Redskins: Not offensive at all!

Boss

Take a Memo:
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
21,884
Reaction score
2,770
Points
280
Location
Birmingham, AL
We've recently been inundated with complaints from the PC Left over the sports team moniker "Redskins," as if this were some deplorably racist term that is crude and offensive. Since I happen to be 1/8 Cherokee and 1/8 Choctaw, I feel my heritage affords me the right to interject my opinion. I am not the least bit offended by the name. My sentiments are shared by a number of mostly tribal high schools around the country who also use the moniker or mascot for their sports teams. The primary target seems to be the NFL's Washington Redskins, who have used the name for 81 years. I'm not sure what made it suddenly too offensive to tolerate.

The argument is that the term "redskin" is equivalent to the "n-word" for Native Americans. This is not true. It is the grammatical equivalent to "blacks" or "whites." The suffix "skin" is only added to denote difference and avoid possible confusion with communists who are known as the "reds." There are disputes over the origin, but it appears the term became commonly applied to "Indians" around 1820.

Now, what IS offensive and racist to my people is the term "Indian" or "Native American." Obviously we are not from the country of India, this has been known for quite some time. Yet for years, people were comfortable calling us "Indians" and didn't seem to mind that it was highly offensive. There are still remnants of "Indian" being used today in our culture. Of course, some political correct shmuck came along and demanded we change "Indian" to "Native American" because that sounded so much better. However, to my people, it is equally offensive.

You see, my ancestors are the indigenous peoples of this land. They are Cherokees and Choctaws, not Native Americans. They were here long before America and never considered themselves natives of the Americas. To call them that, indicates an ignorance of history, as if nothing existed here before America. My tribal people are grouped together with other indigenous tribes and relegated to nativity of your European creation. It is the equivalent of grouping all black skinned people together and calling them the n-word.

To simply ignore all the many differences in tribal cultures and label us all the same, is racist. But beyond being racist, it ignores our individual heritage and stereotypes us as one in the same. Native American sounds good if you're not one of us, it lets you forget about the way you treated my people for many years, the mass executions of millions, the trail of tears, the theft of our tribal lands and reneging of the many treaties your people made with mine. It pretends to bestow some sort of honorable tribute when the tribal indigenous people have never been treated honorably.

If we are going to venture down this road of removing "Redskin" from our vocabulary, we should also eliminate "black" and "white" and denounce groups like the NAACP or UNCF. Congress should no longer have a "black caucus" and we should just make it a Federal hate crime to refer to any person as "black" or "white" ...go ahead and throw "Hispanic and Latino" in there as well. After all, we are individuals who share equality as Americans, right? So why have all the labels to separate us by racial classification?

Or we can all just grow the hell up and understand that names are just names. There is nothing "offensive" about describing someone as "black, white, redskin" or by any other physical attribute. It's when we discriminate against that person on the basis of this that is offensive and racist. It's more offensive and racist to me, a tribal Choctaw and Cherokee, that certain politically correct persons want to speak for me and decide what is and isn't offensive.
 

Huey

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2012
Messages
1,577
Reaction score
117
Points
95
Location
Earth
Have any of you seen a red skinned native American,I know I havent,They are tanned people.
 
OP
Boss

Boss

Take a Memo:
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
21,884
Reaction score
2,770
Points
280
Location
Birmingham, AL
So people can't find Redskins offensive because you don't? What else do I have to clear with you?
Apparently you need to clear a lot of stuff with me because you are too stupid to know it otherwise. But we can start with things that personally affect me. Since I am of tribal heritage, I am the one supposedly being offended by the word "redskins" and I am telling you that it's not offensive to me or anyone that I know of tribal heritage. I have also explained how "Indian" and "Native American" are highly offensive to me and my people. If you are honestly concerned about what offends tribal people, stop obsessing with "redskins" and focus on what we are offended by.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,774
Reaction score
11,084
Points
2,040
So people can't find Redskins offensive because you don't? What else do I have to clear with you?
They can always still be offended, what shouldn't happen is someone being forced to change something because it offends a small fraction of the population.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
53,774
Reaction score
11,084
Points
2,040
So people can't find Redskins offensive because you don't? What else do I have to clear with you?
They can find it offensive, we just shouldn't have to care if its only a small portion of people that are offended.
 

Iceweasel

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
43,343
Reaction score
6,429
Points
1,870
Location
Washington State
A spokesman, whoops, spokesperson for the Washington Redskins came out this morning and said that they have reconsidered the name change. Due to constant onging embarrassment, from now on they will simply be called the "Redskins".
 

william the wie

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2009
Messages
16,667
Reaction score
2,385
Points
280
Redskin refers to the fact that tribes in North America that have not experienced high rates of intermarriage with other races like the Utes, Paiutes, Shoshone and Zuni have about a 20% rate of albinism still. Redskin referred to the higher rates of sunburn among natives because redskin was the 17th century term for sunburn. My own Cherokee ancestors were cave dwellers in the 17th century, presumably to avoid sunburn. Albinism made Indian mates more desirable because they looked more like the blond bluebloods of the European aristocracy than virtually any of the settlers did.
 

Big Black Dog

Gold Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
23,370
Reaction score
7,930
Points
340
I am a long-time Washington Redskin fan. Grew up in that part of the country and everybody was a Washington Redskin fan. I see nothing wrong with the name Washington Redskins. Those that do are making much out of nothing.
 

Wildcard

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2012
Messages
4,735
Reaction score
2,580
Points
1,050
Location
Planet Crazy
The Washington Redskins team name IS NOT offensive and DOES NOT need to be changed, as we are all being led to believe by the liberal shit-for-brains who continually pretend to know-it-all and what's best everybody. :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:

Trigger Nash

Rookie
Joined
Aug 28, 2014
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Points
1
This whole thing should be offensive to redskins because redskins is not really the reason for the uproar. PC is a weapon and this redskins business is just a bullet in its chamber.
 

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
62,144
Reaction score
14,279
Points
2,220
Location
Fredericksburg, VA
The most absurd thing about all this is the notion that a team would pick a denigrating nickname for the team mascot.

Do we have an example of that in regards to any other team mascots anywhere in the USA?

I had some friends that thought the Notre Dame 'Fighting Irish' really meant 'DRUNK Fighting Irish' and they were cool with that.

They were also drunk (usually) Irish men.

:D

Why do we stop the presses and lift our skirts because somewhere someone found offense at something?

Is that stupid shit or what?
 

BillyP

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2014
Messages
1,167
Reaction score
75
Points
50
The most absurd thing about all this is the notion that a team would pick a denigrating nickname for the team mascot.

Do we have an example of that in regards to any other team mascots anywhere in the USA?


I had some friends that thought the Notre Dame 'Fighting Irish' really meant 'DRUNK Fighting Irish' and they were cool with that.

They were also drunk (usually) Irish men.

:D

Why do we stop the presses and lift our skirts because somewhere someone found offense at something?

Is that stupid shit or what?
The dumb looking indian on the Cleveland Indians logo.
 

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2013
Messages
25,745
Reaction score
3,032
Points
280
Location
Earth
More I hear about this "issue" more convinced I am it's simply an anti-sportsteam thing and not a racial thing at all. Do they protest the other sportsteams use of indian names or mascots? Do they protest Jeep for their 'Grand Cherokee' model? Do they protest the Atlanta Braves or other baseball teams as much as the football ones?

This isn't what it seems. It's just some people who hate the Redskins favoring the other team :)
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top