• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Washington Redskins name

blue4

blue4

Feb 3, 2013
2,808
5,417
St. Louis area
#1
I was on a football forum today viewing a thread about this. I'm curious as to the overall feeling regarding this on Talkbass. I said I could see some logic on both sides and was compared to Hitler for that radical opinion. That's a first for me, Internet right of passage I guess. So, are we for or against?
 
#3
No. It's ridiculous. I don't know where Hitler comes into the argument, but I'm fairly sure that neither the team nor the fans are in any way actively causing harm to Native Americans. I believe the word "Yankee" was originally used by Dutch settlers as a disparaging term for English settlers. Should the Yankees change their name?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky, Eric Perry and Gravedigger Dav
#4
Gorn said:
No. It's ridiculous. I don't know where Hitler comes into the argument, but I'm fairly sure that neither the team nor the fans are in any way actively causing harm to Native Americans. I believe the word "Yankee" was originally used by Dutch settlers as a disparaging term for English settlers. Should the Yankees change their name?
Click to expand...
Yankees should keep their name.
I need a target for my hatred.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Timmah, Tony B. Filthy, Funky Ghost and 2 others
#7
A few years ago, the NCAA decided to force a number of school to change their team names and/or logos that they regarded as potentially offensive to native Americans. My school, the College of William and Mary, was allowed to keep our nickname -- "The Tribe" - but forced to delete the pair of feathers from our logo (which otherwise is just the letters "W&M." Meanwhile, the Florida State Seminoles still have a guy in war paint and Indian regalia riding around their football stadium on a horse at football games, while the fans do the "tomahawk chop." I guess "offensive" is in the eye of the beholder, by which I mean "is determined by whomever has the most money."

I'm with O.P. on the general issue. Gotta wonder what the world is coming to when "I can see arguments on both sides" is regarded as a radical position associated with Nazis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DwaynieAD
#11
I'm unsure what the logic is for keeping the name.. If the argument is simply "that's the way it's always been", that doesn't pass muster IMO. A lot of bad stuff has been rationalized in the same way. And sports teams have changed their names many times for all kinds of reasons. This seems like a really good one to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseemick and Unrepresented
#13
IMHO unless your fully Native American I don't think it's your place to say if the names offensive or not.

Just because there are other names like Yankees or the Norte Dame fighting Irish doesn't mean it's ok.

Keep in mind Native American reservations are tough. No jobs many have no running water. The reservations can have casinos which maybe makes them some money but also takes away their original culture.

If my culture was fading and not to mention my land stolen then on too of it made a logo all over the place. I would be mad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseemick, HolmeBass, FilterFunk and 1 other person
#14
Lobster11 said:
A few years ago, the NCAA decided to force a number of school to change their team names and/or logos that they regarded as potentially offensive to native Americans. My school, the College of William and Mary, was allowed to keep our nickname -- "The Tribe" - but forced to delete the pair of feathers from our logo (which otherwise is just the letters "W&M." Meanwhile, the Florida State Seminoles still have a guy in war paint and Indian regalia riding around their football stadium on a horse at football games, while the fans do the "tomahawk chop." I guess "offensive" is in the eye of the beholder, by which I mean "is determined by whomever has the most money."

I'm with O.P. on the general issue. Gotta wonder what the world is coming to when "I can see arguments on both sides" is regarded as a radical position associated with Nazis.
Click to expand...

Seems to me like the tribe would be ok. Be like calling the team "The William and Mary Towns." Don't see a problem with Braves, Seminoles, Blackhawks, or Chiefs either. Those seem to be actual names, or terms of respect. Redskins, I can at least see where one might find that questionable, especially since every other ethnic group has been able to draw attention to the use of slurs regarding them.

I wonder what losing their trademark will do to them.
 
#15
ImNotJoel said:
IMHO unless your fully Native American I don't think it's your place to say if the names offensive or not.

Just because there are other names like Yankees or the Norte Dame fighting Irish doesn't mean it's ok.

Keep in mind Native American reservations are tough. No jobs many have no running water. The reservations can have casinos which maybe makes them some money but also takes away their original culture.

If my culture was fading and not to mention my land stolen then on too of it made a logo all over the place. I would be mad.
Click to expand...

I think I'd be upset at people's reaction to the thought of changing the name more than anything.
 
#16
Gorn said:
I don't know much about the situation and I really don't care, but isn't it mostly advocacy groups and young neo-hippies complaining? Do actual Native Americans have a problem with it?
Click to expand...
Generally speaking, it seems some tribes do have a problem with it and some don 't care very ,much. But yes, actual Native Americans are leading the campaign against the name.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HolmeBass
#17
GregC said:
Generally speaking, it seems some tribes do have a problem with it and some don 't care very ,much. But yes, actual Native Americans are leading the campaign against the name.
Click to expand...
I did not know that. I don't know. It's not my place to complain about it or say it's ok, but it's not like the teams are called "The Dirty Redskins", or the "Thieving Braves". That would be very offensive, but I can understand how Native Americans are against the names as they are.
 
#18
Gorn said:
No. It's ridiculous. I don't know where Hitler comes into the argument, but I'm fairly sure that neither the team nor the fans are in any way actively causing harm to Native Americans. I believe the word "Yankee" was originally used by Dutch settlers as a disparaging term for English settlers. Should the Yankees change their name?
Click to expand...
Seems like apples to battleships there. If that Yankee thing is even true, it must have been used on a much smaller scale for a much shorter time. Redskin, by comparison, refers to an immutable characteristic, was used much more recently, never evolved in meaning to something more neutral as Yankee did, and is connected to centuries of racism and the annihilation of a people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Webtroll, HolmeBass, Unrepresented and 1 other person
#19
GregC said:
Seems like apples to battleships there. If that Yankee thing is even true, it must have been used on a much smaller scale for a much shorter time. Redskin, by comparison, refers to an immutable characteristic, was used much more recently, never evolved in meaning to something more neutral as Yankee did, and is connected to centuries of racism and the annihilation of a people.
Click to expand...
I see what you mean. But I generally find words less offensive than actions. But what's been done to the Natives of this continent is certainly horrendous. No one can argue against that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eric Perry

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back