Sports teams are only racist when..

[RaptorJesus]

Why do white people with no chips in the game wanna erase only the native american names from sports? Seems racist.

Why don't they ever protest the teams named after white people? At least they'd be protesting something relevant to them.

Especially the Redskins getting heat these days which has more of a wwI honor than anything from what I understand.

If anything, if it's about fairness you'd think these that protest would demand they name more after native people's because they are disproportionately represented compared to all the teams using white inspired or white mascots and logos.

Personally I think it's an honor for any race of people to have something like that named after them, and some people just can't see that or take it the wrong way; they should loosen up & just embrace it for what it is.

##Not racist since named after white inspired or use white mascot?:
#NFL
Oakland Raiders (whiteface logo)
Dallas Cowboys (white mascot, named after the Rangers texas law enforcement mostly white at time)
Minnesota Vikings (white viking mascot, nordic inspired name)
Baltimore Ravens (this one might not count but named after Edgar Allan Poe who was white)
Buffalo Bills (named after Buffalo Bill Cody, white)
New England Patriots (white looking mascot, have used a caucasian mascot in the past but the grey one now still looks white)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers (Any of the British, French, or Dutch sea adventurers who chiefly haunted the Caribbean and the Pacific seaboard of South America during the latter part of the 17th century)

#MLB
Cincinnati Reds (renamed in the 50’s because of the red scare renamed to the “Redlegs” came from, this was once a derogatory term used to refer to a specific group of poor white people living on various islands in the Caribbean (generally originally from Ireland and Scotland). They were also commonly known as “white slaves”.)
San Diego Padres (white priest as mascot, named after Fathers/Priest)
Texas Rangers (named after texas law enforcement)

#NBA
Boston Celtics (stereotypical white Irish leprechaun mascot/logo)
NY Knicks (Knickerbacker, is a surname that dates back to the early settlers of New Netherland
Philadelphia 76ers (named after our founding fathers of the revolution who were white)
Dallas Mavericks (Named after TV western show Maverick main characters, white)

#NHL
Anaheim Ducks (named after Mighty Ducks movie who’s cast and members were mostly white)
Ottawa Senators (white person face logo
Vancouver Canucks (a sometimes derogatory name for Canadiens used in the USA)
New York Rangers (after the Texas Rangers, law enforcement predominantly white at the time)

##Racist because not named after white people and named after Natives instead?:
#NFL
Kansas City Chiefs
Washington Redskins

#MLB
Cleveland Indians
Atlanta Braves

#NBA
Goldenstate Warriors

#NHL
Chicago Blackhawks

[Warforger]

Notice how none of the teams with European inspired names were the "Minnesota Europeans" or "The Oakland Whites". The issue with redskin is that it refers to a time where people would hunt Indians for bounties, and the way they proved they killed an Indian was with a scalp of red skin hence "red skins". This is why redskins is a racial slur according to the Oxford Dictionary.

[Camarohusky]

Why does every idiot think they are so smart bringing up this poorly created straw man so often?

NO. You're not smart. If you have any sense, you'd realize that your argument is based on little to nothing and has no real clue what the actual problem with the Redskins is.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/12/14 04:16 PM, Warforger wrote: Notice how none of the teams with European inspired names were the "Minnesota Europeans" or "The Oakland Whites". The issue with redskin is that it refers to a time where people would hunt Indians for bounties, and the way they proved they killed an Indian was with a scalp of red skin hence "red skins". This is why redskins is a racial slur according to the Oxford Dictionary.

Just one addition, wanted to clear up that I mixed up the Redskins with the Blackhawks on the WWI honor origin I just realized. I knew which was which, just got mixed up stream of consciousness when writing my post.

Also to apologize just incase if there was something like this listing all the teams with white inspired names and logos juxtapose to the comparably few native american inspired ones.

Food for thought, Today my Cardinals are playing the Redskins and there is a protest outside the arena both demonstrating FOR and AGAINST the Redskins name. But what I noticed on the news was the one against was like all white people, and the Zuni Pueblo tribe is out demonstrating in support of keeping the Redskin name.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/glendale/2014/10/12/glendale-redskins-protest/17155341/

There are native americans there right now at the game demonstrating against Redskin name too but most the people marching/demonstrating that opinion that they showed are white faced it looked like when I saw my local news covering. Sorry no DVR clip this post.

[orangebomb]

Quick question, why did you bother to list a bunch of teams that are either named after groups of people that are based on history (FYI, there were such a thing as black Vikings, Patriots, Blackhawks etc.) or are largely generic in nature (Chiefs, Raiders, Etc.) and assume that they are white? They are hardly racist on it's own, largely because they were based on generic historical figures, minus any sort of racism that they may or may not have in their own time.

The only names that would be considered offensive are the Washinton Redskins in football, and to a lesser extent the Cleveland Indians in baseball. Hypothetically speaking, the only way that either team change their names is when corporate sponsors start pulling out, and so far, it seems like they aren't willing to do so. There are tons of reasons why they don't care, most of it due to apathy.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/12/14 06:28 PM, orangebomb wrote: Quick question, why did you bother to list a bunch of teams that are either named after groups of people that are based on history (FYI, there were such a thing as black Vikings, Patriots, Blackhawks etc.) or are largely generic in nature (Chiefs, Raiders, Etc.) and assume that they are white? They are hardly racist on it's own, largely because they were based on generic historical figures, minus any sort of racism that they may or may not have in their own time.

The only names that would be considered offensive are the Washinton Redskins in football, and to a lesser extent the Cleveland Indians in baseball. Hypothetically speaking, the only way that either team change their names is when corporate sponsors start pulling out, and so far, it seems like they aren't willing to do so. There are tons of reasons why they don't care, most of it due to apathy.

Well, idea popped in my head after I saw a random graphic on a forum I can't remember which site but was some sports related forum site. Had several of the ones I named logos like the Celtics above the native ones with the heading "Not Racist?" and had "Racist?" above the native ones. I couldn't find the graphic and wanted to do something similar though not a graphic just list them out for discussion or to name any possible examples that if you took a different spin and made a team of equal historical inaccuracy or stereotypical depiction would not be acceptable or have a possible double-standard someone might point out.

I might have gone a little overboard with some of them, though some I think show a double-standard or a sort of free-pass. If I may play devil's advocate; I don't think the native american or other ethnic group equivalent would get the same treatment.

I think there's a pattern, that if you tried a historically inaccurate caricature of like the historical Black or native american equivalent of a Viking it would cause problems. Where as even though Vikings probably never wore a helmet like that (http://www.history.com/news/ask-history/did-vikings-really-wear-horned-helmets), and the Celtics, not every Irishman is some short guy smoking a pipe winking all the time like that.

What about instead of Vikings some equally brutal ethnic group of a darker skin color that did similar things with equally stereotypical caricature.

I will answer the rest with some quick questions of my own.

How well do you think would go over if we had like a stereotypical Black figure equally cartoony as the Celtics one? Or instead a native american with peace pipe and equally stereotypical features for that race?

What if the Buccaneers were the Pirates but had like a black skinned somali pirate caricture instead of the skull or a white one? (or could do this with Pitt. Pirates baseball team they still use or did use a white skin pirate a long time).

Just one more. Philadelphia 76ers (named after our founding fathers of the revolution who were white, some slave owners). What about a team named after a black rights group like named after the Underground Railroad (or substitute Underground Railroad with another important black figure or rights group that achieved something)? I wonder if it would cause problems?

Ok one last one, how about a make believe team like the Celtics (Celts from europe) but lets name after a West African countries' people from which most slaves came from. How would that go over? Could you basically do the equal but with a ethnic group of color instead of white? These are just random thought, look forward to how some might think these would go over or if relevant.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/12/14 07:27 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: I think there's a pattern, that if you tried a historically inaccurate caricature of like the historical Black or native american equivalent of a Viking it would cause problems.

Now, I'd have to disagree. Mere historical inaccuracy alone does not make something racist. Many of the our projections of past peoples are inaccurate. It's what the charicature represents that makes something racist.

To your point, I'd actually say, many benign colorizations of mascots as black would not be a problem. (sure there would always be a small section of the usual whiners who would take anything bad, but it would not be an objectively racist mascot, like the redskins is.

You do have a basic point in that what is and is not racist can vary wildly in a society and seems to have little or no rhyme or reason (except the reason is clear.) What is racist often has less to do with the charicature, and more to do with the history, emotional ,a nd intent behind that charicture. This is why the Blackhawks has almost no problem, and the Reskins does. Sure, they both paint relatively innacurate portraits on native americans, but redskins carries that derogatory baggage of the Indian Wars and everything else bad with it.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/12/14 09:43 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Now, I'd have to disagree. Mere historical inaccuracy alone does not make something racist. Many of the our projections of past peoples are inaccurate. It's what the charicature represents that makes something racist.

To your point, I'd actually say, many benign colorizations of mascots as black would not be a problem. (sure there would always be a small section of the usual whiners who would take anything bad, but it would not be an objectively racist mascot, like the redskins is.

You do have a basic point in that what is and is not racist can vary wildly in a society and seems to have little or no rhyme or reason (except the reason is clear.) What is racist often has less to do with the charicature, and more to do with the history, emotional ,a nd intent behind that charicture. This is why the Blackhawks has almost no problem, and the Reskins does. Sure, they both paint relatively innacurate portraits on native americans, but redskins carries that derogatory baggage of the Indian Wars and everything else bad with it.

I in general sort of agree with you, but I'd like to defer the decision of whether it's racist to Native Americans or someone who it actually affects. Being totally white I don't really care because it doesn't affect me.

I just think white people should not get involved because I don't see what chips we have or stake in any of it. There are clearly a lot of supporters that think the name is an honor and people on the other side that find it totally offensive.

I did finally have a clip from my DVR to share I recorded just after the game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t3OYQvi6to

Check out Dale Vaughn. He's a spitting image of a Native American. That is a legit name from Native American Heritage and this affects him so much (sarc)!

Just look how native american he is, this must affect him so much because when I think of "Redskins" I think of all the people like him of his caucasian color that name must have hurt and affected (sarcasm, not at you though just general sarc)

I wish I had it running earlier but was not in a place where I could set to record, they had tons of white faces marching around. Basically a bunch of white liberals that just like to protest things for the sake of protesting, but they were really small group compared to the supporters of the Redskin name. The Zuni Pueblo tribe and supporters of the Redskin name had a much larger turnout and heavier native presence.

In the clip there's a nice family proud of their race and skin color, and the Redskin name which I think is a healthy way of embracing it sort of like the way any people would regardless of history. Sort of "taking it back" if you will and slowly changing the meaning or perception in culture. Enjoy the clip :)

They also mention that we have like local native american res schools that name their teams the Redskins and are very proud of it.

[RaptorJesus]

Just wanted to also post the follow-up to this from the next morning.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFQ-xiqdl44&list=UUjxT5LDym5nPMCo4G_6Z3Bw

There's a guy in the video, native american at one part who says what I've heard lifelong here in Arizona from all kinds of native americans. There's nothing racist or offensive about the term other than what white liberals who have no business trying to attach a meaning to it in recent years.

The Redskin name is just what they use to describe their people. It has no racist or baggage, it's no different than if you called me whiteskinned or a black person black.

Native american people naturally usually have a reddish tone to their skin, so it's an apt name.

You can see also here the Navajo Nation leader wearing a Redskin cap supporting the team with the owner right next to him.

Not sure if Redskin means something different to you Camarohusky but I've only heard things like you said in recent last year or so. It's my belief that white people or other liberal groups were trying to misinform and inject a meaning to the word that it was never supposed to mean.

Can also see lots of supporters that don't want the name changed, and would be disappointed at having it taken away from them by liberals and whites who have no business in whether Redskin is racist or not (which it's not and there's no problems with the word whatsoever except the ones stupid people made up themselves).

[Boredy-Mcbored]

It makes no sense to me how you complain about white people being involved in the the matter and being supportive of the name change, when you are a white person who said themselves you don't care about the issue.

The sport team is name is racist, when it's racist. The cowboys, raiders and any other term used in your examples above aren't racist because it was never used in a racist way. At the time of cowboys, no one ever said the name in vain. Same with raiders.

I am not a Native American myself, but all I know is that if a team with the name Mississippi Blackfaces sprung up out of no where, I would be livid.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 06:32 PM, Boredy-Mcbored wrote: It makes no sense to me how you complain about white people being involved in the the matter and being supportive of the name change, when you are a white person who said themselves you don't care about the issue.

The sport team is name is racist, when it's racist. The cowboys, raiders and any other term used in your examples above aren't racist because it was never used in a racist way. At the time of cowboys, no one ever said the name in vain. Same with raiders.

I am not a Native American myself, but all I know is that if a team with the name Mississippi Blackfaces sprung up out of no where, I would be livid.

Ok I chose words poorly, I do care. I just don't think it's my fight/I wouldn't be out with the protestors or anything. It's America and I can express my opinions though even if it be on this forum.

I would not like it to change because of all the native people that would be hurt by it, and it's a long traditional history as an NFL team. If there was a team called the Whiteskins I would fully support the team and be proud they chose my race to be honored as a team.

That's part of my point, there could be a Mississippi Blackfaces and that'd be ok with me. You're the racist saying they can't do something because of race.

And you're not Native American either so why should you decide if it's racist? Same if you weren't black, it's not your decision/your opinion doesn't really count unless you are part of that group.

I do feel, growing up in Arizona I have some insight with the amount of natives here easily accessible to talk to. Take what I said about the reservation HS teams earlier we have several called Redskins of their own choosing. You'd think if it were offensive the Reservation of all places wouldn't call it that team name.

Even in scouts growing up in the 90's this came up once about Redskins and native americans in my troop all said the same thing they say now that it's simply a term for the skin color and nothing else. Fathers, grandfathers of natives all said same thing. Not offensive at all.

Look at all of them marching to keep the name. Then look at the ones against it and you see all whitefaces mostly.

& even if it were racist (which it isn't), why just now are there people saying it is? You'd think that would have come up in the 60's or 70's during civil rights movements. That's because it's something only in the last like year or so that someone (most likely white) came up with and tried to attach their own meaning to it.

To quote the guy in the video, stop using the white man's dictionary and go to their home and ask them.

My main complaint is that this is a coup and someone is attaching the wrong meaning in recent to a word translated to english that native americans use themselves in their own native language to call themselves.

It's just a bandwagon liberals jumped on in recent years, nothing more. The name won't change either because there are too many supporters Native American, and the main group against it is white people who have no business calling it racist.

The thing someone said earlier about it having baggage about scalping and all that nonsense is part of what I'm talking about. White man, trying to write his own definition for a word he didn't make and is misinformed about.

Check out that family in the other video further up this thread, that family was navajo and proud as hell there's a team named Redskins.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 06:37 PM, mrgreg846 wrote:

At 10/13/14 06:32 PM, Boredy-Mcbored wrote: I am not a Native American myself, but all I know is that if a team with the name Mississippi Blackfaces sprung up out of no where, I would be livid.

I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

Do black people call themselves that traditionally/is that offensive to them? I think it not traditional or normal name, would they have a problem with it? Are you black, and if so would you have a problem with that name or are you white just looking outside in? I'd be in about the same boat as I am now, ask them if it's offensive/what it means and they will prob tell you.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/13/14 07:10 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

K*ke means circle. Wop mean without papers. N****r is a variation on the word black. Fa**ot used to mean a poor person.

The dictionary meaning or historical usage are irrelevant. It is the current view of the word that matters.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 08:54 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 10/13/14 07:10 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

K*ke means circle. Wop mean without papers. N****r is a variation on the word black. Fa**ot used to mean a poor person.

The dictionary meaning or historical usage are irrelevant. It is the current view of the word that matters.

Who's current view though? You further help prove my point by showing that just because a bunch of white people and liberals have a viewpoint that it's racist or try to impose a definition of the word when meanwhile native americans have used the word themselves generations going back before any of them spoke English.

It's not a slur and never had any negative connotation until outsiders or white people whoever started saying it's racist for being misinformed or not knowing that Native Americans have used the word Redskin albeit in english or in their native tongue.

Those words you list fail as examples because they are slurs and derogatory terms, they aren't things that those people ever proudly used to call themselves.

Do you understand now how dumb people are that say Redskins is a racist team name? Would any of those people ever use those names on their own volition as a team name?

Redskins is used all over the nation in different reservations as a team name for their Schools for christ sake! What do you have to say to that? Would a Hebrew school ever use that slur you so failed to try to pass as a comparison? No because it's not the same thing.

Guess what you can't because you're a dumbass liberal and will avoid answering it because you counted on it just being an NFL team that makes millions each year and didn't count on them using it in a School as their name on their own volition.

Fuck, I seen how you start every post with namecalling and your own sad projection of your broken ass logic. You are some weak shit.

I don't know how else to put it.. Redskins has been a proud name they have used themselves for generations proudly! You people are so out of it.

I mean if the name were Redsavages or something then your comparisons would be valid but it's like if all the non-whites decided to impose that Caucasian is racist by coming up with a bunch of bullshit definitions and stigmas that never existed to try and pass it off as a slur.

Native Americans don't need other people deciding for them what's racist and what isn't, that's more what this is about. They aren't offended it's a coup of whites and misinformed liberals like yourself. Who decides what the current view of a word is anyways? It's their word, let them decide, most of them want to keep the name.

They wanted to keep their land too and look what happened? Enough people held a certain view and took it. So is that still how it is? You wanna take the team name away from them and name it after some white group or make it something really "politically correct" like an animal or inanimate object? Fuck that, fuck your liberalism. There's enough native Americans that say it's not a slur to protect against dumbass liberals like you from ever changing that name.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 10:26 PM, mrgreg846 wrote:

At 10/13/14 08:54 PM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 10/13/14 07:10 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

K*ke means circle. Wop mean without papers. N****r is a variation on the word black. Fa**ot used to mean a poor person.

The dictionary meaning or historical usage are irrelevant. It is the current view of the word that matters.

And that's the dumbest fuckin contradiction! What a dumbass, the whole reason the slurs you just listed are because of HISTORICAL usage and definition! Go troll somewhere else, you're adding nothing here.

I seen you say a lot of stupid shit in like every thread you involve yourself in. Is that a school logo in your Avatar? I'd not have guessed it with what a dumbass liberal you are. Liberals are a disease.

You have done nothing but troll with broken logic, and are just being disingenuous here. You brought a straw man and he is limping badly snapped in the middle right now.

Can you just be genuine here and say that you were wrong and misinformed about the word Redskins? Because that's what just happened.

Probably not because if you go to a University you're an immature dumbass liberal with like 0 real life experiences and a bunch of other liberals brainwashing you.

Clearly have also probably never asked an actual native american about this issue and I already know you're going to say it won't matter because it fits your liberal viewpoint that if there's enough votes or like opinion no matter their stake in the matter that some sort of administrative or government action should be taken just because a bunch of people say so. No matter if it affects them or not. Toooo Liberal for me.

You can't counter anything I said because you are too thick in the head and can only offer up liberal bullshit that can't stand just like the fallacy of an agenda you liberals always bring with you.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 08:54 PM, Camarohusky wrote: stuff

Wait a sec I just realized you are from Seattle, Washington?

It makes sense now all the dumb liberal stuff coming from you... I didn't mean to call you a troll that was a compliment compared to what a dumb liberal you probably actually are coming from that horrible place. I'm sorry man, I'm glad I don't live in Seattle, that place is like Liberalism, USA lol. I might as well be arguing with a little 4 year old with a dent in the head because that's about how one-sided this is.

I forgive you for being so naive now. Here in Arizona we are way more progressive and run circles around you guys intellectually. I didn't realize this was such an unfair conversation. I didn't realize I was speaking to someone so Liberal their state can't handle swingsets in the schools anymore and had to take them out.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/School-Districts-to-remove-all-swing-sets-in-wake-of-tragedy-278453871.html

They are phasing out swingsets because their liberalism has made them that stupid that they actually will not have any at all... Liberalism lol, Why don't you break off like become part of Russia or something you commie liberal. I just hope they are not breeding much up there so the liberalism kind of stays within that state at least.

Can someone who has cognitive ability to use a swingset reply in his place or something?
Or like when you learn how to use one maybe you can come back and talk here?

By your logic the Cleveland Browns would be next because it's not about historical use or definition. It's all about "current view" right? If enough people thought that one was about skin color or racism misinformed liberals like yourself would be protesting it too.

I'm sure if enough of you dumbass liberals had a view that name is racist too you'd try and change it without ever realizing that one is named after a person same as you never realized Redskins is not a slur.

I'm basically done, talking to someone this liberal is like talking to a foreigner. You're like not even recognizable as an American to me hardly. Who would vote to get rid of swingsets in schools that's HORRIBLE!? You people are fucked up in the head or something. No. No more of your broken ass liberal ideas. Take them somewhere else, you will never comprehend, maybe like 20 years after some experience you'll realize liberal ideas like this don't hold up.

[DoctorStrongbad]

Sport teams should be allowed to keep whatever names they have. The world has way bigger issues to deal with.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/13/14 11:31 PM, DoctorStrongbad wrote: Sport teams should be allowed to keep whatever names they have. The world has way bigger issues to deal with.

We should lock this thread right here on a sane note before someone (Camarohusky) who can't even use a child's playground swingset tries to make sense of anything more complex than swinging back and forth on a chain.

Again I apologize Husky, I did not realize that you could not use a swingset or I'd have not responded knowing you were so far behind intellectually.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/10/07/school-district-bans-swings-for-safety-r

[LazyDrunk]

As someone who finds the term "redneck" both endearing and complimentary, I can relate.

Dr. Dre would agree too, NGers.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/13/14 10:57 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: And that's the dumbest fuckin contradiction! What a dumbass, the whole reason the slurs you just listed are because of HISTORICAL usage and definition! Go troll somewhere else, you're adding nothing here.

Call a Jew a circle today and see if they get mad. Chances are they'll just be confused. Call them a K*ke and they'll be mad.

Ask an italian american if they have papers and see if they get mad, they'll like be confused. Call them a W*P and they'll be mad.

Go tell a gay person to pick up sticks for money. They'll likely be confused as well. However, call them a fa**ot, and they'll get mad.

Understand now? If you'd made the scantest of effort you'd actucally have realized I was showing how the historical meanings and definitions fo words often have little to no meaning, but the word itself does. Same goes for redksins. Its shistroical meaning has at least two meanings, one being benign and the other not so much so. However, the term today, to many native americans is representative of the dumb indians like those in Disney's Peter Pan.

[Camarohusky]

A big problem with this argument is that many don't understand what makes something offensive. They act as if there's some sort of objective reason or that something can be patently offensive. That's just not how it works.

Offense is something entirely subjective to a group. If a group sincerely believes something to be offensive than that word is offensive to them.

So, you cannot say that Redskins is not offensive, regardless of how many reasons you try to give. You don't get to decide what does and does not offend others

What you CAN do, as many have attempted in the numerous iterations of this issue on the BBS, is question the sincerity of this offense.

This is why there are little to no words actually offensive to white people about white people. Due to the lack of any baggage associated with any of these words, most white are not being sincere when they say that being called cracker or honky offends them.

So to all of your other examples in that hackneyed first post of yours, if a group came forward as sincerely offended by any of those names, there would be an honest discussion about it. Until then, trying to say that there are other racist names is just a straw man, and a really pathetic one at that.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/14/14 09:54 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 10/13/14 10:57 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: And that's the dumbest fuckin contradiction! What a dumbass, the whole reason the slurs you just listed are because of HISTORICAL usage and definition! Go troll somewhere else, you're adding nothing here.

Call a Jew a circle today and see if they get mad. Chances are they'll just be confused. Call them a K*ke and they'll be mad.

Ask an italian american if they have papers and see if they get mad, they'll like be confused. Call them a W*P and they'll be mad.

Go tell a gay person to pick up sticks for money. They'll likely be confused as well. However, call them a fa**ot, and they'll get mad.

Understand now? If you'd made the scantest of effort you'd actucally have realized I was showing how the historical meanings and definitions fo words often have little to no meaning, but the word itself does. Same goes for redksins. Its shistroical meaning has at least two meanings, one being benign and the other not so much so. However, the term today, to many native americans is representative of the dumb indians like those in Disney's Peter Pan.

Look.. I thought you were just a dumb liberal, but I don't argue with retards.

I can't put it any simpler, NONE OF THOSE ARE VALID EXAMPLES AND YOU JUST FURTHER PROVED IT YOURSELF!!!

THOSE ARE SLURS, REDSKINS IS SOMETHING NATIVE AMERICANS USED THEMSELVES RESPECTIVELY TO DESCRIBE THEIR SKIN COLOR ON THEIR OWN BETWEEN THEMSELVES AND ARE NOT OFFENDED BY IT. SHUT THE FUCK UP UNLESS YOU CAN READ ENGLISH YOU DUMBASS RETARD NONE OF THOSE ARE THE SAME THING. DO YOU READ ENGLISH?

This is like an intellectual equivalent of MIKE TYSON PUNCHING A BABY. Go learn how to use a swingset without getting hurt you DUMBASS SEATTLE LIBERAL.

FOR FUCKS SAKE YOU VOTED SWINGSETS TO BE PHASED OUT OF SCHOOLS. YOU ARE A RETARD AND HAVE NO REASONING SKILLS WHATSOEVER AND STILL FAILED TO ANSWER ANY OF MY POSTS WITH ANY SHRED OF COGNITIVE REASONING OR CULTURAL AWARENESS WHATSOEVER.

[Boredy-Mcbored]

At 10/13/14 06:37 PM, mrgreg846 wrote: If there was a team called the Whiteskins I would fully support the team and be proud they chose my race to be honored as a team.

Buuuuut, whiteskins was never and has never been a racial slur...

You're the racist saying they can't do something because of race.

Noo, I'm just a person that's pointing out a clear racial slur....

And you're not Native American either so why should you decide if it's racist? Same if you weren't black, it's not your decision/your opinion doesn't really count unless you are part of that group.

But, I am black.

To quote the guy in the video, stop using the white man's dictionary and go to their home and ask them.

Stop being a white person that's saying get over a clearly racist thing, because you don't get that it's racist.

My main complaint is that this is a coup and someone is attaching the wrong meaning in recent to a word translated to english that native americans use themselves in their own native language to call themselves.

I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

Do black people call themselves that traditionally/is that offensive to them?

Ok, so would a team called the Mississippi N***as make it better? I'm a black person that uses the N word. In fact, the N word has been used by blacks on black people for years. That doesn't make the name Mississippi N****as any better. Just because people use it, doesn't make it any less offensive for a huge company to make it their brand.

It's just a bandwagon liberals jumped on in recent years, nothing more. The name won't change either because there are too many supporters Native American, and the main group against it is white people who have no business calling it racist.

Like I said, I have no idea how a white person who has never been a subject to a history of racial slurs, is calling something not racist.

It may be hard for you to understand, but it is. The natives against the name change are against their own self interest, but that's not to say that there aren't groups of people like that in any community. There were blacks that were against the civil rights movement. Just because that small sect of people are against their own cause, doesn't make it ok.

:BTW you also contradict yourself saying that we shouldn't be listening white people but you're white.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/14/14 11:05 AM, mrgreg846 wrote: I can't put it any simpler, NONE OF THOSE ARE VALID EXAMPLES

They say it's offensive. So, what about the history of the word invalidates their current offense?

Oh, and incorrect insults in all caps won't win an argument for you, just an FYI.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/14/14 11:24 AM, Camarohusky wrote:

At 10/14/14 11:05 AM, mrgreg846 wrote: I can't put it any simpler, NONE OF THOSE ARE VALID EXAMPLES

They say it's offensive. So, what about the history of the word invalidates their current offense?

Oh, and incorrect insults in all caps won't win an argument for you, just an FYI.

Already WON! Lol, you just repeat yourself and skip over whatever you want to because you have no logic to back up any reasonable counter. Go back and read what I said about the High School Redskin teams, why did they choose that name?

Would you as a liberal go try and take that name away from them? Why they pick that for their HS team is it not a slur? No it isn't.

I typed caps thinking maybe you in washington banned lowercase or something, seems like something they would do since they banned swingsets.

You got nothing. Sorry man but the truth hurts, you lost this one already and dodging the question prove it.

WOP, Kike, all those you mentioned are disrespectful slurs you said yourself. So we agree on that.

Redskins is not like those. What it's more like is a bunch of liberals trying to say Caucasian (a word we have used for generations to call us whites) trying to say it's a slur. Caucasian is not a slur anymore than Redskins would be. But you won't understand that probably because of swingset injuries.

BTW down here in Arizona even the special ed kids get swingsets and don't hurt themselves.

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/14/14 11:15 AM, Boredy-Mcbored wrote:

At 10/13/14 06:37 PM, mrgreg846 wrote:

Buuuuut, whiteskins was never and has never been a racial slur...

Exactly and neither has Redskins ever been a slur

You're the racist saying they can't do something because of race.

Noo, I'm just a person that's pointing out a clear racial slur....

Redskins isn't, that's all I'm trying to point out.

And you're not Native American either so why should you decide if it's racist? Same if you weren't black, it's not your decision/your opinion doesn't really count unless you are part of that group.

But, I am black.

Ok good. You can understand then that Blackfaces would be different. Take African American, is that offensive?
Because that's basically what we have here, the whole Redskin thing is same controversy as if a bunch of liberals tried to say African American is a slur, or any other proper word blacks would use to describe themselves not offensively to all the sudden become offensive because a bunch of liberals on bandwagon say so.

To quote the guy in the video, stop using the white man's dictionary and go to their home and ask them.

Stop being a white person that's saying get over a clearly racist thing, because you don't get that it's racist.

I'm not a racist you're the racist saying his own people can't stand up for themselves and don't get it.
He's navajo trying to tell you too that it's not racist, not a slur. Go ask the elders. Harken to what he says.

My main complaint is that this is a coup and someone is attaching the wrong meaning in recent to a word translated to english that native americans use themselves in their own native language to call themselves.

I wouldn't care if there was a team like that but that's not even a valid example. Redskins is a traditional name they use to call themselves.

Do black people call themselves that traditionally/is that offensive to them?

Ok, so would a team called the Mississippi N***as make it better? I'm a black person that uses the N word. In fact, the N word has been used by blacks on black people for years. That doesn't make the name Mississippi N****as any better. Just because people use it, doesn't make it any less offensive for a huge company to make it their brand.

Exactly my point. No it wouldn't because it's not the same thing as Redskins.
The N word is not something you would use respectfully for years to describe each other.
What about the High School teams on the reservations that call themselves Redskins? There's tons of them that use that team name. What about them? Will you ignore that question like Husky or do you have a reasonable answer?

I have one, it's because it's a traditional description they have used since days of their elders. Not a slur.

It's just a bandwagon liberals jumped on in recent years, nothing more. The name won't change either because there are too many supporters Native American, and the main group against it is white people who have no business calling it racist.

Like I said, I have no idea how a white person who has never been a subject to a history of racial slurs, is calling something not racist.

No? Kike, WOP, even redneck (though i don't find that one offensive, i am endeared to that one), Whitey, there's lots of them that Husky mentioned. Difference is Redskins doesn't fall into that category, it's not a slur.

It may be hard for you to understand, but it is. The natives against the name change are against their own self interest, but that's not to say that there aren't groups of people like that in any community. There were blacks that were against the civil rights movement. Just because that small sect of people are against their own cause, doesn't make it ok.

Exactly! The ones against it are the small sect, it's stupid to change something for a minority group of ones against it when the great majority know what it actually means. Not a slur, not offensive.
"90 percent of respondents did not consider the term offensive, "
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/10/08/how-many-native-americans-think-redskins-is-a-slur/
Do you really think in 10 years (survey was in 2004) that 90% swung the other way?

BTW you also contradict yourself saying that we shouldn't be listening white people but you're white.

No. I didn't say that you shouldn't listen to me because i'm white. I said don't go by the white man's dictionary. I am not a dictionary writer, I just know where the word comes from, from actually listening to the people it came from, Native Americans. Glad I could clear all that up for you. I'm sure you understand now.

Ask some elder tribesman of Navajo or anyone of authority and they will tell you same thing I been saying all along that it's something they just use to describe their skin color and, I think trying to attach a racist meaning to something like Caucasian or other proper word we use to describe ourselves would be the same idiocy.

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/06/18/redskins-fan-cried-in-car-over-trademark-ruling-were-keeping-the-indian-spirit-alive/

[RaptorJesus]

He's said it better than I the whole time from the video. Ask the elders and they'll tell you where that word came from. Themselves, with honor.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t3OYQvi6to

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bFQ-xiqdl44&list=UUjxT5LDym5nPMCo4G_6Z3Bw

[Camarohusky]

At 10/14/14 11:30 AM, mrgreg846 wrote: Already WON! Lol, you just repeat yourself and skip over whatever you want to because you have no logic to back up any reasonable counter. Go back and read what I said about the High School Redskin teams, why did they choose that name?

I have said that it does not matter where the name comes from. If the group that is the subject of the term sincerely believes it is a slur on them, it is a slur. Is that so hard to understand?

Go ahead and question the sincerity of it, but your insistance that it has benign origins changes nothing.

You also completely ignore the whole concept that a people should have the right to control how their representation is used.

Using lots of caps, ignoring arguments, and making ignorant and incorrect insults (you have yet to catch on to this one) is not debate. If you would stop tripping over yourself, you might actually be able to make a good argument.

[Camarohusky]

Oh, and one more thing, would you please show us the documentation of when the native peoples of american granted you the sole discretion over what they should and should not consider a slur?

[RaptorJesus]

At 10/14/14 12:34 PM, Camarohusky wrote: Oh, and one more thing, would you please show us the documentation of when the native peoples of american granted you the sole discretion over what they should and should not consider a slur?

Why don't you show your credentials first since you seem to be the authority on the subject simply because you say so.

At least I presented evidence and facts from real life and not hyperbole like you did.

It's not a slur just because a bunch of mininformed people think it is. What part of that don't you understand? I already said I don't respect you because your worldview is so fucked up coming from that liberal garbage hole you call a state.

If you would stop tripping over yourself, you might actually be able to make a good argument. Listen to yourself, you still refuse to answer any of the valid points I brought up proving you gave up basically but are too immature to admit you are wrong and I am right.

You are the one who has failed to catch on and are living a fallacy in your fantasy world like so many other liberals.

Redskins is used all over the nation in different reservations as a team name for their Schools for christ sake! What do you have to say to that? Would a Hebrew school ever use that slur you so failed to try to pass as a comparison? No because it's not the same thing.

You still fail to answer me on that. Because you can't argue a fallacy, you are wrong. Redskins is not a slur.

Even if the Redskins NFL team changed what would you do about all the Highschool Redskins football teams? Your examples of slurs don't hold up, because no Jewish school would name their team the Kikes.

It's not namecalling if it's true, you are a retarded liberal troll and nothing you've said has been sincere.

I've presented videos, surveys, live interactions with real native americans, and explained what dumb arguments (if you can call them that) you've failed on.

What have you done other than troll and spit bullshit?

Can you not realize that you lost horribly with your straw man like many posts ago?

Please Mods just lock the thread. This is like talking to a 4 year old, he doesn't understand why he's wrong.