And the restaurant chain, at least, had the excuse that it was named after the co-founders: Sam Battistone and Bo Bohnett. THEY could claim, correctly, that the name was never intended as a racial slur.
Unless the founders of the Washington team were Red Skelton and B.F. Skinner, Daniel Snyder can’t make such a claim.
I was going to mention that article as well. It changed my mind on the issue.
His background is Jewish, but I’m pretty sure he worships himself.
The concept of being offended by a sports team name is nonsense to me. For one thing, I’ve never heard of even one individual actually being harmed by a team name. For another, I think the alleged offense is a straw man. People say, “As a Jew, how would you fee if the team was named the NY Kikes or the Cleveland Nggers?" If that came to pass I’d be offended, but the fact of the matter is that no team would ever name itself the Kikes, not out of any deference to my feelings or the feelings of any other Jew, but because that team name isn’t attractive enough to bring in more fans/customers. Teams are named after Indians (Braves/Chiefs/Redskins/Warriors etc) because such people are popular, powerful and attractive to others. Calling your team the "Nggers” would be voluntarily opening your team up to derision and such, no team would do it. As such, the argument is a straw man.
IMHO YMMV.
Go Tribe Beat the Rays.
That just begs the question of why some slurs or stereotypes are “popular, powerful and attractive to others” while others are seen as dehumanizing and hurtful. There’s a message there about stereotypes of different groups.
I never knew that tidbit about Sambo’s which makes it even stranger to me. Was the restaurant being boycotted by black folks? Or was this misplaced white rage turned onto the restaurant to force a name change that made those in the media or who ever started the fuss feel better about themselves?
. Where is Ed McMahon when you need him for one of his Hoooooaaa!
My mileage does. First, unless you are a Native American, you have no way to speak on how offensive the term “redskin” is. If they, as a group, feel that “redskin” is a slur comparable to nigger or kike, I don’t think its for us non-native Americans to say “now, now… We are honoring you. So sit down and shut up.”
What if, for example, the Carolina team wasn’t the Panthers, but the Slaves. The helmet emblem could be a black outline of a black man with an Afro, perhaps some chains around his neck. You say that this would never happen, so the argument is a straw man. Well, yes and no. You are right it wouldn’t happen, but it’s because of political correctness and the sensitivity we all have today. I don’t think that was floating around in the minds of the owners who named the Redskins, nor was it in the minds of fans of football. As time passed, Redskins became grandfathered in, and people don’t think the term redskin is anything but an honoring of the American Indian. Well, they certainly don’t think so, so I’ll defer to them.
If a team couldn’t be called the “Redskins” today, why permit a team to use that name just because it already has the name? No, Redskins would never fly today, and that’s why it should be gone.
I’m the most un-PC person on this board, but I believe in fairness and consistency. If you start taking down some of the names that are found offensive, all should go. I’m not talking about something 2 or 3 people find offensive either. This is pretty obvious. And don’t being out Seminoles as an example of a Native American name being used. They agreed to its use, and quite frankly, if a tribe gives its blessing for the use of its name, that’s good enough for me. But “Redskin” is not a tribe name, it is and always has been a derogatory term to describe Native Americans.
Oh, by the way… Your logic really fails here. You mean to tell me that you think an offensive name would never be accepted by potential fans, and therefore wouldn’t work?
How about if we call a pro football team in Mississippi the “Rednecks”. Their helmet and logo? A nice confederate battle flag, for the world to see. Do you think the Rednecks of the works would scream about that team name and logo? Not a chance. They’d love it. An if you say I can’t use Rednecks, then fine. Let’s call them “Rebels”. not only would people pay money to see them play, but black players would wear the “stars and bars” helmet with pride, because they would be paid a bunch of money to do so. Isn’t the Ole’ Miss nickname “the Rebels”? A ton of black kids go to that school and play there. And wear the name “rebel” on their jerseys, and no one’s making a big fuss. But I believe those “rebels” the team is named after are those same "Johnny Rebs that were fighting in the civil war. I’ll bet, though, if you put a confederate flag on an ole miss helmet, the PC world would get into an uproar, and you would be one of those people agreeing to the terrible symbolism it reflects.
The Osmonds?
Stinkpot, you’re wrong about a half-dozen ways but I’m too tired to educate you and I don’t want to hijack this thread anymore.
Swindon Town
Interestingly in the UK there’s been a bit of a debate about Tottenham Hotspur, who are unofficially, but popularly, (though mainly by their own fans more than anyone else) called “The Yids” which is an antiquated mildly derogatory slang term for someone of Jewish extraction.
Some people (again mainly their own fans) argue that they are re-claiming the term and embracing their Jewish links, others say that by using the term they perpetuating racial epithets. My own view is fairly ambivalent: on one hand there’s no doubt that Tottenham’s fanbase (the vast majority of whom are non-Jewish) are embracing the clubs traditional links with the local Jewish community and the term ‘Yid’ itself is rarely if ever used in modern UK slang, beyond referring to Spurs to the point that many people are unaware from where the term is derived. On the other hand it does make me slightly uncomfortable.
Being in New York, I find the name “Boston Red Socks” offensive.
Fighting Terrapins!
We were the Raiders, our mascot was a heavily armored and mounted 14th century French knight.
Our name offended me as a history buff.
Tell you what- find me a single fotball team that EVER called itself “The Slaves.”
You can’t, because there NEVER was one, even in the days before political correctness!
Even in the days when white people were free to be as racially insensitive as they wanted, NOBODY even THOUGHT about naming a team “The Slaves” or “The N-Words” or “The K-kes.”
Even in the 1920s, every player and every team owner would have said those were stupid names- not because they were sensitive, progressive types, but because everyone wanted a name that made the team sound COOL and macho. The N-word, like "K-kes,"is an insulting term by DEFINITION. Every white player on a football team would have hated being be called that.
On the other hand, white athletes have long been happy to be called Indians, Braves, Illini, Seminoles, Black Hawks, whatever. These names certainly played upon stereotypes, but the stereotypes were thought to be positive. White athletes thought Geronimo, Crazy Horse and Tecumseh were fierce, rugged and aggressive, and those were seen as GOOD things. A team that called itself the Braves was trying to make itself sound rugged and manly. A team calling itself the Slaves would be making itself sound pathetic.
I’m already on record as saying “Redskins” is an insulting name that ought to go. I’m neither wedded to nor adamantly opposed to most other Indian-related team names. But teams have NEVER chosen names they thought would make them look bad.
In Taiwan, there used to be a brand of toothpaste called “Darkie”, featuring as its mascot the most embarrassing stereotype imaginable. Eventually the brand became “Darlie” (no change in the Chinese name, though), and the mascot more generic-looking.
I’m not sure the change is an improvement.
I know that. For crying out loud, we all know that. My example was hyperbole. You don’t have to explain why Indian names, or the generic “Indians” has been used as a sports team moniker. Naming a team “Slaves” would be just as strange as “Prisoners” because of the image it conveys.
I used those names as an example of a name that certain groups would find offensive, just as offensive as Redskin is to Native Americans.
You actually prove my point in your post. You have no idea how sensitive the word Redskin is to a Native American, because you just spell it out. But heaven forbid you spell out Nigger or Kike without the “" taking out a letter, right? Why the double standard? Oh, and guess what. The "” doesn’t prove to the world you aren’t a racist, or even sensitive to the issue.
You wouldn’t want to offend a Jew or a black that may be reading the board, but you don’t even consider Redskin a slur. You need to be consistent. If you are going to show your political correctness with an “", you need to spell "Rdskin” properly.
And there are and have been plenty of team nicknames that aren’t exactly masculine, cool, or Macho.
[/QUOTE]
You got a problem with people jumping out of the way of runaway trolleys?
none
im not an uptight liberal racked with white guilt
Yesterday I drove through a town that had “Go Beavers!” painted on its welcome sign. :smack: