Should the Washington Redskins change their name? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 02, 2024, 04:48:13 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Should the Washington Redskins change their name? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Should the Washington Redskins change their name?
#1
Yes
#2
No
#3
No Opinion
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: Should the Washington Redskins change their name?  (Read 23543 times)
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« on: May 24, 2014, 12:49:53 AM »

Considering the problems facing many Native American communities today, its both absurd and insulting for white guilt liberals to parade around this issue like its so offensive that these people can't sleep at night.

If we devoted this much time to improving the lives of impoverished and marginalized communities in the plains and southwest instead of bickering over a stupid logo, thousands of people would be in a much better place.....

Ah, yes, the old 'worse problems exist, therefore this one doesn't deserve any attention' argument. Brilliant and convincing as ever.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2014, 10:55:10 PM »

To all the yes voters, what alternative name should they use?

Just about anything. "Washington Warriors" has a nice ring to it and they could keep using tasteful Native American imagery.

The people pushing for a name change generally deny that there is such a thing as tasteful Indian imagery when it comes to sports mascots.

There's certainly such a thing as 'less tasteless [than, by implication, the Cleveland Indians]'.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2014, 02:47:37 PM »

I'm sure this will be a fun topic.


Personally I think it should be changed. Redskins is and always has been a racist term, regardless of the context the organization says the name comes from.

Tough crap. That's the way it is. If you don't like it, leave. The end. No gray area.




Leave from where?

murrica
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2014, 03:42:30 PM »

I'm sure this will be a fun topic.


Personally I think it should be changed. Redskins is and always has been a racist term, regardless of the context the organization says the name comes from.

Tough crap. That's the way it is. If you don't like it, leave. The end. No gray area.




Leave from where?

murrica
If you dawn't like it, you can giiiit out!

Damn right.

I'm not leaving the country over the Washington Redskins' intransigence about changing their name. I'm sorry to disappoint you.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #4 on: June 21, 2014, 02:28:55 AM »

Why the leftist outrage on steroids over this all of a sudden? The team has been around for ages.

My understanding is that American Indians have been unhappy about it for a while now, and leftists and liberals of other races are just now starting to notice. That, and there's been some recent legal goings-on about whether it's possible to keep trademarked.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

But that makes no sense. That would make sense if the team were in Boston.
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2014, 03:13:20 PM »

If you are not Native American or Irish, your opinion is not worth much.

I find this way of the thinking simply silly. 

If whether or not something 'is offensive' isn't to be judged by whether the people at which it's directed are offended by it, how is it to be judged? Whether uninvolved members of the general public think they should be offended? Some sort of external rubric handed down from on high?
Logged
Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.
Nathan
Moderators
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 34,431


« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2014, 04:10:42 PM »

If you are not Native American or Irish, your opinion is not worth much.

I find this way of the thinking simply silly. 

If whether or not something 'is offensive' isn't to be judged by whether the people at which it's directed are offended by it, how is it to be judged? Whether uninvolved members of the general public think they should be offended? Some sort of external rubric handed down from on high?

Sbane is saying, in essence, we can't have an opinion.  I see pages and pages of opinions here Nathan, and many who are offended, and probably none of them are from Native Americans.....but their opinions don't count? 

We have discussions here all the time about what is misogynistic.....but only the females here have a right to an opinion?

The thing is the way I read what he was saying was that our opinions on the specific question of whether or not it's offensive aren't worth much. Whether or not it being offensive is sufficient cause to change it is to at least some extent a separate question.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

I mean, it is Daniel Snyder we're talking about. I'm familiar with him by reputation. And I'm not even a football fan.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.035 seconds with 13 queries.