Washington Redskins reviewing name after advertiser pressure

Post Reply New Topic

As someone who has native American friends and has lived with them and is not separated from the rest of them by the Atlantic, I can say this is absolutely something they have cared about for decades. They tend to have bigger problems like rampant poverty and disenfranchisement and desecration of their lands, so it's not exactly their highest priority, but they have always hated such team names. The Braves, the Indians, the Redskins, the Blackhawks, the Seminoles, the Chiefs, the Eskimos. These are all names chosen bc native Americans are considered warlike and intimidating. The same reason some sports teams might call themselves the Spartans. Except the Spartans are viewed with admiration and have not endured centuries of genocide. Whatever admiration these teams may claim to have for native Americans, it is not enough to make them actually respect their wishes.

It would be like a Swedish sports team calling themselves the Lapps then wondering why the Saami aren't thrilled about it. Or an English team calling themselves the M*cks.

First of all, I heard that they named their team after its original Native American owner (or manager, or coach; can't remember).

Secondly, he KNEW they named the team in honor of him, and he was overjoyed!!

Lastly, I also heard that it was NOT Native Americans calling for the change. They have, though, in the past, said something; but, obviously, nothing was ever done about it.

This is part of the problem, alot of this stuff is being done by stupid white people who want to look like they're woke, being sympathetic, or whatever..... Nobody ASKED them to be stupid!!

I'm so sick of this crap, I don't know what to do.....

They're saying they're thinking about having "the black national anthem" at football games ("Lift Every Voice", IIRC), to be played before the "regular" national anthem. First of all, I've been singing that song my whole life, in church; I wonder if we, white folk, are in trouble, now. Secondly, that song's, like 4 minutes, long!!

Also, they're talking about putting "Black Lives Matter" on the back of helmets. Here's what "I" wanna know..... What if somebody DOESN'T want that on the back of their football helmet? Is it not ALSO free speech to say "No"? Such horse-hockey!! !! !!

They tore down the statue of Christopher Columbus, here in Baltimore, the other day----such a bummer. Then, we've got some black people sayin' "It's not MY Independence Day". Then there's this Chuck E. Cheese crap (LOL that's what "I" call it - that Chock, or whatever in Oregon), where they've taken over several blocks of a city----THEN, they had the NERVE to demand things that they felt they needed (masks, sanitizer, food, toilets - I can't remember what all). What on EARTH!?!? (I heard, this evening that the mayor [or some other official] finally shut it down, because of too much gun violence - well, DUH!!) Our "probable" new mayor (have only had the primary, thus far) said he didn't support that statue being there----pretty much, he doesn't care; cops stood there and watched them bring it down, and throw it in the harbor. The same, I hear, is happening in Oregon. Absolute MADNESS!! !! !!

Here's the thing..... When's it gonna end? Don't the powers that be get that whiners are like children----the more you give them, the more they want (meaning, like, tearin' down statues and changing names of military bases, etc.). Do you know how many friggin' buildings and roads, and stuff, are named after these "horrible people"? It'll NEVER stop----especially, cuz when one gives the slightest indication that they are gonna "follow orders" (cave, IOW), then they, who are demanding, will only continue to demand, Hello.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I wish just once----just ONCE----that when someone whines to whatever company, or whatever, that something is "wrong" / racist / whatever, that the company says "That was not the intent", and keeps right on, keeping on (meaning, does NOT change [aka, cave] the image / logo / whatever)! ! HA!! I would LOVE it!!

First of, Having X friends and/or being on the same continent as someone else does not make you any sort of authority.

And that's exactly my point; I can't remember who they consulted last time this came up, but the general sentiment was something like "that's nice and all, but could you do something about the schools and the poverty instead?".




We have football clubs/teams named the after the Syrians, the Assyrians and the Kurds and no one bats an eye. Don't think a Saami team would be quite the problem you're expecting.

Also:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1pmi_football_team

No they don't, they are the helicopter/snowplow parenting generation.

As to when this stops fortunately my prediction from a few years ago that graves will be targeted has not come true. Monuments in cemeteries have attacked been but so far the vandals have not crossed that line. I still expect it to happen. All it is going to take is somebody to break that taboo then it will be open season.

The Chicago Blackhawks won't change nickname because it honors the life of an actual Native America

A team named Sápmi formed entirely of Sami is not the same as a team called Redskins with zero indigenous players. For starters, Redskin and Lapp are racial slurs, Sápmi is not.

What point was it you were trying to make again because so far you don't seem to have made any point.

That's because I mostly don't have a point. Change it or don't change it, it's not skin of my back. I just recall this having been brought up before, and wondering where that went and why.

While there are differing opinions, especially given how many teams have names that reference our people a significant portion of the opposition to these names does come from indigenous people and indigenous lead organizations. Did you bother to look into this at all or did you just believe that opinion because it felt agreeable?



You're sick of it? How do you think we feel about it? You're not part of the group of people being stereotyped and mocked, you're just sick of being reminded we don't appreciate it. If you're sick of hearing about it support us on this matter so it can be resolved and we can stop having to mention it. You don't get to be sick of something perpetuated against us unless you're in favour of fixing it. Your inability to feel empathy makes me wonder why you're so unconcerned how the issue impacts the people who are directly impacted and how your being sick of hearing about it can possibly be as important as our being sick of having to deal with it.



If you don't believe black lives matter you probably shouldn't participate in a league that owes much of it's profits to black athletes and their accomplishments.



A man who committed genocide probably ought not to be celebrated, and if you can't understand why you can at least probably appreciate that some people might find celebrating that sort of person morally questionable even if you don't quite get why they feel so strongly.

Besides, Leif Erikson is far more deserving of recognition than a conquistador so horrible even his fellow conquistadors considered him a monster back when he was still a living monster.



So basically because an injustice was committed long enough ago no attempts should be made to ever rectify it? That seems like a good way to perpetuate these problems instead of resolving them.



So basically what you'd prefer is for these entities to just ignore when a group of people keeps telling them 'we'd appreciate if you didn't use a name that demeans us as a people'. How dare a company be persuaded by an appeal to empathy and decency. I'd love it if people who openly proclaimed their support for these sorts of names didn't get triggered if they're told they sound like racist as*holes. I guess some people's feelings are just considered inherently more valid and valuable in your worldview.

You never know how you are going to feel and every situation is different but this conversation got me thinking about how I would feel about a hypothetical situation.

Lets say there is a team called the Autistics with no autistic personnel. The teams fight song references having no feelings for the other team, the teams cheerleaders do a routine whereby they put a spell on the other team, the cheerleaders do exaggerated meltdowns, stimming etc.

Would I be offended? Yes. If the team changed their name following a boycott that tanked the teams bottom line would I feel a sense of Schadenfreude? Yes. And then what? Would it not be better if the name stayed but the stereotype stuff ended and the the team held celebrations recognizing successful Autistic people?

While the above scenario is utterly improbable “Autistic” is increasingly being used as an insult and to describe negative personalty stereotypes. What if this gets worse would you be in favor of canceling “Autism”, “Autistic”, “Aspie” ?

That last paragraph is off on another subject altogether from naming teams. you're onto the subject of the "euphemism treadmill". I hope it wont happen, but it probably will happen: that they will have to concoct a euphemism for "autistic", and then concoct a euphemism for that euphemism (like how they went from "moron" as an actual clinical term to "ret*d" to "intellectually impaired" to whatever they use now.).

Yes. You cant name a team "the Autistics". But you could name a team after a personage who was known to be autistic, or aspie. Maybe if Elon Musk came out of the closet as the aspie many suspect that he is then... the NFL could honor him by fielding a team called "the Musk Oxes" in his honor! And all of on the Spectrum could take inspiration from it. Or not.

Well so, your examples kinda represent analogies of different examples.

'the Musk Oxes' is kinda like the Blackhawks, it's intended fondly and respectfully but that meaning might eventually get missed.
'the Autistics' is more like the Indians, the euphemism treadmill might make it appear more insensitive or ignorant of how we ourselves identify at some point but it's still fairly neutral in intention.
'the sp****cs' or 'the ret*ds' is more analogous to the Redskins. Even if it was used with the best of intentions and fondness it's just not appropriate because it's still generally understood as a slur.

I wonder what new name they will come up with. In the past I have thought they should keep the name, but well I can see how it is problematic...if it was a sports team name to honor natives they probably wouldn't have gone with 'redskin'. I mean I think there are more important issues in the world than the name of a sports team...but at the same time I see it as being a good thing if they change it as I can see how it's disrespectful to native people.

Actually the last time the issue came up - a couple of years ago- I had the impression that the agreed upon alternative was "the Washington Warriors".

Which I think would be a good choice. You could keep all of the American Indian graphics. And it's alliterative.

But it's not the name of an actual race/ethnic group.

The "Warriors" would only be as "bad" as the "Atlanta Braves". And the Atlanta Braves is only as bad as..."the Minnesota Vikings", or all of the countless "Spartans", and "Trojans" names that school teams across the nation have: legendary ancient warriors who may be associated with particular ethnic groups, but are not the names of ethnic groups.

In my example the “Autistics” are not being used in a neutral manner but in a manner that perpetrates negative stereotypes.

Yes.

And even it werent meant that way. You wouldnt name a team "the Autistics" because it would be offensive regardless of the intent. But someone MIGHT want to salute autistic folks anyway. In which case you would pick a famous person who was known to be autistic to name your team after- honoring autistics by way of honoring that person. Like the Musk Oxen.

Also I dont see the problem with "Black Hawk" because you either get what it's name after (no reason to be offended)or you dont- and think that it's named after a bird species (like the Sea Hawks, or Falcons, or Orioles) in which case there is STILL no problem.

I know how you presented it framed it worse than how I did, but I needed to have my worst example clearly be worse without describing more than the name, so I made all of my examples only reference the name. Your additional elements make it almost as bad as The Redskins.