Grant Fuhr is black? Jeez, does he wear a beard? Because now I’m trying to picture him without his mask on, and I can’t!
Nice hijack of an apology thread, though. Especially the catfight.
So, Liberal, what term would you use? How about, “My Dad’s Cherokee, but I’m not?” Or, “I’m not ‘ndn’, but like to talk shit like I am?”
I know you’ll take my post with all the Christian love in your heart.
Regards,
Z
Term for what? People? How about, I don’t know… “people”? You leftists recoil in horror at the slightest hint of what you perceive as racism, and yet you are the ones who have divided us all up so we can be identified for your stupid entitlement schemes. The only way not to be racist is not to perceive race.
Love ain’t always mushy. You people are like the Pharisees; you need a jolt of reality.
But your idea seems to be the farthest extreme of the political correctness spectrum. You can correct me if I’m wrong on this (just be polite please. This thread needs no more “liberal” outrage 
), but you want to simply avoid the terms entirely. To quote George Carlin “What do you call a man’s man? A person’s person?”
I think we would be better off simply getting over our societal hangups about the words and let peoples actions define them as racist.
I’m saying call people anything you want. Just don’t split everybody up into separate races and then blast other people for recognizing your divisions. Otto got all bent out of shape by some redskin or Indian reference, and then proceeded to use the term “Native Americans” as if that were somehow better. “American” is derived from “Amerigo”. He was one of the first tyrannical conquerors.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1497vespucci-america.html
…and having armed ourselves as best we could, we advanced towards the shore, and they sought not to hinder us from landing, I believe from fear of the cannons: and we jumped on land, 57 men in four squadrons, each one (consisting of) a captain and his company: and we came to blows with them: and after a long battle (in which) many of them (were) slain, we put them to flight, and pursued them to a village, having made about 250 of them captives, and we burnt the village, and returned to our ships with victory and 250 prisoners, leaving many of them dead and wounded, and of ours there were no more than one killed and 22 wounded, who all escaped (i.e., recovered), God be thanked. We arranged our departure, and seven men, of whom five were wounded, took an island-canoe, and with seven prisoners that we gave them, four women and three men, returned to their (own) country full of gladness, wondering at our strength: and we thereon made sail for Spain with 222 captive slaves: and reached the port of Calis (Cadiz) on the 15th day of October, 1498, where we were well received and sold our slaves.
But in the case of Otto, the term redskin at least carries some degree of offensiveness. Last I heard nobody much cared too much about being called americans, and if they do it’s likely not for the reason you gave.
I think you’re reaching if you really think that this is exposing some form of hypocrisy. 
You have to admit it though. If you really had to you could dry your hands with a Canuck.
At the risk of agreeing with Liberal, I think this is wrong. The intent of the speaker is not only a relevant factor, it’s the most relevant factor.
I was pissed because I had just gotten out of the shower and had an actual towel on my head when I read the OP. I assumed it was directed at me and get so furious that I ended up smashing my monitor.
To whom? In a September poll by National Annenberg Election Survey of the University of Pennsylvania, only 9 percent of Indians found the term offensive even in the widely exposed context of the Washington football team. Hell, only 14 percent of hand-wringing leftists were offended.
Really? Maybe if you got out of your ivory tower more often, you’d realize how offensive it can be to be named after one of the men who massacred and enslaved your kinfolk. As Peter d’Errico has said:
“Native American” is a phrase coined in the liberal years of the 1960’s to replace “Indian” with a supposedly more appropriate term. Regardless of the intent, the term is no more appropriate than its predecessor. “America” is derived from Amerigo Vespucci, a 16th century Italian navigator who was once said to be the “discoverer” of the continent. How can the people who were already here be named with his name?
Well then, redskin is offensive to 9% of native americans and 14% of “hand wringing leftists.” Like I said, it’s offensive to someone. Are you trying to correct me or criticizing my lack of statistics?
What percent of people are offended by being called americans? Do you have a stat on that?
Now I’m not much for getting out of my ivory tower ( ), but here round these parts we either call them by their trible name (odawa) or native american. Haven’t had a lot of letters to the editor in the papers screaming at the “american” part. Maybe it’s because the paper boy can’t run up all of the steps to my sealed library.
And isn’t this “native american” more ultra liberal politically correct concern?
Ivory tower indeed. Lib, you have your head up your ass :rolleyes:
Criminey. Why not just say “Noble Savages”? I mean, after all, no one you know of is offended by “noble”. I’ve heard the “I know some personally” line before, but this is the first time I’ve heard “I don’t know of any” used as a defense. What do you call the Inuit, Yupik, and Aleut people?
My apologies. It should read “native americans.” They aren’t offended by the term native americans. By the by, if you are trying to find some round about term of calling me a racist, do just come out and say it.
You have yet to come up with a segment of the population offended by the term native american yet or anything to prove that this fuss about the term is anything but more “leftist hand wringing.” Do you have stats on that?
Also, what by chance do you call the native people of this land that we live in which I shall not call america since it seems to twist yer knickers so much?
Do you just stick to “people?”
I’m not calling you or anyone else a racist, Harborwolf. As I already said, what bothered me was the notion from Otto that one recognition of race was somehow superior to another. Words develop meaning over time from usage and context. Any word can become a slur if it is consistently used in a derogatory way. My only point was that Native American is no improvement over Redskin just because it is a different word. As I already cited, there is opinion in the Indian community that NA is a rather ridiculous term for a number of reasons, all of which I’ve stated and linked: (1) it assigns to a conquered people the name of their conqueror (which I’m sure you’ll concede could reasonably be interpreted as offensive); (2) it lumps the Cherokee with the Inuit (which would be like calling Ethiopians African-Americans); (3) because so many Indians were sold into slavery, some Indians in America aren’t native at all (they’re as much immigrants as the Irish, which, so far as we can tell, applies in my case); (4) the term was invented, not by Indians, but by anal retentive leftists who were attempting to assuage their own guilt (already cited); and (5) the vast majority consensus among representatives of Indian nations is that you should call people what they call themselves (again, cited).
I had a friend/acquaintance in college who is indian, I forget which religious practice, where they don’t ever cut their hair and wear it wrapped up in a scarf on their heads. I had been back from Germany for about 6 months and in the midst of a rather normal conversation I accidently referred to it as a “towel.”
Whoops.
He was PISSED. I attempted to explain but he wouldn’t listen. Here’s what happened: Germany is very cold and many people wear scarves. In german a scarf is a “tuch” but a towel is also called a “tuch.” Since I live in California where scarves are not the most typical item of clothing one wears, I hadn’t actually had to use that word in a very long time, so my mind found the german word (tuch)and translated it incorrectly (tuch=towel).
I had never felt so, well, icky about an honest mistake in my life. I have never made that mistake since.
Sooooo…apology accepted, just don’t do it again, OK?
Right, I got the part about Otto and said that I thought that it was a reach. Since you have not proven to me that more people are offended by the term “native american” than are by the term “redskin,” I’m still going to say that it still is a reach.
As far as the lumping goes, the term “native american” provides a catch all term for those time that their tribal affiliation is not known. I know full well that it is a new (and fairly silly) term borne of the demon seed of political correctness. I grew up calling them “indians” and still have problems making the switch, but I make the effort since I have raised some eyebrows when let slip the "i"word amongst the “native americans” that I know. It’s not that different than calling me “white” or “american” as opposed to “half german, half mixed.” Noone I know seems to be offended by “native american.” Plenty would be a bit pizzled if I dropped the “R Bomb” on them unless I was clearly referencing the football team of the same name.
Then you went off on this Ivory Tower/Noble Savages blah blah point.
In summation, “redskin” still seems more offensive than “native american.” Your point to Otto is a reach. Until you lay me a cite saying that as many or more “people who were here before our honky asses” find the term “native american” more offensive than “redskin,” I will stick to my guns. 
Say whatever you want. My skin is reddish, my hair jet black, my cheekbones high-up on my face, but as the fourth of four, I got hazel eyes. I personally detest (and know others who detest) being named after that son of a bitch. I don’t mind being called Cherokee, or even Indian. At least it shows how ignorant the conquerors originally were.
If nothing else, using the term “Indian” to refer to the people who lived in North America on or before 1492 (and all their descendants) is inaccurate.
If you told someone that your friend, boss, etc is an Indian how many people (in general) would think that you meant Asian Indian?
Sorry, only got back to this thread now.
You don’t mind being called Cherokee or even Indian when you’re not?
You think you can “detest being named after that son of a bitch?” Oh, is that the “American” part or the Native American part that you detest?
Your skin is reddish? What the fuck does that mean? You have high cheekbones?
WTF? You talk shit about semantics then traffic in the same hypocrisy and stereotype that you criticize in others?
Fuck you. Really. I’ve been reading your shit for the last four years. You wanna talk any other shit, fine.
But, go fucking spend some time on the rez before pulling this shit again. Just because your father caught some shit in his day, doesn’t make you Cherokee.
Fuck you. Try being an Indian sometime and not being able to pass. Fuck you.
Spend some time living and working in Indian Country. Then you can talk shit on some message board.
ps. WTF kind of bullshit is this? You know people who detest? This is what has always irked me about you–even that stupid pity party, “what’s wrong with me?” thread of yours.
For everyone eles, I ask that you don’t engage Liberal in any discussion about Native Americans, Indians, Natives, First Nations, or any other group of individuals that could possibly be labeled indigenous. He’s a fucking fake. Even he knows it.
You’ve become quite the bitch.
I don’t know about four years, but my first encounter with you that I recall was a rather pleasant one, not even a year ago. Now, I knew you had a burr up your ass about people using their Indian heritage to get freebies from the government, but I had no idea that you had appointed yourself Moderator of All Things Indian. But if you’re going to assume that role, then you’re going to have to stop being a dumbass.
Like any short-sighted windbag, you use whatever situation you find yourself in as the standard that you apply to everyone else. You (say you) are a member of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, that you in fact don’t even have dual citizenship and carry a US passport. (Op. Cit.), and that you work as either a conselor or tutor (or both, I reckon) with Indian students on the reservation.
But not everyone is like you or has to be like you to “qualify” for their Indian heritage. Let us set aside that I don’t want a damn thing from the tyrants in Washington, DC, either because I’m Cherokee or otherwise, meaning that I don’t give a shit about BIA standards. Why any person of indigenous heritage would is beyond me, but that’s your business. I know quite much of my heritage, some of it taught to me by my grandmother and father, and some of it I’ve researched on my own. But all that aside, it so happens that I cannot enroll in my nation because I missed a beat. I am a direct lineal descendant of Nancy Waidsutte (U-wo-da-sa-ti), who lived within the Qualla Boundary and was Number 2819 on the 1924 Baker Roll, and I am at least 1/16 blood (actually 3/4), but I did not apply for enrollment either within 3 years of my birth or 1 year following my 18th birthday. Those are the requirements to enroll in the Eastern Band. When my father moved down from the Appalachians, it was his intention to do as most Cherokee had done for two hundred years, and blend in with the prevailing culture. He married a woman who was half white and fathered the four of us. I am the youngest, and one of my brothers is dead.
So fuck you and your sanctimonious Mojave proclamations about who’s in and who’s out. Fuck you and your call for people to ignore me. Fuck you and your sycophantic obsession with the BIA. Just plain fuck you.