Last summer, if you remember, the US Patent Office cancelled the Redskins trademark due to the offensive nature of name. The NFL team vowed to take it to the courts to battle it out. Well, yesterday the first battle was fought and the franchise lost. A federal court judge ruled yesterday that the trademark should remain cancelled due to the disparaging nature of the moniker to Native Americans.
This does not prevent the team from continuing the use of the name, and they can even sue others for trademark infringement, but without the federal protection that comes from having a registered federal trademark, they will have difficulty in winning any case that goes to trial.
The team has vowed to appeal, but it is starting to look like they are fighting an uphill battle they will inevitably lose. My guess is that this eventually goes to the Supreme Court, and considering some of the most recent rulings going to the they have in that Court, I'm not sure the team will have enough votes to win.
Comments
We had a thread about the Redskins name a while back and it got nasty quick and was a total sh!tshow by the end of the 300+ comments. Please avoid anything like that this time around. I know it's the offseason and we're bored, but after the tension in the De'Andre Johnson thread, please be mindful of respectful dialogue here. I know this is a touchy subject.
If anyone wants to reread that old thread, it is linked through the word 'cancelled' above. But please, continue the ongoing dialogue in this thread.
I think HB is profiling.
I should have seen it sooner! HB was saying even back then, no standing and no shouting in the stands! The rules are you just have to sit and watch politely, or you'll get kicked out.
Damn. Guess I can't go to games, then.
Hokiebird is in the wrong colored shirt now. Rhino Services is now the security detail for Virginia Tech events and from my understanding, they will have different colored shirts specifying what areas they work. The standard uniform is grey though. They are hiring, if any students/people in the area are interested in a part-time job.
Hey VTGM, how come I have such a difficult time up voting your and NavyMC posts??? Literally.
Not sure. I've heard others have this problem, too, and somehow I'm always involved :) Are you on a regular computer, or mobile device?
Both have Twitter handle follow buttons. Does this happen with any others with their Twitter in the sig?
I was suspecting that. I know a few people do it. Could remove it and try, but given that few people have indicated problems, I'm wondering if it's something device- or browser-specific, potentially in handling that script.
This last time it was the same deal...could not reply/leg just you...but it was a longer thread and by the time I'd gotten further down the page, it was working again. Strange. iPhone 4 w/latest updates. Working fine right now.
Intermittent problems from you and McGruber on different devices, but both which run iOS suggests an iOS compatibility issue. Weird. I'll defer to Joe for any possible problems; I don't know what's under the hood of TKP.
I believe it's a team of draft animals of some sort. Likely on some kind of exercise equipment. Oxen on Ellipticals?
Must be. With the quality of the content and community on the site, they are definitely gettin' after it.
Mobile. iPad v 2. And it's not ALL the time, but most of the time.
let's go ahead and get this out there while we're at it:
Let me tell you what's really offensive. The misspelling of "revocation" in the title.
Sorry but I had to point it out and I like giving Alum07 a hard time.
Its what ya get when you type it on a phone.... mah bad. I'll fix
I love the Redskins.
I've loved them since I was born, I rooted for the team before I understood what race is, much less racism.
I have a hard time putting into words what I'm trying to say here, but I'll give it a shot.
I truly wish that tomorrow I would wake up and no one would find the name offensive. I don't want the name/mascot/colors to be changed...even though I know that is 100% what should be done.
When I think of the name "Redskins", I don't think of anything racist even though I know it is. That doesn't mean I buy into any of the BS that the team is trying to feed us, but I simply think of my childhood. I think of sitting in front of the TV with my dad and cheering for Darrell Green and Brian Mitchell. I think of listening to Sunny and Sam while the TV was turned down. I think of the division championship in 1999, the miracle 5-0 run in 2005 and RGIII's incredible rookie year.
That being said, its not about me. Its football for god's sake. The name is offensive to a lot of people and its unquestionably racist.
Dan Snyder is an awful human being and he'll fight this until the bitter end, but this is a battle he's not going to win.
It should be changed, period.
I grew up thinking of "Redskins" as the name of a football team. It wasn't until much later that I even broke it down to "red" and "skin" to even think about what it means, even with the logo.
All this "debate" and "controversy" is doing is putting the derogatory aspects of the name front and center. If folks just let it be, then we could have entire generations come through only knowing the word as the name of a football team. And I'd be a little more sympathetic if it didn't look like another case of people trying to be offended on behalf of other people that they think might be offended.
Dude I agree with you 100%. I love the team and really wish it wasn't offensive. But it is. My vote for the name change is The Hogs. At least the Hoggettes would still make sense.
Regarding Dan "Fire" Snyder's views on racism, just look at Six Flags' "Charlie Chang" or whatever that horrible commercial character's name was during his tenure on the board there.
Washington Warthogs does have some alliterative potential.
I would much rather stick with the native american theme if the name changed. I wish they could be the washington braves
No, no, a million times no. I want some originality with my team names. Washington Warpath? If, as you say, they stick with the native theme.
That's the first time I have heard that one. I like it
Washington Redcorns?
OOH OOH!
Washington War Hogs! (has me thinking about this and this)
Washington Warriors (meh, its not the worst but still the pig theme is better)
Washington Warheads (this is terrible, admittedly, b/c the mascot would be an ICBM)
I personally lean towards something like the "Washington Lying Politicians," "Washington Corrupt Judges," or something else like that. If the government is going to essentially force you to change your team name, you might as well change it to something that takes a shot at the government.
Washington Bureaucrats. They were really good a long time ago, but now do just enough to not get transferred to a crappier city in another state.
DC Dopers. They'd get rich on the merchandise, T shirt and hat concession alone.
How about the Bullets?
Is the mascot a pot farmer?
Now you're waterin' the patch!
The change is inevitable. I wish somebody other than Snyder (with more charisma/understanding of fans) would be in charge of it. Unfortunately, I think we're going to end up with something incredibly lame.
Can't do a whole lot worse than the Wizards.
Jay Leno - "The washington bullets have changed their name to something less associated with violence and crime. So from here on, they'll just be known as the bullets."
This gave me a good laugh. Leg for you
Long live the redskins.. This is close to what I wrote in the last thread:
It would be a shame for this to become precedent, because the name redskin was first, originally, used as a self identifier by Native Americans. I find it kind of sucky that because it was then used as a racial slur sometime after that, it should be changed.
That means we could turn any word into a racial slur by simply being offended by it.
This is also very similar to that irritating story I saw on facebook the other day about this lady at old navy crying her self to sleep in her car because a young girl told her mother that her and her friend could fit into this specific shirt, and her mom said, "You're right, that shirt is huge". The lady got all offended because she was bigger, and decided to make a twitter post about how proud she was to look fierce in this shirt, and that people shouldn't fat shame others.
What is the world coming to?! sorry if this seems rushed, have a huge meeting to present at in 14 minutes.
"Huge" meeting? I'm sure you'll look fierce.
I think where the true momentum for this is coming from (and just to get it out there, the process to get this team to change its name has been going on for 20 years now, its just that it finally got major political backing over the last few) is that, as a society, we're realizing that just because something in its original design or intent wasn't massively offensive to a group of people, it doesn't mean that it hasn't developed into being so.
You're right, any word can develop into a racial slur if its use eventually becomes so.
I will take issue with your comparison that someone with a weight issue being offended by a girl saying a shirt is so big being comparable to a Native American being offended by the team name. I saw that article, and that story was ridiculous, and I'm not sure its going viral for the reasons in the article. Fat shaming is bad... really bad, but it is not on par with racial issues. You can control your weight, you cannot control your race (despite what Michael Jackson tried to do).
Youre right, I didn't mean the issues were comparable.. I really mean these stories make me feel similar.
As to your massively offensive comment, I've heard more white people call for the name change than native american associations, although I have not been following it for 20 years.
Per this article, that there are 62 high schools with the name "Redskins". A couple that are dominantly Native American.
Like HammerTime, I've been a longtime fan, and never thought of the word in relation to race. I guess I'm just confused. How is the word "redskin" akin to the n-word if 62 high schools are using it as a mascot. I can safely say that 0 use the n-word, w-word, c-word, k-word, etc as a mascot. How does the cleaveland indian organization get away with not only that goofy looking mascot, but the fact that they aren't even using the right name (Indian vs. Native American). And yet we fund these high schools.
In my lifetime, I've never heard it used racially. I've head it used negatively only by NFC east team fans (still not racially).
So I present 2 thoughts:
1. If the word is offensive, then do the same thing that you're doing with the confederate flag: remove it from all public buildings (schools included). End it with the determination that a racial slur deserves
2. Is it possible that a word that may have been thought as incorruptable has now taken on a new, non-offensive meaning? Probably not, but maybe. Maybe the next generation, as a whole, will never think of it as anything more than a football team.
I also don't count on Snyder doing anything positive...ever
Once the name is changed at all those high school, I'll relent and agree that the Washington Redskins should change their name. Until that happens, Redskins for life.
am I the only one morbidly curious as to what all these are? I mean, I'm pretty sure I know what the n-word is, but the rest I can only guess. I guess that makes me lacking in the racial slurs vocabulary department
yeah same here...I'm at a total loss on w-word and k-word. I have a guess for c-word but even then it might be a bit of a stretch....n-word I'm pretty sure I know which one they're referring to. I really want to know what the other words are but I'm also afraid to ask
K-work is probably a slur against Jews. I won't say it here, but there was an issue of Wolverine that was recalled because the word "killer" had been replaced with that word -- which is literally the only reason I know that word exists, and is a slur. (Link, for anyone who would like to figure it out: http://www.recalledcomics.com/Wolverine131Recalled.php)
Perhaps the w-word is the one against Italians...a acronym for WithOut Papers.
I'm guessing the w-word is the slur about Latinos that Carlos Mencia uses over and over in his stand up acts.
I think that particular W word applies to polish people not Italians, but if we can tell it can't be that offensive
c-word is cavalier. It's the worst thing you could call a VT fan.
Cavalier was actually a derogatory term used in the 1600s.
which is why i find this whole thing silly
congrats all, you got 'em.
summary of your argument:
"All these other sports teams that have racist names, so the pro football team in Washington DC should be allowed to have a racist name too"
Not convincing.
incorrect summary.
I simply posed the question of how BLATENTLY racist could "redskins" be if so many institutions adopted it as a mascot. Is it ambiguously racist? Maybe. Could the term have actually evolved into a positive term? Maybe. I don't really know. Its a huge grey area, but I think you've grossly oversimplified my previous statements.
All I'm going to say is that this world is becoming so PC that:
That being said..
Edit: Out of this conversation, that is, not the planet...yet...
My "PC" rule of thumb:
If it offends one person's sensibilities, who gives a shit?
If it is degrading or derogatory to any race, creed, color, ethnicity, sexual orientation or physical/mental handicap, then it needs to go.
Also, meanings, context and connotation change over time as language is an organic thing. What wasn't considered derogatory in its original context can come to be seen as such naturally over time via association. The swastika was used for centuries as a religious symbol by Hindus and other faiths.
As an ex- member of the Redskins executive team, this was a tough thing for me. I spoke with Mr. Cooke about this before some of our meetings with several Native American representatives and he stated there was a couple of things he'd never do, "I'll never change the name of the Redsksin and I'll never get rid of the half-time band". He at least listened to what the Native Americans had to say and his belief still stood that the name was not racist. It's also important to remember he was 70+ yrs old at the time and times were different. As for me, I believe in the first amendment, but as a non-minority, I can't even comprehend how it would feel to be suppressed or what the feeling would be like to have something I believe to be a slur put up as someone's mascot and I remember one Native American used that saying- "we're not mascots", and that resonates with me. Ultimately, the NFL is an industry, has an image it wants and needs to uphold in order to keep the machine going. This issue IS a PR problem no matter what side anyone wants to take, and ultimately, the NFL WILL step in and pressure Douche Snyder to change the name because it's bad for the NFL image. The end game will be that Dan, the NFL, and the players (they get proceeds from licensing) will all make more money off the name change- a group of Native Americans will be satisfied with the result, others will bitch and bellyache for a while, and once the ball is kicked it won't make a bit of difference.
And, in the end, even if the courts delay a final decision, this is where the true change will come from. The NFL is all about its image, and right now this team name controversy is causing them issues. It really won't be long before someone like John Oliver does an expose on the situation, and the public starts to put pressure on advertisers to pull their money from the NFL until its changed. This will happen, its inevitable at this point. Once the NFL starts to lose money directly because of this situation, the change will be swift and permanent.
Considering the door is open for retailers to make merchandise with the name and logo right now because the franchise lacks trademark protection, I'm actually surprised we haven't already seen more movement towards an official name change.
Companies can't do that until the entire appeals process has been exhausted. At least that's what I've read.
The Daily Show already did this and it made the fans clinging to the name look ridiculous. The fans that were ardent defenders lost their charisma when the reporter put the Native American focus group and the Redskins fan focus group face-to-face.
I could get behind the Washington Warriors
I really like that name too. I don't even have a problem with the fact NBA team Golden State has the same moniker. It really rolls off the tongue nice. Another good name idea is the Washington All-Americans http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/a-new-name-for-the-redskins-108314.html#.VZ6yr03bLcs
Are they allowed to be the warriors? I thought they wouldn't be able to copy another pro team's name.
did anyone tell the cardinals or the giants that?
I didn't know if maybe the rules had changed and those were grandfathered in
I am just guessing here, but I think they would be allowed to do that because the name "Warriors" isn't what would be trademarked/registered...it's the full name of "Golden State Warriors". So "Washington Warriors" would be it's own trademark.
I lived in the DC area my whole childhood. Now I live out west and right now I am in Navajo territory. I saw a Navajo girl on Tuesday wearing a Redskins lanyard and shirt. Yesterday at the casino I asked dealers and people I was playing with what they thought of the controversy, the most common response was "What controversy?" This is an "issue" that people who aren't even NA have decided is an issue.
Also, just to be that guy, Cheesehead is a trademarked name that is considered a racist term for Dutch people.
Just because some members of one tribe have no issue, it's a non-issue for native Americans as a whole? That's a stretch. I know some people of NA ancestry who do take offense. The objection need not be unanimous.
It's a small sampling, but it proves what some polls have already shown
It's not a sampling, it's an anecdote.
Back when Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation, there were a sizeable percentage (a definite minority, but a notable number nonetheless) of slaves that didn't want to be freed. The thought of freedom terrified them. Some refused to leave the plantations out of fear and uncertainty about how to actually be free men and women.
Some things can't and shouldn't be decided by opinion polls.
It is a sampling. Not a particularly insightful one in terms of the opinions of Native Americans as a whole but it is still a sampling.
"Sampling" requires a standardized methodology to be implemented for data collection. That wasn't done here. It was an anecdote.
"Sampling is the process of selecting units (e.g., people, organizations) from a population of interest "
And, if not done correctly, skews the results such that they are unreliable or completely wrong. This sample is "people I ran into at a casino." It's a "sample" in a colloquial sense, but not a scientifically or statistically relevant one for making any broad statement beyond, "people I met in the casino were generally of a given opinion."
"Not a particularly insightful one in terms of the opinions of Native Americans as a whole"
I didn't say it was representative of Native Americans
I'm really not disputing the interpretation of the issue; I'm merely disagreeing with your oversimplification of what good sampling is.
No, but OP did, which I disputed. There's no research value in the casino anecdote in terms of drawing conclusions worth a damn, so I feel okay saying it's not a sampling in the sense that the social sciences use the term.
It is statistically a convinence sample. I don't appreciate you trying to prove a point by disputing the term he used. It is unnecessary. You made a valid point with your comparison to slavery opinion polls so there is no reason to dispute his use language he used.
I'm not going to pick sides here but there are differences between Native Americans and the Dutch...
for one thing, I don't recall the U.S. stealing land from, murdering, raping and pillaging the Dutch...
I guess what I'm saying is that you have a point with the Cheeseheads but there is a whole lot less historical context there
Correct, and I get that. My point on that was more on the legal side of things.
yeah I know where you were going there...my point is that this is a social issue, not a legal one
I agree there are definitely differences between the Dutch and the Native Americans, the main one being over the whole Manhattan real estate fraud scam.
As far as the Redskin controversy, I'm still behind the idea of renaming them the "Washington New Potatoes", whom fans could then inoffensively, and endearingly refer to as the Red Skins.
You mean how the Dutch bought Manhattan from the Canarsee tribe that lived on Long Island by trading items that while plentiful in Europe, were unavailable to the Native Americans and then when they found out that the Wappinger Confederacy actually owned Manhattan later, they payed for it again?
Also remember that all commerce is about exchanging something you value less for something you value more. The Native Americans valued the European goods (typically things like cloth, clothing, metal tools, guns, and ammunition) more than they valued a swampy island. Similarly the Dutch valued an island in a harbor into which Hudson River flowed more than they valued the trade goods that were plentiful in Europe. Further, the deal was good for both sides in that it allowed for further contact and trade between the groups, meaning that the Native Americans were able to trade things like furs that they had less use for but were in high demand in Europe, for more of the European goods that they weren't able to produce as efficiently if at all.
Is it sad that growing up when I heard the name redskins I thought of the NFL team not Native Americans?
You, and everybody else in America.
The thing that kills me is that the team is in the nation's capitol and their rival claims to be "America's team". The 'Skins have the perfect opportunity to rebrand in a patriotic way and stick it to the Cowboys at the same time. This fight is about pride. When Miami University of Ohio (which was a University when Florida was still owned by Spain) made a ton of money on new merchandise sales when they switched from Redskins to Redhawks.
This whole name change is why I want the Redskins to hurry up and win a Super Bowl again. I've been waiting essentially my entire life to see them just go to one. I was 6 during the last Super Bowl season, and didn't actively follow football.
Anyway, I'd be torn if they changed the name, and then won one, like something I've been waiting forever for never happened. If they win one and then change the name, then I'd be fulfilled in seeing my team with the big one.
If you don't like that a team uses Redskins as it's name, there are 31 other teams you can choose to follow. It really is that simple. And as for those trying to make the argument that "words can become offensive over time," I really don't think anyone walking around in 2015 who uses the word Redskin is referring to anything other than a football team. The word hasn't become offensive. The word hasn't changed. People's delicate sensibilities have just decided to take offense at it. That doesn't make the word wrong. That makes their perception wrong.
Or potatoes.
And seriously, seeing the potatoes just makes me think of the football team.
How the hell did I forget the potatoes!? I just ate some last night. But still, point stands.
That's a lot of claiming that something isn't offensive when there are multiple entities out there saying the exact opposite.
Just because something isn't offensive to you doesn't mean it isn't to others.
What I said was that the word itself is not inherently offensive, is not intended to be offensive, and is not used to offend, but merely to describe. This to me is different than people taking offense. Just because they choose not to like it, doesn't mean it's bad. I don't like Brussels sprouts, but that doesn't mean the grocery store should ban them.
Granted, I don't know everything about everything here, but there's only really one tribe of Native Americans that I've seen truly offended by the name, and they live in New York. Then there's some other groups here or there.
Most other accounts I have read, Native Americans are either not offended by the word, or are offended by the idea that it would be taken away.
Most of the folks that I have seen be "offended", as I've said before, are those who appear to be offended on behalf of those who they think would be offended.
Somebody could be offended by anything. I've heard just as much support from native Americans as I have not.
With that said, if I owned the team, I would simply rename the team officially the skins, drop the head logo and go back to the spear or some other variation of the feathers. Simple and very little loss of nostalgic memories.
Ill take the spear logo back. It was pretty cool.
HEY NOW
There PLENTY of reasons besides the name to not like the Redskins.
You could like teams who win
You could like owners who arent turd sandwiches
You could like nice stadiums
Any of which are perfectly valid reasons to like any of the 31 other teams.
Actually, those reasons also eliminate the Raiders, and mostly the Browns.
What bothers me is that you just know that there are some people really churning these politically correct issues who have no interest at all in the Washington Redskins or football. It was all they could do to find a handful of Native Americans to be the face of their "issue". Nobody was finding this name offensive until those people started getting editorials in the Washington Post and the Daily Show.
Now people are saying "Oh yea, I guess that might be offensive". When was the last time someone used the word "Redskins" in a purposefully derogatory way when referring to Native Americans?
I'm pretty sure the people hyping this could find some better use of their time.
I also object to using the trademark office being hijacked as a tool for this purpose , as their job shouldn't be the "politically correct" hall monitor. Their job should be protecting people's trademarks. Their priorities seem a bit skewed here.
One of the Patent and Trademark Office's job is to ensure trademark's are not offensive. Nobody can trademark "F- you" or anything racist, so this is actually well within in the PTO's line of work. Copyrights are not protected by the PTO.
Could you imagine how ungodly rich a person would be if they could trademark "Fuck you?"
The PTO has a purpose, and this is clearly a political distortion/exploitation of that.
They weren't winning in the court of public opinion, so they went after it in a judicial court.
I'll take the name change and owner change bundle package, please. Let's just get it over with and put this whole ugly last 20 years behind us.
Washington Red Tape... now that's a name everyone can get behind. Intimidating to opponents, as well.
What about the Washington auditors? That would strike fear into everybody.
If there's no sweet mumbo-jumbo package duo, I'll just take the owner change over the name change, please.
(Did anyone else in this thread mention that he's a real doucher?)
Our country is becoming way to hypersensitive. Words only have power if you give it to them.
Without actually having apposition I will say it has NEVER been better to be an Eagles fan in DC.
Snyder is gold, the team and roster is still no more settled, and RGIII is still the best option at QB.
Almost makes up for how much the talent pool on 106.7 dislike VT, and are apathetic and uninformed about college football in general.
Except at the end of the day, you're still an Eagles fan. :)
It sure is nice. we have the closest the NFL will ever get to a mad scientist as coach, and he has us winning 20 games in 2 years.
And for the life of me I cant understand why anyone would take RGIII, Dan Snyder, 4 HC's and 1 playoff appearance a decade over consistent deep playoff runs and 2 HC's over the same time.
Not being associated with other Eagles fans is worth all of that.
It's ingrained.
I tried to find another team to support. Not necessary bail on, but just another team that could give me a reason to still be interested in December. But then 2012 happened, and then training camp moved to Richmond.
I have the Ravens as a secondary team (as my wife likes them), but I've been with the Redskins for too long to just give up.
And technically, it's three playoff appearances in a decade.
Believe it or not there are people out there that cheer for a team because it is their hometown team where they grew up, no matter how bad it gets. Imagine that
He's a Philadelphia fan...
have you seen their sports teams recently? Sixers, Phillies, and Flyers... arguably, that IS as bad as it gets.
The state of VT sports and Philly sports also have some very sad and distinct parallels.
Good but not great football, with multiple close calls and a championship loss, and no more than 1 other sport really good at one time with most wired in mediocrity with only coaching changes to bring hope.
So are you saying VT is as bad as it gets now?
But at least VT is in Blacksburg, and not Philly.
I wasn't going to be that guy, but I'll jump on. Yeah, sorry but the city sucks. (At least it gave us "It's Always Sunny".)
So I assume your MLB, NBA and NHL loyalties are up for grabs then due to the recent poor performance of Philly's franchises?
I'm 27. DC sports have been at best a tease (Caps, Nats) and usually a dumpster fire (Skins) and sometimes just like to pull guns on dudes for poker debts (I still love you Gil).
Why anyone would want it?
DC is my hometown. The teams are my teams. Thick and thin.
Ill be honest the first in anyway competitive game of basketball I watched all the way through was the 2010 Duke upset so I really don't care about the NBA.
NHL hard core Flyers fan and will fight any Devils or Rangers fans who have it coming. Grew up playing roller hockey as a kid so it was for a long time my big sport.
Baseball Ive been pretty down on since getting 3 teeth knocked out as a kid, if the Phillies winning wasn't enough to get me on board I just don't think its for me.
So it really does come down to the NFL and the NHL being my only two pro sports. I DO actually live in Ashburn now and can understand why so many people from all over moving here can get up with the Nats, just don't feel it myself.
But in the larger picture my sports enjoyment goes.
1. Hokie Football
2. The rest of college football
3. All other Hokie sports
4. NASCAR
5. NFL
6. Everything else.
7. Whatever Sports Center wants me to see
8. Imagining how long it will take for UVA to recover from the Mike London era
can I ask a racially charged question? Growing up, black was acceptable, african american was prefered, but "colored" would get you in trouble. So, why is isn't it the NAAAAP or NAABP?
Basically because the group is supposed to be geared towards the advancement of all races, or "colors."
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4142989/
Thank you for that. It provided a good laugh.
oh ok, I guess that makes sense. So why'd they fire someone for being white but pretending to be black?
***DUCKS***
she quit...
She quit, but don't worry, she still identifies as a NAACP employee
She quit b/c she insulted most black women. As my wife said, she wanted the glory without the grief. Many white Americans played and still play a crucial role in achieving equal rights. All she had to do was say she was a white woman down for the cause and she would have been welcomed with open arms. Instead she lied when she didnt have to.
I'm off the soapbox. VT, 2000 B.S.. Sociology. VT educates too well!
Colored refers too many people back to separate but equal times. White only vs colored water fountains and such. It makes one think that having a dark hue is bad. African American was a progressive first step, but with so many people from the Caribbean and Africa migrating in, it doesn't carry the same connotation. Same principle with using colors. Using colors to describe people's heritage is quite simple minded. Example: Calling people "colored" and/or "black" when Black is devoid of hue. Counter intuitive.
So I am to believe that a team has been willingly referring to themselves by a self-deprecating, racist, derogatory name for decades? People proudly refer to themselves as Redskins and Redskins fans. That would seem to logically imply that "Redskin" is being used in a complimentary fashion. An ideal. An embodiment of an admiration of certain qualities that positively represent American Indians and which qualities you would likewise want to see represented by your players on the football field. If you wanted to call the team the Washington Dumpster Fires (regardless of how accurate that term may have been for some time now), that would obviously be a negative. Using Redskins as the team name is the complete opposite of that. Color is beautiful, no? And yet we seem hell-bent on making a bland, gray, little world for ourselves.
might I point out that there is a team called the Chicago Fire. At a point in history, this would be considered incredibly poor taste. So does that mean that if enough time passes before you start referencing something, it becomes acceptable or are just incredibly inconsistent as a society (I'll take option B for 1000, Alex).
on another note. If the name were changed to the Washington Dumpster Fire, it would be a source of outrage for years and then as the term fell into disuse, it would eventually become so normal that people would think a dumpster fire was an NFL team...
On your second point, that would be like saying Redskins was initially meant to be a disparaging moniker, and it wasn't. Even the anti-Redskin Slate article that came out last go around admitted as much. Because no team would intentionally want their team to be tied to negative qualities. That's my point. Saying Dumpster Fire would be an outrage now but later on we would be used to it isn't the same situation.
As for the Chicago Fire, yeah, people that lost all would not be fond of it immediately being used for their team name, but years later, it becomes a redemptive "yes we lost all, but we overcame and we're still here". An apt, local, reclamation of what was a bad ordeal originally. Though, in my opinion, almost all of the MLS team names are exactly the sort of bland, grayness that I'm talking about...
so I get what you're saying about the Chicago fire...but in the case with the Redskins, that sentence looks more like
"yes we lost all
, but we overcame and we're still here"No less admirable for having lost. That they lost and still exhibited attributes that you would like reflected by your football team is a good thing.
The only part I don't get is why Redskins are getting thrown under the bus but the Cleveland Indians get to continue with an even more ignorant name and a blatantly racist logo. I'm all for a name-change at this point, but you'd think it would go across the board.
Their primary logo is no longer the Indian head. That is their throw-back logo.
Maybe there is a way to meet in the middle?
Who doesn't love a good redskin potato?
Carbs offend me.
My suggestion was to go the Prince route:
The Redskin Potato joke isn't funny after the first time.
Been a Skins fan my whole life, since the late 60's, and love the team, even though I despise the current owner. George Allen was my first sports hero, and I will hate the Cowboys to my last breath.
That being said, I would be very comfortable with a name change that honors Native Americans, such as the Washington Warriors, or the Washington Braves, or the Washington Wigwam (couldn't resist).
I hate PC whiners, but the name is considered a pejorative by many of those to whom it refers, so the honorable thing to do, (not the PC thing to do) is to change the name to one that honors those folks. That way the team can likely keep the emblem, colors and such, and everyone can go home happy.
I agree going to Warriors or Braves or Natives and keeping the logo, colors, and traditions would be great, but I think the Oneida Tribe that is pushing this name change is against all names that refer to Native-Americans. My guess is if public pressure or League pressure finally forces the owner's hand, he'll have go away from the Native-American theme completely.
Yep... the end game is to eradicate all Native American imagery from the franchise, be it the nickname, logo, mascot, etc.
Once they're done there, they'll use the precedent to go after the Cleveland Indians, Atlanta Braves, and Golden State Warriors, among others.
There is no precedent that would force the organization to abandon any Native American related name. There are plenty of professional sports teams that have names of that nature.
From what I've read, the Seminole Tribe and FSU have a good relationships, and they continue to endorse the usage of the name, flaming spear, etc.
I guess they don't go to the same bars.
I'm not sure that is relative to my comment but I appreciate the informative post. Upvote for you
No one understands where the name came from. I make all this horseshit mute.
I long ago stopped reading Gregg Easterbrook but his always referencing the Redskins as the Potomac Drainage Basin Indigenous Persons was great.
Can we please shut down threads to the redskins name? I'm a VT fan with a big opinion on this topic, but so many people can't keep their heads on straight for this conversation. Too much pride and team loyalty for a truly honest debate. I'm tired of hearing about it.
Then don't click on it.
My only regret is that I have but 1 upvote to give for this post.
Pride and loyalty are normal attributes to a good debate. If you don't like the opinions, you are probably not interested in a debate at all, only affirmation of your own opinion.
so they can call themselves the Washington Redskins or The Redskins, and the cheerleaders can be the Redskinettes for as long as they want, but just can't trademark it, correct?
not sure why this is earthshaking or surprising
First off, I am part Native American, more so than the 1/32 Native American that now Senator Elizabeth Warren used in her electoral campaign. This was not criticized by the same media that are lambasting the NFL team. It's patently obvious they are of the same political origin.
NFL teams do not name themselves after the weak of societal history. Do you see any teams called "the peasants", "indentured servants", or since they are saying its a racial issue "slaves". This thinking is inherently flawed. Look there is the, Kanas City Cheifs, the Florida State Seminoles, etc. These promote strength and power. These names are not even remotely associated with negative connotations. Think of it this way, imagine it this way, what if they used your last name as their alias would you feel offended? How about the color of your skin? Please note they asked to be identified as such.
I wish people would stop taking the news media's comments as absolute fact and start to think critically about the situation on their own.
I wish
All I know is here's one of my all-time fave Redskins cheerleaders. Enjoy!
She is one of my favorites as well, now that I know she exists
They're all my favorites. Now that I know they exist.
maybe we should do NFL pick six in too....
Oh, and her name is Lee Henggeler (sounds like one of those names from one of the Austin Powers movies). Sorry didn't post that up before.
Although it was fun, I am happy that my wife has decided to settle down and raise a family.
Change the name to the Washington Braves. After all, they were the Boston Braves before they were the Washington Redskins, and they can keep all the same icons.
Then the political correctness types can focus their energies on some other meaningless quest. Like attacking the Washington Braves.
Isn't this entire thread political?
Its a social issue that is being discussed