Should the Washington Redskins Change Their Team Name?

Discuss the NHL, NFL, CIS, NCAA, Lacrosse, Soccer, Baseball, Basketball, Motorsports, Golf, Rugby, Amateur Sport, Curling, Wrestling ... Whatever Sport or Leisure activity you like!

Moderator: Team Captains

Post Reply
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

I'm sure most forumers are aware of the growing demands that the Redskins change their team name. Even NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has said that "If one person's offended, we have to listen." Team owner, Dan Snyder has refused to consider a name change, and it appears that the decision is wholly his. Keith Olbermann on ESPN referred to the team name as "the last racist name you can say in the office without getting fired." Olbermann then goes on to say that Snyder will eventually change the team name, given the increasing pressure, even from the league, for money.

Should the name be changed? What do you all think?

Oh, by the way, if this has been discussed in another thread already, I apologize. I did look, and couldn't find this particular discussion.
User avatar
cromartie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5005
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 2:31 pm
Location: Cleveland, usually

I love their annual rivalry game with the New York Niggers, personally.

And if that sentence made you cringe, I'd challenge you to defend the difference between the two, because their isn't any.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

South Pender wrote:I'm sure most forumers are aware of the growing demands that the Redskins change their team name. Even NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has said that "If one person's offended, we have to listen." Team owner, Dan Snyder has refused to consider a name change, and it appears that the decision is wholly his. Keith Olbermann on ESPN referred to the team name as "the last racist name you can say in the office without getting fired." Olbermann then goes on to say that Snyder will eventually change the team name, given the increasing pressure, even from the league, for money.

Should the name be changed? What do you all think?

Oh, by the way, if this has been discussed in another thread already, I apologize. I did look, and couldn't find this particular discussion.
It's been on my mind, from time to time. I don't think I ever started a thread on it.

Theisman defends it of course.

I have mixed feelings about it.

As a youngster growing up in North America, I liked the name, unaware of the racist angle. When playing Cowboys and Indians I just as much liked playing on the Indian side as on the Cowboy side. So the name always had positive connotations for me.

Seeing the viewpoints now, If Native Americans want it to go, then it has to go.

Under owner George Preston Marshall, for years he refused to integrate the team, an issue of racism, which cuts close to the controversy over the name, taken as racist by Native Americans.
During most of this unsuccessful period, Marshall continually refused to integrate the team, despite pressure from The Washington Post and the federal government of the United States.[25] On March 24, 1961, Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall warned Marshall to hire black players or face federal retribution. For the first time in history, the federal government had attempted to desegregate a professional sports team.[26] The Redskins were under the threat of civil rights legal action by the Kennedy administration, which would have prevented a segregated team from playing at the new D.C. Stadium, as it was owned by the U.S. Department of the Interior and thus was federal government property. -- Wikipedia
To me it is kind of like the situation where a member of an ethnic group can say the racist word, but a non member cannot.

Would Native Americans call a sports team they own by that name? If they did, they might get away with it. "We are the Redskins." I think there is some pride associated with the name.

If a rapper owned a sports team, and used the N word in the name, could he get away with it?
............

Bottom line for me ... the name Redskins will probably go to the wayside due to public pressure.
............

Blackhawks next? Love that jersey.

Chiefs next?

Indians next?

Any offended Vikings out there? :wink:

Canucks has something of a pejorative nature in its history. I've looked it up from time to time.

Yankee was not a term of endearment.
.............

A standup comedian in an adult club could come up with a funny (to some) routine with offensive sports names. Kind of a Lenny Bruce angle.
..........

Team nicknames can be a weird thing. Back in the 1970s I recall a local softball team, full of self proclaimed idiots, which proudly called themselves the "Preverts," with the incorrect spelling and pronunciation.
..........
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

As I think about this, I think that an important distinction exists between the terms "redskin" and "Indian," (in the US, native Americans, our "First Nations People" are still referred to as American Indians) or "chief." I believe that "redskin" is largely a derogatory term like the "N-word" (as cromartie points out; for some reason when I tried to include the actual word, I got *beep* in the text), whereas some of the other references to native Americans are more neutral or even flattering, like "chief," "brave," etc. I suspect that the derogatory terms have to go, but the other, more neutral terms may take longer to be excised. Edmonton Eskimos? Or should that be updated to Edmonton Inuit? :wink: Cleveland Indians?
Blue In BC
Hall of Famer
Posts: 3337
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2003 9:32 am
Location: Port Moody, BC

It's only a negative word if you allow it to be a negative word. I've never considered the " Redskins " as anything other than a team name.

You could just as easily say the name " Cowboys " has a negative connotation IMO.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

I get the impression from SOME in the community that they don't care because there are REAL and IMPORTANT ISSUES that can get left twisting in the wind (land claims, environment, residential schools etc...) by chatter about topics like this. Not complaining, about the topic SouthP, just saying these can be considered derogatory and/or smokescreens. For e.g. one fellow I know told us at a meeting about poverty: "I don't care what you call me. The endless loud debates on first nations, aboriginal, indian, whatever, LETS FOCUS ON THE REAL ISSUES".

Its tough because as an outsider I am not the one to make that call as to whether 'redskins' is offensive. Or what a cultural group wishes to be called. I know that there are quite a few labels that could be used to describe my ethnicity and/or other parts of communities I belong to. I ask people to be respectful and when I am told I am being disrespectful I try to be accomadating.

If they are going to change their name (the Redskins), IMO, this would be a good time to do it. This hasn't been a long period of success lately. I'm not saying only unsuccessful teams with possibly politically incorrect names should change but it would seem to be a better time than others should they choose to do so.........
User avatar
cromartie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5005
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 2:31 pm
Location: Cleveland, usually

WestCoastJoe wrote: It's been on my mind, from time to time. I don't think I ever started a thread on it.

Theisman defends it of course.
Theisman's a clown. Of course he'll defend it. Redskin alumni of prominence aren't willing to risk their appearance fees to speak out on the issue. He's no different.
I have mixed feelings about it.

To me it is kind of like the situation where a member of an ethnic group can say the racist word, but a non member cannot.
I've never seen why this is a problem. But then again, I thrive on self degradation and post ironic humor. So I get it.
If a rapper owned a sports team, and used the N word in the name, could he get away with it?
This, on the other hand, is well beyond the line. Artistic expression is one thing, public sphere activities such as sports teams are another.
Blackhawks next? Love that jersey.
Chiefs next?
Indians next?
A little bit of etymology would help here. The Chiefs were named, in part, after Chief Bartle, who was the mayor of Kansas City that negotiated the relocation of the Chiefs from Dallas to Kansas City.

The Blackhawks which, until eight years ago were called the Black Hawks were named that way for a reason, and that reason can be found here.

The Blackhawks and Indians are an important study in contrast with this issue. The Blackhawks, along with the Seminoles, Fighting Sioux and Chippewas (are different than the Indians and Redskins in this manner. In the former case, the teams are named after specific tribes or a Chief, and those tribes gave the teams in question a blessing to continue to use the name and appropriate iconography. Personally, I think the NCAA should leave the University of North Dakota the hell alone if the Sioux tribe gives the university it's blessing in continuing to use the existing logo. I also personally think that, after receiving the blessing of the Huron tribe, Eastern Michigan should not have converted from the Huron name and iconography to the Eagles name and iconography.

In the latter cases, Indians and Redskins are generic race related terms (in the case of Redskins) or iconography (in the case of the Indians) that can reasonably be construed to be racist in nature.

The Braves get relatively little flack because they don't have anything beyond a tomahawk as their logo, having rid themselves of the laughing brave logo in the mid 1980s.
As for the Indians, I don't understand how people who are offended by this aren't equally offended by this. The Chief Wahoo logo should really be phased out.
User avatar
Robbie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8380
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2004 10:13 pm
Location: 卑詩體育館或羅渣士體育館

With sensitive racial topics like this, the list is indeed endless. Would Irish-Americans be offended over Boston's NBA team? Or how about University of Notre Dame's sports teams that imply that the Irish love to fight?
South Pender wrote:the terms "redskin" and "Indian," (in the US, native Americans, our "First Nations People" are still referred to as American Indians) or "chief." Cleveland Indians?
In this day and age, the term 'Indian' is certainly not derogatory as it now simply refers to someone from the country of India. Therefore, are a lot of Indian-Americas, Indo-Canadians, and everyone else from the second-most populous country very offended over the misrepresentation of Cleveland's baseball team? From what I know, the answer is no as I don't see large groups of Indian social groups protesting over that name.
notahomer wrote:I get the impression from SOME in the community that they don't care because there are REAL and IMPORTANT ISSUES that can get left twisting in the wind (land claims, environment, residential schools etc...) by chatter about topics like this. Not complaining, about the topic SouthP, just saying these can be considered derogatory and/or smokescreens. For e.g. one fellow I know told us at a meeting about poverty: "I don't care what you call me. The endless loud debates on first nations, aboriginal, indian, whatever, LETS FOCUS ON THE REAL ISSUES".
As the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words and as such, it's understandable if you try to make a mockery of this. Therefore, I totally understand why Native Americans did protest against the Tomahawk Chop celebratory chant and dance at Atlanta Braves games. Similarily, I understand how Asian Americans were very offended when clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch designed some Asian caricature t-shirts: http://www.snopes.com/racial/business/tshirts.asp

When Vancouver was granted an NBA team in 1995, the original name proposed was the Mounties. I guess by then political correctness was in full swing already so the RCMP prevented the team from using that name. I suppose the so called offensive nicknames are ones that are grandfathered. That said, I guess it's safest to name sports teams after animals, or safer yet non-living items, or even safer yet how about not even having a nickname and simply name the team after the city (Baltimore Football Club, Toronto FC, FC Dallas, New York City FC).
South Pender wrote:Should the name be changed? What do you all think?
That said, when was the last time a professional sports team actually renamed its nickname? Notwithstanding abbreviations (North Stars to Stars, Mighty Ducks to Ducks) or city relocations, I remember only one case and it has nothing to do with racial reasons in the NBA. In 1997, the Washington DC NBA team was renamed from Bullets to Wizards because of the violent overtones in the city.
祝加拿大加式足球聯賽不列颠哥伦比亚卑詩雄獅隊今年贏格雷杯冠軍。此外祝溫哥華加人隊贏總統獎座·卡雲斯·甘保杯·史丹利盃。還每年祝溫哥華白頭浪隊贏美國足球大联盟杯。不要忘記每年祝溫哥華巨人贏西部冰球聯盟冠軍。
改建後的卑詩體育館於二十十一年九月三十日重新對外開放,首場體育活動為同日舉行的加拿大足球聯賽賽事,由主場的卑詩雄獅隊以三十三比二十四擊敗愛民頓愛斯基摩人隊。
祝你龍年行大運。
恭喜西雅图海鹰直到第四十八屆超級盃最終四十三比八大勝曾拿下兩次超級盃冠軍的丹佛野馬拿下隊史第一個超級盃冠軍。
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

It is an issue for our times.

If I had a vote to end the use of these logos, I would give my proxy to a Native American group. Want to force me to vote? I would vote to ban them. If I was starting a professional sports team, I would try mightily to avoid this kind of controversy.

A few years ago, when I was doing volunteer work with a First Nations group, I participated in a discussion of some of these issues. I showed some of the logos. Most disliked them. A few liked some of them.

I probably still have the materials somewhere.
...........

From a quick internet search.

Tommy Hawk ... cited as racially insensitive by the NCAI.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Washington Redskins ...
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Cleveland Indians.
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

I think that if we ask Native Americans, or American Indians, as they don't seem to mind being called, most would say (and some bands have said) that they consider the term "Redskin" to be racist and derogatory. Perhaps for this reason alone, the team name should be changed. How about Washington Tea Partiers; that has an ominous tone to it that might frighten opponents. :wink:
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

Robbie wrote: In this day and age, the term 'Indian' is certainly not derogatory as it now simply refers to someone from the country of India. Therefore, are a lot of Indian-Americas, Indo-Canadians, and everyone else from the second-most populous country very offended over the misrepresentation of Cleveland's baseball team? From what I know, the answer is no as I don't see large groups of Indian social groups protesting over that name.
I get your point, but in the U.S., many native Americans are also called Indians, and there has been no agreed-upon term among different Indian bands as to what would be preferable. Actually, the current preference among these native Americans seems to be "American Indian," and I'd say that this has been the preference and practice for the past 30 years or more.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

Robbie wrote: ....
As the old saying goes, actions speak louder than words and as such, it's understandable if you try to make a mockery of this. Therefore, I totally understand why Native Americans did protest against the Tomahawk Chop celebratory chant and dance at Atlanta Braves games. Similarily, I understand how Asian Americans were very offended when clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch designed some Asian caricature t-shirts: http://www.snopes.com/racial/business/tshirts.asp
.....
I remember only one case and it has nothing to do with racial reasons in the NBA. In 1997, the Washington DC NBA team was renamed from Bullets to Wizards because of the violent overtones in the city.
Puzzled by what you mean there? My only actions are to listen and try to understand what actual people of the culture have to say. So in a way my actions are listening to other peoples words. I will say in my experience there is a range of opinions. Lots of people are UNDER THE MISTAKEN impression that their view, is EVERYBODYS VIEW. Simply not true while I REFUSE TO MAKE COMMENT one way or the other as to whether they are offensive (because as a non-member I don't feel I deserve to say "it offends me"). I totally get why people would be offended by the tomahawk chop or those T-shirts you posted pictures of but that isn't the point in my opinion. I accept it simply because some say it offends them.

I can only remember one case of that happening too and it was the case you outlined.
Last edited by notahomer on Tue Sep 17, 2013 6:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

South Pender wrote:
Robbie wrote: In this day and age, the term 'Indian' is certainly not derogatory as it now simply refers to someone from the country of India. Therefore, are a lot of Indian-Americas, Indo-Canadians, and everyone else from the second-most populous country very offended over the misrepresentation of Cleveland's baseball team? From what I know, the answer is no as I don't see large groups of Indian social groups protesting over that name.
I get your point, but in the U.S., many native Americans are also called Indians, and there has been no agreed-upon term among different Indian bands as to what would be preferable. Actually, the current preference among these native Americans seems to be "American Indian," and I'd say that this has been the preference and practice for the past 30 years or more.
This was my point in my earlier post. Some members of some bands ARE offended by some of the terms (First Nations, Aboriginal, Indian,etc....). I think the fellow I mentioned was onto something because he said (his words paraphrased) "our people are arguing over labels and I don't care, call me an Indian, call me whatever, I want the real issues like homelessness, poverty and addiction to be addressed"
Post Reply