It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Redskins say name 'respectful,' suggest Senate Dems don't have all the facts

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   


It seems the Redskins have fired back at Harry Reid.




In a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, team President Bruce Allen wrote: "Our use of `Redskins' as the name of our football team for more than 80 years has always been respectful of and shown reverence toward the proud legacy and traditions of Native Americans."


Now, if a large group of Native Americans come out and say they find it offensive.

I would agree it should go. That's not what the numbers show.




The three-page letter -- titled “The Truth about the Redskins’ Name and Logo -- references research that "the term Redskins originated as a Native American expression of solidarity." It also notes that the team's logo was designed by Native American leaders and cites surveys that Native Americans and Americans as a whole support the name, including a 2014 Associated Press poll that showed 83 percent of Americans favored keeping the name.


Why would Harry Reid even get involved. Doesn't he have anything better to do ?




Redskins owner Daniel Snyder has refused to change the name, citing tradition, but there has been growing pressure including statements in recent months from President Obama, lawmakers of both parties and civil rights groups.


There is Tradition going back to 1933. The entire Stadium sings "Hail to the Redskins".




In the letter, the senators mentioned the NBA's quick action recently to ban Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling for life after he was heard on an audio recording making offensive comments about blacks.


For Harry to try to compare this to the Donald Sterling case....Weak




In a written response Thursday, NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy said "the intent of the team's name has always been to present a strong, positive and respectful image."


So unless and until it offends real Native Americans...Harry and his buddies should shut up.

I wrote this awhile back explaining how I felt about the Name...

The Washington Redskins must Change Their Offensive Name

Fox Sports






edit on 24-5-2014 by whyamIhere because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Oh boy I am just waiting for some laughs considering the links.

Anyway I think the entire premise of changing an 80 years plus team name is just stupid. I am willing to bet the name and logo have done more for relations than against it. As a kid the team and logo actually got me interested in learning about true native Americans I remember buying books and such on the subjects. Kids look at things differently.


edit on 24-5-2014 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

I'm kind of on the fence about this...

Regardless WHO is offended by it, should a football team be named a racial label?
Would it be OK if a new team came out and called themselves the "Crackers" or the "Kikes"?

I realize that some native Americans are offended and some aren't. But why should a football team have such a name, anyway? If it's offensive to SOME Native Americans, isn't that enough?

The franchise has shown that the majority of AMERICANS don't think the name should change. Of course, most European Americans aren't going to see a problem. But the truth is there are plenty of Native Americans who ARE offended and want the name to change. Maybe not a majority, but if some are offended, I don't see the problem in changing it, simply because it's a word with a racist past.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
I really don't get it. Football is the most revered institution in the US. Almost every boy grows up dreaming of being a pro ball player. The team name commands respect not derision.

I sucked at football but still take pride in my Viking heritage being honored by MN and my Fighting Irish heritage being honored by Notre Dame.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere
i don't see any problem with the name. if there was a huge outcry over it, then i would probably change it; but i think someone in government is the LAST person who can have trouble over the name.

in school we weren't really taught what was done to native americans in the name of western expansionism. reid just wants to score some votes for the dems. it's all BS politics on both sides (because they are the same).



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:53 PM
link   
If they are forced tochange their name, I suggest the Washington Wasichu. It has a pleasing alliteration and could be wa-wa for short.


Wasi'chu
Wašíču is the Lakota and Dakota (known collectively as the Sioux) word for people of non-indigenous descent,[1] with derogatory connotations. It expresses the native population's perception of the non-Natives' relationship with the land and the native population. Typically it refers to white people,[2] but does not specifically mention skin color or race. The term "black wasichu" has been historically used to describe a person of African descent, and a Native American who adopted non-Native ways could "make himself over into a wasichu."[3]
en.wikipedia.org...'chu



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic




The franchise has shown that the majority of AMERICANS don't think the name should change. Of course, most European Americans aren't going to see a problem. But the truth is there are plenty of Native Americans who ARE offended and want the name to change. Maybe not a majority, but if some are offended, I don't see the problem in changing it, simply because it's a word with a racist past.


True, it does have some racist overtones.

However, I have yet to see a large group of Native Americans object.

We have almost erased everything Indian. This was meant as a good thing.

So, right now it's just a bunch of busybody people telling Natives they should be offended.

Also, with all the things failing in this Country. Harry decides to act on this ?



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
Also, with all the things failing in this Country. Harry decides to act on this ?


Yeah, Harry's getting senile or something. He's done some really stupid things lately.

I don't know how the name Redskins first came into being. Think I'll look that up. If it was meant in a respectful way, that would sway me a little toward keeping the name.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere


African American's are called "black" because of their color. So....I guess calling them blacks is now offensive. I am just confused on how they think.
Firepiston



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   
This isn't how the team got named, but how the word "redskins" came to be.

The term redskins was given to the scalps of native Americans, which were sold along with bear and beaver skins. The Christian women were offended by the term "scalps", so the trappers called them "redskins".

Origin of the Term



I am Blackfoot, Cherokee and Choctaw...and yes, the term is extremely offensive to me.
...
So, you see when we see or hear that term...we don't see a football team...we don't see a game being played...we don't see any "honor"...we see the bloody pieces of scalps that were hacked off of our men, women and even our children...we hear the screams as our people were killed...and "skinned" just like animals.


Well, I can certainly see why some might find it offensive, regardless how the team got its name...



Proclamation issued in 1755

By His Honour's command
J. Willard, Secry.
God Save the King

I do hereby require his Majesty's subjects of the Province to embrace all opportunities of pursuing, captivating, killing, and destroy all and every one of the aforesaid Indians.
...
For every scalp of a male Indian brought in as evidence of their being killed as aforesaid, forty pounds.

For every scalp of such female Indian or male Indian under the age of twelve years that shall be killed and brought in as evidence of their being killed as aforesaid, twenty pounds.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere



We have almost erased everything Indian. This was meant as a good thing.

So having a team that has a derogatory name for a team is a good thing?



However, I have yet to see a large group of Native Americans object.

You must not be looking very hard. So far the National Congress of American Indians has object to the name as well as The American Indian Movement's and the Navajo Nation Council. Here is a easy way to tell if it is ok to use the term Redskin. When was the last time it was used when referring to a Native American?



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Just more PC nonsense.

Redefine speech, ban words.

Soon it'll be banning sentences and phrases.

Don't like the name?
Don't watch the game!



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:28 PM
link   
OK, after reading How the Redskins Got Their Name, I think it should be changed.

You can read it if you're interested, but the only reason the team wants to keep the name is for the money. And IMO, that's not EVEN a good enough reason to offend a group of people.

What say you, whyamIhere? Would you be OK with a team called the "Detroit N-words"?



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   
I think society has gone bunkers.

Is changing the name of a team all that these elected officials have to do, can't they just go play golf and stay out of our hair. The only Indians that I know that are redskins have sunburn.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Benevolent Heretic

Or here is a Smithsonian senior linguist's take from your same source, the Washinton Post.




For many Americans, both Indian and otherwise, the term "redskin" is a grotesque pejorative, a word that for centuries has been used to disparage and humiliate an entire people, but an exhaustive new study released today makes the case that it did not begin as an insult.

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.

-----

In fact, the earliest usages of "redskin" that Goddard tracked down were in statements made in 1769 by Illinois tribal chiefs involved in delicate negotiations with the British to switch loyalties away from the French.

"I shall be pleased to have you come to speak to me yourself," said one statement attributed to a chief named Mosquito. "And if any redskins do you harm, I shall be able to look out for you even at the peril of my life." The French used the phrase " peaux Rouges " -- literally "red skins" -- to translate the chief's words.

www.washingtonpost.com...


edit on 24-5-2014 by Deny Arrogance because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
This country is becoming way too ridiculously pc towards everybody who's feelings are hurt by even what they feel is the slightest affront although it's not meant to be. So the Redskins have to change their name even though 80+% of the majority is ok with it. The same thing happened here in Philly. A steak shop which was called Chink's (a nickname for the original owner) since 1949 had to change it's name to Joe's after 60 years because a few people took it as a derogatory racial slur. It's just a word, for Christ's sake.

www.philly.com...

Some regulars threatened to never come back if they changed the name. So they changed the name anyway at the risk of losing business to accomodate a few people who didn't frequent the place anyway. If you don't like a name of a businesss, just don't financially support it. Easy peasy. If you don't like the Redskins name, don't go to the games or buy their merchandise.
edit on 24-5-2014 by UnBreakable because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Why would anyone want to name their team with a derogatory term? It was meant as a tribute.
Broadening the definition of racism is not progress.



originally posted by: buster2010
a reply to: whyamIhere



We have almost erased everything Indian. This was meant as a good thing.

So having a team that has a derogatory name for a team is a good thing?



However, I have yet to see a large group of Native Americans object.

You must not be looking very hard. So far the National Congress of American Indians has object to the name as well as The American Indian Movement's and the Navajo Nation Council. Here is a easy way to tell if it is ok to use the term Redskin. When was the last time it was used when referring to a Native American?



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: UnBreakable

But that makes too much sense. The last thing people want to be today is sensible. Emotional knee-jerkers? Yes. Objective thinkers? No.


edit on 5/24/2014 by ItCameFromOuterSpace because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

So, if your alternative is true, it wasn't offensive and if my original meaning is true, then it's HIGHLY offensive to some and I would understand that.

This is also from the same source:



How much of the above is true? All of it, according to the custodians of Native American history.

How much is false? All of it, according to the custodians of white American history.


Who are you going to trust about Native American History? Them or the white people who have a financial interest in keeping the name?

My point is that there are enough Native Americans who find it offensive to change the name. This has been a fight for many years (my link is 20 years old) and I don't think it's going away.



posted on May, 24 2014 @ 04:55 PM
link   
As a Native American myself, I find it funny when white people chime in on what we should feel is offensive or not.

Of course it is you have dealt with type of stuff on daily basis..I mean who else would know what is good for us, other than a white person..


I think the term is offensive, as having to have dealt with people calling me this...and..no... they did not use it as compliment. Here would be one example "You f@@kin' dirty redskin, get a job" as yelled from a car while coming home from work.
edit on 24-5-2014 by Onslaught2996 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join