanity that offends people.. Are they going to create a law, where you can't use profanity...? Because it offends....? I think that just about everything would be outlawed if they were to do that because alot of people are offended by various things... And let me add this... there are over 90,000 fans that feel the same way I do.. The Redskins have the biggest stadium in the N.F.L. You think for one momemnt, that if this name was racist, you think that the Redskins would get over 90,000 fans for one game...? I don't think so.. You think that Joe Gibbs would work for a team with a racist name.. With Joe Gibbs being a Christian...? No way..

jeremyroyce wrote:It doesn't matter whether Washington, Virginia or Maryland is attached to it. It is a racist word period. Are you saying that if the team was called the Washington N-----s, the N-word here wouldn't be just as offensive?

How can the Redskin word be racist if this name is not used at all othen then to address the Washington Redskins.. Do people use the N word that you included.? yes.. they do use that word.. so if a team called themself that name that then would be different... When have you ever heard someone call sombody a Redskin to offend someone....? The N word is always used all the time.. I hear people saying it all the time to offend people.. Just like people use profanity that offends people.. Are they going to create a law, where you can't use profanity...? Because it offends....? I think that just about everything would be outlawed if they were to do that because alot of people are offended by various things... And let me add this... there are over 90,000 fans that feel the same way I do.. The Redskins have the biggest stadium in the N.F.L. You think for one momemnt, that if this name was racist, you think that the Redskins would get over 90,000 fans for one game...? I don't think so.. You think that Joe Gibbs would work for a team with a racist name.. With Joe Gibbs being a Christian...? No way..

Yeah by that logic the new LA team should be the LA Crackers (an offensive term to some and not others), the logo a LA Police dept. badge (honorable), fill the 100,000 seats at the Coliseum, hire Dick Vermeil and call it a day. As not offend, a case could be made for the LA Beaners who would wear a mexican hat logo.

Bottom line I support the team whether they change the name or not. I just know in my heart the term redskin was not originally a honorable term refering to American Indians it was meant to address the fact that the American Indians were/are not white, thats makes it a racist term regardless of how it is used now.

I'm still not sure why, even if the name were racist, Dan Snyder (or whoever) should be under obligation to change it.

Is there even one good reason to coerce them (through the government) to do so, rather than appealing to them privately through letters? (That is, aside from the fact that you can't get your way unless you coerce through the government?) To what does an activist appeal that allows them to force Dan Snyder to do something against his will?

stwasm wrote:

1niksder wrote:

stwasm wrote:For you to say "get over it" shows a real lack of sensitivity to minorities and the oppression they've faced over the last 400 years. Until you understand the Native American experience, or that of any minority, for that matter, you can't possibly understand the pain and hatred certain terms evoke. It's a racist name and you're kidding yourself if you believe it isn't.

The word Redskin is considered a racist term. When refering to the NFL franchise that represents Washington, is based in Virgina and plays it home games in Maryland the term "redskin" is not used disparagingly. So I see no problem with this.

It doesn't matter whether Washington, Virginia or Maryland is attached to it. It is a racist word period. Are you saying that if the team was called the Washington N-----s, the N-word here wouldn't be just as offensive?

Hey Brainiac what part of my 1st sentence did you not understand. Comprehension of what you have read should be complete before you respone.
Let's try this again....
1.I wrote The word Redskin is considered a racist term .... IMO this would mean I agree the word Redskins is considered a racist word. I'm not a specialist in linguistics but I sure I can find a lot of them that would agree also. You seem to agree which is why I don't understand the drivel.

You say... It doesn't matter whether Washington, Virginia or Maryland is attached to it. It is a racist word period.
You're wrong ... the term "redskin" is not used disparagingly it is the NAME/LOGO of the team. For it to be considered racist or disparagingly the term would have to refer to Native Americans in the Organization, on the team, or if the team represented a reservations.
It's the name of our team to make anymore of it makes no since at all (maybe that's why it a off season topic every off season

As far as the Washington N_____s goes in this case it would be all in the spelling.

If the N word ends with a R then it could be perceived as being racist, But if the N word ends with a A then it's open for debate.

I all cases the motives of the Namer/Re-namer must be considered

I'm done beating this dead horse....

Unfortunately I'll have to read each and every post post

REDSKINS FOREVER !! NEVER GIVE UP. EVEN IF THEY CHANGE THE NAME, THEY WILL ALWAYS BE THE REDSKINS

SkinsJock wrote:I grew up in Fiji and ...

Fiji the most multi-cutural country in the South Pacific. Suve has the most delicious collection of restaurants from different cultural backgrounds and other countries, including polynesian of course. They have some of the best curry I have ever had (together with Malaysia). Shopping in Suva is interesting. Having a good time in its beaches (the Fijian resort, for example) is fantastic.

NOBODY is offended there if they are called Indian-Fijians, Native-Fijians, Chinese-Fijians, European-Fijians, etc You get the picture.

Ah! The All blacks. Well, now we are talking pride here. My favourite Rugby team. They are a collection of players from different ethnic backgrounds. But that is not the reason why they are called thew All Blacks. Although it is not clear where that name truly comes from, there is an interesting debate about as to whether the name comes from the colour of their uniforms OR the fact that an announcer amazed about the speed of the whole team called them "All BACKS" but people began to mix the terms.

There is probably no greater historic rivalry in Rugby than New Zealand versus South Africa (although New Zealand - Australia is not far behind). Kind of Redskins versus you know who or Redskins Giants. Every time these threee teams play, I am reminded of the Skins "body bag" game.

SkinsJock wrote:FYI - The New Zealand rugby team, the "All Blacks" will typically do a war dance called a "haka" before their matches - this is always led by a native (Maori) and involves a lot of gestures towards and specifically directed at the opposing team.

Followed sometimes by -personal- challenges from one player to another from an opposing team !!!

Other teams have conducts in response, which might be considered pretty intimidating in the field too. The Springbocks from South Africa actually have this thing about extending their arms across the shoulders among all of their teamates and walking together aginst their opponents. It is so good! Rugby does not have a penalty called "unnecessary roughness".

The rules have preserved the integrity of the game. Something, I fear the NFL may not do if they keep on over-protecting the ability of offenses (QBs and WRs) to score.

Interesting point that the ALL BLACKS was not a segregated team.

Here we go again...

Saturday, July 16, 2005; Page B01

Native American groups won another chance yesterday to challenge trademarks covering the name and logo of the Washington Redskins, which the groups say disparage millions of people.

The football franchise had appeared to prevail in the longstanding trademark fight when a federal judge ruled in its favor nearly two years ago. But yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals said the case deserves another look because one of the plaintiffs might have been unfairly denied the right to pursue it.

The Danny will fight this out in court as long as necessary to keep the name

NOT GONNA HAPPEN, HOW MANY TIMES IN THIS LIFETIME WILL THIS THREAD BE PUT UP.

No offense, but these activists are as stupid as when the breat cancer woman and gays all started kicking and screaming like babies when the Razorback's defensive coordinator Reggie Herring start putting pink jereys on players whoi were determined as "slacking" on film.

Get a life.

Thanks Smithian! We are the Washington Redskins!

This is not "negotiable"!

We are! We will be!

This issue has been around for a decade.

How about the Washington Gladiators!@!

it's getting so old... I also feel the name will never change... but I see another oppurtunity... and all the effort being made again and again... it still scares me..

snyder has a net worth that is more than any/all of the native americans(was that the 'proper' way to say it? ) in this trial. thats all that matters in the judicail system today..... money. case closed.