Getting Offended on Behalf of Other People (Redskins)

[Giraffes_Can_t_Dance]

@lance_strongarm

We should do a poll of African-Americans about the word “nigger” and whether most find it offensive and whether they’ve adopted the word for themselves and if they understand its true meaning. Then consider whether the results make it a suitable team name.

Worst…Analogy…Ever!!!
Again, flimsy explanations like this speaks volumes for the disconnect many in the “that’s racist” crowd are experiencing with racial matters.

[Kimstu]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

Problem is that that guy is not some sort of disinterested scholar. He is an activist on these matters. So when his results happen to align with his exact views and contradict those of major media organizations, I would tend to dismiss them.

Except that, as I noted back in post 193, exactly the same sort of underlying self-serving bias has been claimed in the case of the “major media organization” too:

However, the Post seems to have a bigger plan in mind for its poll than simply addressing a name or mascot. […] The team now wants a divided Supreme Court to hear its case and could use all the political goodwill it can muster to make that happen.

Meanwhile, Snyder and company have made no secret about the fact that they want a new stadium to replace 19-year-old FedEx Field in Landover, Md. A Danish architect already designed a new stadium with a moat that could be built at sites in Prince George’s County, Maryland; Loudoun County, Virginia; or D.C. itself. However, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser has already made it known that she considers the team name offensive, but has wavered slightly on that stance in an effort to woo the team.

Without Snyder or his organization even opening their mouths, the Post posited that “Native Americans’ indifference” (in a poll of self-identified Native Americans that the paper itself conducted, mind you) “could reset D.C. stadium talks.” It even goes so far as to point out the fact that she “has more often said ‘many’ consider the term offensive” and that she “has also occasionally — perhaps out of habit — still uttered it.”

That’s where this absolutely stops being about names and mascots and starts being about what polls are often about: political campaigning. […]

No, there isn’t consensus on whether the name and mascot are offensive. No, there isn’t even a 90% consensus among the self-defined Native Americans the Post interviewed on the subject. But when one side is arguing about the harm caused by the name and the centuries of degradation behind it, and the other side argues that it isn’t bad enough to prevent from cashing in on a trademark or building a new stadium — likely with taxpayer dollars — there’s a divide that poll numbers can’t see and won’t be able to measure.

In other words, the argument is that the Post deliberately chose to present the Redskins name issue as a matter of indifference to Native Americans, in order to diminish local reluctance to giving the Redskins a new stadium.

So when the Post’s poll results “happen to align with their exact views and contradict those of” a pollster who (unlike the Post) took the trouble to verify that his respondents were actually Native American, would you “tend to dismiss them” too?

[Bricker]

@Kimstu

Except that, as I noted back in post 193, exactly the same sort of underlying self-serving bias has been claimed in the case of the “major media organization” too:

In other words, the argument is that the Post deliberately chose to present the Redskins name issue as a matter of indifference to Native Americans, in order to diminish local reluctance to giving the Redskins a new stadium.

So when the Post’s poll results “happen to align with their exact views and contradict those of” a pollster who (unlike the Post) took the trouble to verify that his respondents were actually Native American, would you “tend to dismiss them” too?

What’s your evidence that the Post favors a new stadium?

[Goofus]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/washingtons-nfl-team-should-build-its-next-stadium-in-the-district/2016/01/11/39f300ea-b8a7-11e5-99f3-184bc379b12d_story.html

[spifflog]

@Miller

Are you asking for a cite that dictionaries are descriptive by nature, or for their specific methodology used to determine the meaning of “redskin?”

The latter. I don’t usually ask for a cite for things that I can look up, but I’ve spent about 20 minutes looking for the methodology on how dictionaries determine if something is offensive or not, and I can’t find it. And since some are using the dictionary notation as sufficient evidence that the term is offensive, I’d like to understand how they came to that determination. I’m not saying that your statement is wrong, but I’d like to understand it.

At first blush, I have a difficult time believing that they did extensive research and conducted national polls, but I suppose it’s possible. I could be more readily convinced that a bunch of college English professors got in a room at the annual meeting in Omaha and talked it over.

As I noted previously, two polls say 9% and it’s been noted that the dictionary reference equals overwhelming so something doesn’t match.

[spifflog]

nm

[Nars_Glinley]

Anecdotally, I work in a city that describes itself as the “Indian Capital of the Nation”. The population is over 40% Indian. The local theater is named the Redskin. I have never heard a complaint about it.

[mistymage]

@Nars_Glinley

Anecdotally, I work in a city that describes itself as the “Indian Capital of the Nation”. The population is over 40% Indian. The local theater is named the Redskin. I have never heard a complaint about it.

Have you heard complaints regarding drinking, drug use, unemployment, substandard housing, diabetes, or depression? Those tend to be more on the minds and tongues by those affected severely by them. But that doesn’t mean people aren’t also offended or outraged by things like being used as mascots, that almost all NAs depicted in movies/tv are by actors with little to no NA roots, or pick any non NA specific topic that has 2 sides: cat declawing, dog ear cropping or tail docking, breastfeeding, or shoes on or off in the house. Unless you are having a sit down and really know people very well you are not going to hear any of that stuff. But first you’ll probably hear about stuff like the neighbor who mows all day, the neighbors’ whose dogs bark all day and night or maybe about something good.

But if you want numbers the National Congress of American Indians represents “the combined enrollment of its member tribes in 2013 as 1.2 million individuals” and it is against the usage of Redskin(s) as a name for teams. Washington Redskins name controversy - Wikipedia

Times change and names have been changed to keep up with them: From Negro Creek to Wop Draw, place names offend

As far as the Redskin Theater goes… it was owned and named by white people Paul Thornton Stonum (1907-1986) - Find a Grave Memorial who owns it now? I have no idea.

[Kearsen]

@Miller

Yes, I know. That was precisely the point of my previous post. The dictionary is descriptive. It describes how people actually use words in the real world. If the dictionary lists a term as “derogatory,” that’s because that’s how people are using the word.

Are you asking for a cite that dictionaries are descriptive by nature, or for their specific methodology used to determine the meaning of “redskin?”

Is there any evidence of the term redskin being used in a derogatory way , say in the last 50 years? Bc personally (and maybe I’m in the wrong area) but I am just not seeing it

[tomndebb]

@Goofus

Actually, my reasons for wanting the team’s name changed are only about 20% “it’s better to be not racist than to be racist.” The other 80% are “I want to see a rich East Coast Jew lose something really valuable and not get it back.”

This looks very much like trolling.

Knock it off. Do not repeat this sort of nonsense and do not pursue this particular line of discussion.

[ /Moderating ]

[Nars_Glinley]

@mistymage

Have you heard complaints regarding drinking, drug use, unemployment, substandard housing, diabetes, or depression? Those tend to be more on the minds and tongues by those affected severely by them. But that doesn’t mean people aren’t also offended or outraged by things like being used as mascots, that almost all NAs depicted in movies/tv are by actors with little to no NA roots, or pick any non NA specific topic that has 2 sides: cat declawing, dog ear cropping or tail docking, breastfeeding, or shoes on or off in the house. Unless you are having a sit down and really know people very well you are not going to hear any of that stuff. But first you’ll probably hear about stuff like the neighbor who mows all day, the neighbors’ whose dogs bark all day and night or maybe about something good.

But if you want numbers the National Congress of American Indians represents “the combined enrollment of its member tribes in 2013 as 1.2 million individuals” and it is against the usage of Redskin(s) as a name for teams. Washington Redskins name controversy - Wikipedia

Times change and names have been changed to keep up with them: From Negro Creek to Wop Draw, place names offend

As far as the Redskin Theater goes… it was owned and named by white people Paul Thornton Stonum (1907-1986) - Find a Grave Memorial who owns it now? I have no idea.

I hear people complain about just about everything. That’s the nature of the human condition. I’ve just never heard any complaints about the Redskin theater. I don’t know who owns it either.

The NCAI also seems to have an issue with all Indian names. FWIW, the local Indian school (run by the BIA) is the Braves. The public high school is the Warriors. I cannot imagine the commotion that would be created if an outside agency were to petition that their names be changed.

[Nars_Glinley]

@mistymage

As far as the Redskin Theater goes… it was owned and named by white people Paul Thornton Stonum (1907-1986) - Find a Grave Memorial who owns it now? I have no idea.

Out of curiosity, did you know the owner or are you just assuming that he was white?

[mistymage]

@Nars_Glinley

Out of curiosity, did you know the owner or are you just assuming that he was white?

I followed his genealogical lineage and other than building a tourist attraction named Indian City USA his family had no other NA “shout-outs” in their obituaries. It’s really doubtful that in a town 60% white, in the 40s, 50’s and 60s that an NA had any spot on the various community boards the father and son served on. Let alone that the family came from Missouri and then ended up in Oklahoma. NAs of those eras seldom had money let alone enough money to build a chain of movie theaters.

Missouri is not known as an Indian State because “When the first Europeans arrived in the late 17th century, most of the few thousand Indians living in Missouri were relatively recent immigrants, pushed westward across the Mississippi River because of pressures from eastern tribes and European settlers along the Atlantic coast. Indians then occupying Missouri belonged to two main linguistic groups: Algonkian-speakers, mainly the Sauk, Fox, and Iliniwek (Illinois) in the northeast; and a Siouan group, including the Osage, Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, and other tribes, to the south and west. Of greatest interest to the Europeans were the Osage, among whom were warriors and runners of extraordinary ability. The flood of white settlers into Missouri after 1803 forced the Indians to move into Kansas and into what became known as Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma). During the 1820s, the US government negotiated treaties with the Osage, Sauk, Fox, and Iowa tribes whereby they surrendered, for the most part peaceable, all their lands in Missouri. By 1836, few Indians remained.” http://www.city-data.com/states/Missouri-History.html Today there are about 25,000 NAs in Mo. Missouri | Encyclopedia.com

I followed his lineage which leads to “white first names, white last names” back in Missouri to his father only (all the info there) but on his mother’s side you can go back three more generations to more white names. The odds of a NA man of any appreciable amount marrying a white woman in those days are pretty slim. I’m talking the 1830s to the 1950s.

I, myself, can only go back 2 generations before running into the genealogical roadblock of native names on my maternal side. My mother was born in 1938, her mother 1902 (my mom is one of the younger kids of 9), her mom (my ggm) had a native first and last name.

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

[QUOTE=mistymage]
I, myself, can only go back 2 generations before running into the genealogical roadblock of native names on my maternal side. My mother was born in 1938, her mother 1902 (my mom is one of the younger kids of 9), her mom (my ggm) had a native first and last name.
[/QUOTE]

I am actually enrolled with the Osage, and our family is one of several mixed-blood families with a European surname going back generations from intermarriage with settlers. So it depends really. On the Cherokee side of the family we hit that Native-name roadblock though a few generations back.

[edwardcoast]

I see no problem with non-NA people being offended by it, because they are in a position to speak more about it so their voice is heard, and they know it is wrong. The Native Americans historically have gotten such a raw deal and ignored for so long, they have bigger issues than being concerned about being mocked by having a sports team named after them. That could explain the poll numbers. There was a documentary on Native Americans and it showed that on the featured Reservation that alcoholism was pretty high.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

Just came across this, in a resurrected zombie:

@hajario

There is an Indio Muerto Street here in Santa Barbara. Indio Muerto is Spanish for Dead Indian. Several years ago a group of college students decided that the name was racist and had to go. They had protests and everything.

The Native American tribe that is local to Santa Barbara is the Chumash. One of the Chumash elders was asked by a reporter at the local newspaper if he found the name of the street offensive. Thinking about his reply makes me smile to this day. “What I find offensive,” he said, “is a group of white college students taking offense on my behalf.”

Haj