Washington Redskins Name Controversy

[LeMansAid]

I can't quite imagine that covering their helmets.

The skivvies pulled right up would serve that purpose though.

 

[ryzno]

Boston Braves moved to Milwaukee, before finally settling in Atlanta. (MLB)

How, as a fan of a relocated team, does one react?

Kinda off topic, team movement and mascots...
I'm not sure how much y'all keep up with the Braves, but as a ATL born and raised guy(one of the few left), I have watched the Braves move once already in our city.(After the '96 Olympics, Fulton Co. Stadium was shut down turned in to a parking lot with a marker showing Hank Arron's Record home run, the Olympic Stadium was rebuilt to accommodate a baseball field. Across the street from the old stadium.) Now I had no problem with that(except the stadium was never designed for baseball.) I even find it weird how Atlanta Motor Speedway and Road Atlanta, have Atlanta in the name when they are a good 20 miles(AMS) and a good 50miles(RA) outside the city.

Now earlier this year the Braves big wigs, decide to move to Cobb Co.(In 2017, with a 30 year contract) The stadium has always been in downtown not outside the city, since they moved to Atlanta. I am very displeased with their decision, they held no meetings and quietly passed it through city council, behind closed, locked doors.

Now over the years the Braves have had controversial mascots(Cheif Knock a Homer, he ran out of a tee-pee and did a little dance, after a home run. (Interesting fact: Cheif was a real Indian.) And a logo(the face of a Indian on the shoulder of the uniform.)
And now some still complain about the logo. The swooping A with a tomahawk as the middle line.

Georgia has a very deep "Native American" history. A lot of towns and areas are the names of tribes or things in their language native.

Now as far as I see the race situation, I could honestly care less if they brought back the Atlanta Crackers(minor league)(I am not referring to the Atlanta Black Crackers)I am talking about the white Team before integration in MLB.) As a white male the word cracker does not offend me(we make a nice snack )

All in all this is another PC group, just like the ones that come down here trying to remove god and prayer in our schools, due to offending people, yet other belief's can do as they please.

Call me ignorant, but don't call me a racist. I see all race and religious disputes, utter non-sence... Nobody is better then anybody...

 

[fatkrakr]

What I don't understand about all this PC BS is why some people think their right not to see or hear something out weighs the right of someone else who does want to see or hear it. It just makes no sense to me.

 

[Liquid]

Let's just wait for an expansion team called the Sioux City Palefaces, then things are balanced out.

 

[redskinfan1982]

All in all this is another PC group, just like the ones that come down here trying to remove god and prayer in our schools, due to offending people, yet other belief's can do as they please.

Been a Skins fan my entire life... My whole family is... And I agree with the statment quoted above... There's MANY other issues that should be delt with... To me Someones religion, sexual preference, and political preference is their choice... Not mine... At the end of the day, we are ALL human, we ALL bleed the same color blood... And we ALL SHOULD love one another, respectin' the fact that WE ALL have the right to make our own choices, and live with them... If people, business, and other organizations choose to display their God, or any other beliefs, then more power to them!... If you have a problem with it, Then don't go there... But using media, and PC propaganda, to push people into a collective thinking, or forcing them to "do as I say not as I do", Is abosoluty WRONG... I'm sorry for goin off topic, but I had to say something... I have a hard time puttin' words together, so I HOPE People understand what it is I'm tryin to say... And don't twist it into something that it is not... White, Black, Hispanic, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddists, etc, makes NO difference to me... You are who you are!... Once again... Sorry for my little rant... I hope I didn't offend anyone... I just cannot believe how divided, we are as a country, and as a world...

As for the Skins Changing their name... I say No...

 

[TenEightyOne]

Been a Skins fan my entire life... My whole family is... And I agree with the statment quoted above... There's MANY other issues that should be delt with... To me Someones religion, sexual preference, and political preference is their choice... Not mine... At the end of the day, we are ALL human, we ALL bleed the same color blood... And we ALL SHOULD love one another, respectin' the fact that WE ALL have the right to make our own choices, and live with them... If people, business, and other organizations choose to display their God, then more power to them!... If you have a problem with it, Then don't go there... But using media, and PC propaganda, to push people into a collective thinking, or forcing them to "do as I say not as I do", Is abosoluty WRONG... I'm sorry for goin off topic, but I had to say something... I have a hard time puttin' words together, so I HOPE People understand what it is I'm tryin to say... And don't twist it into something that it is not... White, Black, Hispanic, Christian, Muslim, Jews, Buddists, etc, makes NO difference to me... There are flaws to Everyone, every race, every organization, and every religion... There always will be!... Once again... Sorry for my little rant... I hope I didn't offend anyone... I just cannot believe how divided, we are as a country, and as a world...

As for the Skins Changing their name... I say No...

That made sense to me. But who's saying we can only deal with one thing at a time? To me (not knowledgeable about whatever sport it is the Redskins play, it'll be rounders or rugger-for-sissies, right? ) the term's as archaic as da n-word. I'm not saying it's as potent but it's of the same ilk.

In my opinion we're all human, we all have the same colour blood. I can't believe how divided the world is sometimes, I think words like "Redskins" just serve as a reminder of the worst divides.

 

[redskinfan1982]

In my opinoion we're all human, we all have the same colour blood. I can't believe how divided the world is sometimes, I think words like "Redskins" just serve as a reminder of the worst divides.

I can see that point of view... I've always been a skins fan... and I just would hate to see it changed... But in essence, You are right... The word is... Im just a fan, who would be sad if it was changed... even if it has to be...

 

[DK]

All in all this is another PC group, just like the ones that come down here trying to remove god and prayer in our schools, due to offending people

Ever heard of the Establishment Clause and/or the Treaty of Tripoli?

 

[huskeR32]

When I think about this whole thing, I usually always end up placing myself in Snyder's shoes, and trying to think of how I would handle it. And I always come to the conclusion that I would change it.

Some of the questions that have come up in this thread, I think, miss the point. What does it matter if the people clamoring for the name change don't watch football? Or aren't of native ancestry? Or are political commentators? I don't think any of that matters at all. Shooting the messenger is one of the oldest forms of building strawmen.

If I was Snyder, and was aware of even one time where the name of my team caused a person of native ancestry to feel badly about their heritage, or to think back on sad/painful memories about what had happened to their people, then that would be the only thing that would matter to me.

As far as this:

A poll found that 90% of Native Americans found the name unoffensive, and out of the 10% that were offended, many of them probably don't care about a football team using it.

Even if this is true (I say "if," because [citation needed]), then the same 90% will be fine with the new name too. So who cares?

 

[fatkrakr]

When I think about this whole thing, I usually always end up placing myself in Snyder's shoes, and trying to think of how I would handle it. And I always come to the conclusion that I would change it.

Some of the questions that have come up in this thread, I think, miss the point. What does it matter if the people clamoring for the name change don't watch football? Or aren't of native ancestry? Or are political commentators? I don't think any of that matters at all. Shooting the messenger is one of the oldest forms of building strawmen.

If I was Snyder, and was aware of even one time where the name of my team caused a person of native ancestry to feel badly about their heritage, or to think back on sad/painful memories about what had happened to their people, then that would be the only thing that would matter to me.

As far as this:



Even if this is true (I say "if," because [citation needed]), then the same 90% will be fine with the new name too. So who cares?

Yeah because its much better to give in to their BS than it is to actually stand up and say I have as much right to have it (whatever it may be) as you do to it not being here. Again, why does their right not to see it take precedence over someone else right to display it?

 

[huskeR32]

Yeah because its much better to give in to their BS than it is to actually stand up and say I have as much right to have it (whatever it may be) as you do to it not being here. Again, why does their right not to see it take precedence over someone else right to display it?

Where did I use the word "rights," or even speak to anybody's rights in my post? To me, it doesn't boil down to that at all.

If I owned the team, that is what I would do.

I guess I should have emphasized it more in the first place, but that's the perspective I was answering it from.

If I owned a sports team, and that name was racially offensive to a group of people, no matter how small, I would change it. I wold then continue to rake in my hundreds of millions of dollars, and enjoy all the benefits of owning my own sports franchise, with the added bonus of knowing that I no longer contributed to anyone's feeling of not being a completely welcomed or respected part of our society.

 

[Keef]

People need to grow balls.

@huskeR32 where's the downvote button?

 

[huskeR32]

People need to grow balls.

@huskeR32 where's the downvote button?

Let me get this straight - I can understand completely how people would find the word "redskin" offensive, in a very similar way to finding the n-word offensive. And if I could, at very little sacrifice to myself, avoid using that word, I happily would. And all of that means that I need to "grow balls?"

I fail to see how being accepting and inclusive of other people is a challenge to my manhood.

 

[fatkrakr]

Where did I use the word "rights," or even speak to anybody's rights in my post? To me, it doesn't boil down to that at all.

If I owned the team, that is what I would do.

I guess I should have emphasized it more in the first place, but that's the perspective I was answering it from.

If I owned a sports team, and that name was racially offensive to a group of people, no matter how small, I would change it. I wold then continue to rake in my hundreds of millions of dollars, and enjoy all the benefits of owning my own sports franchise, with the added bonus of knowing that I no longer contributed to anyone's feeling of not being a completely welcomed or respected part of our society.

You don't have to use the word "rights" for this to be about rights and that's what this is about.

So you own a sports team and a group wants you to change the name and you agree, but what if the city where your team is based wants the name to stay? Now who are you going to side with? There is a good chance the residence of the city will boycott your team, do you still change the name and toss your millions out the window? I don't think so your going to keep the name and collect your millions as planned.

 

[Danoff]

People need to grow balls.

Yea, they should grow some balls and change their name. It's racist. What's the big deal, just change it to something else.

 

[Carbonox]

Let me get this straight - I can understand completely how people would find the word "redskin" offensive, in a very similar way to finding the n-word offensive. And if I could, at very little sacrifice to myself, avoid using that word, I happily would. And all of that means that I need to "grow balls?"

I fail to see how being accepting and inclusive of other people is a challenge to my manhood.

Yea, they should grow some balls and change their name. It's racist. What's the big deal, just change it to something else.

Who are you to get offended on behalf of a group you're not part of?

 

[Danoff]

Who are you to get offended on behalf of a group you're not part of?

I'm not offended.

 

[huskeR32]

You don't have to use the word "rights" for this to be about rights and that's what this is about.

That's what it is about for you, not for me. Don't put words in my mouth. I stated very clearly that my answer is representative of what I would do if I were Snyder. And if I were Snyder, my "rights" (and for the record, I do think he has the right to name his team whatever he wants to) wouldn't be a factor. I would change the name for the reasons I outlined.

Who are you to get offended on behalf of a group you're not part of?

Where did I say that I was offended? Truth be told, I'm not.

If I owned the team, and if the name of my team caused a group to feel marginalized or disrespected due to their race, then I would change the name. Because I wouldn't want to be the source of that feeling.

And one more thing, you may want to be careful assuming who is and isn't a part of a group. How do you know what ethnicity I am?

 

[Danoff]

If I owned the team, and if the name of my team caused a group to feel marginalized or disrespected due to their race, then I would change the name. Because I wouldn't want to be the source of that feeling.

Beyond that, it just projects a negative image for a business. I know they're worried about brand loyalty, but they need to stop worrying, grow a pair, and get a better trademark/mascot.

 

[Liquid]

Hm, better names for a team nominally based in DC:

Washington Senators
Washington Capitols
Washington Americans
Washington Union
Washington Justice
Washington Congress
Washington Eagles
Washington Stars
Washington Columbians

A new mascot wouldn't be hard to make out of one of those.

 

[Keef]

Yea, they should grow some balls and change their name. It's racist. What's the big deal, just change it to something else.

It's private property. They don't have to if they don't want to.

Washington Senators

Senators lie, cheat and steal.

Washington Capitols

Already an NHL team from there called the Capitals and would possibly be a conflict.

Washington Americans

It's an international league and all the players aren't necessarily American.

Washington Union

This could work if the local high school doesn't object and it doesn't conjure images of labor unions which Americans hate.

Washington Justice

Justice doesn't exist in DC and everybody knows it. Every time the team lost it would make a hilarious joke.

Washington Congress

This could work, but again people hate congress and they're nothing but a bunch of crooks.

Washington Eagles

Washington Stars

Dallas might have a bone to pick with that.

http://img.bleacherreport.net/img/a...gratulated-by_crop_exact.jpg?w=650&h=432&q=85

Washington Columbians

This is America son, how dare you name a team after a buncha furriners!

So you see the predicament. The team has been an established franchise for 82 years. When somebody says the word "redskin" everybody thinks about football, not Native Americans. You basically have to try to make the word racist which is exactly what all these bleeding hearts are doing. Going out of your way to dig up from the depths of society a derogatory term which lost its meaning decades ago is a racist act in itself. Stop trying to purify society and just watch some damn football, jeez.

Racism is the act of elevating one race above another based on biological differences. Words cannot be racist. The way you use them can be. If you associate the word "redskin" with the idea that Native Americans are somehow below the white man, that's racist. Using the word to name a football team, a concept which has absolutely nothing to do with race, is not racist in any way.

I'm not offended.

Then why do you think it should be changed? Are you projecting your idea of racism on others? What if an American Indian told you that he didn't want the team's name change and that he just wants people to stop pissing about and watch some damn football? Would you insist that the term is racist and tell him that he should hate it like you do and should want it changed? Effectively telling him, "You're a redskin and you should hate this word." So now you're associating the word redskin with American Indians. So now that you're aware that you consciously associate the word redskin with American Indians you feel guilty and want it changed so you can feel good about yourself.

How about you simply not associate the word with American Indians and watch some damn football? That'd be a lot less racist of you.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

@Liquid - I think part of the problem with things like the Browns moving to Baltimore is that it meant a total change of city. There was only one top-tier team in Cleveland until they moved. Down here, we have half a dozen franchises all based in Sydney - the Roosters, the Rabbits, the Sea Eagles, the Bulldogs, the Panthers, the Eels and the Tigers. And that's in a city of four millions people. We could afford to lose one - and we did; the North Sydney Bears. But to have one team per city, I can see why people would become upset if that team were to move hundreds of kilometres away.

Like I said, teams tend to reflect the culture and identity of a place. Ten or fifteen years ago, the Parramatta Eels ("Parramatta" meaning "a place where eels are found") were huge. But if you walk through the city today, you wouldn't know they existed. The yellow and blue has been replaced by the black and red of the Western Sydney Wanderers. People just haven't switched teams; they've switched codes. But if you go down into the Canterbury-Bankstown area, the Bulldogs have a huge following; likewise if you go west to Penrith and the Panthers.

I think the resistance to a name change steams not from the demand for political correctness, but a sense of betrayal - especially if it's done to be politically correct. It might compromise the team identity, especially if it's a generic name like the Washington Wildcats. If they're going to change, they need something synonymous with the city identity. The New England Patriots (and sister franchise the New England Revolution) do it; so, too, do the MLS teams Chicago Fire and Cleveland Crew. Even we have the Freemantle Dockers (Freemantle being a port in Perth) and the old Illawarra Steelers (industry being big in the Illawarra; even when the team merged with the St. George Dragons, they kept some vestige of the mame, officially becoming the St. George-Illawarra Steel Dragons). So I think you're onto something with tying a new name to something uniquely Washington DC, though I doubt people would be responsive to something politically-oriented.

 

[The Bman]

The Utah Jazz in the NBA is the perfect example of regional identity not being changed. They originally played in New Orleans (which is associated with jazz music), but they didn't change their name following the relocation, so now they have an unfitting team name for where they are located.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Still better that Real Salt Lake - "Real" is Spanish for "Royal"; Real Madrid was essentially the King of Spain's team.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Still better that Real Salt Lake - "Real" is Spanish for "Royal"; Real Madrid was essentially the King of Spain's team.

Yup, always prounounced "ray-ARL" here... calling a team "Real XYZ" in the sense of "bona fide" would seem weird to a lot of people. In fact the meaning's so widely understood that even I know it, and I can't tell one end of a soccerball from another.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

I'd say the NFL has bigger problems than the Redskins' name:

http://m.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-29424250

 

[GTPorsche]

That and the rampant domestic violence issues.

The Utah Jazz in the NBA is the perfect example of regional identity not being changed. They originally played in New Orleans (which is associated with jazz music), but they didn't change their name following the relocation, so now they have an unfitting team name for where they are located.

Los Angeles Lakers were originally the Minnesota Lakers. Los Angeles Clippers were previously the San Diego Clippers. Dallas Stars were originally the Minnesota North Stars. Calgary Flames were the Atlanta Flames.

 

[Liquid]

@prisonermonkeys I absolutely understand from a fan perspective the impact of changing the identity of a club, for better or worse. It's something we take very seriously in the UK. But unlike the UK, where clubs are almost exclusively founded as social or communal projects, professional teams in the United States are often founded as commercial ventures and as already alluded to, name changes and even relocations are not uncommon over there.

@Keef But we need a name change which has that horrible, horrible marketingspeak appeal. Who cares about the truth behind the name when Washington Senators or Washington Justice sounds good? Eat a chilli dog and enjoy cheering the Congressmen.

I tried looking up other things associated with DC and found a nickname of "The American Rome" and the scarlet oak being the official district tree so... Washington Romans or Washington Scarlets?

 

[GTPorsche]

Lots of Roman influenced architecture in D.C., so that's the reason for the nickname.

Should just rename them to the Washington Hogs. Then a group of their fanbase would better fit in with the team.

Spoiler

 

[Danoff]

It's private property. They don't have to if they don't want to.

Yup, I agree. Doesn't mean they shouldn't do it.

Then why do you think it should be changed?

Because it's racist and therefore a negative image for the business. Businesses are free to be racist and project racist things, and I'm free to think they're stupid for doing so.

Are you projecting your idea of racism on others?

No, it has a definition. It would also be racist if they changed their name to the "Blackskins" and had a black guy as the mascot.

What if an American Indian told you that he didn't want the team's name change and that he just wants people to stop pissing about and watch some damn football?

Why would that change my opinion on the matter?

Would you insist that the term is racist and tell him that he should hate it like you do and should want it changed?

I will insist that the term is racist because it is. I wouldn't presume to tell someone what they should or shouldn't hate.

Effectively telling him, "You're a redskin and you should hate this word." So now you're associating the word redskin with American Indians.

None of that applies to me.

So now that you're aware that you consciously associate the word redskin with American Indians you feel guilty and want it changed so you can feel good about yourself.

This has no bearing on my feelings about myself. What some organization with a racist name does or does not do has exactly zero impact on my self-image. I am aware of the fact that native americans have a different pigment to their skin than myself (same goes for tons of other racial groups), and I am aware of some of the racist terms that can be used for native americans (as is the case for tons of other racial groups). No that doesn't make me feel guilty about anything, nor should it.

How about you simply not associate the word with American Indians and watch some damn football? That'd be a lot less racist of you.

Yea, let's not associate this with native americans.

There's nothing wrong with having a native american mascot either (see below). They should just use a term that isn't racist. It's not like it's unprecedented. The Washington Redskins as an organization gets to make this decision, not me. It's their business and up to them what image they want to portray. I'm sure on some level they'd like to have a name that didn't reflect negatively on their organization. I'm sure the Ravens, for example, aren't jealous of their neighbors' mascot and franchise name. If you asked the Ravens if they'd rather their name had some sort of racist connotation I'm sure they'd be like "uh... absolutely not. We would not like to trade places with the Redskins." The Redskins don't change their name because they don't want to look weak, and they don't want to alienate fans. What they don't realize is that their fans don't love them because of their mascot any more than Jacksonville fans love their team because they love Jaguars. What the Washington team calls themselves is not all that important. They need a bit more self-esteem as an organization to realize that they can change their name and nobody will care. The Bullets did it not that long ago - it happens.

And I don't see why anyone gets indignant at the notion that they should change their name. It's a stupid name with negative connotations. Why should we hang on to it? No, I'm not offended. But I think it's dumb for any business to go around projecting a negative image for no good reason. Until they change their name, I'll think they're stupid.