Should the Washington Redskins change their name?

[ingemann]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

[Badger]

I forgot people like Eazy-E and other rappers use the term n*gger so it's perfectly o.k. 

No it's not perfectly okay, but to claim that redskin is at the exact same level as n in terms of offensiveness is an absurd oversimplification.

Oh God.

As much as I disagree, can we agree it is at LEAST as offensive as "darkie" rather than debating over semantics? Please??

[DINGO Joe]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

In the near term, no matter what you call them, they'll still suck.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I forgot people like Eazy-E and other rappers use the term n*gger so it's perfectly o.k. 

No it's not perfectly okay, but to claim that redskin is at the exact same level as n in terms of offensiveness is an absurd oversimplification.

Oh God.

As much as I disagree, can we agree it is at LEAST as offensive as "darkie" rather than debating over semantics? Please??

No. It was never intended to be a racist name in any way shape or form. "Darkie" most certainly is meant that way.

[The Ex-Factor]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

American football is so big and Washington D.C. is a huge market - and the Redskins are a pretty popular team as far as football teams go - that there will still be tons of focus regardless. However this name issue is giving them a ton of bad PR from Congress, Native American groups, the press, and liberals that they wouldn't be getting otherwise. It doesn't help matters that their owner is generally considered one of the worst owners in professional sports:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Snyder

[Хahar 🤔]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

There are only 32 teams. All of them are important.

[7,052,770]

I forgot people like Eazy-E and other rappers use the term n*gger so it's perfectly o.k. 

No it's not perfectly okay, but to claim that redskin is at the exact same level as n in terms of offensiveness is an absurd oversimplification.

Oh God.

As much as I disagree, can we agree it is at LEAST as offensive as "darkie" rather than debating over semantics? Please??

No. It was never intended to be a racist name in any way shape or form. "Darkie" most certainly is meant that way.

Today it would be, in 1932, maybe not. You know the Kentucky legislature removed the line "the darkies are gay" from My Old Kentucky Home a few years ago, right?

[Mr. Morden]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

As others have said, the NFL as a whole is hugely popular in the US, and there are only 32 teams, so they all get their share of attention.  Washington, DC is a big market, so they'll get plenty of attention regardless, even though the team isn't very good right now.

[Badger]

I forgot people like Eazy-E and other rappers use the term n*gger so it's perfectly o.k. 

No it's not perfectly okay, but to claim that redskin is at the exact same level as n in terms of offensiveness is an absurd oversimplification.

Oh God.

As much as I disagree, can we agree it is at LEAST as offensive as "darkie" rather than debating over semantics? Please??

No. It was never intended to be a racist name in any way shape or form. "Darkie" most certainly is meant that way.

Oh George.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I forgot people like Eazy-E and other rappers use the term n*gger so it's perfectly o.k. 

No it's not perfectly okay, but to claim that redskin is at the exact same level as n in terms of offensiveness is an absurd oversimplification.

Oh God.

As much as I disagree, can we agree it is at LEAST as offensive as "darkie" rather than debating over semantics? Please??

No.  Redskin is at the level today where how it is used determines whether it is offensive or not,whereas darkie would be offensive no matter how it is used.  I suppose it depends upon whether one thinks any use of redskin by non-redskins is offensive.  I don't think it has reached that point when used in a sporting context, or if has, then I eagerly await the announcement by the Notre Dame Emerald football team of their own new name.

[Meursault]

I don't think anyone else agrees with you.

"Darkie" used to be a brand name too, used for a line of toothpastes with a Negro cariacture for a mascot. They changed it to "Darkle" later on.

[Sbane]

I don't get what people have to gain from needlessly antagonizing Native Americans, I really don't.

Also, you guys don't get to decide what words are offensive to a certain group. If native Americans think redskins is racist, then it is. If the Irish think "fighting Irish" is offensive, then it is. If you are not Native American or Irish, your opinion is not worth much.

[Simfan34]

I don't think anyone else agrees with you.

"Darkie" used to be a brand name too, used for a line of toothpastes with a Negro cariacture for a mascot. They changed it to "Darkle" later on.

I believe it was actually "Darlie".

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

While Hitler banned smoking and created vast totalitarian order in Europe, Americans were smoking cigarettes and drinkin' Tennessee whiskey.

Hitler banned smoking? News to me.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

While Hitler banned smoking and created vast totalitarian order in Europe, Americans were smoking cigarettes and drinkin' Tennessee whiskey.

Hitler banned smoking? News to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-tobacco_movement_in_Nazi_Germany

Reaganfan needs a history lesson.

[dmmidmi]

I have a few question.

Now I know nothing about American Football, so I don't know how important the Redskins are as a team.

But how much of the media's focus on the team are because of the perceived offensive name? How would a name change effect the Redskins. Would they simply become something of a ignored team or are they important enough, that there would still be focus on them?

In the near term, no matter what you call them, they'll still suck.

That's what happens when your franchise relies on a QB with only one knee and a middle of the road defense. DeSean Jackson should help improve their passing game, though.

It doesn't hurt that they play in the same division as the Cowboys, Eagles, and Giants, though.

[Iosif]

How does it punish you to rename a football team?

Because it would be giving into the politically correct lovers.

So if Donald Sterling tried to change the name of the Clippers to the N*ggers that would be o.k. because it's anti pc. gotcha.

I think there's the line you don't cross, obviously. Redskins isn't nearly as offensive as the 'N' word.

I think once you begin crossing the line though, you do more harm than good. I don't want a child to grow up 20 years from now in a world reading about how the most free country in the world is just like Europe because we changed what made us unique to please a select few.

What's wrong with Europe? Most of the Western European/Scandinavian countries have higher standards of living and higher levels of happiness than we do.

Harry I know about the whole standards of living, but it comes at the cost of freedom. See maybe our differing political views just don't jive with our views on what we consider freedom.

I believe in majority rules, in free trade, free enterprise, freedom of speech. What always made the United States a great country was that we were the opposite of the rest of the world.

While Hitler banned smoking and created vast totalitarian order in Europe, Americans were smoking cigarettes and drinkin' Tennessee whiskey.

While the Japanese and Germans had brutal concentration or death camps, the camp we had for Japanese Americans didn't include sick torture, abuse or extermination.

An Axis war leader once said, "I'd never want to invade the United States, because there would be a gun in the back of every soldier." The Jews didn't have weapons. Resistance groups failed. America was FOUNDED on a resistance victory against Britain.

We got rid of Europe here a long time ago for the specific purpose of not being Europe. Dare I say, that most Americans, even our leaders in the 1940s, thought more like ME than like you. By thinking like me, we won.

What if our WWII leaders thought like you? I don't believe victory could have been assured. That is why I'm such a pain in the butt about being against liberalism. I think it threatens us.

Wow. I don't know where to start...

[dmmidmi]

I don't get what people have to gain from needlessly antagonizing Native Americans, I really don't.

Also, you guys don't get to decide what words are offensive to a certain group. If native Americans think redskins is racist, then it is. If the Irish think "fighting Irish" is offensive, then it is. If you are not Native American or Irish, your opinion is not worth much.

This.

[emailking]

Also, you guys don't get to decide what words are offensive to a certain group. If native Americans think redskins is racist, then it is.

That's two different concepts. Something is racist if it discriminates on the basis of race. On its own it's not inherently a good thing or a bad thing. It is also objective if the discrimination (or lack thereof) can be established one way or the other. On the other hand, offensive has a definitive negative connotation and is subjective.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

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

I find this way of the thinking simply silly. 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

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?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

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?

I assure you if the opinions of a vast majority of Redskins fans were to change the name, or else, it would be changed. 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

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.

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.

[Sbane]

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?

I assure you if the opinions of a vast majority of Redskins fans were to change the name, or else, it would be changed. 

What I am trying to say is that you are not in a position to say what is or isn't offensive to Native Americans. I didn't say you can't have an opinion on this issue. Of course you can have an opinion and post about it. I am talking more specifically about you or others here saying that "redskins" should not be an offensive word to Native Americans.

[Napoleon]

The Cowboys really do win if the Redskins change their name though. This has been going on since the 1500s, why throw in the towel right after drafting RG3?