New Column For an Old Argument: Change the Name

[Red_One43]

"DarthMonk"

It's becoming comedy, bro. You actaully seem to understand my points better than almost anyone and after massaging my words for a while tell me you don't understand. There are way too many things to try to straighten out. I hope everyone understands this. It is precise and straightforward without a hidden agenda:

I am not laughing. You are telling me that I am supposed to understand this:

DarthMonk wrote (from the "Petty" Thread):

I am part Blackfoot myself and find the name somewhat offensive intellectually but not emotionally ... if that makes any sense.

No, it doesn't make sense. That is why I asked. Notice that you say the "name" meaning "Redskins." My question of clarification:

Red_One43 wrote:
"I think I get what you are saying, but can you spell it out for the sense of discussion? " (This question was my "first one above" that you were responding to) (Hint - "for the sense of discussion" means I am going to discuss whatever your response might be).

Your response:

Honestly, for the first one above the word "somewhat" is important. By way of example note that when you watch the news you never hear a reporter refer to a Cherokee or a Sioux or a member of any other tribe as a "redskin." It would sound very perjorative in that context. That would be intellectually obvious to almost any listener. On the other hand, I am NEVER emotionally offended when I hear my team called the "Redskins."

You went from the "name" which means "Redskins" to to the slur "redskin." You did that. Who is calling Cherokees and any other Native American peoples - "redskin?" You made that analogy. I asked you if you are saying "Redskins" and "redskins" are one in the same which is what your analogy seems to be saying. I still haven't gotten an answer on that question. No, I didn't get what you are saying.

Here's the last sentence of my response:

Red_One43 wrote:
"So are you saying that we should change the name Redskins, but you personally can live with it? "

That is what I thought you were saying - no hidden agenda- just no clear answer from you. Therefore, I didn't understand.

BTW did I get your dander up? Furthermore, wasn't it you who came on this topic saying that both sides were valid and we "Redskins" name supporters in this discussion were showing hostility to a Saints fan (Oops) who was telling us our name needs to be changed?

DarthMonk wrote (From the "Petty" Thread):

Sounds like a few pretty innocuous posts by oops aroused some strong feelings and maybe even a little hostility.

Both sides of this issue are valid.

DarthMonk Wrote:

Dander seemed to rise suddenly. Seemed a little odd but that is typical thread action too, I suppose.

My agenda was to point out what seemed like borderline hostility. I could very well be wrong.

Look, for whatever reason, you decided to judge us. All I asked was for clarifaction of statements that seemed to me to say that you were against the name - I see below that I finally got a straightforward answer. That is all I asked. I feel I am perfectly legit to keep prying until you either hit the "IGNORE" button or answer my question with a straightforward answer. No one is forcing you into this discussion. Now, I am not going to ask you, what WERE you thinking when you decided to judge us (meaning the ones discussing with "Oops"), drop your opinion on us and expect nobody to respond. Now, that would be comical if I did.

Here is your straightforward answer which you could have given awhile back instead of speaking in riddle.

I'm fine with the name of our team. It is the Redskins.

Thanks for the straight up answer.

PS - Our team name does not need to be defended by anyone for my sake.

"Red_One43"
"Oh but it does and has been in the courts. We all know that this issue will keep coming up. So there will be future threads. I don't plan on starting any, but I will be sure to be in the discussion not that my 2 cents will solve anything - I just love this site."

Not for my sake.

Sorry, I missed the "for my sake." Actually, I am not sorry I missed it. For YOUR sake? Now, THAT - IS comedy, bro.

But if you feel the need, or desire - have at it.

Not only do you want to be the judge and deem us hostile to someone, with a hidden agenda, who was tellling us that our team name is personally offensive to him, now you are granting me permission to proceed on this thread. Thanks, I'll take you up on that.

[Bob 0119]

Technically wouldn't "Native American" be equally offensive intellectually since the indigenous peoples of what is now North America were here before it was called America?

Shouldn't we refer to those indigenous peoples by their tribes (as they do) instead of lumping them all into one category like "Native American?"

Isn't Redskin also a kind of potato? Is that also offensive?

Does this post remind anyone else of a Michael Moore documentary with it's leading questions but no real stance which can be attacked?

[Red_One43]

Technically wouldn't "Native American" be equally offensive intellectually since the indigenous peoples of what is now North America were here before it was called America?

The "Native American" can be offensive. It depends on who you are speaking with. In my job, if I am using a PC term for an individual and they say stop calling me that. I ask what do you prefer. If they say, "Bob." I call them, "Bob." Seriously though for checking the box on the form, it is the individuals choice as to which box to check. The US government and States do not define race. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe Louisiana took their definition of who is considered "black" off the books. They were/are the only government in the US to have defined race. It was, if 1/32 of your ancestry was black then you were "negro" (the term they Louisiana used.
Nobody regulates what you check in the box. You can be any race you want on paper and you can choose to be offended by any word you want.

http://books.google.com/books?id=4dgDAA ... &q&f=false

Shouldn't we refer to those indigenous peoples by their tribes (as they do) instead of lumping them all into one category like "Native American?"

You should refer to tribes by their names like the Seminoles of FSU: however, if the governments put all the tribes' names on the form, we would have no more trees in this country. Let's not stop there - What about lumping all Spanish people as hispanic - Mexicans, Spaniards (who aren't even anywhere near Hispanola), El Salvadorans, chicanos, lationos - get the picture. Here's one for you - a white South Afican becomes a citizen of the U.S. - what do you call him? African American.
Speaking of African Americans - Don't even assume all African Americans accept this term. Becareful calling an Asian person - Oriental. Heres another - you got meet the Asian Tourist Association (made up name) who organized a trip to DC - you go to meet they and the first thing you ask is what country are you from and you get Houston, Dallas, New York, Clifornia - not one person from Japan, China etc - they are an Asian AMerican traveling club. Anglos or caucasians? (which technically includes Native Americans and Hispanics). White? It is the persons preference. Who makes these forms anyway?

Let's change the name to the Washington Cherokees-Lakotas-Pueblos-Powhatan- Seminaols-Oneidas-Cushata-Apaches-Hopi-Commanche-Alabama-Dakota- Muskogee-Wiyot- STOP! "Redskins" is a historical name used to honor a historical past of a people - Even in the 1930's the name was not meant to be used to refer to all Native American people nor is it meant for people to use it today. It is a team name. One doesn't refer to all Native Americans as "Chiefs, Warriors, Braves" just like you don't refer to all Irish as "Fighting Irish" or all Scandinavians as "Vikings." It is important that teams such as the Redskins be respectful in how they represent this history. The indian (darn, I said "indian") head logo, in my opinon, was done respectfully. Every time some people of Native American decent see that Indian (drn, I said it again) head logo - it makes them proud - it is hard to explain how and I won't try on this site. It is one of those one has to experience - not all Native Americans see things the same just as not all Anglo, African American, or hispanic people see things the same. Each person's experience is different from another but they can find things in common. Although there is pain when some fans take artifacts out of context and demonstrate in a historically wrong manner, one can over look that and see the representation in one's own eyes.

Also, I want to point out is if one visits several reservations across this country one will find that Native Americans come in all different colors like people of other races do. One will find folks with skin as pale as any pale anglo person and don't think for one minute that are an anglo choosing to be indian. Listen to them speak and one will know that they are indian. One would see people that one would have sworn that they were black, but once again talk to them - they are indian. They have lived and experienced being indian.
Then you have mestizos ( a term with several meanings of mixed indian heritage) who in the southwestern state are a mix of Mexican and Indian race. Does "Redskins" honor mestizos? It depends on the mestizo person. Does the name offend them? Depends on the person. I think that it is great that folks are concerned how Native American peoples feel about this topic and thus polls in my opinion are a good idea. I also think more people should be more concerned about the struggles of the Native AMerican people today.

Isn't Redskin also a kind of potato? Is that also offensive?

No "Redskin" is not, but "redskin" is a kind of potato. Is it offensive to call a"Redskin" a potato? Next time you see Brian Orakpo, call him a potato and see what he says. After seeinghis tweet this week, make sure that I am not around when you call him "potato."

Does this post remind anyone else of a Michael Moore documentary with it's leading questions but no real stance which can be attacked?

No it doesn't remind me of a Michael Moore documentary - Michael Moore's documentaries genrerated millions of dollars, your post will generate 2 cents (Like everyone else's) and countles smiles, LOLs and some LAMOs.

Michael Moore's questions with no real stance can be attacked and so can your questions - Anyone can find something in anything to be offended. Be ready when the stuff hits your fan for posting such an offensive post

[langleyparkjoe]

Hey RedOne, what's LAMO ? I know what LMAO means though.

[Red_One43]

Hey RedOne, what's LAMO ? I know what LMAO means though.

Dammit! I just offended someone! LMAO!

[fanforlife]

Where I live people are simply refer to as "Native". Not "Native Canadian" or "Indigenous people" just simply as "Native". Everyone seems to be OK with that. Nobody is offended by it. Some times maybe by "the Six Nations people".
I have some friends that are Native & they know how I feel about the Skins, & they've always told me that they aren't offended by the name "Redskins". They understand that it's just the name of a football team & not intended to offend anybody. It's my opinion that we should just get passed this & move on.

[TCIYM]

Well, we could refer to ourselves as "Over-Berings" but people might mistake that for "overbearings" and then we would have to defend the name to people who don't know when to shut up.

[Bob 0119]

Where I live people are simply refer to as "Native". Not "Native Canadian" or "Indigenous people" just simply as "Native". Everyone seems to be OK with that. Nobody is offended by it. Some times maybe by "the Six Nations people".
I have some friends that are Native & they know how I feel about the Skins, & they've always told me that they aren't offended by the name "Redskins". They understand that it's just the name of a football team & not intended to offend anybody. It's my opinion that we should just get passed this & move on.

What makes a person "native"? Is it as simple as where you currently live such as "a Los Angles native" or is it based on where you were born? I was born and currently live in America, doesn't that make me Native American?

As far as I'm concerned we would do a lot to eliminate racism by eliminating race and referring to a person's skin color like we do eye and hair color.

The fact is that most African Americans I know have never been to Africa and the one group of African Americans I do know, who came to this country recently, aren't black.

I don't see Redskin as being any more racist than divisive terms like Native American, African American, European American, or Latin American. Why can't we all just be Americans of different skin colors?

[SkinsJock]

The Washington Resdkins are going to continue to be the Washington Redskins for the foreseable future and there's NOTHING wrong with that

The Dallas Coyboys are more likely to change their name to the Dallas Cowmen than we are


this is a non event - have fun

[Red_One43]

Where I live people are simply refer to as "Native". Not "Native Canadian" or "Indigenous people" just simply as "Native". Everyone seems to be OK with that. Nobody is offended by it. Some times maybe by "the Six Nations people".
I have some friends that are Native & they know how I feel about the Skins, & they've always told me that they aren't offended by the name "Redskins". They understand that it's just the name of a football team & not intended to offend anybody. It's my opinion that we should just get passed this & move on.

What makes a person "native"? Is it as simple as where you currently live such as "a Los Angles native" or is it based on where you were born? I was born and currently live in America, doesn't that make me Native American?

As far as I'm concerned we would do a lot to eliminate racism by eliminating race and referring to a person's skin color like we do eye and hair color.

The fact is that most African Americans I know have never been to Africa and the one group of African Americans I do know, who came to this country recently, aren't black.

I don't see Redskin as being any more racist than divisive terms like Native American, African American, European American, or Latin American. Why can't we all just be Americans of different skin colors?

Bob, you make some good points - yes - you are "native" from your perspective. Labels are just that - labels. The funny thing about these labels are the people that they are assigned to didn't come up with the labels for themselfs.

The topic of "race" and all the issues that come is a complex issue and probably more complex in the U.S.

I think that supporters of the name "Redskins" can agree that the team was not named Redskins for racist reasons. That would make no sense.

Now whether or not, in our history, the Indians should have ever been called, "redskins" is another debate - but that debate shold also include the manner in which the "West was Won." I don't hear "Redskins" name protesters mentioning that. All of that was part of our history. Historically, when the country was expanding people referred to Indians as "redskins." Nobody was on the dusty streets protesting.
The name has historical reference.

[Red_One43]

Now bring us to 1933, when George Preston Marshall changed the name of the team from a name that already honored Indians, "Braves" to a name that references a color of skin of those same people. That name being "Redskins." Tom Benjey, Bill Dietz's biographer who studied Dietz' for 5 years, concludes that the team was named for Bill. I deduce that Bill must have affectionally been called "Redskin" in order to have named the team after Dietz. It could not have been named after Dietz because he was an Indian because the previous name was of Indian reference.

There have been people who have tried to despute that it was named after Dietz, but those are bold accusations not supported by any facts. The only person on record it seems to research it is Tom Benjey.

No racism in the origin of the naming of the team and the name of the team today, Redskins, is not used in a derogatory way toward anyone.

[Bob 0119]

I would not be offended by a team called the pale-faces...

[Red_One43]

I would not be offended by a team called the pale-faces...

Historically speaking - that team is in Dallas.

[crazyhorse1]

I would not be offended by a team called the pale-faces...

Historically speaking - that team is in Dallas.

The name "Redskins" honors the team and the Indian people. That is how it was intended and what it still does. Why would the team degrade itself by giving itself a degrading name. It wouldn't, and didn't. Like all team names in sports, the name alludes to the positive attributes of the creatures or persons so honored. Even the name Pirates alludes to the courage and fighting ability of pirates. Their greed and dishonesty or other negative attributes are simply not being addressed; nor are the sexual exploits of lions being suggested by the use of the name Lions. That is universality understood in sports. The team name Redskins has no negative connotations. Those who claim not to know that are usually being untruthful. Sometimes, they are simply being stupid.

[Red_One43]

I would not be offended by a team called the pale-faces...

Historically speaking - that team is in Dallas.

The name "Redskins" honors the team and the Indian people. That is how it was intended and what it still does. Why would the team degrade itself by giving itself a degrading name. It wouldn't, and didn't. Like all team names in sports, the name alludes to the positive attributes of the creatures or persons so honored. Even the name Pirates alludes to the courage and fighting ability of pirates. Their greed and dishonesty or other negative attributes are simply not being addressed; nor are the sexual exploits of lions being suggested by the use of the name Lions. That is universality understood in sports. The team name Redskins has no negative connotations. Those who claim not to know that are usually being untruthful. Sometimes, they are simply being stupid.

I agree with you about what the name means and the examples that you use. Love your Avatar. I was drawn to the Redskins because of Larry Brown and I came to embrace with my heart the Redskins as my team because it referenced Native American history. I am proud to see that Indian head logo on the flag, the field, the helmets, and on anything "Redskin."

[langleyparkjoe]

Well. So what have we REALLY learned in this thread? The importance of there being an NFL season so we don't talk about name changes of the REDSKINS.

Again, some of you may not like it, but to quote someone who said it before me "DEAL WIT IT!"

[Red_One43]

Well. So what have we REALLY learned in this thread? The importance of there being an NFL season so we don't talk about name changes of the REDSKINS.

Again, some of you may not like it, but to quote someone who said it before me "DEAL WIT IT!"

One thing that I learned that I didn't know before is that there is a biography on William Dietz, the man who the "Redskins" are named for. I plan to order it right now.

Keep A-Goin: The Life of Lone Star Dietz by Tom Benjey

http://www.amazon.com/Keep-Goin-Life-Lo ... 0977448606

BTW, I get nothing for the plug.

[langleyparkjoe]

BTW, I get nothing for the plug.

Nonsense! You get the satisfaction of knowing you shared Redskins related information to these Redskins fans who are 'yutes' and don't know the history. Heck, I didn't know all of this until I read the thread and I'm not a yute by anymeans. LOL

[Red_One43]

BTW, I get nothing for the plug.

Nonsense! You get the satisfaction of knowing you shared Redskins related information to these Redskins fans who are 'yutes' and don't know the history. Heck, I didn't know all of this until I read the thread and I'm not a yute by anymeans. LOL

Looking at it that way, LPJ, you are absolutely right. Ordered my copy from Amazon.com and am expecting it on the 5th of April. I cannot wait to start reading it.

Got my copy and have started reading. It is even a signed by the author copy.

[Deadskins]

The funny thing about these labels are the people that they are assigned to didn't come up with the labels for themselfs.

Actually, they did. The word "redskins" is a translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. The tribe literally called themselves the Redskins. And they called themselves that long before ever having seen Europeans.

[Red_One43]

The funny thing about these labels are the people that they are assigned to didn't come up with the labels for themselfs.

Actually, they did. The word "redskins" is a translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. The tribe literally called themselves the Redskins. And they called themselves that long before ever having seen Europeans.

Well, I stand corrected. Thanks Deadskins.

[langleyparkjoe]

The funny thing about these labels are the people that they are assigned to didn't come up with the labels for themselfs.

Actually, they did. The word "redskins" is a translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. The tribe literally called themselves the Redskins. And they called themselves that long before ever having seen Europeans.

dam for real bruh?

[Red_One43]

But it wouldn't surprise One Star if Coach Dietz himself had suggested the name
Redskins. "This was a way to be a fierce team. For him to give that name to the
team, I can imagine him fighting back in a way," says One Star.
"I could see that he named that team for a reason. So we can go on fighting."

One Star is William Dietz's grandnephew.

http://www.lonestardietz.com/BuryMyHeartatRFK.pdf

[Red_One43]

The funny thing about these labels are the people that they are assigned to didn't come up with the labels for themselfs.

Actually, they did. The word "redskins" is a translation from the French of an Illinois tribe's name. The tribe literally called themselves the Redskins. And they called themselves that long before ever having seen Europeans.

dam for real bruh?

This is a long article, but well worth reading. It is subtitled "A Brief History of the word "redskin." It contains arguments from both sides of the name change issue. One might struggle to ge through the Susan Harjo interview, but I always find it good to hear what the opposition has to say. I found the interview of Steve M. Hokuf a Redskin player on the 1933 team very enlightening on the atmosphere of the team back then.

http://www.lonestardietz.com/BuryMyHeartatRFK.pdf

[ATX_Skins]

I like the team name. I personally don't give a rats ass who is offended.

I am not sensitive to peoples feelings, get a clue natives (the ones complaining), nobody really cares about what you think. It's just really annoying.

Until the "fighting Souix" of the University of South Dakota change their name, the Redskins aren't going anywhere.

Nobody brought up that the Eagles are a disgrace to our national bird? Philly sucks and everyone knows America is the best! I find Philly to be offensive!

Didn't some bible thumper groups have issues with the "Devil" Rays?

I'm an Atheist and I could care less about the Angels...

Why do we even bother to entertain these morons?