Jump to content

Providing independent coverage of the Minnesota Twins.
Subscribe to Twins Daily Email

The Store

Recent Blogs

Photo

This exists

  • Please log in to reply
57 replies to this topic

#1 Fatt Crapps

Fatt Crapps

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 19 September 2013 - 01:24 PM

Redskins name change not as easy as it sounds - ESPN

#2 Mr. Brooks

Mr. Brooks

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,497 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 08:35 AM

Until he ruined the entire article with that head scratchingly ignorant final sentence, he had made some good points.

#3 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 09:32 AM

I hate Rick Reilly; he's a chum, who grandstands every damn sentence he writes. On the issue itself: is something still offensive if only some people feel it's offensive? Yes.

#4 Fatt Crapps

Fatt Crapps

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 02:03 PM

"A simple test for Rick Reilly: answer the challenge of Ray Halbritter of the Oneida Nation. Go to his house, look at his grandchildren and say, 'My goodness these are some cute little Redskins.' If it is really a name of honor, you will make the trip and say it to the Halbritters. If you won’t, then you are completely full of it. News flash: he won’t."

#5 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 02:15 PM

And that's opposite his point in 1991 on the same issue.
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#6 Hornhead

Hornhead

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 02:22 PM

He makes the perfectly valid argument that offense can be taken to so many things. We have become such a thin-skinned culture because of the relatively new idea that that people should be able to go through life without being offended. And if you aren't offended, allow us to free you of your ignorance. How bizarre that those who fail to recognize and fight legitimate evil and injustice construct their own brand of it (aka political correctness).

Here's another test. Go into a white family's home and comment about the cute whites sitting on the couch. Context makes all the difference.[FONT="][/FONT]

#7 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 02:39 PM

Here's another test. Go into a white family's home and comment about the cute whites sitting on the couch. Context makes all the difference.


Well yeah, but last I checked no one is named the Florida State Crackers.

The issue here is thinking a race of people make for good cartoonish mascots. I despise political correctness, but that isn't even remotely the issue here. It's latent sentiments of racial superiority or indifference for cultural destruction manifesting as team nicknames.

#8 Hornhead

Hornhead

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 03:28 PM

The issue here is thinking a race of people make for good cartoonish mascots. I despise political correctness, but that isn't even remotely the issue here. It's latent sentiments of racial superiority or indifference for cultural destruction manifesting as team nicknames.

Sounds like a page straight out of the PC playbook. Okay, what evidence exist showing team nicknames destroy the cultures from which they were adopted? Per the article, the Native-American culture as a whole takes no offense and regards the Redskin name with pride. They understand the connotation it holds with regard to fighting ability and courage. The push for change comes primarily from white Leftists with an insatiable appetite for uncovering these "offenses" and transforming society to meet their vision. The resulting victim groups created can often be manipulated or solidified into thinking the Left serves to protect them from the oppressive desires of the Right.[FONT="][/FONT]

#9 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 03:56 PM

Sounds like a page straight out of the PC playbook. Okay, what evidence exist showing team nicknames destroy the cultures from which they were adopted? Per the article, the Native-American culture as a whole takes no offense and regards the Redskin name with pride. They understand the connotation it holds with regard to fighting ability and courage. The push for change comes primarily from white Leftists with an insatiable appetite for uncovering these "offenses" and transforming society to meet their vision. The resulting victim groups created can often be manipulated or solidified into thinking the Left serves to protect them from the oppressive desires of the Right.


We already destroyed their culture, this is just insult to injury. But you're right, I'm sure if it was the Mississippi Uppity Negroes or the Wisconsin Mass Murderin Honkies you'd also be complaining about political correctness shutting those names down too.

This is just subtle racism at work and you're too busy looking to feel insulted by it that you don't see the deeply rooted message this sends. It doesn't even have to bother someone else for it to bother some of us thtwe are still stuck in demeaning a people that already had so much taken from them.

#10 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 04:07 PM

I missed two great ones! I bet all the PC complaining right wingers would line up to support, in principle, some group calling their team the Fiddling Fiars or Pedo Priests and similarly mocking and stereotyping a whole group of people for their own entertainment.

#11 Hornhead

Hornhead

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 05:21 PM

I missed two great ones! I bet all the PC complaining right wingers would line up to support, in principle, some group calling their team the Fiddling Fiars or Pedo Priests and similarly mocking and stereotyping a whole group of people for their own entertainment.

The intent of those team names is to demean a group. You appear to believe the same is true for Redskin when examples abound to the contrary, some from Native-Americans themselves! Odd that a person who says our culture needs a thicker skin with regard to these perceived offensives is the one who is busy looking to feel insulted. Sounds like you at least reluctantly agree then that nicknames did nothing to destroy the culture. I can only guess such a mindless reflex resulted from too much exposure to one of our many overpriced institutions of Leftism (aka university).[FONT="][/FONT]

#12 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 06:15 PM

The intent of those team names is to demean a group. You appear to believe the same is true for Redskin when examples abound to the contrary, some from Native-Americans themselves! Odd that a person who says our culture needs a thicker skin with regard to these perceived offensives is the one who is busy looking to feel insulted. Sounds like you at least reluctantly agree then that nicknames did nothing to destroy the culture. I can only guess such a mindless reflex resulted from too much exposure to one of our many overpriced institutions of Leftism (aka university).


I never suggested these nicknames destroyed the culture, it would be a ridiculous suggestion. (almost as ridiculous as your use of it as a scarecrow) Short of genocide I'm not sure we can do that. This is more akin to pissing on the grave.

What you don't seem to understand is that these nicknames DO demean a groups culture and religion. We are mocking it, stereotyping it, and cartoonishly mimicking it. We're just so accustomed to demeaning them that we can't even recognize it when we do it.

#13 Hornhead

Hornhead

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 07:01 PM

I never suggested these nicknames destroyed the culture, it would be a ridiculous suggestion. (almost as ridiculous as your use of it as a scarecrow) Short of genocide I'm not sure we can do that. This is more akin to pissing on the grave.

What you don't seem to understand is that these nicknames DO demean a groups culture and religion. We are mocking it, stereotyping it, and cartoonishly mimicking it. We're just so accustomed to demeaning them that we can't even recognize it when we do it.

Sorry, I misinterpreted what you were saying, similar to how you may be misinterpreting the use of Redskin as a term of derision, although you are not alone in that regard. So where does it stop? The author mentioned the Fighting Irish among the team names that should be on the hit list. The use of that mascot is far more cartoonish. With the last name O’Hara, I could have seized my opportunity to be offended but instead chose to have fun with it and even had a couple ND sweaters with the silly leprechaun on them. Guess I was just young and ignorant.

I am frustrated how relatively insignificant issues draw so much focus when we have many weighty issues of far great importance to tackle. Battles like these show people are bored. Civil rights have been realized to such an extent that the movement is making up new rights and victim groups to remain relevant. Despite re-electing a black President, our country hasn’t been more divided in my lifetime. Clearly something has gone terribly wrong.

#14 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 07:13 PM

So where does it stop?


How about where we stop cartoonishly mocking a culture and religion by making them our sports mascots for starters? You want to throw the Irish in that...fine by me. There are obvious differences (like, we didn't slaughter them out of greed and then put them in a corner somewhere so we could try and more easily forget we slaughtered them. Minor difference I'm sure you'd contend), but if that's what it takes. Fine by me.

As for the rest, I would argue the very notion we have to "battle" this, is an indictment in and of itself. One of our biggest problems is a disregard for how we mistreat others if even unconsciously. Small battles like this can go a long way, especially when they shouldn't be a battle at all.

#15 Hornhead

Hornhead

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 08:22 PM

How about where we stop cartoonishly mocking a culture and religion by making them our sports mascots for starters? You want to throw the Irish in that...fine by me. There are obvious differences (like, we didn't slaughter them out of greed and then put them in a corner somewhere so we could try and more easily forget we slaughtered them. Minor difference I'm sure you'd contend), but if that's what it takes. Fine by me.

As for the rest, I would argue the very notion we have to "battle" this, is an indictment in and of itself. One of our biggest problems is a disregard for how we mistreat others if even unconsciously. Small battles like this can go a long way, especially when they shouldn't be a battle at all.


I really can’t imagine the far-reaching benefits to be achieved by changing the team name. This country has recognized its sins, perhaps more than any other country. Just seems like folks trying to impose their will on others.

You may have heard of a piece of “art” decades back called Piss Christ consisting of a crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist urine. Pretty offensive, mocking stuff you might say. However, I value liberty over my right to not be offended and have no desire to infringe upon the rights of the artist, although supporting him with tax dollars via the NEA is another story. I am a rare breed for sure, but that should help you understand my position more clearly.

#16 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 21 September 2013 - 08:35 PM

This country has recognized its sins, perhaps more than any other country. Just seems like folks trying to impose their will on others.


The very fact we continue to openly mock a culture and religion we all but destroyed speaks to the contrary.

We're talking about a professional sports team, based in our nation's capital, in a league that receives significant government support and protections, not some individual artist. The comparison is pretty ridiculous.

#17 Ultima Ratio

Ultima Ratio

    Super friend

  • Members
  • 1,743 posts

Posted 23 September 2013 - 11:52 PM

The very fact we continue to openly mock a culture and religion we all but destroyed speaks to the contrary.

We're talking about a professional sports team, based in our nation's capital, in a league that receives significant government support and protections, not some individual artist. The comparison is pretty ridiculous.


Who are "we?"

Are you suggesting that the natives should be offended, though they are not? I find that offensive, especially coming from a white man (I'm guessing that you are). Are they not bright enough to know when they should be offended? Is this not ethnocentric?:P
Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

#18 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 08:54 AM

Who are "we?"

Are you suggesting that the natives should be offended, though they are not? I find that offensive, especially coming from a white man (I'm guessing that you are). Are they not bright enough to know when they should be offended? Is this not ethnocentric?:P


We as in our culture. Some Native Americans are insulted and some are not, the point is not that they feel insulted but that our culture should take a close look at how we continue to portray and treat Native Americans.

#19 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 12:14 PM

Who are "we?"

Are you suggesting that the natives should be offended, though they are not? I find that offensive, especially coming from a white man (I'm guessing that you are). Are they not bright enough to know when they should be offended? Is this not ethnocentric?:P

Do you really think the handful of Native Americans who are not offended is representative of the whole populace? Seriously?

What class is is the capacity to anticipate offense in others, whether that actually exists or not. There's nothing classy about naming a football team the Redskins. And to extend your point (unfairly, but that's the kind of arguments that we're passing off as legitimate I guess), I suppose we should dispense with manners altogether, because well, not absolutely everyone is offended if I don't say thank you and please.

#20 Ultima Ratio

Ultima Ratio

    Super friend

  • Members
  • 1,743 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 02:21 PM

Handful? Did you read the article, no I guess. It's an overwhelming majority. You seem to be with the commissioner's absurd criteria that if we can find one person offended, we must halt everything and listen. That is a recipe for censorship and paralysis in public discourse.

"And even though an Annenberg Public Policy Center poll found that 90 percent of Native Americans were not offended by the Redskins name, and even though linguists say the "redskins" word was first used by Native Americans themselves, and even though nobody on the Blackfeet side of my wife's family has ever had someone insult them with the word "redskin," it doesn't matter. There's no stopping a wave of PC-ness when it gets rolling."

Nailed it.
Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains.

#21 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 06:09 PM

Handful? Did you read the article, no I guess. It's an overwhelming majority. You seem to be with the commissioner's absurd criteria that if we can find one person offended, we must halt everything and listen. That is a recipe for censorship and paralysis in public discourse.

"And even though an Annenberg Public Policy Center poll found that 90 percent of Native Americans were not offended by the Redskins name, and even though linguists say the "redskins" word was first used by Native Americans themselves, and even though nobody on the Blackfeet side of my wife's family has ever had someone insult them with the word "redskin," it doesn't matter. There's no stopping a wave of PC-ness when it gets rolling."

Nailed it.


Native Americans are welcome to keep using it then. It doesn't make it appropriate as a team name.

Since when does the right thing to do depend on the person wronged feeling wronged?

#22 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 10:30 PM

Well, let's look at that study.

This report deals with interviewing conducted from Oct. 7, 2003, through September 20, 2004. In that

period 65,047 adults were interviewed, of whom 768 identified themselves as Indians or Native Americans.

Yup, a survey of nearly 800 people! In which, they actually targeted some 65,000 adults! Ha! If the goal was to survey Native American views of the offensive nature of the name Redskin, I imagine there are more credible methods of obtaining such information.

Edited by PseudoSABR, 24 September 2013 - 10:42 PM.


#23 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 24 September 2013 - 10:38 PM

In my experience, the people actually living on reservations throughout the country are pretty offended by all kinds of names referring to their people--whether it's Indian, Native American, American Indian, or Redskin--so many find any catch all term other than their tribal name totally offensive. As if the Dine' people of Arizona (what we call the Spanish term Navajo) are really much like the Ojibwe people of the midwest (which are often referred to the anglicized chippewa).

I'd bet that the people contending that so few are offended have done little to no research (much less thorough reading) to defend their beliefs.

#24 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 01:30 PM

In my experience, the people actually living on reservations throughout the country are pretty offended by all kinds of names referring to their people--whether it's Indian, Native American, American Indian, or Redskin--so many find any catch all term other than their tribal name totally offensive. As if the Dine' people of Arizona (what we call the Spanish term Navajo) are really much like the Ojibwe people of the midwest (which are often referred to the anglicized chippewa).

I'd bet that the people contending that so few are offended have done little to no research (much less thorough reading) to defend their beliefs.


My experience on many reservations and working with a lot of Native Americans in jobs I've held has the Braves, Chiefs, Raiders, and Lakers as the top 4 teams on reservations in popularity.
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#25 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 04:25 PM

My experience on many reservations and working with a lot of Native Americans in jobs I've held has the Braves, Chiefs, Raiders, and Lakers as the top 4 teams on reservations in popularity.

I don't want to protract this argument out any further, but I don't think it's any surprise that Cheifs and Braves are more popular than Redskins and Indians.

Edited by PseudoSABR, 25 September 2013 - 04:39 PM.


#26 biggentleben

biggentleben

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 963 posts

Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:01 PM

I don't want to protract this argument out any further, but I don't think it's any surprise that Cheifs and Braves are more popular than Redskins and Indians.


Certainly, but they all tend to get lumped one in the same. I think that's the significant issue. There doesn't seem to be a difference in many people's eyes between a logo/name intended to honor Native tribes and one utilizing a slang.
Staff Writer for Tomahawktake.com, come check it out!

#27 PseudoSABR

PseudoSABR

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 1,955 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 11:23 AM

Certainly, but they all tend to get lumped one in the same. I think that's the significant issue. There doesn't seem to be a difference in many people's eyes between a logo/name intended to honor Native tribes and one utilizing a slang.

I think that's a fair point, and part of why it's difficult to get actual traction on this issue.

#28 Fatt Crapps

Fatt Crapps

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 320 posts

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:50 AM

The push for change comes primarily from white Leftists with an insatiable appetite for uncovering these "offenses" and transforming society to meet their vision. The resulting victim groups created can often be manipulated or solidified into thinking the Left serves to protect them from the oppressive desires of the Right.


How about those 700+ demonstrators outside the Metrodome tonight? You should've been there to tell them how you feel.

#29 Twins best friend

Twins best friend

    Member

  • Members
  • 37 posts

Posted 02 December 2013 - 12:06 AM

I apologize if this is too unrelated to Minnesota for this site but I've seen a lot reported recently on whether or not to change the name of the Washington Redskins due to the derogatory origins of the word and I wanted to state where I stand, and also see what other people thought in what I consider a safer environment than the nfl.com forum.

I will carefully state that I do not think the name should be taken offensively and therefore does not need to be changed. There is a common theme amongst NFL teams that their name is always taken from something that is meant to be powerful or ferocious (i.e. Bears, Lions, Vikings, Jets, Chargers, Broncos), or important (Packers, Patriots, Steelers). Knowing this, I can't imagine a name being chosen with cruel or mocking intentions and thus have to derive that Native Americans could fit in either category of naming and that "redskins" was a product of the periods common terminology. Yes the word had negative connotation at the time but I will take a page from South Park to illustrate my feelings on the word today.

South Park addressed an issue that I struggle with frequently in how the meaning of words can change. South Park uses a different term as illustration but my feelings towards the term "redskin" are similar. I can't visualize anybody using the term "redskin" as a racial slur. In my mind, redskin applies to the color of their uniforms. That might sound silly but when somebody says "redskin" I don't think of an actual person, I think of a football teams maroon jersey.

That's my piece and I'd like to know how others feel.

#30 TheLeviathan

TheLeviathan

    Twins News Team

  • Twins News Team
  • 4,884 posts

Posted 02 December 2013 - 11:27 AM

There is a whole thread telling you how people feel, many of those posts quite effectively derail the ideas you posted.