PETA Wants Washington Redskins to Change Logo, Not Name
Smithsonian Institution senior linguist Ives Goddard spent seven months researching its history and concluded that “redskin” was first used by Native Americans in the 18th century to distinguish themselves from the white “other” encroaching on their lands and culture. There is a famous speech buy a native American chief declaring himself as a Redskin.
Once peta joins a side, you know who to go against.
Political cartoon compares Redskins logo to swastika, confederate flag.
In a related story, The Richmond Free Press is dropping the Redskins nickname for the Washington NFL team from its pages, calling it racist.
In an editorial Thursday, the weekly primarily aimed at the city’s African-American community called the name insulting to Native Americans and divisive.
(It’s only divisive if you let it be.) This generation is the biggest bunch of pussy “wanna be victims” and they will finally allow the country to be overrun by illegals wishing for freebies and the communists that appease them
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
More race baiting from The Overfiend. “Let’s ask a bunch of white people if they are offended by a word that has been used as a racial slur against Indians.” That makes a lot of sense. Stick to your Kegel exercises, nanny. [/quote]
The only people offended by this are stupid, paternalistic, white people (and pretend Natives like Senator Liz Warren (D-MA) who faked being Cherokee in order to get affirmative action and an affirmative action professor spot).
Every Apache I know is a Redskins fan.
Stop acting like you know what is better for us “ignorant savages.” We can take care of ourselves.[/quote]
so what you’re saying is that the media sensationalize everything to do with race? no way!!
[quote]AliveAgain36 wrote:
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I think we should just switch to numbers. I mean the Giants might offend short people. The Patriots might offend everyone else by implying that they are not patriots. The packers might offend homosexuals (and we KNOW how sensitive THEY are). The Bengals, Lions, Bears, Ravens, Panthers, Colts, etc… might offend animal rights activists. The Jets would obviously offend all of our Latino constituants because they would be percieved as “against them” (West Side Story, people!). The Raiders and the VIkings bring some absolutely horrific imagry to mind that I’m sure offends womens groups.
Or maybe people should just shut the fuck up about it and stop being little PC bitches. But this is America, home of the pussified liberal, so they’ll probably end up changing the name.[/quote]
Indianapolis heard your advice and named their new minor league soccer team Indy 11.
However, this will probably offend:
-Christians since their were only 11 remaining apostles after Judas Iscariot was disgraced
-Spinal tap fans
-Canadians[/quote]
They’d better damn well change it–nothing goes to eleven except amplifiers.
On a related note–Bob Costas, you suck. Did anybody watch his halftime…whatever it was…during the Redskins Cowboys game? If I wanted to hear about politics or race relations I would watch CNN, C Span or some other political channel. I want to watch football! and hear about football. And forget about politics while the game is on.
Next Howard Cosell. I think he’ll beat out Olberman for the final spiral down into Cosellism.
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
On a related note–Bob Costas, you suck. Did anybody watch his halftime…whatever it was…during the Redskins Cowboys game? If I wanted to hear about politics or race relations I would watch CNN, C Span or some other political channel. I want to watch football! and hear about football. And forget about politics while the game is on.
Next Howard Cosell. I think he’ll beat out Olberman for the final spiral down into Cosellism.[/quote]
No accident. NBC coordinated with the government, whether on gun control, abortion or Redskins name. Bob Costas always tows the liberal line and is keen on hearing himself talk so he can rub shoulders with other small minded liberals in what he believes is showbiz.
He’s a fuckin dick. He’s part of what I refer to as the 24/7 assault on America.
Pick up 90% of magazines or newspapers and you get the liberal brainwash in one sentence or another, then when you think you can sit back relax, forget about world issues and watch your favorite team Costas accosts us with his little candy ass civics lessons.
Hey Bob “little dick” Costas… The only plausible way a woman could defend herself from an NFL linebacker is for her to have a gun. If the Indians had more guns maybe they wouldn’t have been on the losing side of history.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
On a related note–Bob Costas, you suck. Did anybody watch his halftime…whatever it was…during the Redskins Cowboys game? If I wanted to hear about politics or race relations I would watch CNN, C Span or some other political channel. I want to watch football! and hear about football. And forget about politics while the game is on.
Next Howard Cosell. I think he’ll beat out Olberman for the final spiral down into Cosellism.[/quote]
Did that little prick really go off AGAIN on politics? If so, I’m glad I missed it.[/quote]
Oh yes. Yes he did. I’m sure the halftime sermon is now on YouTube somewhere if you’d like to laugh and alternately get really pissed lol. I tried to forgive him for the gun debacle, mostly because I have good memories of watching my very first Olympics listening to him spin stories…and hey guns are for better or worse a very emotional topic for lots of people regardless of whether they should be addressed or not (and poorly understood at that). This though…this is not a big deal, this is just PC wankery and he already had his mulligan.
I can’t stand Bob Costas, dude doesn’t look like he could hit a wiffle ball off a T. Yet he broadcasts like every freakin sporting event! I wanted to punch him repeatedly during the last Olympics/
As an indian… am I offended?
No, I’m not that sensitive.
However, I am embarrassed as a football fan and an American and think they should change it. I still like them more than the cowboys, though.
Should they be forced to change it?
No. The lawsuit is more likely for publicity and to keep it relevant to the media. They tried this back in the late 80s and it fizzled out.
I have actually been to the National Congress for American Indians (which doesn’t actually represent all indians) and spoken w/ one of their senior policy advisers (but not about this specifically), so I do kind of keep up to date… I think I may have known the niece of one of the people quoted in the article.
For the record, and I think this was hinted at in your article (though, having a DC article about the redskins is like having a Boston article about the red sox, what do you think they’ll conclude?), every reputable organization representing indian peoples is against the mascot and the name. The name derives from the term “deer skin,” which is a slur. These organizations are also against blatant stereotypes like the cleveland indians’ mascot ( http://hnn.us/sites/default/files/MascotAd_0.jpg ) and the use of sacred chants like the atlanta braves… and a bit further on similar issues (chiefs’ name, etc).
Personally, the skins should change everything, the braves shouldn’t use the chant, the indians should get a new mascot, the blackhawks should change their mascot… I think Univ. of Ill. already got rid of their mascot (a white guy dressed up like a chief), but I have no prob w/ names like the Chiefs or the warriors. Some folks I’ve talked to (indian vets) were offended by the wounded warriors program because they thought “warrior” should be reserved for indian peoples.
Unfortunately, this has almost taken on a partisan agenda w/ conservative news supporting the skins and the more liberal news stigmatizing them because, IMO, the conservative news mistakenly assume indians are just “another minority looking for a handout,” when most natives are conservative themselves and get political backing from the more ideologically conservative politicians because most tribe’s main goal is reduced federal power. However, tribes also tend to get political backing form very liberal politicians as a people that have been screwed over (treaties not being honored). Where they lose political backing is w/ many moderates because their states don’t have any tribes, so why would they support a program that will help the indians, when it doesn’t help anyone in their state? Fiscal conservatives also tend not to support the tribes because the US has legal obligations to them that will cost money (though, not all that much because of the small population), and they are against any form of spending, even though it is literally unlawful not to support some tribal programs.
This is America. It’s really very simple, if the name offends you don’t give Snyder $300/a ticket or buy the $200 RGIII Jersey. If enough people do this he will change the name.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
This is America. It’s really very simple, if the name offends you don’t give Snyder $300/a ticket or buy the $200 RGIII Jersey. If enough people do this he will change the name.[/quote]
And if someone is offended, since this is America, he can voice his opinion. He can contact sponsors and advertisers to put pressure on them.
It really is a question of who and how many are offended. If Indians are offended they are so few in number most Americans can’t relate. If a team decided to call itself “America Deserved 9/11” and its logo was the Towers coming down I’m sure it would arouse a lot of people into some sort of action. We all have our “crybaby” button.
[quote]1 Man Island wrote:
As an indian… am I offended?
No, I’m not that sensitive.
Personally, the skins should change everything, the braves shouldn’t use the chant, the indians should get a new mascot, the blackhawks should change their mascot… I think Univ. of Ill. already got rid of their mascot (a white guy dressed up like a chief), but I have no prob w/ names like the Chiefs or the warriors. Some folks I’ve talked to (indian vets) were offended by the wounded warriors program because they thought “warrior” should be reserved for indian peoples.
[/quote]
Oh, Ok. I must misunderstand the meanings of offended and sensitive then.
[quote]Brett620 wrote:
Since I’m Irish, do you think Norte Dame will change their mascot?
I’m offended by the stereotype.
They changed the ‘Fighting Sioux’ didn’t they??[/quote]
I don’t get it.
I’m only offended by the Redskins if they beat my Chiefs. In all other cases I don’t give a shit about them.
Didn’t feel the need to start a new thread and didn’t want to sidetrack the NFL thread. So I just bumped this one. Also, would be curious to know Mr. Lilly White bottom right Native Americans actual heritage.
[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Didn’t feel the need to start a new thread and didn’t want to sidetrack the NFL thread. So I just bumped this one. [/quote]
Lol, I like how one of the Native American’s name is Bob Wilson… He must be a part of the Starbucks tribe.
im offended by the Buccaneers name…its offensive to all pirates around the world…
fla st seminole…???
