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

It's becoming almost a daily news thing now...the crybaby whiners trying to get the name "Redskins" changed to something else...if I were Danny Boy I'd tell them the name has been the same since 1932 and it's staying this way no matter what!

grampi wrote:It's becoming almost a daily news thing now...the crybaby whiners trying to get the name "Redskins" changed to something else...if I were Danny Boy I'd tell them the name has been the same since 1932 and it's staying this way no matter what!

I think they need to settle it once and for all and prove the origins of the name as referring to the warriors who painted the skin red before going into battle.

That said, this probably isn't ever going to go away.

Just change the name to reflect the derivation of the name to:

"Washington Redskin Warriors" or the "Washington Redskins" for short

This is never going to go away as long as there is someone trying to get their name in the newspaper and their 30 seconds of fame.

Wasn't there some guy on the Washington council that wanted to change the name to something depicting a red posterior? Yes, Redtails...that was it. Doesn't getting a redtail have certain connotations? Can you imagine the announcers and the jokes they can come up with? It would no longer be football but a raunchy comedy routine. Bring back George Lopez. Can we resurrect Lenny Bruce?

Seriously, I remember Dan Snyder saying that the name would not be changed when he gained ownership of the team. I have not heard that he has changed his mind.

I'm actually kind of irritated that this is in the news again so much this week. Literally a bunch of noise about nothing.

So sick of this debate anyway. I kind of wish Snyder, NFL and the fans for that matter would just be honest and say, "Yes, we realize the name may be offensive to a very small minority of people. We're sorry about that. We just don't care about it enough to change the name."

I hate all of the arguments against the name as much as I hate the whining about political correctness.

The name will always be the Washington Redskins. Native Americans don't even find it offensive. Fake outrage and the team should never cave.

HAIL TO THE REDSKINS

The Washington Redskins have not mocked Native Americans by naming the franchise after them but instead honor them. There have also been multiple Native American organizations that expressed publicly that the name is not considered offensive.

Maybe the organization should pay homage to Native Americans to include public awareness, donations, scholarships, etc to Native American organizations. Then maybe the name would be viewed as a positive rather than a negative.

When was the last time a professional sports franchise changed their name due to public pressure and/or political correctness? This subject opens the door to other Non-Native American offensive team names as well.

The politicians that bring this subject to the forefront should focus on more important issues...

I'm indifferent. However, I also agree with the quote below...

Susan Shown Harjo
wrote:"It's not up to the offending class to say what offends the offended."

Chris Luva Luva wrote:I'm indifferent. However, I also agree with the quote below...

Susan Shown Harjo
wrote:"It's not up to the offending class to say what offends the offended."

Well said.

Redskins Reparations wrote:When was the last time a professional sports franchise changed their name due to public pressure and/or political correctness?

Bullets to Wizards?

4 in 5 Americans polled say that the Redskins should not change their name. only 11 percent say that they should.

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

Although 79 percent favor 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 percent said the name should not be changed, and 7 percent 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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ap-gfk-poll-finds-widespread-support-for-redskins-name-4-in-5-americans-say-dont-change-it/2013/05/02/6bb42b32-b345-11e2-9fb1-62de9581c946_story.html

Deadskins wrote:

Redskins Reparations wrote:When was the last time a professional sports franchise changed their name due to public pressure and/or political correctness?

Bullets to Wizards?

That wasn't public pressure. The owner did that after the Rabin asasination.

yupchagee wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

Redskins Reparations wrote:When was the last time a professional sports franchise changed their name due to public pressure and/or political correctness?

Bullets to Wizards?

That wasn't public pressure. The owner did that after the Rabin asasination.

Wow didn't know that. Thought it was a political move.

BTW you guys ever hear of a bakery company called "Bimbo Bakeries"? They're actually a very large company across the nation (not sure if they're international).

I'd think that if we're going after company names, there's a lot worse out there than what we're dealing with.

I dont see where Redskins is any more offensive to Native Americans than the name Giants is to fat people.

I would bet the name Giant has been used more often in a derogatory manor to describe the obese than Redskin has to describe native americans.

While were at it, theives everywhere should request Pittsburgh's name to be changed and shouldnt the gay community be upset with Green Bay.

Thats how ridiculous this really is

yupchagee wrote:

Deadskins wrote:

Redskins Reparations wrote:When was the last time a professional sports franchise changed their name due to public pressure and/or political correctness?

Bullets to Wizards?

That wasn't public pressure. The owner did that after the Rabin asasination.

It was still political correctness.

jmooney wrote:While were at it, theives everywhere should request Pittsburgh's name to be changed

Um, it's Steelers, not Stealers. And thieves, not theives.

I don't know where the term redskins came from but that is no longer important and I will touch on why in a second.

The Boston Braves were looking for a new name because of the conflict with the MLB Braves, they wanted to keep their connection to the American Indians and also add a tie to the Redsox, so Redskins was an obvious choice.

Eighty years ago the term may have been offensive, but over time words take on different meanings. In the 50's If you said a man was gay it meant something completely different than it does now. Back when the Skins first took their name if you said you needed to go home to feed your bitch people knew you had a female canine that was getting hungry. Now if you walked into a bar and said you just had a conversation with a Redskin you would have 100 out of 100 people in that bar assuming that you had just talked to a professional football player. You might have to go through more than a thousand before someone would think you were talking about an American Indian.

So 100 years ago if I said, "I just traded my bitch to a guy for his ass and he was just gay!" There wasn't anything dirty about that quote, but now I will probably get censored for it. So as times change so do the meaning of the words.

skinsfan#33 wrote:I don't know where the term redskins came from but that is no longer important and I will touch on why in a second.

The Boston Braves were looking for a new name because of the conflict with the MLB Braves, they wanted to keep their connection to the American Indians and also add a tie to the Redsox, so Redskins was an obvious choice.

Eighty years ago the term may have been offensive, but over time words take on different meanings. In the 50's If you said a man was gay it meant something completely different than it does now. Back when the Skins first took their name if you said you needed to go home to feed your bitch people knew you had a female canine that was getting hungry. Now if you walked into a bar and said you just had a conversation with a Redskin you would have 100 out of 100 people in that bar assuming that you had just talked to a professional football player. You might have to go through more than a thousand before someone would think you were talking about an American Indian.

So 100 years ago if I said, "I just traded my bitch to a guy for his ass and he was just gay!" There wasn't anything dirty about that quote, but now I will probably get censored for it. So as times change so do the meaning of the words.

I was with you the whole way bruva

For more than three thousand years that symbol represented life or good fortune to dozens of cultures around the world.

Now it has a completely different connotation.

The meaning of words and symbols change over the years. Redskins is no longer a derogatory word.

grampi wrote:It's becoming almost a daily news thing now...the crybaby whiners trying to get the name "Redskins" changed to something else...if I were Danny Boy I'd tell them the name has been the same since 1932 and it's staying this way no matter what!

The name for our team is not changing .. but there are some that view the term differently and they are not all "crybaby whiners"

the term is not and has never been intended or used by the organization in an offensive way

Snyder will handle this appropriately and not offensively

all good points. growing up i NEVER even knew bout the derogatory word and only that redskins were a football team.

of course i want it to remain the same.

but if it has to change please not the red-tails.. that sounds so terrible. give us the warriors.. but then our song would be trashed. smh

jmooney wrote:I dont see where Redskins is any more offensive to Native Americans than the name Giants is to fat people.

This is EXACTLY what irritates about this stupid debate. That people on the pro-Redskins side play stupid about and refuse to acknowledge that the word "Redskins" is a slur and offensive to some people. I'm not expressing an opinion here I'm giving you a FACT. Look it up in the freaking dictionary.

red·skin
[red-skin]
noun Slang: Often Disparaging and Offensive.
a North American Indian.
— n an old-fashioned informal name, now considered taboo, for a Native American

I don't think we should change the name. But I'd love to see fans quit playing dumb about it and arguing that this small minority of people is crazy for being offended. They're not.

They're also not getting the name changed ever and need to get over it. This is just a way for people to get their names in the papers periodically.

Deadskins wrote:

jmooney wrote:While were at it, theives everywhere should request Pittsburgh's name to be changed

Um, it's Steelers, not Stealers. And thieves, not theives.

lol. WOW.

riggofan wrote:lol. WOW.

wut a jerk, you couldn't let it slide like the rest of us huh?

SkinsJock wrote:the term is not and has never been intended or used by the organization in an offensive way

Totally agree with that. Its also just an out of date word. When do you think was the last time somebody called another person a "redskin" and meant it in an offensive way?